Impoverished and disappointed with living in post-Milošević, transitional Serbia, its citizens have been watching for years how a small circle of businessmen gained huge riches, spread their influence to almost all relevant political parties and even – if one believe what is said after each and every elections – directly affected what parties would form the government.
Mišković arrest: Anti-Corruption sweep starts in earnest
Impoverished and disappointed with living in post-Milošević, transitional Serbia, its citizens have been watching for years how a small circle of businessmen gained huge riches, spread their influence to almost all relevant political parties and even – if one believe what is said after each and every elections – directly affected what parties would form the government.
Source: VIP
Close the entire text of the article here
For all that time the politicians (many of them directly connected with big capitalists through interest or finances) had been repeating ritually that they were determined to tackle the systemic corruption and the economic crime. However, all of that, with some minor exceptions, remained just talk.
Until Wednesday, when the current government made the most radical move so far regarding the issue and arrested the most powerful and most influential local tycoon, the owner of Delta Holding Miroslav Mišković.
The fact that the investigation of some parts of Mišković’s wide-spread business operations started during the mandate of the previous government (although it is a question how enthusiastically they did it) eliminates in advance possible objections that there are any political motives behind this move of the authorities, as it is implicated in the first reports of some Western media outlets. The fact that this move will inevitably have political consequences is yet another issue.
From that point of view, the arrest of Mišković – on the assumption that the charges against him are well grounded as they seem to be – is a huge political and moral gain primarily for the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) as the biggest party-member of the governing coalition. The SNS is now proven to be a party that is determined to truly tackle the organized crime and corruption, the party that does not make empty promises.
On the individual plan, that gain is even bigger for the party leader and the First Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandar Vučić, who – in addition to several other offices he performs – has taken the fight against the high corruption as a personal mission. Whatever the course of the further events will be, Vučić is going to be remembered as the one who has done something nobody else has ever dared to: he has arrested Mišković, who in Serbia is the symbol of wealth gained through fishy business transactions and political connections.
The Prime Minister and the Minister of Interior indeed is the leader of the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) Ivica Dačić, but the perception of the public from the beginning is that the issue is Vučić vs. Mišković battle as well as that for time being Vučić is winning it. It is yet to be seen how Vučić and the SNS will politically capitalize this breakthrough in the fight against corruption.
It could depend on whether the further investigation against Mišković and other arrestees would perhaps lead to some individuals from the other two party-members of the governing coalition – Dačić’s Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) and the United Regions of Serbia (URS) led by the Minister of Finance and Economy Mlađan Dinkić. Although it is too early to speak about it, such turn of events could give a reason and justification to the SNS to provoke early elections at a point of time.
And the SNS would certainly win at the elections more convincingly that it was the case in May this year. An additional encouragement to the SNS to make such a manoeuvre could be the decision of the EU, which highly likely would be made in summer of 2013, to set the date for the beginning of the accession talks with Serbia. With Mišković in court, or perhaps in jail, and a confirmation on the date for the beginning of the accession talks, the SNS might assessed that the time is perfect for the party to run in the elections. But, it is not time right now for such speculations.
The other direct effect of the arrest of Mišković is connected to the very relations between Serbia and the EU, since the anti-corruptionfight is one of the key conditions Brussels set to Belgrade. The European Commission demanded from Serbia to investigate 24 disputable cases of privatization, but it is obvious that there are much more cases that need to be subjected to a through investigation. The fact that the current government started it with the most powerful figure in Serbia’s business demonstrated to Brussels that the authorities in Serbia has taken it seriously.
Mišković’s wealth, influence and odium he incurred in public will certainly have an effect on that a single party will not take his side now, because it will look like as an indirect recognition of an interest-related connection with him. However, no party can say now that it could not care less because of the arrest, because Mišković, just like other big businessmen in Serbia have been doing, over the years co-financed (willingly, or not) most of – if not all of – the major parties.
Other tycoons cannot say that they could not care less either, because they – now when the most powerful of them is arrested – realize that no one can count on political protection any longer as well as that their business operations over the previous years will be investigated thoroughly too. The reasoning of an average citizen tells them that the big businessmen do not have a reason to be nervous, if they do not have anything to hide, but it is not unthinkable that some of them will take precautions – to leave the country for a while, for example.
