LKS on Mon, 31 Jan 2000 01:37:46 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> The Best Radio in the Worst System in Europe |
Below is a complete text of Zoran Djukanovic' interview with Radio B2-92's Veran Matic, which has been published in De Groene Amsterdam http://www.groene.nl/2000/2/zd_matic.html (condensed version in Dutch) and on the Press Now Site http://www.dds.nl/pressnow/about/press/00jan12.html. Aleks Zoran Djukanovic The Best Radio in the Worst System in Europe - Interview with Veran Matic Radio B92 was founded several months before the fall of the Berlin Wall. Over ten years of rapid development, and after founding the ANEM network, B92 became accessible to listeners in the greater part of Serbia and has become the symbol of independent media there. It has brought together in its work rebellion, rock'n'roll, the Internet and its own sense of humour. It has awoken the dangerous ambition of being a stronger opponent to the Milosevic regime than the fractured political opposition. During the NATO bombing, the regime seized its offices and facilities. The station's tenth anniversary seems like an appropriate occasion, not for celebration, but for a candid discussion with Editor-in-Chief Veran Matic about the hopes, disappointments and problems facing B92 in "the worst system in Europe". At its foundation, ten years ago, B92 was not what it has grown up to be in the meantime. Can you tell us what Radio B92 was like in its early years without loading in what was to follow? Can you recall your plans, remember yourself as editor-in-chief at the end of the 'eighties? It was a completely different time. It seemed that we were on the threshold of true change. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the crisis of the Communist system throughout the world, even in Yugoslavia, led to the awakening of great hope. At that time even Dom Omladine, where we had begun work in a twenty square metre room, was a lively and attractive place, fall of young people, real and fake dissidents, intellectuals. We believed that change would happen relatively rapidly and that we would be able to develop a completely new concept, primarily a youth concept, for a free radio. The breadth of the concept we set out with is confirmed by the fact that we took the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as our basic platform, realising that we could not limit our fight only to Article 19 (freedom of speech) without fighting for other freedoms at the same time. This is why the radio was formed partly as a movement which at the same time was a professional journalism operation and a struggle for the freedom of information. This dual role has remained constant, because nothing has changed in the repressive apparatus. The brain drain from Belgrade began in the early nineties and has continued to this very day. What's your opinion of this? Has it changed throughout the year? In the mid-nineties there emerged the sentiment that those who had left had no chance and no right to judge those who stayed. Is it possible to stay clear-headed watching friends and colleagues depart? In your eyes, what is the relation between the Diaspora and those who have stayed? Of course it's very difficult to get over this. It's not only the cold analysis that each capable and valuable man who leaves weakens the resistance. It's also a highly emotional experience when somebody who has been your friend or close acquaintance for years suddenly leaves. I have never condemned anyone or had regrets that they have left. I have never had what is usually known as the Sarajevo syndrome. But problems do arise when someone who has left, sooner or later, it doesn't matter which, asks you "What are you people doing there? Are you insane?" And then you feel that something has seriously changed that your friend of yesterday has begun to see you as an insect. And you become angry and sad because of that. However there is an infinitely larger number of them who still take quite a normal position of what's happening here. Many of them are prepared to actually do something. We've tried through frequent contact in radio programs to build bridges and eliminate the animosity to those who have left which emerges from time to time. I think this is a very important task for our radio. The values these people can bring to us when we have gone through some serious changes are very broad, not only the experience of "living under democracy", but concrete skills and knowledge they have acquired. Nobody has the right to judge anything except oneself. And even that is arguable. If we immerse ourselves in those kind of judgements it will never end. And it will become much more important than the changes themselves and the decent life we'd like to live. Trials are something I don't want to take part in. If somebody thinks that trials are to follow, trials in which one group of people will try others because they left or stayed, because they read "Politika" or "Danas", because they are christened or not, natives or colonists, and that it is going to be wrapped up in something some call denazification, then this is complete foolishness. We can certainly re-examine and assess our actions. But forcing this kind of trial would only diver attention from the real problems once more. In the beginning, and later on, the concept of B92 was accused of being too urban, even alternative. Who could have imagined that the "urban alternative" would give birth to the idea of the ANEM radio and television networks, capable of covering the greater part of Serbia? Of reaching where print media can not? >From as far back