By: Dr. Andrej Umek
The wiretapping scandal undoubtedly had a significant impact on voters’ decisions last Sunday. That in itself would not have been problematic; what is concerning is that this affair was consistently and completely misinterpreted in the mainstream media, and in two essential ways. The first tendentiously incorrect position promoted by these media outlets was that exposing corruption constitutes an attack on the sovereignty of the state.
In my view, this claim is incorrect. Exposing corruption strengthens Slovenia and its sovereignty, provided, of course, that such revelations are followed by appropriate judicial proceedings, which one should expect in any democratic country, and consequently by the elimination of corruption and the establishment of equality among all citizens. What is unacceptable and misleading is that the mainstream media portrayed the perpetrators of corrupt – meaning criminal – acts as victims of an intrusion into Slovenian sovereignty. They attributed responsibility for this to the political opponents of those who committed the corrupt, that is, criminal acts. The mainstream media thus adopted the position that exposing corruption is unacceptable, whereas corruption itself is not; indeed, that it must be protected, if not otherwise, then through silence.
The second thesis conveyed to Slovenian voters by the mainstream media was that the revelation of corruption during the pre‑election period had been commissioned by SDS and Janez Janša. For anyone capable of sober reasoning, this thesis is complete nonsense and can only be understood as an obvious attempt to influence the election. I base this view on two evident facts. The execution of the “wiretap” operation is simply too expensive, reportedly around one million dollars, for any Slovenian political party, let alone an individual, to afford. Equally misleading is the claim that anyone in Slovenia could have commissioned such an intelligence operation from Black Cube. It is clear that those who can direct Black Cube act in the interests of Israel and consider that Dr Golob’s coalition has seriously encroached upon those interests. This is understandable only if we recall the positions Slovenia took in the UN Security Council, the threat that it would join South Africa’s lawsuit, the accusations against the Israeli prime minister at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, where a Slovenian judge also participated, and, finally, the pro‑Palestinian demonstrations in Ljubljana. These took place under the slogan “From the river to the sea, one Palestine will be.” This is a call for the complete destruction of Israel, and it would indeed be surprising if no one reacted to it.
In short, the wiretapping affair unfolded as a confrontation between the Slovenian left‑wing political bloc and its adversaries in the international political arena, adversaries it created itself through its extremely radical positions. The Slovenian centre‑right parties had nothing to do with this affair. Nevertheless, the mainstream media dragged them into it, entirely without cause. This undoubtedly influenced the election.
Privately owned media are shaped by their owners. They report in accordance with the owner’s preferences, and the owner bears responsibility for that. The situation is different with our national media, especially RTV Slovenia. This outlet should be significantly more objective and should not serve only the interests of the left‑wing political bloc. To achieve this, I am convinced that we should follow the German model and split the national broadcaster into two branches, one closer to the left, the other to the right political option, just as ARD and ZDF function in Germany. I am convinced that such an organisational structure for the national broadcaster would strengthen Slovenian democracy and prevent doubts about the fairness of future elections. I believe this is in the interest of all honest Slovenian citizens, regardless of their political beliefs.