In the late 1990s, the organization Otpor! developed in
Milosevic-ruled Serbia.
Considered by many as a rag-tag group of student protestors, the group soon
became the leading citizen-based force for resistance to the Milosevic regime.
Otpor! used non-violent tactics to create a broad base of citizen support and
delegitimize the Milosevic regime domestically and even internationally.
In our New Tactics database, you can find the details of
some of Otpor!’s work and methods, one in particular is entitled “Organizing
demonstrations outside of police stations after arrests of activists.” At first
glance, it might seem that demonstrations by young people after an arrest
wouldn’t serve to rattle a regime as brutal and infamous as Milosevic’s.
However, looking more closely at the work of Otpor! it’s clear that they can
serve as a model for young people’s movements all around the world, even living
under very repressive regimes.
Otpor! stood in the face of adversity and not only had an
international impact, but managed to keep up morale, consistently add new
members to their group, gain international respect (it eventually got funding
from the U.S. State Department), and reach its ultimate goal of helping to
bring down Milosevic.
Otpor!, like many other protestors in non-democratic
societies, faced scrutiny, intimidation, and arbitrary arrests from the government.
Instead of letting these things slow their movement, Otpor! used arbitrary
arrests by the government (whose intent was to intimidate and silence protestors)
as a means of gaining media coverage, motivating other activists, and exposing
and mocking the government’s illegitimacy.
Looking at this tactic makes me wonder how it can be applied
to other situations in other countries. In the news right now (for a multitude
of reasons) is Iran.
Recently, over 100 students protested at a speech by President Ahmadinejad at Tehran University.
According to CNN, the students got into the speech despite tight security and
started yelling things like “death to the dictator.” News of anti-Ahmadinejad
protests is becoming rarer as of recent because of increasingly tough
crackdowns on anti-government activity. According to CNN students were once the
main force behind the reformist movement in Iran, but with all the governmental
crackdowns the student voice has been stifled considerably.
So is it possible for Iranian students to develop something
like Serbia’s
Otpor! to combat the violations on their human right of expression and
assembly? Are there things that make Serbia’s
political situation in the late 90s vastly different than Iran today?
What are the first couple of steps to organize something as successful as
Otpor! in a climate of repression like Iran?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Only elements of Otpor's campaign are exportable
I think this is a great issue to raise.
From experience where I am based, in Zimbabwe . . .
First, we have facilitated motivational discussion sessions using the documentary Bringing Down A Dictator which chronicles the downfall of Milosevic. The documentary was produced by A Force More Powerful. We also screened a documentary detailing the consumer boycotts in South Africa during the Apartheid era, also produced by A Force More Powerful. Our dicussion sessions were mainly comprised of students. Overwhelmingly the participants could relate more to the South African documentary than the Serbian one. Therefore context is very important. During both screenings we got students to write down a list of tactics that they noticed being used in each documentary and then discussed the suitability of those tactics being implemented in Zimbabwe. For example, throwing leaflets off the tops of tall buildings as was one of Otpor's tactics.
I do think that Otpor inspired a certain kind of activism in Zimbabwe. Please visit www.zvakwana.org - a group that seemed to resonate with Otpor.
It has been useful to review the range of tactics used by Otpor and contextualise them for Zimbabwe. This often means that a particular tactic will be implemented whereas it might be more difficult for an actual movement to be formed and mobilised. For example, in Zimbabwe students are very poor, and our transport system is both costly and inadequate. Just these two issues affect whether students can effectively mobilise.
Another point to consider is whether you want a social or student movement to be mobilising for the ouster of a regime or government and whether they should be "promoting" the election of an opposition movement. Zvakwana, for example was equally critical of the Mugabe regime as it was of the MDC opposition party.
Otpor used some wonderful cultural and information communication technology tactics to inspire the political participation of ordinary citizens. I think that movements in other parts of the world would do well to review Otpor's tactics and see which of them suit their context.
Ultimately we should be developing movements and using tactics that inspire, motivate and build tolerance - we need to work "for" positive change rather than simply "against" dictators.
A Force More Powerful Resources
I'm really excited to see this exchange.
It's great to see that the range of tactics used by Otpor! have served to inspire discussion, debate and possible adaptation in the context of Zimbabwe and other countries. The resources from the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict are excellent. http://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/resources.shtml
The New Tactics project was launched with the vision of bringing together both the people and the examples of innovative approaches, strategic alliances and the ability to learn from and adapt unexpected sectors/countries/cultures experiences to move forward advocates' own issues. (Read more about the benefits of tactical thinking - http://www.newtactics.org/sites/newtactics.org/files/resources/Need_for_New_Tactics_Guide.pdf)
Nancy Pearson, New Tactics Program Manager
Ideas to fit context
Thanks BClark, for your comments about context. I think for students the motivation is there to do activism, but then the exact methods and means of having effective action are not always in place for young activists.
Even among different universities the tactics of reaching audiences and making change are different. For one thing, certain audiences respond better to a wide variety of things. Where I go to school the University is such a large size that the means of reaching other students parallel that of a small city. Other, smaller schools likely use different, more personal techniques. Taking into account the context of a situation is so important for the success of a tactic, and the morale of the organizers as well.