as 1991, when the war began, I have been convinced that urban energy and youth subculture would be part of the front which would of necessity, if we're not all locked up or executed, triumph in the end. Of course our triumph is not political in nature, nor did we strive for that. It's a consciousness which has spread naturally, simply because the spirit of the times is similar in Serbia and the Netherlands. It's a spirit of the city, not the village of village tradition. We've awoken the genuine energy which is present in cities of two million and cities of fifty thousand. This kind of "city patriotism", which it is very important to understand, is no longer a generation thing. That's how we've managed to stop being solely youth media, through this energy. I think that one of the more important keys to our success was the fact that we've never ignored the values in the provinces and ANEM, in practice, began as a normal result of the strategy built over years, as well as a predecessor to the civil moments which have emerged in the provinces almost every day since the bombing. So, regarding the spirit we are promoting, this was most prominently picked up during the protests of 1996 and 1997. You have the image of an ordinary man. However, they say that B92 would never have made progress had it not been for an applied visionary approach - being strategically ready for progress, not limiting the horizon with one fixed idea. That determination emerged from a combination of various motives. The first was completely personal, because people from the radio, including me, were always interested in many more things than the radio itself. Culture and everything around it, >from the Internet to the theatre, music and publishing, visual arts and so on, were something of a safe island at the time, our choice of kinship. On the other hand this was also a defensive measure. We thought that if we broadened our activities from the radio itself, this would automatically have a certain protective role. Also this mobilised and motivated a far greater number of people than would happen with classical media. Many people from the outside world contributed to this development with their experience, strength of personality and creativity. Their presence has helped us as a correcting factor as well. Our people don't have the habit of listening to those with greater knowledge, different experiences, different energy and so on. The arrival of Adrienne van Haeteren in Belgrade and our decision that she should, as well as other functions, head our cultural centre, Cinema Rex, also caused a lot of controversy. (Why do we need a foreigner to run our cultural centre when we have plenty of our own people, and so on). However this turned out to be great step forward, and she stayed in Belgrade for more than three years. After that, Julia Glyn-Picket came from London to help us, and the whole team which works in jobs related to the English language services (news, Web site and so on). Through the strength and potential of their influence, ANEM and B92 have grown to be a symbol of independent media in the Balkans. You have written several impressive pieces on media strategies for opposing the regime. You're probably the only representative of the independent media who has been received at one time or another by Madeleine Albright, Al Gore, Hilary Clinton, Robin Cook and so forth. My meetings with important politicians, even Madeleine Albright, have had only one motive: the protection and development of the radio as well as the global development of peace, democracy and stability in this region. I don't attach too much importance to these meetings, at least not in a personal way. After all, they've only made me problems on the local scene. After each of these meetings I have been largely Satanised by the government-controlled media. When the radio was seized by the police, I heard they had a lot of fun looking at photos of me with various international politicians. They used them later in a campaign against me, along with the fact that they found a complete set of "Koha ditore" (daily newspaper published by independent Albanian journalists in Kosovo). What is much more important is that I have always been critical of the policy of these people. This is why it is important to get an opportunity to tell them that and this is what I see as the most valuable thing, that I have managed to tell them that in direct contact as well, not only through the media. Some of them have been offended (Mr Holbrooke, for example), some of them used it clumsily, with potentially lethal consequences: during the bombing, Robin Cook mentioned my name twice, talking about the ban or the radio as an argument for bombing a country in which such people and such media are persecuted. This was reported here in Yugoslavia and could have had fatal consequences. Have you ever been interested in pure politics? No. Dealing with so-called pure politics demands completely different kinds of activity. Of course I'm very aware that the way I work has a lot to do with politics. But if pure politics means party work, and that IS politics, then I'm pretty restrained. This doesn't mean that I think party work is something bad or unnecessary, on the contrary, but I'm simply not the man for something like that. During the NATO bombing, it seemed that the Serbian independent media lost their ironic edge and any kind of comedic distance from the gravity of the situation. During the bombing we were banned, and it's questionable whether any kind domestically directed sarcasm could have functioned. On our site we had contributions