OTPOR
From WRIWiki
Otpor campaign in Serbia 1998-2000
Bringing Down Slobodan Milosevic
By Majken Sorensen
Describe the problem: In 2000, Slobodan Milosevic had been in power for 13 years, and Serbia had been involved in four wars with neighbouring territories and NATO. Serbia had become an international pariah, and within Serbia there was little space for opposition. Elections were manipulated, independent media harassed and young people felt trapped and disillusioned about their future.
Goal of campaign: Bringing down Slobodan Milosevic
Vision: Since Otpor (which means “resistance”) brought together a diverse group of people aiming first and foremost to bring down Milosevic, their common vision was a Serbia without Milosevic. Otpor also had a vision of a democratic Serbia, a free press, free universities and a “normal” country. Otpor activists were aware of the need for further nonviolent action for democratisation - after the fall of Milosevic - and planned various forms of pressure and monitoring of the new government. However, in the event, it became clear that opinions about how to understand democracy differed and Otpor started to fall apart soon after achieving the downfall of Milosevic.
Strategy: Otpor started as an informal network of students in 1998. It has its roots in the daily student demonstrations against electoral fraud in the winter 1996/97. After the NATO bombing of 1999 Otpor started to grow, expanding outside Belgrade to be active all over Serbia. From the beginning, Otpor had a clear decision of using nonviolence only: this was largely pragmatic, because to use violence would be to meet Milosevic where he was strongest. They instilled an awareness of how nonviolence might work through organising training workshops. Another strategic choice was to have a relatively flat structure with great autonomy for the individual Otpor groups. Because of the relative lack of independent media, Otpor used a strategy of communicating directly with the Serbian population by using tactics of graffiti, leaflets, posters and street theatre, as well as making use of relatively new technologies such as the internet and text-messaging. Otpor used a strategic combination of humour and “black” actions. The humour was used to lower fear by making people laugh, and had the side effect of attracting attention and more members. The black actions were used as a contrast to show the seriousness of the organisation, especially from January to May 2000. When the police launched a major crackdown of Otpor from May 2000 with terrorist accusations, arrests and beatings, Otpor returned to silly actions which dramatised the overreaction by the police and authorities. Otpor also put pressure on the opposition political parties to unite behind one presidential candidate to stand against Milosevic when he called early elections in September 2000, which proved to be a crucial decision. Otpor accepted help in the form of money and nonviolence training from different institutes in the US and Europe, which has turned out to be a controversial decision. During the campaign the regime used this to accuse Otpor members of being traitors and NATO spies, and afterwards it has caused doubt among groups abroad working on nonviolence, which are suspicious of the motives of these institutes. Although the importance of such assistance should not be over-emphasised, this case shows how accepting such support can endanger the credibility of an organisation.
Tactics: In the month prior to the elections, Otpor launched its campaign “He’s finished”. The slogan appeared in black and white everywhere, especially as stickers over Milosevic’s election posters, and as graffiti painted on walls. Another campaign that Otpor initiated together with a couple of other organisation was called “It’s time”, which was an ordinary “get out to vote” campaign, encouraging people to participate in the election, since a high voter turnout was expected to help the opposition.
Otpor used a diverse range of nonviolent tactics: A long march from Belgrade to Novi Sad demanded unity among the democratic opposition parties. Rock concerts became associated with resistance to the regime. A celebration of the Orthodox New Year began as a party and concert but ended with photos from the wars and the names of everyone who died because of Milosevic’s politics, sending people home with the message “think what to do so we have something to celebrate next year”. Since humour was part of the overall strategy, this was reflected by using satiric and ironic messages in the actions: One of the very first actions Otpor did was called “It is rotten, it’s going to fall”. Two pumpkins were placed in a tree and faces cut out. One of them had a flower behind its ear, an easy way to recognise Mira Marković, the wife of Milošević. When Otpor activists shook the tree, the pumpkins fell down. The subtlety and humour would have been lost if the “rotten” connection between the pumpkins and the regime had been spelt out. A last example shows how an oppressors own words can be used against her: Mira Marković said that the Communists came to power with blood, so they would not leave power without blood. The Otpor activists then went to the hospital to donate blood and said “Here is our blood, now you can go”.
Many social groups took part in the movement to bring down Milosevic - strikes against electoral fraud played an important role - and the police were reluctant to move against them. In the climactic moment on 5 October 2000 when demonstrators from all over Serbia surrounded the parliament building in Belgrade, nonviolence proved vitally important - most police were unwilling even to try to disperse the crowd.
The downfall of Milošević was a necessary step in the democratisation of Serbia. However, subsequent progress has been disappointing and Otpor itself ceased to exist as a movement. Some of its activists are now prominent in non-governmental organisations, and some have been involved in running nonviolence training workshops for other groups seeking to counter electoral fraud, for instance in the Ukraine, Georgia and Belarus.
Resources: “Bringing Down a Dictator”, DVD, 60 minutes
Albert Cevallos, Whither the Bulldozer?: Nonviolent Revolution and the Transition to Democracy in Serbia (US Institute of Peace special report No 72 - downloadable from www.usip.org)
Web page for Centre for Applied NonViolent Action Strategies, which involves some former Otpor activist, includes articles by Otpor activists and others on their strategy and tactics: http://www.canvasopedia.org/content/serbian_case/otpor_strategy.htm
