Politicians in Belgrade have put all local committees in an awkward position, although their current position was not enviable either.
The opposition sees the conquest of Belgrade as one of the key moments in taking over power at the republic level. There is money, there are projects, and it is true that it is difficult to achieve in the current conditions.
However, the position on (not) going to the elections was not clearly communicated, thus the opposition confused the citizens, and then demotivated a part of the voters. People simply don’t understand who is boycotting and what is being boycotted – only Belgrade or all of Serbia and, if Belgrade can’t, why can, for example, Novi Sad and Nis? Last time we checked, they were cities in the same state.
Both sides of the opposition have good arguments for their decision. Yes, the big question is whether we should give legitimacy to the government by participating in elections without improved conditions? But why are the people who have accepted mandates in the republican parliament talking about boycotting bars?
However, the main thing is the following – does anyone have the illusion that this government will really make any concessions, without first providing itself with a new mechanism of manipulation and theft?
Alibi
Every event in Belgrade is interpreted as a matter of interest for the whole of Serbia. With a strong foothold in the capital, but also with party headquarters in the capital, the Belgrade opposition could survive the boycott.
However, outside of Belgrade, another boycott, after the one in 2020, would mean the end of the opposition, the disintegration of local committees that have invested a lot of energy, with scarce resources, to be recognizable and to overcome “traditional” local politicians. Does Belgrade have the right to ask the rest of Serbia to make sacrifices for it once again?
Splitting “Serbia against violence” created an alibi, both for those who are boycotting and for those who will vote. The “fighting” opposition will complain about the conditions, about the allies until now, about the impossibility of complete control of the electoral process, about the fact that too much time was spent on the debate about the boycott instead of the campaign. “Boycott” the opposition will say – well, what did you expect?
If both sides of the opposition have an alibi, what do the citizens have?
Novi Sad cannot withstand another boycott
In the mayoral elections in 2004, Maja Gojković defeated Borislav Novaković by 700 votes in the second round. So little made the difference between a winner and a loser, which shows how important every vote is at the bar.
In 2012, the progressives did not win the local elections in Novi Sad, they did not even have the most votes. In contrast, the opposition could count on less support thanks to the effect of “white tickets”. However, the reorganization of the government in Novi Sad took place thanks to the agreements in Belgrade, as well as the fact that SNS embraced those whom it had previously accused of buying votes.
Four years later, the SNS was convincing, but there was also an opposition that, if the LSV had not decided on a salto mortale, could have counted more than 25 mandates.
Then came the election boycott in 2020. The SNS was able to form a local government independently, but it was generous to its partners. And in what condition does the current convocation of the Novi Sad parliament end?
The government was given a mandate to do what it wanted and used it for further urban violence. She weaned herself from hearing the voice of the opposition in parliament, so she had no intention of listening to citizens in critical situations. Greenery was abolished, and playgrounds, facades and “green” pockets were offered.
The opposition in the parliament is represented by several councilors. There are LSV and POKS, which until recently were part of the government, then the radicals who announce a coalition with SNS in the upcoming elections. The New DSS still has opposition continuity. And that’s it for you.
Although the SNS maintains the high number of votes it receives in the elections, it also shows that the opposition has grown to the level where it can threaten the progressive government. With the story of the boycott, and indecision and trotting in the campaign, a good opposition result is not guaranteed.
Big scam
The problem with Serbian politics is that several big narratives have been established – Kosovo, NATO, EU, Russia, SPC, Vučić – and the whole society is determined based on them. As these “motives” are the most useful for creating divisions, the government has done its best to transfer them from the national level to the local level.
For this reason, local regime portals write about the “NATO opposition”, about Đilas and Šolak, mirroring the division that exists at the republican level. This does not allow competition in ideas at the local level. Thus, local politics has been erased from our reality. That’s why the mayor of Novi Sad is not Milan Đurić, but Aleksandar Vučić.
The “communal coalition” could not survive, because it is unnatural to confront Vučić and cooperate with him at the same time. The coalition of POKS and SNS at the bar broke up because of Kosovo. Božidar Protić was excommunicated from the local parliament apparently because of disagreement with a local topic, but the interest of the Serbian Orthodox Church was indirectly “touched”.
The opposition caught on to the same mantra. Talking about the boycott of the Belgrade elections, they actually meant all the other places in Serbia as well. Although the boycotting parties have in principle given the freedom to local committees to decide on participation, previous events have contributed to the fact that there are no real winners.
Who will the people of Novi Sad listen to?
The main task of the Novi Sad opposition was to convince the people of Novi Sad to show up at the polling stations on election day. Now that task is even more difficult for them.
It is encouraging that they remained united on the issue of (not) going to the elections. Although one list would look good in public, it is difficult to achieve – there are simply too many parties and movements for everyone to be satisfied. However, in relation to the progressives and Mayor Đurić, they are in a big campaign gap.
The boycott story makes it difficult to rely on previously published research. However, according to them, the Novi Sad government could be decided by the votes that Branimir Nestorović received in December. Who will they go to?
The right could count on some of those votes, but so could the Move-change movement, bearing in mind that Savo Manojlović will carry the “halo” of candidates, which could be a characteristic of Misha Bachulov as well. However, the best remedy for the opposition would be to count on the fact that the majority of those votes will either be absent or go to the SNS.
One can calculate to one’s heart’s content, plan lists, deals and agreements, in the end it will be the people of Novi Sad who will make the final decision – whether they will walk or stay at home. There is no doubt that SNS will harness its capacities to bring its sympathizers to the polls, the question is whether the rest will hear the call of the opposition, or the city?
It is up to the people of Novi Sad to decide what they want. Will they listen to the voice of Belgrade or what is heard in their city?
They are the ones who should look at what Novi Sad is and, more importantly, what it could be. And then they answer to themselves – do I care?