in the spirit, but it's true that the intensity of the intervention made the situation more serious, and made it too miserable to be able to function as before. This is also the explanation for the lack of subversion of state repression, censorship etc. Anger at the intervention itself and the inability to do anything about it impelled people to take care of themselves until the intervention was over, so that they would be able later more easily to continue where they had left off. There was censorship, but no censorship could block the ironic signals which seemed to have quietened down. During the siege of Sarajevo, along with the ideological glorification of victimhood, the media occasionally showed an amazing capacity for ironic perception of the war. What's the difference? There was irony here as well, although more in ordinary private life than in the media. The reason is very simple: the danger of being banned, arrested, expelled or going missing was, at least in the first few weeks of the war, very real. Later, it began to disappear. It was enough to see the messages that went through the Internet. Commentaries, fantasies, metaphors, all of that, permeated with facts, give a completely different picture of the war and the media in it. A much richer and more varied picture than some are willing to admit. This kind of content has moved more into the cybersphere than being part of what the everyday media offer. What if we were to compare the war experience of Sarajevo and Belgrade? The war experience of Sarajevo was not only incomparably longer, but incomparably harder. I think that these two experiences cannot be compared in gravity. Apart from children, and people with nervous conditions, Belgraders were all able to say to themselves "I'm not in direct danger because I don't live near barracks, the state television or a police centre. Although mistakes were, obviously, possible. And they certainly happened, more out of Belgrade than in it. The people of Sarajevo lived in hell for three years. What happened here, and the consequences of the destruction on the souls of people, as well as the expulsions and the crimes against Albanians and what happened after that and is still happening to the Serbs, is yet to researched. After the still unsolved murder of journalist and media proprietor Slavko Curuvija, there were rumours around Belgrade of death lists with more names. How did you feel in that situation? You were arrested but, after all, they released you the next day. Can you talk about that? I felt uncomfortable. I think that's the right word. And not just me. The majority of my friends and associated had that feeling. It's not exactly pleasant to know that they can simply abduct you or kill you anywhere and at any time. Especially for your nearest and dearest. You think about them most at those times. But there's a mechanism of self-protection in which you try not to think about it while you try to resist every day. Later I learned that this was not very wise because there were real threats to me personally from the very highest level of the authorities. Finally in mid-May I moved to Montenegro, when there was a real possibility of physical danger. What's the status of an independent journalist in Serbia today? About five hundred journalists are out of work. This is something they're not writing about much in the West. And they're out of work not because they themselves have made that decision but because the regime has closed down the media they work for. I think that the situation is even more dangerous for journalists now because the regime feels shaken. For the first time, personal sanctions have begun to yield better results than the longstanding, indiscriminate sanctions which have mostly been of assistance to Milosevic. The destruction of the state radio and television infrastructure, despite the rapid restoration, is a serious handicap for the regime. The daily jamming of B2-92 and Studio B Television (since they began broadcasting our programs and since Vuk Draskovic began to change his platform) testify to an extremely high level of nervousness within the regime and a major focus on independent media (much more than on the opposition), which announces that the independent media are certainly in first place on the current list of the dictatorship's enemies. What's the position of the independent media on the issue of Serbian nationalism? The stand on the nationalist issue in Yugoslavia has usually only been abused, manipulated in order to replace the earlier Communistic ideological matrix with nationalism and later with elements of fascism within Serbian society. This is something predominantly connected to the regime, the dominant ideology, the dominant intellectual trend, the dominant stream of social life. With the help of the media, particularly the electronic media, it has been expanded to a much broader area. The independent media have taken an approach to the national issue which is much more connected to the profession: that the greatest good for the nation is provided by truth, facts, not what the regime has been promoting: myths, legends, largely distorted historic events, turbo-culture and so on. This is why we were all being declared anti-national; by the mere fact of not glorifying our own nation we had no right to existence. Thanks precisely to the independent media, Belgrade was declared an entirely non-Serbian city. Remember the statements of Dragos Katajic and, Dragoslav Bokan as well as the Serb Chauvinist nationalist corps in Bosnia who once described Belgrade as a den of iniquity, a multi-cultural core. The