Finally, at this moment it is hard to say what economic implications of the arrest of Mišković could be. Anyways, all companies within the Delta Holding system will be put to the test now, because they have to demonstrate their ability to survive on the market in the situation when the influential boss cannot perform the influence any longer. It will show then to what extent Mišković’s company is based on healthy economic foundations as well as how much of its success is the result of Mišković’s political connections and financial manipulations.
You have clearly formed some narrow personal opinions about how the mind, politics and the world works. Sadly, those opinions do not accord with the real world.
For example, there is an infinite variety of opinion towards the EU. Very few take the extreme position of being 100% for or 100% against. Are you one of those extreamists?
And the same applies to just about every other point you raised, or will raise - the world is not black & white but a myriad of shades of gray.
You demanded that we "be honest". Surely honesty is about telling the truth and refering to facts. So far, you have done neither. All you have written is your personal anti-SNS bias.
My position regards this conversation is simple. If you want to accuse SNS members of something and be taken seriously, show us the evidence.
My position regards the current anti-corruption charge lead by Vucic. Carry on the good work.
My position regards corruption in Serbia. It's a way of life and part of the social fabric and will take generations to remove - if that's what is wanted. But you have to start somewhere.
My position regards the SNS's EU stance. Not sure. I suspect they're saying good things just to get Brussels' cash but really prefer to cosy up with Moscow.
(Bob the Builder, 15 December 2012 15:06)
I have no idea what on earth your argument is then. So you're in other words telling me I'm talking rubbish, but you say you don't think they are 'whiter than white', make your mind up.
If you honestly believe that they were not truly anti-EU while they were SRS members then you don't have a clue what you are talking about. They were free to leave the party at any time, the fact that they ran an election on those lines and suddenly left is proof of this.
Pragmatic? Jesus Christ what does pragmatism show you on such an issue, there is no mid way in being pro-EU or anti-EU, you are either one or the other. In this climate if anyone is going to jump the fence they will turn against the EU because of what is happening inside the eurozone. Pragmatism is another way of politicians changing their minds to win votes, they have no principles but just go which ever way the wind blows.
Discussing this with you is pretty pointless, it would be different if you had complete faith in these politicians but while you tell me I have no evidence and therefore imply I am completely wrong you also admit you don't think they are whiter than white, so make your mind up. You seem a little confused to be honest, reassess the sitation. Are they corrupt politicians or not? I am asking, are they completely clean or not? I you think they are then fair enough thats your view, if not then I have no idea why you are arguing against me other than to play devils advocate merely for the sake of it.
(SCP UK, 15 December 2012 12:03)
So, no evidence, just more of your innuendo and biased speculation.
It is not for me or anybody to prove 'innocence'. The burden of proof always falls to the accuser. It's strange how people wanting to be considered to offer intellectual debate, but only offer agenda driven speculation and innuendo, always seem to come up short on that simple concept.
And, to try to answer why the change in EU stance amongst the senior SNS personnel, I offer 3 possibilities.
1. They never were anti-EU whilst in the SRS, but were loyally following Seselj's leadership. A loyalty they are no longer bound to.
2. Whether they personally are for or against the EU, they have chosen to be pragmatic with the electorate. Compare results of SNS v SRS to understand that simple point.
3. Perhaps they are not as pro-EU as you think they are.
PS. Do I believe that Vucic and co are 'whiter than white'. Never. But the best thing that happened in Serbian politics was them casting that fool Seselj aside and the SRS disappearing electorally.
(Bob the Builder, 15 December 2012 00:28)
Lets be honest, anyone who can see clearly knows that politics in the former Yugoslavia is ridden with corruption, as is the same with former socialist dictatorships. It is about principle, when all the evidence shows that the EU is in strong decline, we have politicians who used to be so anti-EU now becoming pro-EU. Either they are completely thick or have 'changed their minds' because of some outside persuasion, and when I say persuasion I mean certain offers being given. Then we see these men running the country, after being cheated in the election in 2008 when they held anti-EU views. My point is if men are willing to betray principles once, what says they wont do it again? Why should we presume they are completely trustworthy when they have changed their colours once before? While I admit it is hard to produce empirical evidence to PROVE they are corrupt, maybe one day it will emerge, but in the meantime I ask you, do you have evidence to suggest they are completely innocent from corruption?
