January 1997 Monitoring.

(This summary is based on the January reports of all of the countries, except for Turkey, whose report is from December 1996. There were no reports from Macedonia and Romania available).

Mariana Lenkova

ALBANIA

In January 1997 the Albanian press focused their attention on different problems of their fellow nationals living in some of the neighboring countries, as well as on major political events which took place there (e.g. the anti-government rallies in Bulgaria and the FRY). This resulted in mainly informative reports on Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey, and some more or less biased materials on the other Balkan neighbors.

GREECE got its usual wide coverage, due to the ever-present "Albanian emigrants problem", namely the presence of anti-Albanian feelings in the Greek society. The greater part of the newspapers were putting the blame for this "racist treatment" of their brothers solely on the Greek side: "With guns against Albanians [...] Greek Albanophobia. Over 400 police stations have been set up in the outskirts of Athens. The Greek Foreign Ministry denies "the broom", while the emigrants’ anxiety heightens" (KJ, 8); "The abdomen of the Trojan Horse is cut open. The Hellenic kiss turns into a bite" (R, 8). There were others, however, who found Berisha’s passivity in solving this very issue the biggest problem: "The emigrants: Berisha, protect us! Insecurity and fear among our 200,000 emigrants in our Southern neighbor" (KJ, 7); "Why does Tirana shut up in this situation" (ZP, 11). It should be mentioned that ZP, in its January 15th issue, had a whole section on the reaction of the Greek press in defense of the innocent Albanians: "Don’t shoot at the Albanians."

MACEDONIA came to the fore when the papers reported that there had been no Albanian language program on the Macedonian national TV on New Year’s Eve ["Macedonian TV expelled the Albanians" (RD, 9)] and when the protests of the Macedonian students against the teaching of the Albanian language at the university level were covered ["The absurd in the civilized world" (ZP, 16)].

As regards SERBIA, the coverage was based again on the conditions of the Albanian minority in Kosovo, which has always been "the victim of diplomatic trifles" (R, 5). Even in the cases when the opposition rallies in Belgrade were discussed, the Kosovo theme was present: "Whom will the Kosovo people greet in Belgrade?[...] The Serbian Nazis denounce Milosevic today for his failure to achieve the ultimate objective. The greatest part of the Serb opposition comprises of Nazis and of extreme right people, so if this tendency is not killed now, Nazism will continue to live in Serbia" (ZP, 9, quoting Toronto Sun’s interview with political commentator Erik Morgdis). This sounded like a sensible warning, especially when it came together with similar suggestions in other papers: "Milosevic is provoking war in Kosovo [...] Whenever a war for democracy is waged in Serbia, Milosevic starts waging a new bloody war. There is no more Croatia or Bosnia, Kosovo is his last chance, but also his last lost battle" (ZP, 22, quoting Vuk Draskovic).

Guide to newspaper initials: RD Rilindja Demokratike (the paper of the Democratic Party); ZP Zeri i Popullit (the paper of the Socialist Party); Rep Republika (the paper of the Republican Party); PQ Poli i Qendres (the paper of the Social Democratic Party and the Party of the Democratic Alliance); GS Gazeta Shqiptare (independent); KJ Koha Jone (independent); A Albania (independent); R Rilindja (independent).

The Bulgarian media followed the tendency from the previous months to cover the other Balkan states in order to make a comparison in respect to (and at the expense of) Bulgaria itself. This tendency was even more pronounced in this month which was characterized by profound social unrest and anti-government rallies all around the country which culminated in the ruling Socialist party resigning from power in late January.

The implication in most of the articles on ALBANIA was that even that "backward" country "has overtaken us": "We are lagging behind even Albania which was once far behind Bulgaria..." (C, 4-5); "Our poverty is worse than the post-war poverty of 1919, now we are worse off than the Albanians" (T, 13). All these comparisons sounded rather bitter and self-ironical. They were obviously not meant to present a favorable picture of Albania, but to criticize the Bulgarians themselves. This was shown in an even stronger way through the reversal of a well-known stereotypical expression of the "heating coil" which used to be associated with Albanian "backwardness", while now "Albanian Heating Coil Heats Up Faster" (C, 20).