first time B92 encountered the national issue in a more serious way was when Slobodan Milosevic decided to introduce sanctions against the regime of Radovan Karadzic in the Bosnian Serb republic. Up to that time our journalists had not been able to enter Bosnia. They were forbidden entry; they weren't given accreditation because the press office was run by Radovan Karadzic's daughter. The whole time they were never off the air on state television in Serbia. The moment they completely disappeared from the screens of the state television, we tried to enter and we were welcome. Suddenly it was perfectly alright for somebody from our radio to go to the Republic of Srpska. Of course even then we continued to criticise both Radovan Karadzic and Milosevic for everything they had done, both totalitarian nationalist regimes. In that sense, we haven't changed, the political alignments of the politicians have changed. The next, similar, example is connected to Operation Storm in Croatia. This was the largest exodus in Europe since World War Two, until the exodus of the Albanians in 1999. At the time it was completely obvious that it was a political deal, that Milosevic consented to NATO proceeding with that operation. That's why he tried to hide the refugees, who were arriving for weeks in long convoys heading for Belgrade, and send them out into the provinces. It was a catastrophe and it was not important that it was a national catastrophe, Serbian this time. We reported on it. We had our people in the convoy. We decided to launch a humanitarian project in collaboration with our listeners. It had an enormous response and was an example of civil self-organisation which hasn't been bettered yet. We're working in a similar way now with the refugees from Kosovo. Among intellectuals, those who don't carry weapons, the debate about the NATO intervention was reminiscent in tone of the Cold War. You travelled widely after the bombing, talking, trying to eliminate misunderstandings. Have you discovered where the problem lies for one side (donors and international aid organisations) in understanding the other (Serbia's independent media) and vice versa? To some extent it a classic cold war misunderstanding. It's much broader and much more complex than I can explain here. But let's look at the aim of the intervention: the prevention of a humanitarian catastrophe and the establishment of peace and a multi-ethnic Kosovo on one side and the ousting of Slobodan Milosevic on the other. Today we see that one humanitarian catastrophe has been prevented and another brought about, while a peaceful and multi-ethnic Kosovo and the ousting of Slobodan Milosevic are nowhere in sight. Time will reveal the actual aims of both sides, NATO and Milosevic. I believe that it is today much clearer that Milosevic's real opponents are mostly those who have always been his opponents and that there is no solution from outside for a change of regime in Serbia. But the trauma of the war and the merciless and shameless propaganda against all who opposed the war will leave deep scars on all of us. I think that the most important thing is to not draw conclusions in advance but to perceive as many facts as possible through concrete research, if possible, more thorough insight, more serious analysis, not superficially based on the conclusions of the creators of day-to-day politics or based on the prevailing emotions. I'm trying to open up a process of peaceful, sober, constructive discussion on all the subjects of misunderstanding and lack of understanding, without trying to immediately find definitive conclusions, simply to undertake a process of re-examination, both of ourselves on the inside and those on the outside. But how can mutual trust be regained? Only through a joint, prudent and consistent fight against this regime. Without pathetic and empty rhetoric. We're working on a project of sensitising the public to open dialogue on the crimes committed in Kosovo and other parts of the former Yugoslavia as well. B92 has worked on a lot of programs in this field, a lot of books. We want to use the similar experience of countries which have undergone the process of self-examination and truth-seeking, such as Chile and Argentina. To speak about the denazification of Serbia is highly inadequate and counterproductive because it draws historical analogies which are inapplicable. I would prefer to speak about re-examining one's own role, responsibility and guilt. We're going to publish about thirty titles relevant to discussion of the process. We've already held a seminar for ANEM editors led by the Vice-president of the South African Commission for Truth and Reconciliation, Alex Borain. We're preparing a whole series of similar seminars. The aim of all this is to find an authentic model for facing our recent history and undergoing catharsis in order to begin the process of reconciliation. Of course this process would have to be undertaken by a democratic government, but it's up to us to awaken a feeling for this process in the public as much as we can. Can you put yourself in the position of an outside observer? Why is it that, after the bombing, central Serbia and the provinces (long considered to be a source of support for Milosevic) became more active than Belgrade in protests against the regime and what the regime had done in Kosovo in the name of the Serbian people? There was much more damage in provincial Serbia during the war. It's not well-known that very few reserve army members from Belgrade were sent to Kosovo. Naturally this led to much greater resistance and political activism, often