(SCP UK, 14 December 2012 20:58)
You write alot about what could be termed "moral corruption" given what you claim to be their political U-turn. Do you have any evidence whatsoever beyond your mischievous speculation as evidence of any other form of corruption?
Furthermore, has the thought ever crossed your mind that those who formed the SNS may have done so for the simple reason that they, as are the majority of the Serbian public, fed up with Seselj's narrow-minded self-promotion and his use of SRS fund-raising to support his personal legal crusade in the Netherlands?
(Bob the Builder, 14 December 2012 18:00)
While I agree with Miskovic's arrest we should be under no illusion that the Serbian government is making a genuine push against corruption, if we are to assume none of the current ministers are corrupt then this is incorrect.
To make it clear I am not an outright SRS supporter (though I agree with some policies), but the move which Nikolic and Vucic took against the SRS shows nothing but corruption. It is no secret that the coup which took place within the SRS was western sponsored, we saw (other than Seselj) the two highest ranking members of the SRS explicitly betray their party. Two politicians who were well known by their militant hostility towards the EU managed to change their views overnight and become some of the EU's best friends in Serbia, then all of a sudden the electoral campaigns of the SNS were flooded with funds and they won the election. Does anyone seriously believe this happened in the absence of corruption? Anyone who thinks so must be hugely delusional.
The point that I am making is that if these two politicians were corrupt enough to undergo the political transformation that they did, and including Dacic whose corruption is undoubtable, then why should anyone be convinced that their push against corruption is genuine? By all means arrest men like Miskovic and punish them, but people must not be fooled by men like Nikolic, Vucic and Dacic.
(SCP UK, 14 December 2012 14:04)
Lets be honest, anyone who can see clearly knows that politics in the former Yugoslavia is ridden with corruption, as is the same with former socialist dictatorships. It is about principle, when all the evidence shows that the EU is in strong decline, we have politicians who used to be so anti-EU now becoming pro-EU. Either they are completely thick or have 'changed their minds' because of some outside persuasion, and when I say persuasion I mean certain offers being given. Then we see these men running the country, after being cheated in the election in 2008 when they held anti-EU views. My point is if men are willing to betray principles once, what says they wont do it again? Why should we presume they are completely trustworthy when they have changed their colours once before? While I admit it is hard to produce empirical evidence to PROVE they are corrupt, maybe one day it will emerge, but in the meantime I ask you, do you have evidence to suggest they are completely innocent from corruption?
(SCP UK, 14 December 2012 20:58)
You write alot about what could be termed "moral corruption" given what you claim to be their political U-turn. Do you have any evidence whatsoever beyond your mischievous speculation as evidence of any other form of corruption?
Furthermore, has the thought ever crossed your mind that those who formed the SNS may have done so for the simple reason that they, as are the majority of the Serbian public, fed up with Seselj's narrow-minded self-promotion and his use of SRS fund-raising to support his personal legal crusade in the Netherlands?
(Bob the Builder, 14 December 2012 18:00)
I have no idea what on earth your argument is then. So you're in other words telling me I'm talking rubbish, but you say you don't think they are 'whiter than white', make your mind up.
If you honestly believe that they were not truly anti-EU while they were SRS members then you don't have a clue what you are talking about. They were free to leave the party at any time, the fact that they ran an election on those lines and suddenly left is proof of this.
Pragmatic? Jesus Christ what does pragmatism show you on such an issue, there is no mid way in being pro-EU or anti-EU, you are either one or the other. In this climate if anyone is going to jump the fence they will turn against the EU because of what is happening inside the eurozone. Pragmatism is another way of politicians changing their minds to win votes, they have no principles but just go which ever way the wind blows.
Discussing this with you is pretty pointless, it would be different if you had complete faith in these politicians but while you tell me I have no evidence and therefore imply I am completely wrong you also admit you don't think they are whiter than white, so make your mind up. You seem a little confused to be honest, reassess the sitation. Are they corrupt politicians or not? I am asking, are they completely clean or not? I you think they are then fair enough thats your view, if not then I have no idea why you are arguing against me other than to play devils advocate merely for the sake of it.
(SCP UK, 15 December 2012 12:03)
You have clearly formed some narrow personal opinions about how the mind, politics and the world works. Sadly, those opinions do not accord with the real world.