GREECE was covered mainly in regards to the so-called "Pomak nation" and to the issue of the returning of Paissy’s Slav-Bulgarian History. The former was covered unanimously in all the mainstream papers, stressing that "Greek Emissaries Agitate for Pomak Nation in Pirin" (S, 2); "Greeks Push Pomak Encyclopedia in the Rhodopes (headline)... The book advocates that the Pomaks are not Bulgarians, [but] ... Greeks" (S, 24). It even made the proclamation of "24 Chassa" that there are "200,000 Greeks of Bulgarian descent" sound simply as a counterpoint to the Greek "Pomaks-Greeks". At the same time, it is notable to point out that in some of the commentaries on the second major issue, the authors appealed for seeking a compromise and even for Bulgaria to give up its claims: "We should not fight over Paissy’s history. Every scandal over the sacred to Bulgarians Slav-Bulgarian History is shameful. (...) Whether the Greeks will demand the manuscript or not is not the issue. Bulgaria should preserve its dignity and not haggle if asked to return it. (...) By no means should this country or its representatives try to show muscle and refuse to hand over the book if asked by the Greeks. Because then we may lose both the Zographu monastery and the manuscript." (S, 11), while others hoped that the Greeks might show understanding: "The Greeks can best understand our pain for the valuables exported from Bulgaria" (C, 14). Apart from these two topics, Greece kept its image of an intolerant state ["Greeks Do Not Want Guest Workers" (headline) and "illegal immigration is a great problem and until it is settled it will continue to generate racism and xenophobia." (24Ch, 9)] and a state which is constantly looking for profit ["EU Injects ECU 8,000 Mln into Greece, Athens Gains Most from EU Membership" (S, 4)]. The only positive references to the country had to do with descriptions of the traditions and the "fiery temperament and ability to enjoy life" (NT) of the Greeks.

As regards MACEDONIA, the "language problem" continued to dominate the scene. However, it is interesting that there were many more articles appealing for acceptance of the realities, rather than looking back into past disputes: "The realities today are that there is a Macedonian language which, though it evolved from the Bulgarian, is a different language. This is the language in which several generations were taught at school, in which books and newspapers are published and films made. This is the literary language in which Macedonians speak, write and read today (...) And if we wish to promote cooperation with Macedonia we have no choice but to face the facts." (Do, 3); "Now we should decide what is best for us: a dogmatic linguistic dispute or improving relations with our Macedonian brethren. In any case, any further continuation of this dispute is in the interest only of pathological anti-Bulgarians nostalgic of the Yugo times in Skopje" (T, 15). In discussing the neighbor’s internal affairs, the press maintained the image of Macedonia as an undemocratic state, especially when dealing with ethic Bulgarians: "Nothing has changed in Macedonia five years after the proclamation of its independence (...) 30 per cent of the citizens of Macedonia who have ventured to identify themselves as Bulgarians live in constant fear, persecution and harassment by the Macedonians secret services" (De, 14). These implications culminated in a rather powerful article on the anniversary of "Bloody Bojik in Macedonia": "No one knows how many mass graves were dug on that Bloody Bojik in the long-suffering land along the Vardar. A total of 140,000 people were shot in the former Yugoslavia immediately after the Second World War, historian Vladimir Dedier, official biographer of Josip Broz Tito, claims. After the break between the Yugo marshal and Stalin in 1948 still more passed through the prisons and death camps organized after Stalin’s model. Bulgarians formed the bulk of these as a percentage per capita of the population. A large photo of human bones ran through the article - "the remains of those exhumed in June 1996 near Letevci in Macedonia" (T, 3).

The stories on ROMANIA lacked the usual negative and ironical suggestions. In fact, Bulgaria itself got all the irony, as in the case of Albania. There were references of Bulgaria’s and Romania’s reversed positions: "In December 1989 there was no closer and friendlier country for Romania than Bulgaria. [...] But things started changing four years ago and today Bulgarians and Romanians have almost changed places in the civilization ratings. [...] In the minds of ordinary Romanians Bulgaria is associated with the Wild West. The hundreds of petty smugglers also contribute to Bulgaria’s unenviable reputation. [...] On the markets ordinary Romanians see Bulgarians in a most unfavorable light." (Sega, 23-29). This bitter comparison was shown even better in an interview with Philip Bay, American political scientist, journalist and entrepreneur in Bulgaria who was quoted as saying that "most Bulgarians still wish to think that Bulgaria is superior to and much more advanced (politically, economically and culturally) compared to countries like Romania, Albania and Macedonia. [This is] national self-delusion... Today each of these countries offers better short-term and long-term opportunities for investment because of its raw materials, better (almost virgin) opportunities for investment in tourism and more favorable geographic location from the point of view of Europe. Most of the enterprises in Romania are at a higher technological level and are more export-oriented to the West than the Bulgarian." (Sega, 9-15).

