MONTENEGRO: A FARCE, AND PERHAPS A TRAGEDY IN THE MAKING Srdja Trifkovic When Ambassador James Bissett, Professor Ronald Hatchett and I accepted an invitation to give public lectures in Montenegro as guests of the Movement for the Common State of Serbia and Montenegro, we knew that what we had to say would not be welcomed by the separatist government of Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic. Knowing that passions are running high in this deeply divided land, we were careful to make sure that what we say is reasonable and true.
Arriving in the wake of countless foreign experts who had supported the cause of Montenegrin separatism, we believed that it was both proper and necessary to present an alternative point of view. In four hectic days (July 3-6), we and our colleagues from Greece and Russia presented a total of seven panels, in Podgorica (twice), Niksic, Budva, Bar, Kotor, and Herceg Novi. Ambassador Bissetts focus was on the Canadian legislation for any future referendum on the independence of Quebec. In a normal place, and within a normal debate, his detailed account of Canadas Clarity Act would have been welcomed by all parties as a valuable contribution to the issue of who should have the right to vote in a referendum, what exact question should be asked, and what constitutes a clear majority. Professor Hatchetts parallel between various dangers facing an independent Montenegro, and the sobering experience of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in the first decade of its independence, was based on an informed and insightful analysis of the dynamics that are at work in both places. In particular Dr. Hatchett pointed out that the threat of greater Albanian chauvinism which has already turned one-third of Macedonia into an area effectively ungovernable from Skopje would not spare Montenegro. If the state of Texas, with its 24 million people, a powerful economy, and the legal right to secede, realized the peril of independent statehood in an uncertain world Dr. Hatchett concluded then it would be advisable for the tiny Montenegro, with its 650,000 people earning $200 a month on average, to think twice before separating. My own presentation was focused on the experience of two small but culturally and historically important European nations that inhabit clearly defined countries but do not enjoy sovereign statehood. Neither Catalonia nor Scotland is deprived of any element of meaningful nationhood by virtue of being in a common state with other nations that share similar geopolitical and economic interests. The dynamics of their social, economic, and political development are not impeded from Madrid or London, which is proven by the failure of separatists to capture a significant segment of the vote in either country. I was also careful to point out that the intention of the Montenegrin government to exclude its citizens resident in Serbia for the referendum one third of the electorate! was unacceptable under international democratic standards, most recently exemplified by the participation of French and Dutch citizens resident abroad in the referendum on the European Unions constitution last May. The reaction of the controlled media in Podgorica to our efforts was depressingly predictable. To give you some flavor of the place, on only one day (July 6) the leading pro-government daily Vijesti compared us to a bunch of Mein Kampf-reading thugs in a Munich beer hall in the early 1930s; the semi-official Pobjeda daily accused us of performing for a small fistful of dollars; while Prime Minister Djukanovic himself stated that he did not mind our visit because, in his view, our musings would only strengthen the cause of independence. Someone did mind, however, and the scandalous article described by Tom Fleming in his post was published only one day after our departure from Podgorica: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/cgi-bin/hardright.cgi/2005/07/09/Dictator_ Threatens_ Contrary to Toms advice, however, and that of many other friends and associates, I am going back to Podgorica tomorrow (July 12) to hold a press conference and challenge the authorities to arrest me, or else to admit that the allegations are false. I have already sent a letter to Djukanovic inviting him to denounce the allegations, especially since he is now implicated thanks to the incriminated article claiming his Cabinet as the source of the forged letter. A more stringent demand was made in a letter sent to Djukanovic by Ambassador Bissett: If it is true that the existence of this forged letter was leaked to the media by members of your Cabinet as claimed by the paper that has published it - then I would further respectfully ask that you order an immediate investigation to uncover those of your subordinates responsible for such an outrage. Your reputation and that of your Government stands to be condemned by Western governments, institutions and media if your personal intervention is not forthcoming. Dr. Trifkovic opposes the separation of Montenegro from Serbia, Bissett wrote, but he has always been forthright and honest in his opposition and has done so through reasoned argument and peaceful discourse: The accusation contained in the forged letter is not only monstrous, it is ridiculous. That any responsible newspaper would publish such unadulterated and vicious fiction reflects poorly not only on the newspaper concerned but also on Montenegro itself. As Prime Minister, and since you have become personally implicated, it is only proper that you take steps to publicly condemn this forgery and bring those responsible for its publication to justice. In view of another paranoid article that appeared in the semi-official Pobjeda daily on Saturday, July 9, claiming that a detailed plan to instigate violence in Montenegro is being masterminded from Chicago, it is obvious that the accusations against me are not a red herring: they reflect a sustained campaign the like of which does not exist anywhere in Europe, and even world-wide may find a rival only in Pyongyang. Hell-bent as I am now to get this matter sorted out once and for all, I have engaged a foremost Podgorica lawyer, Milorad Ivanovic, to sue the paper. I have also spoken to the American Embassy in Belgrade and to the U.S. Consulate in Podgorica, pointing out that the Montenegrin press is effectively accusing the United States of harboring terrorists and would-be assassins. An official at the Consulate, T.J. Grubisha, told me that the U.S. will not comment on the affair at this stage, but he has reiterated the view of the State Department that my colleagues and I have engaged in a legitimate public debate on certain issues that are of interest beyond the borders of Serbia and Montenegro. The debate is sorely needed, and the government of Montenegro is doing its best to stifle it by means that reflect its nervousness, even panic. On this form it is not fit to be accepted into Europe, or any other institution that claims to uphold democracy and human rights. I would still welcome a frank but respectful debate with the proponents of Montenegrin separatism. So far I have not encountered any willing interlocutors, however. Perhaps they do exist, but for as long as they allow the upholders of thuggery, muggery, and buggery to dominate the public discourse in Podgorica, their cause will remain tainted by lies and criminality. If you have any useful thoughts or insightful comments on this matter, perhaps Prime Minister Djukanovic would welcome a word from you: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: 011-381-81-242-329 Serbian News Network - SNN news@antic.org http://www.antic.org/
