Željko Kerum, mayor of Split, founded a new political party in Split. Ceremony was held in Sky restaurant, at the fourth floor of his Joker shopping centre in Split. The event was aired by TV Dalmacija, his local TV station and replayed twice during the day.
There are more reasons for such over-exposure by his media outlet than pure propaganda. By airing and recording that event, Kerum tried to prevent most of Croatian media - increasingly hostile due to his major faux pas at national television less than week ago - from distorting his words or the character of his party.
In his speech Kerum denied that he was "nationalist or racist", and explained that he only "gave true answer" to "provocative question" - the same answer that would truthfully tell "majority of Croats and Serbs". Then he tried to describe himself as "good man who always helped people", "that he was raised that way" and that his patriotism didn't include "hatred towards anyone". Trying to dispell the myth of Kerum as flaming Croatian bigot, mayor of Split reminded the audience of his independent candidates' list on May 2009 elections, that included ethnic Serbs and atheists.
Is this non-apology going to help Kerum get out of trouble? Probably not. Reputation of a bigot is easily gained and difficult to discard these days. In order to quash it, Kerum would have to employ all kinds of spectacular gestures like Sanader's attending of SDSS Orthodox Christmas party. Such gestures would be rejected as hypocrisy by his critics and interpreted as a sign of weakness by his followers. Kerum concluded that the best course is simply to contain the damage.
Controversy created by Kerum's "unfortunate remarks", on the other hand, again gave Croatian shallow media and commentariat perfect excuse not to report or comment on more important issues - character and platform of his new party and its eventual effect on Croatia's politics and future.
The first phrase that comes to mind after watching the birth of Kerum's party is "tabula rasa". Just like its founder, it lacks strong political or ideological foundation. Kerum himself admitted by claiming that "the people are disatisfied with two major parties" (HDZ and SDP) and "that the market" (for new parties) "has opened", allowing his new party to fill it. Kerum - as self-made "common man" without previous political career and experience - is going to fill the void created by widespread disappointment with Croatian political class. In doing so, he wouldn't be constrained by his political beliefs, logic or ideological consistency.
That inconsistency could be found in the name of party itself - Croatian Citizens Party (Hrvatska građanska stranka). On one hand, Kerum is forced to use name "Croatian" just like all those Croatian nationalist parties created in 1990, when Croatia was still part of Yugoslavia. On the other hand, by using a word "citizen", Kerum tries to give impression of more "hip", left-wing definition of Croatian state that doesn't emphasise ethnicity - just like multi-ethnic "civic" or "citizens" parties in neighbouring Bosnia-Herzegovina.
In this way Kerum tries to get to the Holy Grail of Croatian politics - position in political centre that could allow him to shift allegiances and policies depending to various economic and political circumstances. If a right-wing coalition is required, his party will be "Croatian". If a left-wing coalition is required, his party will be "citizens".
Another way to achieve Ideological ambiguity of Kerum's party is in personnel politics. None of the people in the new party leadership had any previous experience in political parties - they are almost exclusively Kerum's relatives, business partners or former top employees in his companies. None of them is likely to articulate some meaningful political program or original idea.
The platform of the party - exposed in parts by Željko Šundov, deputy mayor and Kerum's long-time right-hand man - is also hardly original. It looks like a carbon copy of almost any Croatian political party platform with usual set of obligatory declarations (human rights, democracy, UN, EU and NATO membership) and contradictory goals (pro-business policies vs. generous welfare state). Few hints of ideological affiliations in platform, however, point rightwards - mostly due to platform stating "support for all peaceful civic religions" instead of "freedom of religion" or "separation of church and state".
Those hints would be emphasised by anti-Kerum media in order for his party to be branded as "right-wing" or, thanks to verbal outbursts of Kerum and some of his over-enthusiastic supporters, "far right". In my view, however, "right-wing populism" is better term. Kerum himself explained his party as an attempt to "enter market", and the Split and his surroundings are currently more right-wing than other parts of country. In other words, Kerum would adapt his party ideology and policies towards ideological framework of his average voter.
At the same time, it is clear that Kerum has lofty ambitions of being a player at national level. He described HGS as "third strongest party in Croatia" - quite a stretch, considering that it was just founded and never had opportunity to test its strength at elections or opinion polls. Kerum, therefore, expects either to be kingmaker whose party will decide who has majority in Sabor or even to be prime minister himself.
HGS and Kerum, however, can't achieve that at this time. Kerum yesterday predicted that his party could win 10 seats in Sabor. This is feasible, but mostly at the expense of HDZ in Dalmatia - already mauled in May 2009 elections. Even with so many seats, HGS now looks like mostly regional phenomenon, somewhat stronger than regional HDSSB party in Slavonia.
In order to rise above that level, HGS would have to be something more than beacon for disgruntled right-wingers in the areas Denis Kuljiš recently began to call "Eastern Croatia". Sticking to mindset of Split and its hinterland would only create perfect excuse for SDP and HDZ to finally create their long-sought "Grand coalition" and preserve status quo by setting themselves as guardians of "proper European democracy" and against Kerum and other "dangerous irresponsible populists".
Recent Comments