SERBIA got its coverage primarily on the basis of the protests in Belgrade which were often compared with the similar processes in Bulgaria, pointing out that "Having seen the mass protests in Serbia, the Bulgarians now want to follow their neighbors’ lead" (NT, 14-15). The greater part of the articles were positive, and still there were warnings that "[T]he members of the opposition [...] have often outdone Milosevic in courting the nation’s pride and hatred" (Sega, 16-22); "As a historian I should say I have certain fears that nationalism may push democracy into the background in that country. For more than a century and under all kinds of circumstances, nationalism has been above everything else in Serbia" (De, 17 quoting historian Bobby Bobev). The attitude towards the Serbian opposition acquired an even strongly pronounced negative nuance when the condition of the Bulgarians in the Western Outlands was discussed: "It makes no difference to the Bulgarians in Tsaribrod [Dimitrovgrad] who is in power in Belgrade - the Socialists of Milosevic or Draskovic’s Zajedno... Draskovic would continue Milosevic’s policy of erasing the ethnic awareness of Bulgarians in the Western Outlands" (C, 8).

Though the interpretations of Islam as a threat, coming from TURKEY, were present, they were not very numerous: "Islamic Global Force Trained in Istanbul" (T, 5). It is notable however that a more pragmatic view was voiced in an interview with an International Relations professor from Marmara University: "The Turkish Prime Minister merely uses Islam to achieve political ends of his own... Erbakan and Ciller are both being just pragmatic. They change their rhetoric depending on the situation [...]. Erbakan’s party garnered only 20% of the vote. That’s what all their strength amounts to. The other people do not have pro-Islamic leanings. That is why their intention to introduce Islamic rules will prove a failure" (168Ch, 3-9). Other "traditional" topics like the "aggressiveness" and the "sexual habits" of the Turks were also covered, usually presenting their messages in a rather implicit and meaningful way. However, provoked by an article in the Turkish press on the alleged desire of Bulgarian football player Kostadinov to change his nationality and religion, the Bulgarian papers produced the most synthesized stereotype on the Turks: "However, this bomb had to explode in order to show to the Bulgarians who hire themselves out to Turkish teams that our neighbors are dangerous partners. And perfidious as well, because the sword of another religion will be always dangling over the Christians’ heads" (24Ch, 15). Kostadinov: "This fabricated lie is the nastiest thing I have ever heard".

In January there were comparatively few articles on the ethnic and religious minorities in the country. The ROMA were present in the crime columns of the papers, where the readers learnt about cases of organized thefts - mostly of food, timber and coal - by large groups of Roma: "Hungry Gypsies Loot Sugar Refinery" (De, 21); "Starving Steal Stiffs from Incinerator; Gypsies forage among dead animals in dumps, HEI horrified" (T, 23). Perhaps because of the critical situation of this minority whose members are hardly surviving in the present economic crisis, there were some objective articles which showed that there are many Roma who try to make a living in all kinds of ingenious ways: "Gypsies Barter Wicker Baskets for Loaf of Bread" (NT, 29-30); "Roma Beauties Belly-Dance Nude for a Living" (S, 17). The ethnic TURKS and the Bulgarian Mohammedans were again discussed mostly in regard to the political activity of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF) as well as to the threat of "Turkization" and "Turkish economic domination" (24 Ch, 30) in the predominantly Turkish populated regions. Still, Antonina Zheliazkova, an expert on inter-cultural relations, expressed a rather optimistic opinion: "[W]hen a nation is heading to misery, inter-ethnic tensions mount. However, it is just the opposite in Bulgaria [...] A ‘fraternization’ of Christians and Muslims to cope with the crisis has been observed of late" (24Ch, 9). Although there were not many references to the non-traditional denominations, it is quite notable that January saw the first ever article examining the implications of "sects" and "sectarianism" (that is the way those denominations are usually called) where the author asked the real taboo question: "Has any journalist ever bothered to check if there is a grain of truth in all allegations of the evil intentions of foreign missionaries in this country?" (De, 7), thus making the first attempt to be more objective and not to follow the already established negative stereotypes in the whole media.

Guide to newspaper initials: 24 Ch "24 Chassa", C "Continent",De "Demokratsiya", Do "Douma", SN "Standart News", T "Dneven Troud", NT "Noshten Troud", Sega "Sega" magazine, 168 Ch "168 Chassa".

