Halfway down the Danube

A Radical Party President -- whether he actually does anything or not -- would probably stop Serbia's slow process of rehabilitation dead for months or years.

So, it looks like there aren't going to be any winners.

Question: Do you see any future for Serbia and its neighbours (FYROM, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosova/o, Albania) that doesn't include them becoming peripheral labour-exporting associate member-states of the EU?

So, it looks like there aren't going to be any winners.

Actually, I think Tadic will probably win. (Though not certainly. Various things could sink him.)

Question: Do you see any future for Serbia and its neighbours (FYROM, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosova/o, Albania) that doesn't include them becoming peripheral labour-exporting associate member-states of the EU?

Yes.

Doug M.

Well Tadic will certanly win the presidential elections and this will be great victory for him and Democratic Party. They will offcourse try to influence existing goverment in some way or even try to split it. My point is that people voted for candidate rather then for party.Its very likely only people who are for and support Marsicanins party voted for him. Tadic showed more energy then Marsicanin and radical candidate got his usual number of votes and nice suprise was Karic. With new constituion new elections are to follow and I dont think Democratic party will have that high number of votes.
P.S.
Less then 50% went to vote.

Doug:

My apologies for my pessimism. It's just that I see a fairly large gap between that cluster of countries and many of their post-Communist neighbours, economically and politically, and I'm not sure that much is happening to reduce the disparities. Or am I wrong?

Marko: From here, Tadic looks pretty strong. I wonder how much good he'll do for the Democrats, though. If he gets in, he'll be in a very strong position compared to the rest of his party colleagues...

Randy: I can't speak so much about B-H, Macedonia, Albania, or Kosovo, as I've visited those either briefly or not at all.

Serbia, though, has hidden depths. The macroeconomic statistics are certainly dismal, but they don't tell the whole story.

Keep in mind that Serbia was a reasonably prosperous part of the former Yugoslavia -- especially if you don't include Kosovo. Serbia "should" have a pcGDP about 50%-60% that of Croatia, or a bit more. PPP adjusted, that would be more like 60%-80%. Either of these figures would make Serbia a very plausible EU candidate.

Also, although Serbia's pcGDP would be lower, its larger population means more "depth on the bench" in terms of human resources. In terms of things like educational levels, there wasn't much difference between prewar Serbia (without Kosovo) and prewar Croatia.

So why is Serbia in such a mess? Well, like everyone in the FY, they suffered massive dislocation from the breakup itself. Unlike Croatia, say, they weren't in a position to shift quickly to other markets and suppliers. Add years of sanctions; a decade of grotesque corruption and mismanagement under Milosevic; diversion of resources into the failed wars in Bosnia and Croatia; brain drain worse than anywhere in the region except perhaps Bosnia; and, last but not least, the NATO bombing, which single-handedly knocked another 25% or so off of Serbia's GDP.

The rest of the FY had these problems too. Tudjman's regime, for instance, was just as corrupt as Milosevic's. But Croatia was richer to begin with, and more geographically favored. Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia, meanwhile, where always poor. Serbia got hit harder than anyone but Bosnia, and had more to lose than anyone but Croatia.

So, if Serbia gets its act at least halfway together, it should bob back upwards towards its "natural" position at the middle of the Balkan league tables, rather than the bottom. With /good/ leadership, IMO it could do a lot better than that. As I said, the human capital is there. There are still a lot of smart, ambitious, well-educated Serbs in Serbia, and they're not all trying to emigrate to Canada. Give them some capital and a government that's halfway clean and reasonably functional, and I think they could amaze you.

If you really want me to, I could list half a dozen specific industries where I think Serbia could be quite competitive. Steel is one. Pharmaceuticals are another. But I think you get the idea.

Doug M.

So, if Serbia gets its act at least halfway together, it should bob back upwards towards its "natural" position at the middle of the Balkan league tables, rather than the bottom. With /good/ leadership, IMO it could do a lot better than that. As I said, the human capital is there. There are still a lot of smart, ambitious, well-educated Serbs in Serbia, and they're not all trying to emigrate to Canada. Give them some capital and a government that's halfway clean and reasonably functional, and I think they could amaze you.

I wouldn't be amazed, actually. My main problems lie in relation to the question of Serbia's governance. It's true that Serbia has a lot of assets, but if it remains semi-detached from the wider European community under a series of nationalist governments unpopular outside of its frontiers, these could begin to dissipate.

If you really want me to, I could list half a dozen specific industries where I think Serbia could be quite competitive. Steel is one. Pharmaceuticals are another. But I think you get the idea.

I do. Thanks!