Democratic Transition in Croatia: Value Transformation, Education, and Media

CONCLUSION: Building Liberal Democracy in Croatia

CONCLUSION Building Liberal Democracy in Croatia Knut Vesterdal T he chapters included in this book have in different ways contributed to an understanding of Croatia’s democratic transition since 1990 and of the role played in that process by the transformation of political values. An important element of consolidating a liberal democracy is, obviously, the creation of formal institutions that promote the nature of this regime type. These institutions include the rule of law, the elective legislature, universal suffrage, political parties, and so on. However, underpinning this book is a consensus that these elements, however necessary, are not sufficient elements of what we may refer to as liberal democracy. There are several examples of states that have implemented democratic institutions but in spite of this cannot be defined as liberal democracies. The transition from authoritarian to democratic rule is always filled with challenges, and Croatia does not represent an exception in this sense. It takes years, even decades, to overcome the problems related to a period of transition. Most Western democracies developed institutions, norms, and values over decades, if not centuries, and still remain imperfect, according to Robert A. Dahl, who describes Western democracies as polyarchies.1 Croatian President Stipe Mesić, who was reelected to a second five-year term in January 2005 after winning over the Croatian Democratoc Union (HDZ) candidate Jadranka Kosor, stated: “I am proud of the maturity of Croatia’s democracy. . . . Today Croatia is taking big steps into Europe,” and “My appeal to you is let’s all head together towards a just, modern Croatia.”2 BUILDING LIBERAL DEMOCRACY IN CROATIA 355 These statements point to important aspects of the challenges in Croatian politics and society, aspects that are analyzed and discussed in this book. In this volume, the authors locate and analyze the transformation of Croatian values during the past sixteen years, in the process giving us an overview of important aspects of Croatian history in the same period. Some of these are related to what we refer to as a civic culture, which undergirds the development of liberal democracy, which again has been a stated goal for Croatia from the word go.3 In this concluding discussion I first present the relation between liberal democracy, civic culture, and its values, offering arguments that tie the elements together in a band of philosophical necessity , and then go on to discuss the role of nationalism within this discourse. I argue that exclusive nationalism is incompatible with the values of liberal democracy and thus exists as a crucial challenge in Croatia’s approach toward integration into Western Europe and the European Union. I then apply this theoretical approach to comment on the contributions to the book, discussing how they relate to each other within the framework of the theory adopted. With the contributions in view I argue that Croatia is on her way to consolidating liberal democracy but that it will still take years to overcome the challenges related to changing values, both in people’s minds and in the specific political culture, which is a precondition for making liberal democracy work in a legitimate and effective way. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LIBERAL DEMOCRACY AND CIVIC CULTURE: VALUES As mentioned, one of the main goals of Croatian society today is to integrate into Europe, join the European Union (EU), and thus to be a part of “the modern society of states,” with its free market and economic prosperity. The way to make these ambitions come true is through consolidation of liberal democracy. A prerequisite for being a member of the EU is the establishment of certain liberal institutions, which also implies substantial emphasis on the liberal values connected to these, which again is linked to the establishment of liberal democracy. The latter term is frequently used by politicians and scholars without giving sufficient attention to the signification of it. There are many ways of describing this type of regime, but there are still some common characteristics we have to take into account, and it may be appropriate to repeat Ramet’s definition in the introduction to this volume “By liberal democracy I mean a system based on the principle ‘government of the people, by the people, and for the people,’ with multi-candidate elections , an independent judiciary and separation of powers, and an uncen- 356 KNUT VESTERDAL sored press, and committed to the principles of rule of law, the protection...