Refusing to admit defeat

Zdravko Saveski
Political scientist and a member of Levica

It is difficult to admit defeat. In everyday life, as well as in politics – it is difficult to admit defeat. Admitting defeat is a virtuous move, characteristic of people with integrity. Only they can admit that they have been defeated. Others always find excuses for their defeat, it is always someone else’s fault and they never blame themselves for it.
Admitting defeat is an important integral part of democratic culture, without which democracy building in one country can not succeed. In a healthy democracy, which organizes fair and democratic elections, everyone has equal chances to convince the public of the regularity of their own politics, and if defeated, it is not only virtuous, but also important for the democratic process to admit defeat. If he does not do that, he does not hurt the political opponent, but weakens the faith in democracy, something that, if he is devoted to democracy, should be unacceptable.
We don’t see this in post-referendum Macedonia. The facts about the referendum are inexorable. Significantly less than half of the voters went to vote in the referendum and therefore it was unsuccessful. Since it did not have the necessary turnout, the question of the number and percentage of  “for” votes was irrelevant. Such are the rules for all countries and for all referenda. But, no! For Macedonia and this referendum, the government insists that other rules should apply after losing the referendum. The government is constructing a manipulative issue for the referendum, the government was the only one that conducted an organized campaign for the referendum, almost all media supporters of the referendum have a dominant presence, some media even a monopoly, so that fair conditions for a referendum campaign can not even be discussed. There are many indications that the government filled the ballot boxes and that turnout was not as much as the official results showed. But, no! It is the government that complains. Readiness to admit its defeat, and this in such a state of affairs – it will not. Just excuses and running away from political responsibility.
It is especially worth considering the excuses about the Voters List. Did they not know what the situation with the Voters List was when they scheduled the referendum? Why did not they mention that the Voter List was problematic during the campaign, and it “occurred to them” only after losing the referendum? Second problem of the Voters List – before the elections in 2016, SDSM participated in the editing of the list and gave its approval. In these past two years, for the local elections in 2017, the Voter List grew by 30,228 voters, and for the 2018 referendum, vice versa, it decreased by 8,308 voters. These facts raise questions that the government is still not answering. First, how in just ten months, from the parliamentary elections of 2016 to the local elections 2017, the number of voters in the Voters List grew by as much as 30 thousand? If this was a natural process, why in 2018 the number of voters did not grow by a similar figure, but even decreased? If SDSM gave the green light to the Voters List in 2016, and if during the course of its rule in 2017 the Voters ‘List increased by 30 thousand, then how did SDSM dare to complain about the Voters’ List in 2018? If they thought that the Voters’ List was troublesome, why did they stay silent all this time and did not initiate its additional revision before the referendum? Yes, it’s easier to look for excuses for your own failure. But in every normal country it will be considered unworthy behavior of the one who suffered defeat.
And what do we do now? After the defeat of the referendum, Zaev had a moral and political obligation to resign. Organizing new elections is unnecessary; it would have been legitimate for the Parliament to elect a new Prime Minister from the ranks of SDSM, who would finally start working on the implementation of their electoral programme, for which they won all the votes in the election. But this would be done by a virtuous politician who contributes to democracy in his country. Zaev proved that it was not. He refuses to admit defeat and, moreover, desperately tries to implement what he has conceived, regardless of how much abuse, laziness, wasting money, violating principles it means. The referendum was unsuccessful, let’s try our luck in the Parliament. If this does not work, let’s go to elections. And if elections fail too, what will be next? Is there an option of a resignation in Zaev’s plan? Or, as irreplaceable as he imagines to be, regardless of the number of defeats, does power belong to him? But wait, didn’t we fight against this kind of irreplaceability of politicians when we fought against Gruevski?
The options around Zaev are closing and he knows it. The imperial master supports his vassal in everything, but only if the vassal delivers what he requires of him. Before the referendum, Zaev was well-fulfilling the task they gave him to create conditions for Macedonia to be urgently accepted to NATO within the geostrategic plans of the United States. But after this failed referendum, it is no longer so certain that the vassal will be able to do his job. And when it becomes clear, the imperial master, and not the people, will be the one who will replace the incompetent vassal. Therefore, Zaev’s position is fragile. And that’s why he continues to harass the public with his agreement with Tsipras, and therefore has stalled the work of institutions that do not work as it is, but are put on stand-by mode and operate only in the creation of conditions for Macedonia to become a formal part of NATO. Before the referendum, Zaev seemed to be on the right track to become a long-time ruler of Macedonia. But now, he might lose even his position.

Therefore, he tries in any way to deliver to the imperial master what he was instructed to deliver. In the context of an unsuccessful referendum and in the context when MPs of VMRO-DPMNE, as well as MPs from SDSM, have not received election mandate from citizens to vote for a change of the Constitution, he wants to “convince” MPs of VMRO-DPMNE to act in the opposite manner. It is too naive to believe that arguments will eventually persuade the MPs of VMRO-DPMNE to vote on constitutional changes. Bribery and blackmail! These are Zaev’s “arguments”! Whether these “arguments” will be successful, remains to be seen. At this point, I would just like to point out the behavior of the camarilla supporters and SDSM clients who only want to build an image of themselves as opponents of corruption. Although it is clear to them what kind of “arguments” Zaev uses to convince VMRO-DPMNE MPs, they join in ignoring the fact that the referendum was unsuccessful and support the “finding of solution” in the Parliament. Have you ever asked yourselves – is this how Gruevism is overcome or reproduced? Is this how European or Balkan Macedonia is being built?
Poverty, not the name, is the priority that needs to be solved in this country. If SDSM really was a Social Democratic Party, that is, if the name of the party was more than an ornament, there would have been no need to emphasize this separately. From the first day they would have been engaged in solving the problem of the impoverishment of the vast majority of the people. With the same enthusiasm that they have in “resolving” national issues. They still manage to deceive people with fairy tales, with NATO, with the EU, but for how long? Start doing your job and lay off the excuses, fairy tales and clientelism, you can not fool the people forever.