The Greek media covered the main events taking place in the Balkans during the month. However, pure informative articles were published only in respect to Bulgaria, while the other Balkan countries were presented in the light of some of the "traditional" stereotypes associated with them.

Thus ALBANIA got the usual depiction of an economically devastated country whose citizens "are coming our way again, in waves, towards the friendly Romeiko [Greek people] to make up for their losses . Now they will not all remain simple workers but determined to make a lot of money and having smarted from their disaster, and as they have it a little in their blood, they will dash by groups into illegality" (Eth., 20). The stereotype of the Albanian criminal was carried over and over again, leading to exclamations like "Let them call us racist. We are tired caressing all scums that came here uninvited, so as not to lose the reputation of hospitable Greeks. I am seriously considering in fact to move to Albania, as it will be quieter there since all the outlaws are here" (Ad.T., 12). At the same time, and for the first time to such extent, there were many comments and articles on the climate of racism and hysteria, which called for self-control. "Not all Albanians are the same, we should not as a society lead ourselves to the extremes and to a witch hunt" (E.T., 7); "As part of our recent racism , Albanians are to be blamed for everything." (E.T., 9).

The "name-problem" remained the main discussed issue as regards MACEDONIA: "In the encyclopedia "Nea Domi" the entry "Skopje" doesn’t exist! The authors have adopted the Slavs’ position. The reader is referred to the entry Macedonia. I wonder, what will our children learn in the end? That there exist two Macedonias or that Greece is trying to falsify History?" (Ad.T., 12). Reactions like the latter were frequent and they did not contribute to the building of a positive image of the neighboring state at all. It seemed that only culture may be a source of good words for Macedonia: "Cultural bridge between Skopje and Greece" (Eth, 7)

Apart from describing the gloomy economic situation in ROMANIA, the Greek press did not fail to mention the name of that country whenever a foreign suspect happened to be Romanian: "The cold-blooded murderers were the three Romanians" (AP., 18). This pattern was not anything unusual because the Romanians are the "number two" in the list of (foreign) usual suspects (after the Albanians).

January showed a stronger tendency of negativism towards the regime in SERBIA. There was even an article, incriminating all the Greek media for having changed their stands so easily: "Let’s go back to Slobodan Milosevic. Let’s recall how the Greek mass media presented him during all these last few years. Let’s remember the eulogies, the daily praises and the positive characterizations. ‘Ingenious politician!’ ‘Man of vision!’ ‘Daring leader!’ But during the last months, mainly since November, we can notice a considerable change in the attitude of the Greek press towards S. Milosevic. He is now ‘dangerous’, ‘he is leading the country to disaster’, ‘his regime is personal and corrupted’" (El., 9). Yet there were also some comments, which warned against the Serbian opposition leaders as "upstart heroes [..] who are not the most capable for the roles that had been suddenly assigned to them, in spite of the fact that they may support democracy, freedom and human rights. And who knows what would happen if, suddenly, S. Milosevic disappeared from the scene and they were called to take over the leadership of the country?" (N. 14/1).

TURKEY was presented again as a vastly undemocratic Islamist country where "[M]inors confessed under torture but were convicted" (El., 17); "Turkey is a slaughterhouse, they executed 190 in ‘96" (Eth., 18). And a genuine summary of all previous stereotypes found its expression in the following: "Turks are a mob! An ignorant people! Sunk in misery and unhappiness Molon lave [ancient Greek for come if you dare and seize our weapons] dirty Turks. We are waiting for you. The people and the army are ready to produce new Thermopyles [where ancient Greeks fought heroically against the Persians and uttered the molon lave]" (Ad.T., 2).

As regards the internal minorities, the "traditional" way of coverage was preserved. Thus the MACEDONIANS simply did not exist ["unholy alliance with intensely anti-Hellenic elements of well-known circles of pseudo-Macedonians and the hard-liners of the Muslim minority which serve Ankara’s interests." (Ap., 5)], the ROMA were "a big problem" (Ad.T., 17), while the TURKS had reportedly built "the minaret of servitude" (E.T., 21). The only positive comment was given in an interview by Minister of Public Order, G. Romaios, who said that "he intends to impose and help root an anti-racist climate in the police force by recruiting young people from minority population groups like Gypsies and Pomaks." (El., 11)

Guide to newspaper initials: Ad.T. Adesmeftos Typos (center-right); Ap. Apogevmatini; E.T. Eleftheros Typos (center-right); El. Eleftherotypia (center-left); Eth. - Ethnos (center-left); K. Kathimerini (center-right); N. Nea (center-left); V. Vima (center-left - Sunday equivalent to Nea)

In December 1996 the Turkish press had extensive coverage of the events, taking place in the other Balkan countries, limiting itself to just informative articles on Albania, Macedonia and Romania, while allowing for more comments on the other neighbors.