For example, there is an infinite variety of opinion towards the EU. Very few take the extreme position of being 100% for or 100% against. Are you one of those extreamists?
And the same applies to just about every other point you raised, or will raise - the world is not black & white but a myriad of shades of gray.
You demanded that we "be honest". Surely honesty is about telling the truth and refering to facts. So far, you have done neither. All you have written is your personal anti-SNS bias.
My position regards this conversation is simple. If you want to accuse SNS members of something and be taken seriously, show us the evidence.
My position regards the current anti-corruption charge lead by Vucic. Carry on the good work.
My position regards corruption in Serbia. It's a way of life and part of the social fabric and will take generations to remove - if that's what is wanted. But you have to start somewhere.
My position regards the SNS's EU stance. Not sure. I suspect they're saying good things just to get Brussels' cash but really prefer to cosy up with Moscow.
(Bob the Builder, 15 December 2012 15:06)
While I agree with Miskovic's arrest we should be under no illusion that the Serbian government is making a genuine push against corruption, if we are to assume none of the current ministers are corrupt then this is incorrect.
To make it clear I am not an outright SRS supporter (though I agree with some policies), but the move which Nikolic and Vucic took against the SRS shows nothing but corruption. It is no secret that the coup which took place within the SRS was western sponsored, we saw (other than Seselj) the two highest ranking members of the SRS explicitly betray their party. Two politicians who were well known by their militant hostility towards the EU managed to change their views overnight and become some of the EU's best friends in Serbia, then all of a sudden the electoral campaigns of the SNS were flooded with funds and they won the election. Does anyone seriously believe this happened in the absence of corruption? Anyone who thinks so must be hugely delusional.
The point that I am making is that if these two politicians were corrupt enough to undergo the political transformation that they did, and including Dacic whose corruption is undoubtable, then why should anyone be convinced that their push against corruption is genuine? By all means arrest men like Miskovic and punish them, but people must not be fooled by men like Nikolic, Vucic and Dacic.
(SCP UK, 14 December 2012 14:04)
So, no evidence, just more of your innuendo and biased speculation.
It is not for me or anybody to prove 'innocence'. The burden of proof always falls to the accuser. It's strange how people wanting to be considered to offer intellectual debate, but only offer agenda driven speculation and innuendo, always seem to come up short on that simple concept.
And, to try to answer why the change in EU stance amongst the senior SNS personnel, I offer 3 possibilities.
1. They never were anti-EU whilst in the SRS, but were loyally following Seselj's leadership. A loyalty they are no longer bound to.
2. Whether they personally are for or against the EU, they have chosen to be pragmatic with the electorate. Compare results of SNS v SRS to understand that simple point.
3. Perhaps they are not as pro-EU as you think they are.
PS. Do I believe that Vucic and co are 'whiter than white'. Never. But the best thing that happened in Serbian politics was them casting that fool Seselj aside and the SRS disappearing electorally.
(Bob the Builder, 15 December 2012 00:28)
You have clearly formed some narrow personal opinions about how the mind, politics and the world works. Sadly, those opinions do not accord with the real world.
For example, there is an infinite variety of opinion towards the EU. Very few take the extreme position of being 100% for or 100% against. Are you one of those extreamists?
And the same applies to just about every other point you raised, or will raise - the world is not black & white but a myriad of shades of gray.
You demanded that we "be honest". Surely honesty is about telling the truth and refering to facts. So far, you have done neither. All you have written is your personal anti-SNS bias.
My position regards this conversation is simple. If you want to accuse SNS members of something and be taken seriously, show us the evidence.
My position regards the current anti-corruption charge lead by Vucic. Carry on the good work.
My position regards corruption in Serbia. It's a way of life and part of the social fabric and will take generations to remove - if that's what is wanted. But you have to start somewhere.
My position regards the SNS's EU stance. Not sure. I suspect they're saying good things just to get Brussels' cash but really prefer to cosy up with Moscow.
(Bob the Builder, 15 December 2012 15:06)
So, no evidence, just more of your innuendo and biased speculation.
It is not for me or anybody to prove 'innocence'. The burden of proof always falls to the accuser. It's strange how people wanting to be considered to offer intellectual debate, but only offer agenda driven speculation and innuendo, always seem to come up short on that simple concept.
