The main reasons for changing the route for the Zagreb-Split highway in the controversial section Žuta Lokva – Ličko Lešće were not ecological, as the local government first explained. Instead, money was the main motive, money they did not want to go to Serb refugees, which would have been the case had the future highway gone on proposed route A.

Three variations

This interpretation of the new trade with the Serbian land has gone so far that the project leaders of the highway have been called to withdraw the proposals which passed through Serbian land, and which the Serbs already allegedly sold to the state even though the change in ownership was never written into the land registries. They were also accused of having intentionally drawn these proposals through Serbian lands to disable them from returning to these regions, which then excluded the former variation. Primarily, it turns out that the portion from Žuta Lokva to Ličko Lešće is not an ecological issue, but an ethnic one. Considering that no one cares about the Serbs, but they do care about the 25 million DEM, the amount planned to buy the land for the highway construction, they used the situation which arose when the government announced their plan to build the Zagreb-Split highway. With one move, they made the resolution of the problem of destroyed and unrepaired Serbian property impossible, and the money was redirected in accordance with the wishes of the local governments and the obvious private interests of individuals in the political leadership of Otočac and Lika.

Were the opposite true, there likely would not have been any surprise by the local population, which became very dismayed when they realized that nothing remained of the ecological ideas they had supported to then, and that the highway had been changed to route B, which was considered to be the most expensive, and that there was no rebellion from the local powers that be. That is, of all the proposed variations, 36 in total, only 3 remained as the most acceptable: A was the cheapest, B somewhat more expensive, and E the most expensive, but considered the most acceptable according to ecologists. Public Works Minister, Radimir Čačić, wholeheartedly supported the cheapest variation, the one called route A, while ecological associations and the citizens raised their voices against any route other than route E, the ecological one. However, when it proved that route E was more expensive than route A by some 200 million DEM, even when the 25 million DEM for land compensation was added onto the cost of route A, money which would have been paid to Serb refugees who left their homes either during or after the war and headed for Serbia.

Lobbying for megaprofits

This conflict, which has been ongoing for weeks, was cut short in the end by Premier Račan, finding somewhat another variation to route B, or a subvariation of the most unacceptable route. With this new variation, now called route B1, all of the voices which had formerly been against building the road from Žuta Lokva – Ličko Lešće had suddenly been calmed, and if one can judge by the comments from local governments, the building can now begin. Not even the price of the new route, which according to Račan and Čačić, is 108 million DEM more expensive than the least expensive Route A, hasn’t bothered anyone. True, Čačić publicly showed his disagreement with the way in which routes for future highways are chosen, obviously suspicious of the good intentions of those who give ultimatums, but also in the common sense of those who agree to such nebulous suggestions. After his disagreement, immediately followed attacks which suggested that Čačić himself was owner of land which route E passed through, to which Čačić replied with, “I don’t even know how to approach such comments”, obviously realizing in which direction the attacks had been cast.

Since the end of the summer, when the idea of the accelerated building of the Zagreb-Split highway was proposed, there has been no end to the lobbying, the end goal of which was exclusively megaprofit, at the expense of an already impoverished nation. One of the few honest organizations in the entire craziness was Zelena Akcija (Green Action), whose Lika branch organized a protest against the building of route A, in the belief that such a route would have massive impacts on the environment in the Gacka Valley. This river is considered to be one of the three cleanest rivers in Europe, and in addition, is surrounded by springs of drinking water of exceptional quality.

All the remaining studies conducted on the remaining routes (12 variations and 26 subvariations), with the goal to protect the water springs, were thrown out, while the Greens continued to only support the ecologically most acceptable route, route E. Even though the remaining routes could have been made acceptable with some extra protection, the local governments wholeheartedly supported the Greens, but with a different goal at stake – their own profits, and their political and nationalistic motivations.

Not only will the most expensive route be built instead of the least expensive one, the additional problem of the Serbian villages and land remain unresolved. Obviously, by building a highway through the Serbian lands, they tried to avoid the reconstruction of those villages, an issue on which virtually nothing has been done to date. With the building of this route, they would have bought the land for little, and any future claims for reconstruction would also be annulled by the fact that most people would not be motivated to rebuild their homes with a highway running through their land. In addition, their silence would be purchased with the 25 million DEM. In other words, Čačić’s ministry has now been given the task of building a more expensive highway, of paying compensation to the local Croat population for their land, and of rebuilding Serbian homes.

What the real cost of such an equation is – no one dares to say. What remains is only the comment by Milorad Pupovac, who spoke on behalf of the Serbian National Council saying, “we do not wish for the current refugee situation to be used in any way against their interests and their right to return and to have access to their property”, by which it could be concluded that it is not clear even to the Serbian leader in Croatia just what they are trying to accomplish with the ecology and the Serbs.

Rising costs

Čačić’s rejection of route E was due to its cost, which would be more than 200 million DEM than route A. Half a billion marks is no small sum, and the savings would be visible only in one segment – one part of route E passes through state owned land, and thus they would save on the 25 million in land compensation. The newest subvariation, B1, not only costs 108 million DEM more than route A, but that price will also increase by the 25 million to buy the land. As the government accepted a change in the route for the future highway, so did they also accept a range of additional consequences which such a decision carries, and which are relentlessly multiplying. Seeing how the local government in Otočac managed to move the highway route off of the refugee Serb land, to one which passes through almost exclusively Croat property, now the residents of the village Modruš, a little to the north, have also launched an offensive to raise the price of their own land, and have even threatened to launch a constitutional court case against the investors and the government.

The unison which the residents of Ogulin and the leaders of the Lika District have moved on the already charted highway routes, like the results they achieved, speak that the entire government plan, commonly called the “3 times 3” (three hours from Zagreb to Split in three years for 3 billion DEM) could soon fail. The sudden increase in the cost of only one part of the highway is the result of a political consensus to shift the part of the road from Žuta Lokva – Ličko Lešće from the planned route to one which better suits the local powers.

Property manipulations

In addition to the ruling HDZ, the minority parties in the local governments, HSS and SDP have also become involved in the action to move planned routes. When the route was changed to one which suited them, all the protests against environmental impacts and sources of drinking water suddenly came to a halt, in spite of the fact that route B1, called Račan’s route, falls close to the Gacka River, and enters into the urban zone of Otočac, which goes against all trends in road building, where bypasses are built in order to protect cities from traffic brought by such highways. Not even the local ecologists are no longer fighting the new route, even though route E, which they called “the only acceptable route” fell through.

The manipulations of the Serbian property and the further delays to the resolution of the Serbian land issue – though building a highway through those lands is also not the best solution, also holds within it the inability of the government to face problems put before them. If they are so quick to buckle under the pressure of local governments, who used the arguments of the ecologists, even though none of them appeared at the environmental protests, then it is worthwhile asking the question: in the comments by government vice-president Željka Antunović that Serbs are looking for their property only to sell it and return to Serbia, is there perhaps a deeper connotation than ignorance or a lack of political tact, perhaps even a continuation of those Tudjman comments that the Serbs could take with them only as much land as remained on their shoes, and happy trails to them?