quite spontaneous, in the rest of the country than in Belgrade. Also the whole repressive apparatus and the state media are concentrated in Belgrade, not the provinces. In addition, the Zajedno opposition coalition survived at a local level in a large number of towns, when it fell apart at the national level. Problems are perceived in much more concrete terms (not abstractly, at the level of political struggle by the party leadership). There is also the beginning of a spontaneous process of decentralisation within the parties. The leader-oriented parties have begun to lose influence, precisely thanks to the leaders and because it was natural that leaders from the provinces would begin to emerge. You have probably seen the analyses of the International Crisis Group (ICG) which are available on the Web. What do you think of their latest paper "Transformation of Serbia: the Key to long-term stability" in August 1999? Without stability and democracy in Serbia there is no stability and democracy in the entire region. I agree completely with the ICG about that. The other thing, however, is what will Kosovo's future look like if the necessary changes occur in Serbia? I hope that the ICG will find an answer to that question, otherwise their next stop will be Macedonia. The proactive approach taken by the European community is very important. It's important to reach agreement with the US on that. I think that when it comes to Serbia there is constant conflict between the European and American approaches, which so far has been exploited very skilfully by Milosevic. What's your view of the Serbian opposition at the moment? The opposition is still in disunity, but now it is the people who are insisting on changes. If the opposition doesn't achieve them peacefully, I'm afraid that desperate people will, and this would not be good. I believe that the opposition will have to listen to the voters. I even believe that there will soon be a reasonable faction established within the ruling parties which will try to make the necessary changes. It's very important to reach consensus on the primary aim of opposition activity and that is the departure of Milosevic. I think that this is crucial for the success of the democratisation process. Any regime which follows will be easier to change than this one. Radio B92's premises and the major part of its equipment were confiscated. Under a slightly changed name, Radio B2 92 is now a guest at Studio B. How do you feel in that role? We all feel like guests. Naturally we work under much more difficult conditions. It's not natural, as an adult who has both an apartment and a job, that you should be a guest somewhere. We are, in fact, some kind of refugees. However we're lucky that we've managed to begin broadcasting again and that we managed to restore the network operations very quickly. We're working on a series of projects, such as establishing a network of programs broadcasting Albanian-language programs in Montenegro (this began during the bombing). That network is spreading through the region with media in Albanian, Macedonia and Kosovo. The important thing is that with all our work we've won space for autonomous activity at the very outset. Even in this new role as refugees we're working according to the criteria we laid down a long time ago. The good thing is that, because of our ten years of commitment, nobody even thinks about influencing us except the state apparatus which is very frustrated by the fact that, even under the most radical repression, we have managed to restore everything. What do you think about the opposition potential of Vuk Draskovic who controls Studio B? Vuk Draskovic and the Serbian Renewal Movement are a significant political factor. Without Draskovic it is difficult to imagine the current regime being replaced. That's a fact, whether you like him or not. This fact should be considered a serious starting point. That it was Studio B which enabled us to broadcast is also a fact. But that doesn't mean that anybody, especially Vuk Draskovic, is interfering in our program. We would never accept anyone interfering in our work. How is the development of the Radio B2 92 project going so far? Can you tell us anything about ratings? According to the latest surveys we are at the moment number three in Belgrade. The radio station which robbed us of our equipment, our premises, our frequency and our name is in the twentieth place. So much for influence. We have restored our music production division, publishing, the Internet... Would you like to say anything which we haven't covered here? It would be easy to say that changes will come in a few months, but it's not such a simple and easy process. We are even ready to fight for that within a year or two. We are not so tired that we would leave everything at the mercy of the worst of all systems in Europe, a system which has not only impoverished and humiliated us, but has also made us an object of hate and wariness throughout the whole world. Veran Matic' e-mail address: veranb92@xs4all.nl Website B2 92: www.freeb92.net This is an integral version of the interview with Veran Matic. Shorter version was published in De Groene Amsterdammer, 12 January 2000 Press Now supports independent media in Southeast Europe --> http://www.dds.nl/pressnow/ News on media manipulation, restrictions and repressive laws, freedom of the speech and press in Southeast Europe. Press Now Internet, Amsterdam mailto:aca@dds.nl ......... ..... ............. .................. Les faits sont faits. http://www.fis.utoronto.ca/~stalder # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net