A recurrent victory of political force whose policy is decently compatible with Western geopolitical interests seemed pretty enough for their appraisal.
Ultimately, it became just another example that fits the pattern that has been carried out by the international community for several decades. Geopolitical interests of the greatest powers in international relations have been preferred to genuine agitation for democracy.
To be fair, a recent foreign policy of Serbian government is the most acceptable at the moment. However, what I want to underline is that compromise made between foreign policymakers and the Serbian government haven't given more than it has sacrificed. In other words, maintenance of democracy in Serbia is at even greater risk than eventual turnover in foreign policy course.
What draws attention, in the first place, is an issue of origin. As it is typical for autocracies to rise from revolutions or coups d'etat, it is very less common for them to simply follow from democratic legitimacy. However, as many will agree the said is not enough, in order to strengthen my distinction, I should make the second condition.
The autocracy may have democratic origins only if radical modifications of state laws are previously done for the sake of it. Even though there were more of such modifications in Serbian during 1990ies than now, neither the government of that time can be classified as truly autocratic as those modifications weren't radical enough to satisfy autocracy criteria, e.g. both governments have had significantly liberal laws, pluralist political systems, functioning separation of powers etc.
How is then such deviation practically occurring? As we may conclude from the above, it only appears as a democracy. This is a convincing appearance. It means that democratic processes and laws are generally functioning, but an incompatible practice takes place to great extents behind the law. It can be described as a tendency of manipulating law and even breaking it in extreme cases when the sustainability of the ruling pyramid is in danger.
Thus, we have examples of hidden deals, racketeering and judicature under pressure, to name a few of them. Such practices are necessary in order to preserve both government and those whose interests it rests upon, the deal I call the ruling pyramid. However, all of this could be said for some governments in Serbia before 2012, as well as for many governments in the neighborhood. What makes Serbian democracy of today special, along with probably only Montenegrin one, are some more interesting traits.
Manipulations under the mask of free media help pyramid to expand ways it sustains itself. The most obvious sign of it is a quite unusual situation where the leader is very frequently present in the media. Moreover, there are more and more journalists and celebrities joining the pyramid. These are exactly the conditions for self-censorship and inferiorityto the leader. The reason for all of this lies in the idea that the agreement between the government and those who rely on it will be better secured that way. People, especially those who don't have any access to the Internet, easily believe what they are presented.
The pyramid itself is placed everywhere the government has an impact. In Serbia, such extension is decent. The entire public sector, subsidies, and generally institutions dependent on governmental support belong to it. Many people choose to obey the rules of practice in order to preserve their positions and benefits. Thus, we have disastrous economic and fiscal policies that are intended to keep the aims of deviation.
An attitude that I have been recently trying to elaborate in my own research is that democracy is a basis for a functional society. It gives a stability that is necessary. Usually, when democracy is flawed, the economy suffers too and vice versa. In the conclusion, I have to illustrate the essential condition of Serbian deviation of democracy, the one that made its economy and freedom suffer as well.
In long-term, this essential problem may be overcome through education and order, two great arguments in favor of EU membership for Serbia. Until it is achieved, we should strive to avoid bad deviations of our system. Being aware that it cannot be turned into true autocracy is the first, relieving step. However, the deviation may get worse day by day. The most recent example of it are manipulations in the electoral procedures. In order to stop it, we have to support the most acceptable options available.
The motivation of this article primarily comes from my reactions to false interpretations of Serbian elections that may have been seen in the media, as I have written in the beginning. Concerns about the return of far-right parties in parliament are exaggerated, as they are still a minor force compared to some examples from Europe. For them to come to power as a true nationalist threat, first Vucic has to fall down. And only if it happens, they may become a sort of threat. At the moment, the main threat is deviation of democracy that is happening under the current government. Its foreign policy deserves an approval, but that's not enough for citizens.
Fortunately, there has been a political option which gave magnificent insights and proposals to treat the problem as a whole. I am talking about a pretty new movement named 'It's Enough', that has just passed the electoral threshold. As I always tend to be moderate in my writings, now I may sound silly, but both their vision and credibility earned my support. If you are intrigued by possible future scenarios, only by looking at them a positive one may be found.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.