And, to try to answer why the change in EU stance amongst the senior SNS personnel, I offer 3 possibilities.
1. They never were anti-EU whilst in the SRS, but were loyally following Seselj's leadership. A loyalty they are no longer bound to.
2. Whether they personally are for or against the EU, they have chosen to be pragmatic with the electorate. Compare results of SNS v SRS to understand that simple point.
3. Perhaps they are not as pro-EU as you think they are.
PS. Do I believe that Vucic and co are 'whiter than white'. Never. But the best thing that happened in Serbian politics was them casting that fool Seselj aside and the SRS disappearing electorally.
(Bob the Builder, 15 December 2012 00:28)
You write alot about what could be termed "moral corruption" given what you claim to be their political U-turn. Do you have any evidence whatsoever beyond your mischievous speculation as evidence of any other form of corruption?
Furthermore, has the thought ever crossed your mind that those who formed the SNS may have done so for the simple reason that they, as are the majority of the Serbian public, fed up with Seselj's narrow-minded self-promotion and his use of SRS fund-raising to support his personal legal crusade in the Netherlands?
(Bob the Builder, 14 December 2012 18:00)
While I agree with Miskovic's arrest we should be under no illusion that the Serbian government is making a genuine push against corruption, if we are to assume none of the current ministers are corrupt then this is incorrect.
To make it clear I am not an outright SRS supporter (though I agree with some policies), but the move which Nikolic and Vucic took against the SRS shows nothing but corruption. It is no secret that the coup which took place within the SRS was western sponsored, we saw (other than Seselj) the two highest ranking members of the SRS explicitly betray their party. Two politicians who were well known by their militant hostility towards the EU managed to change their views overnight and become some of the EU's best friends in Serbia, then all of a sudden the electoral campaigns of the SNS were flooded with funds and they won the election. Does anyone seriously believe this happened in the absence of corruption? Anyone who thinks so must be hugely delusional.
The point that I am making is that if these two politicians were corrupt enough to undergo the political transformation that they did, and including Dacic whose corruption is undoubtable, then why should anyone be convinced that their push against corruption is genuine? By all means arrest men like Miskovic and punish them, but people must not be fooled by men like Nikolic, Vucic and Dacic.
(SCP UK, 14 December 2012 14:04)
I have no idea what on earth your argument is then. So you're in other words telling me I'm talking rubbish, but you say you don't think they are 'whiter than white', make your mind up.
If you honestly believe that they were not truly anti-EU while they were SRS members then you don't have a clue what you are talking about. They were free to leave the party at any time, the fact that they ran an election on those lines and suddenly left is proof of this.
Pragmatic? Jesus Christ what does pragmatism show you on such an issue, there is no mid way in being pro-EU or anti-EU, you are either one or the other. In this climate if anyone is going to jump the fence they will turn against the EU because of what is happening inside the eurozone. Pragmatism is another way of politicians changing their minds to win votes, they have no principles but just go which ever way the wind blows.
Discussing this with you is pretty pointless, it would be different if you had complete faith in these politicians but while you tell me I have no evidence and therefore imply I am completely wrong you also admit you don't think they are whiter than white, so make your mind up. You seem a little confused to be honest, reassess the sitation. Are they corrupt politicians or not? I am asking, are they completely clean or not? I you think they are then fair enough thats your view, if not then I have no idea why you are arguing against me other than to play devils advocate merely for the sake of it.
(SCP UK, 15 December 2012 12:03)
Lets be honest, anyone who can see clearly knows that politics in the former Yugoslavia is ridden with corruption, as is the same with former socialist dictatorships. It is about principle, when all the evidence shows that the EU is in strong decline, we have politicians who used to be so anti-EU now becoming pro-EU. Either they are completely thick or have 'changed their minds' because of some outside persuasion, and when I say persuasion I mean certain offers being given. Then we see these men running the country, after being cheated in the election in 2008 when they held anti-EU views. My point is if men are willing to betray principles once, what says they wont do it again? Why should we presume they are completely trustworthy when they have changed their colours once before? While I admit it is hard to produce empirical evidence to PROVE they are corrupt, maybe one day it will emerge, but in the meantime I ask you, do you have evidence to suggest they are completely innocent from corruption?
(SCP UK, 14 December 2012 20:58)