BULGARIA was discussed in regards to its economic and political problems ["Chaos in Bulgaria" (Akit, 23/12), "Collapse of Bulgaria" (Akit, 26/12)] which affect directly the Turkish minority in that country. Thus a petition with the Constitutional Court by the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) for the dissolution of the MRF, a formation backed by the ethnic Turks in Bulgaria, was covered by the Turkish papers under headlines like: "Dangerous developments in Bulgaria" (T, 6); "Our kindred’s party under threat" (M, 7).

GREECE was presented in relation to different problems which the two countries face. The issue of bilateral cooperation being one of the fundamental ones, it is notable to point out that a meeting of the Turco-Greek Business Council was covered in a number of different ways - from "[A] longed-for dialogue" (A, 9), through "Turco-Greek business romance needs time" (H, 10), to openly negative qualifications like: "Let’s not forget, one cannot make friends with the Greeks" (T, 18). The issues which got a unanimous negative coverage were connected with Cyprus ["Athens sends a ‘butcher’ general [...] who has slaughtered Turkish Cypriots in 1964." (H, 7)], and with the alleged help which Greece lends to terrorist organizations ["Collaboration between the Greek fascists and the PKK" (S, 23)]. However, the harshest commentaries were provoked by a sports incident between a Greek and a Turkish basket ball team. This brought to the surface all kinds of stereotypes to conclude that: "[T]he Greeks who for years lived under our rule and who since centuries bear the ensuing obsession, let alone lifting the [insulting] banner, assailed our players like mad dogs in the middle of the game. . . . This occasion brought together the elderly soldiers of the crusading armies, who usurped Besikta?’s rights and favored the Greeks" (A, 12). It seemed that with all this negativism the Turkish papers were really satisfied only when "NATO slaps Greece" (T, 19) and "The US slaps Greece" (A, 3).

There was a sharp increase in the materials on SERBIA due to the anti-government demonstrations in Belgrade. It is interesting to point out that even though the media were predominantly against Milosevic and his "red gang" (T, 16), they were conscious of the fact that the opposition is not "immaculate" either: "After treading behind the slogan of Greater Serbia, Serbian people now instinctually engages itself for the first time in a serious settling of accounts [...] Even though our Maoist Gray Wolves still lick his boots with utmost meanness, countdown has already begun for Milosevic, a ‘tyrannosaur’ as he is called by the libertarian periodical Vrene, a ‘tyrant’ and a ‘dinosaur’ at the same time [...] Yet,[...] excepting Vesna Pemic who has from the beginning resisted chauvinist gale [...] it is not forgotten that Djindjic, who draws the highest profile nowadays, has sung the praises of the assassins of Pale, Radovan Karadzic and Radko Mladic. Vuk Draskovic, another opposition leader, has a similar past too" (H, 10).

In respect to its internal minorities, the Turkish press concentrated on the dialogue with the PKK, implicating the KURDS in both the positive coverage ["Victory of dialogue [..] proven to be the most effective way to end the bloodshed [...] a new era in the Kurdish problem" (YS, 10)] and the negative one ["conferring with the separatist and bloody terrorist organization [...] advocating separatists [...] aiming to create a crack in the struggle of the Turkish Republic against the PKK" (A, 10)].

Guide to newspaper initials: H Hurriyet; M Milliyet; S Sabah; YY Yeni Yuzyil; T Turkiye; Z Zaman; D Demokrasi; C - Cumhuriyet; A - Aksam; YS - Yeni Safak

January was another month of anti-regime demonstrations, which made the coverage of the Balkan Neighbors sporadic and the media related similar events happening in some of the other countries.

ALBANIA was more vividly present than in the previous months. Its coverage was usually taken from the foreign news agencies and the only rather negative comment was the one which appeared in Dnevnik (18), where Albanian President Sali Berisha was mercilessly criticized for his support to pro-democratic demonstrations in the FRY: "The latest Berisha statement, as well as his open call from the end of last year to Albanians from Kosmet to use the demonstrations of the opposition in Belgrade for the fulfillment of their own political goals, is actually a mere continuation of decade-long appetites of official Tirana on Kosovo and Metohija."

