I do not believe that the relationship with the leading countries of the world will be an important issue in the upcoming elections. Voters show both high degree of emotion and high degree of rationality, so it is difficult to plan a campaign that would focus on the relationship with those countries, especially since party activities do not treat this issue as a priority, says Srdjan Bogosavljevic (Ipsos Strategic Marketing).
To what extent is evident the division between the supporters of East or West?
There are some matrices in public opinion and one of them is that we love Russians. However, even the Russians that we love, we do not like too much. Positive attitude towards Russia is present among approximately 45 percent of the voters. When you look at the trend, it is one steady line that has rarely oscillated in the last few years, only two or three times. For instance, at the times of Putin’s or Medvedev’s visits to Serbia, or at the time of the signing of the Energy Agreement to which the media devoted much attention.
Relationship with the United States is also very steady, but at a much lower level. Very few people have a positive attitude towards America, only between five and eight percent. It seems very little, but the same percentage of people has a positive opinion about the Serbian parliament.
At first glance we could draw the conclusion that since Russians are desirable ally and America is undesirable partner, the parties that could benefit from this fact should exploit the relationship between the large states during the elections. But behind this emotional surface there are also hidden some very rational citizens’ views. When people are asked where they would like to get their children educated and where they would like to live or to work most of them mention America or the European Union. Or for example, the question if Serbia should become a part of the EU or the Russian Federation even leads the supporters of Russia to opt for the EU.
What is the treatment of the EU?
Relationship with Europe is turbulent and largely associated with the events that are important for the relations between Serbia and the EU. While the answer to the referendum question of whether to vote for or against joining of Serbia to the EU still shows majority’s inclination toward the EU, the number of statements of those who have positive attitudes towards the EU is clearly lower, and usually varies between 25 and 35 percent, with occasional larger fluctuations. The huge advance was recorded when Belgrade hosted Eurovision Song Contest, or when Serbia got Schengen visas. When bad things happened, such as occasional pressures or events like arrest of Mladic and Karadzic, the EU’s popularity declined sharply. On the whole, Europe is still predominantly treated as something that is near and necessary.
And relationship with NATO?
NATO is a very unpopular institution, less popular than the United States. Only about three percent of the people positively assessed NATO, but when the question was raised in a form of a referendum, or whether Serbia should join NATO or not, that percentage went over 12 percent. People think like this: I do not like them, but they can provide some security and reduce the risk of new war with someone else. It is also a rational attitude.
How is the relationship with NATO, Russia, USA and the EU going to be represented in the election campaign?
It is not hard to see that in regards to some of the most important topics most of the parties have the same attitude. These are the stories of unemployment and new jobs, corruption, the attitude towards Kosovo. Almost all parties say that they plan to keep Kosovo and to join the EU, that they are all against kinds of corruption, and all of them claim to be dedicated to creating new jobs vacancies… Therefore, the parties will look for specifics in their campaigns and they will try to fight the other political messengers instead of the messages themselves, claiming that everyone else is doing wrong and they are doing the right thing.
This would be a chance for some parties to use their attitude towards the Russians for example. But I’m not sure this can be successful because parties do not differ much in relation to so-called national themes. Not many of them would say they are against Russia, and not many would admit they are against EU.
In which ways are other countries interfering in the internal politics of Serbia?
Foreign countries are interfering in politics as much as they get a chance. Opportunities for such actions are always present. For example, the Russians can now act as intermediaries between SNS and DSS and there were many stories about the American influence on the formation of the present government. It is also possible that parties achieve some of their priorities in cooperation with other countries – for example investment or anything else. We witnessed the same phenomenon shortly before October 5th when the action “Oil for Democracy” was a kind of bait, just like the SAA (The Stabilization and Association Agreement), obtained just before the election, as well as Fiat investment.
Is there awareness among voters about the economic importance of relationships with the most important countries of the world?
The attitude towards foreign investors shows that we are not aware of where they come from. When we ask the voters who make most of the investments, we get answers that are inconsistent with reality. Russians are often put first, and Japan is also high on this list. This is probably due to the donations Japan made to Serbia and the fact that Belgrade has buses from the their donation with a very distinctive Japanese flag. Although it is quite clear that we cannot prosper without foreign money, neither the state nor the media have run serious campaigns to get wider strata of the population interested in this subject.
There are less and less investors today and games for attracting them are becoming more and more fierce. They do not invest in countries just because of good laws and favorable business conditions, but also because that society shows them they are wanted. In our case, the desire for investors is still not emphasized in parties’ programs and performances.