Question: NATO attacks unified the public opinion here. There are two sides in the conflict, and everybody has to take one or the other; everything else is, naturally, less important. Such context erases the need to supply variety on the market of ideas. If so, has the Western alliance, by bombardment, achieved a paradoxical aim of the long-term suppression of pro-western ideas in Serbia?

Answer: In extreme situations like this, the controlled public opinion has neither the wish nor the need to waste time on any finesse or nuance of varied opinions. Undeniably, widespread patriotism, and the absence of the usual political life, are the only two realities which can be noticed clearly in this situation here, with the public opinion so formed. When on the stage you have war reporting, and commanded public opinion too, the skeptics will be in trouble, of course; skeptics, and all those who feel the need to think critically, which means, precisely the people who in normal times create the public opinion. I am afraid that many intellectuals will only now understand the hero of Sartre's drama The Devil and the Lord who says: "If you want to deserve hell, you need not even get up from your bed. The world is pure injustice itself: if you accept it you are an accomplice, if you change it you are an executioner." This is an existential angst that least of all can be solved by the persons who, like Rublyov, just keep silent. The character of our future democratic life, and therefore our place in the framework of the Western civilization to which we always have belonged, depend on the manner in which our intellectuals will suppress or resolve this dilemma.

Question: What is the literary scene doing in all this? Institutionally, literature is, in peacetime also, a satellite or a loyal supporter of politics. Witness to this are the literary awards, most of them, in Yugoslavia and abroad, and special media favors to the "engaged" writers. In this particular moment, the focus of attention goes even to those who squeeze daily political slogans into the traditional five-foot verses. Generally, there is a need to stand up against those powers who threaten and kill, definitely; but, what will be, in peacetime, the consequences of this return to epic folklore verses?

Answer: If we agree that literature and the skill of writing should not be mystified, then we will not be surprised that always, in all times and at all places, there was much more bad writing than good. In fact, I think that literature is an absolutely amateurish work, which a person ought to perform in himself, to the criteria of his own talent. Literature is available to all, and everyone is entitled to it, including those who will write to some quaint standards, or express their political views and interests. I believe, even, that the eternal predominance of poor-quality writing is logical and beneficial. It serves as a frustration which awakens the need for valuable work, thus motivating both the creativity and the receptivity. I am sure that in the future days of peace and normal life this will be confirmed.

Queston: We are talking peace. It seems that peace - rather, how to move from war time to peace - urgently requires a valid theoretical elaboration?

Answer: It is interesting that such theories appeared in the 19th century, when wars did not have such an apocalyptic dimension. Why aren't there in the atomic age, when the entire world is faced with a real threat of disappearing forever, some other theories which would at least explore the modern meaning of the traditional perpetual peace projects? I think that, for instance, Kant's essay "Perpetual Peace" has particular relevance at this time. Especially the part in which he defines the true peace contract as the contract in which all hints of a possible future war are eliminated also. As for us, our country: we do not even have a genuine, autonomous peace movement. Apart from a few women, and a few non-governmental organizations, the peace movement never could find true supporters among us. But I think that today, in Belgrade, something opposite is happening, and Belgrade is, because of reduced communications, the only social microcosm into which I have any insight right now. In Belgrade today I feel an amazing increase of tolerance and peacefulness in the interactions among the people. Faced with pure violence, Belgrade shows its nonviolent face in the dark streets, in bomb shelters, in queues for food. I have a feeling that exactly at this time, now, a psychological basis is being formed for a future pacifist movement which will survive the dramas that may yet come upon us. I have always thought that there is a crucially important similarity between all the large cities in this world, similarity which gives an urban man the opportunity to feel at home in each of them. I am convinced that Belgrade has always belonged to one such imaginary republic of all the big cities of this world. Especially now when Belgrade is, perhaps more than other cities, aware of the correctness of the ancient proverb: Pax optima rerum (Peace is the best of all things).

Igor says that the interview was well-liked by the people for whose opinion we care. They noticed a grain of courage and reason that we wanted to show.