BULGARIA also got a large portion of the interest, mainly because of the protests in the country which were criticized in the official Yugoslav media. Some of the articles of the BSP’s paper - Douma - were reprinted and re-interpreted in Politika, thus adopting the criticism against the Bulgarian opposition as criticism against its Serbian counterpart: "Street democracy [with implicit comments on alleged conspiracy theories against the authorities in the two Balkan countries] - the scenario was essentially the same" (P, 11).

If the coverage of the above mentioned countries was more extensive than before, this was not true of the coverage of GREECE. The latter was present in the ordinary news columns of the official papers, without provoking too many comments. However, Nasha Borba was the only paper which mentioned and really welcomed the change in the Greek official position as regards the "new Serbian policy" (Greece finally demanded that Belgrade respect democracy): "In connection to the Serbian political crisis, the Greek government has (despite the delay) drawn ‘a line in the sand’ which others who either support or criticize the Simitis’ government should at least try to reach." (14).

The image of MACEDONIA was presented in different ways by the official Serbian newspapers and by the independent ones. This was clearly seen especially in the coverage of the student demonstrations against a draft law allowing the teaching of the Albanian language in the Pedagogical Faculty in Macedonia. On the one hand were the papers which opposed this "demonstration of intolerance" because "contrary to their colleagues in Belgrade and Sofia, [these students] are asking not the enlargement, but the denial of democratic rights to their colleagues of other nationalities" (NB, 20). While the other stream in the coverage ran like that: "it is publicly admitted here that a recently passed law for the Pedagogical Faculty is just ‘a state visa’ for the legalization of the illegal Shiptar university in Tetovo, which, at the end of last year celebrated two years of ‘successful work’" (D, 12). The other theme which got its place in the FRY papers had to do with Macedonia’s alleged readiness to obey to foreign orders: "Gligorov’s ‘oasis of peace’ is on the road to lose its sovereignty and identity completely, exactly because of the Western friends, who were (regardless of whether asked to do that or not) in charge of preserving it." (D, 20).

ROMANIA did not attract much interest, so the reports from there were mainly on the first moves of the newly elected government, as well as on some sensational aspects of Romanian life: the boycott of Romanian wines by British homosexuals (DT, 24); the trade with children (VN, 19); the planned marriage of a boy who changed his sex two years ago (N, 25)

The most problematic issue which the FRY media discussed in regards to TURKEY was again the threat coming from the latter’s Islamization: "What’s going on in Turkey was predicted by many. The Islamists, who have been in power only for six months now, are trying step by step to turn the country back to sheriat" (P, 30); "Erbakan is trying to become the leader of the Islamic world" (P, 04). The Turkish government took its full share of bad publicity on the basis of its stand on the Cypriot missile crisis when the Serbian papers quoted the Greek Minister of Defense as saying "Turkey is preparing for war!" (N, 09).

As regards the internal minorities, the interest was centered primarily on the new terrorist attacks in Kosovo, which were allegedly done by the ethnic ALBANIANS: "Shiptar separatists from Kosovo and Metohija are becoming more ruthless in the realization of their intention to establish ‘the Republic of Kososvo’" (D, 18); "Shiptars are incomparably less compact than at the beginning of that ‘struggle’. An increasing number of them are turning to business and profit and are asking for a peaceful solution. that’s why separatist leaders decided now to ‘solve the situation in the their own ranks’ first of all, through methods of liquidation and intimidation for which ‘the Liberating Army of Kosovo’ is used" (VN, 24). The MUSLIM minority was also discussed, mainly in relation to the fact that the local power in three municipalities in Sandzak went into the hands of the Muslim List for Sandzak. Vecernje Novosti called this a case of "dangerous arrogance" and went on that "some moves of the new municipal authorities [...] are threatening to stir political and national passions in this part of Serbia again. Although they are trying to dress everything they do in a democratic form, the SDA leaders [...] are making moves that can, sooner or later, have unpredictable consequences." (VN, 24). The HUNGARIANS from Vojvodina were perhaps the only minority which got some positive coverage, though for the most part it remained out of the interest of the media. The only explicit comments appeared after the ethnic Hungarians lost their absolute majority in the local authorities in Subotica: "Conflicts into history" (VN, 15); "Agreement instead of blackmailing" (D, 20).