ing moralit}’ and religion from the publicrnsquare, and, in general, carrying out thernextraconstitutional, policymaking legacyrnof die Warren Court.rnMany of those on the Court who seemrnnot to care about their constitutional rolernwere Republican appointees, but it is thernDemocrats who want to make the futurernof Supreme Court policymaking a campaignrnissue. Al Gore was quick to declarernthat the precarious nature of the five-tofourrnmajorit}’ in the partial-birdi abortionrnease was a potential threat to abortionrnrights, and he urged the undecided tornvote for him so that he could appointrnmore pro-abortion justices. A few weeksrnearlier, Justice Scalia reportedly confessedrnplans to retire should Al Gore win,rnbecause the sensible Scalia has no desirernto remain on a Court dominated by “livingrnconstitution” types. George Bush hasrnreeentl}’ stated that, while he has no “litmusrntests” for Supreme Court appointments,rnhe wants to appoint more justicesrnlike Scalia and Thomas. I’m voting forrnBush, and hoping he does.rn—Stephen B. PresserrnVUK DRASKOVIC, the leader of Serbia’srnmajor opposition party, was slightlyrnwounded on June 15 when gunmenrnopened fire through a window of his holidayrnhome in the Montenegrin coastalrntown of Budva. After being treated at arnnearby hospital, Draskovic immediatelyrnaccused Yugoslav President SlobodanrnMilosevic of masterminding “an assassinationrnattempt.” Two days later, Montenegrinrnpolice announced that they hadrndetained the gunmen who had shotrnDraskovic and “knew who had orderedrnthe shooting.”rnSo far, so conventional: A ruthless dictatorrnwants to get rid of an oppositionrnpolitician and orders his thugs to assassinaternhim. But things are seldom whatrnthey seem in the Balkans. In Serbia, forrninstance, the opposition and the regimernhae one thing in common: They sharernan abiding contempt for Draskovic, thernperennial leader of the Serbian RenewalrnMovement (SPO). Publicly, the oppositionrnparties have condemned the shooting,rnand they are at least pretending to acceptrnhis claim that it was the work ofrnMilosevic’s secret police. But off thernrecord, all Belgrade agrees that Draskovicrnconcocted the plot to increase his popularity’rnand diffuse tensions within his partyrn—which, for the first time since itsrnfounding a decade ago, no longer uncriticallyrnaccepts his erratic leadership.rnWhenever Draskovic faces pressure,rnhe seeks to resolve it through some dramaticrngesture that will enable him tornreinvent himself. His neurotic unpredictabilityrn—frustrating to his supportersrnand other opposition activists —has becomernintolerable since he survived a suspiciousrncar crash in which his wife’srnbrother and three bodyguards were killedrnlast fall. “His volatility provoked howls ofrnderision earlier this month, when hernbacktracked on a pledge to mount a unitedrnstand with other opposition parties atrnlocal and federal elections,” writes journalistrnZeljko Cvijanovic. Even somernmembers of his own part)’ suspect that hernforged a pact with Milosevic to maintainrncorrupt SPO municipal authorities inrnseveral major Serbian cities; “The SPOrnleader’s actions have also set him on arncollision course with some in his partyrnwho believe he is trying to neuter its standrnagainst the regime. They also resent hisrnquarreling with other opposition partiesrnwith whom they believe they can co-operate.rnOther opposition leaders are increasinglyrnreluctant to work with him.”rnThe doubts about the veracity ofrnDraskovic’s claims were not dispelled byrnthe arrests of the supposed assassins: Rumorrnhas it that some of the suspects werernactually members of his party or evenrnpersonal bodyguards, which may implyrncomplicity rather than lethal intent.rnThe account given by Draskovic of thernevent itself is unbelievable. For example,rnhis wounds were superficial, but therernwas a massive pool of “blood” on thernfloor. He was —uncharacteristically—rnalone in the house, although he claims tornhave received death threats only days earlier.rnThe bullet marks on the wall werernfar above his head. Balkan-affairs analystrnBob Djurdjevic concludes that there wasrnno motive for the assassination: “Whyrnwould Slobodan Milosevic waste a bulletrnon a politician who has distinguishedrnhimself throughout his career by the abilityrnto shoot himself in the foot? . . .rnDraskovic’s botched ‘assassination’ has sornfar managed to kill only the target’s ownrncharacter and credibility.”rnWhy indeed? Cui bono? With politicalrnenemies like Vuk Draskovic, SlobodanrnMilosevic needs no friends: His statusrnas Serbia’s president-for-life is secure.rnHe has drawn Draskovic and his coterierninto the temptation of corruption—theyrncontrol four of the richest municipal authoritiesrnin Serbia. This has made themrnsusceptible to Milosevic’s blackmail.rnturning them into potential collaborators.rn”He has been able to use Draskovicrnas a willing or unwitting tool,” says arnprominent Belgrade opposition leaderrnwho asked to remain anonymous.rn”[Draskovic] would rather let Milosevicrnrule for another ten years than see anyonernbut himself in his place.”rnWith each passing day, the scenariornplayed out in Budva looks increasinglyrnsuspicious. Political killings in Serbia arernone of the few growth industries; they arernadministered cleanly and efficiently.rnThe list is long and includes a police general,rna defense minister, and prominentrnorganized crime figures. Had Milosevicrnreally wanted to kill Draskovic, yournwould be reading an obituarv’.rn— SrdjaTrifkovicrnO B I T E R D I C T A : The chroniclesrnmasthead continues to grow. PhiliprnJenkins, whose articles have appeared almostrnmonthly for the past vear, joined thernmasthead as a contributing editor withrnthe July issue. Janet Scott Barlow, a frequentrncontributor to Chronicles, rejoinsrnus as a corresponding editor. Her newrnbook, The Nonpatriotic President: A Surveyrnof the Clinton Years, will be releasedrnsoon by our publishing imprint, ChroniclesrnPress. And George McCartney,rnwhose movie reviews have graced ourrnpages for the past 15 months, has agreedrnto become our film editor. In addition,rnhis reviews will now appear in a newrnmonthly column. In the Dark, which canrnbe found at the end of the Vital Signs section.rnThis month’s American Interest columnrnfirst appeared in the July issue ofrnWorld Report, the quarterly newsletter ofrnThe Rockford Institute’s Center for InternationalrnAffairs. To receive a free samplerncopy of the newsletter, please write tornCliristopher Check, Executive VicernPresident, The Rockford Institute, 928rnN. Main St., Rockford, IL 61103.rnOur poet this month is Gail White,rnwho lives in Breaux Bridge, Louisiana.rnHer poetry has been published in numerousrnmagazines across the country. Herrnlatest book. Landscapes With Womenrn(Singular Speech Press), is a collection ofrnthe works of four women.rnOur art is provided by Bill Subik, arnfree-lance illustrator living in New YorkrnCity. His clients include Brill’s Content,rnNewsday, and the City Paper of Washington,rnD.C. He is also a regular contiibutorrnto several magazines in Connecticut.rnSEPTEMBER 2000/9rnrnrn