As SDA Crumbles: Collapse of Executive Power Becomes More Likely

SARAJEVO, (Patria) - Does the SDA have the right to remain silent in the face of the evident crumbling of the state? If they received the trust of the majority of the electorate, they were also burdened with the greatest responsibility. Namely, there has not been such a situation before where the SDA is losing power and disintegrating within its own structure. Until now, elections brought privileges, and with the first real crisis, those privileges became tools for the party's collapse.

What will the SDA do in this crisis?

Of course, they will now try to shift the blame to SBB. Just as they did with DF at one time. Let's recall, when DF, as a partner in power, questioned certain director positions in public companies, the SDA immediately dismissed them. Then they chose SBB as a partner, which they are now accusing of causing chaos, after they participated in the dismissal of the Government of Tuzla Canton.

What is the essence of the SDA's catastrophe?

Out of 13 SDA deputies in the Assembly of Tuzla Canton, as many as 10 rejected the demands of the central committee in Sarajevo, and only then did the SDA react. Those who immediately accepted positions in the government were expelled from the party, including the new Prime Minister of the Tuzla Canton Government, Jakub Suljkanović, Enes Gegić, Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Slavena Vojinović, the new Minister of Culture, Sport and Youth, then Senad Alić, President of the Assembly of Tuzla Canton, and Husein Topčagić, Minister of Internal Affairs. Thus, ten SDA deputies and these five so-called SDA cadres chose government privileges over the party. In Tuzla, some journalists say: If all positions in the Tuzla Canton government had been offered to other SDA opportunists, they would have certainly been "comfortably filled".

If the SDA had to choose other parties (SBB and DF) as partners in power, the question is why they didn't choose the right people for themselves and pursue a serious personnel policy? Who chose this crowd of careerists and ignoramuses and pushed them into parliament, the executive power, and the SDA's leadership structure? Within itself, the SDA has long lacked a built-in hierarchy of values and quality personnel selection. Almost regularly, the 'connected' and mostly incompetent have had the final say. If expert governments were mentioned, they would reject it furiously, viewing the proposer as a psychiatric case.

The SDA has long been promoting its arbitrary structure at the expense of the state. Minor serious conflicts within the party have led to the collapse of the executive power system and pushed the state towards an abyss. After Tuzla and the increasingly likely dismissal of the Government of Sarajevo Canton, one must ask, are there any cadres left in the SDA who will remain with the party if they are stripped of their functions, positions, or any privileges?

Because of all this, the SDA today resembles a private corporation where all members are shareholders, drawing privileges from the party in proportion to their position in the party hierarchy. Now that everything is collapsing, it is evident that for most SDA opportunists, the key motive for their engagement prevails: What kind of party, I want power.

The SDA's responsibility in the face of the dangers of the state's collapse is evident. The SDA has lost the support of the majority in both the Federal and State Parliaments. This calls into question, above all, the survival of the Federation Government, whose direction is unclear. And all this, seven months before the next general elections.

Today, the SDA's incredible indifference to this crumbling of the state is also being revealed. In their discussions about expelling disobedient cadres, they are still only talking about cleaning their own ranks.

Today, the true face of a party long built on nepotism, corruption, cronyism, and incompetence is being revealed. Unfortunately, all this dirt within its own ranks, which they want to deal with, gave the SDA its key strength in the elections. It was a system maintained by clientelism, unhealthy careerism, and privileges. The crowd of individuals who have so far flirted with concern for national interests and sworn by patriotism has proven reliable only when personal interest is involved. /S. O./