 |
SAT, 02 FEB 2002 00:34:07 GMT
Montenegro and Serbia after Solana's Mediation
Are Negotiations a Goal or a Memans?
Another round of negotiations on the future relationship between
Montenegro and Serbia ended in Belgrade last Friday (Jan. 25). Top
government officials from Belgrade and Podgorica accepted an invitation
from Javier Solana for yet another meeting of expert teams in Brussels
at the beginning of February, leaving a final decision up to the
politicians.
AIM Podgorica, January 27, 2002
Yet another meeting of top Montenegrin, Serbian and Yugoslav officials,
held under Javier Solana's watchful eye this week, has failed in
bringing Belgrade and Podgorica any closer. Despite this, however, all
of them left Federation Palace more optimistic than when they entered
it. Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica after half an hour of plenary
debate said he was awaiting the continuation of negotiations "with more
optimism and hope." Montenegrin President Milo Djukanovic found reasons
for content in the fact that "dialogue is proceeding at the planned
pace" and with a high degree of tolerance. Finally, the EU high
representative for foreign and security policy got what he was looking
for: yet another round of expert talks, in Brussels on Feb. 4, with the
participation of international experts, as well as (hopefully) a final
round of political negotiations by the end of the month.
How will this new delay reflect on conditions in Montenegro?
"The EU wants the Yugoslav federation to become a member, and we are not
indifferent to what is going on in it. Our plan is to end all meetings
by the end of February and to realize the final goal – to have all of
you as part of the EU; we will do everything in our power to make this
happen," Solana said before leaving Belgrade, and added that "separation
is not a speedier, but a slower road towards the EU."
The powers of Brussels, it is to be believed, are not small. The
government in Belgrade and the opposition in Montenegro trust them more
than they trust their own strength. Many officials from the two groups
said they expect, or rather hope, that Solana will finally give
Djukanovic a paper and a choice: take it or leave it. But this did not
happen, not even on this occasion. This is why pro-Yugoslav circles
found comfort in the fact that at the upcoming meeting in Brussels EU
experts will not only listen to what their Balkan colleagues have to
say, but will enlighten them on numerous points from the angle of the
European Fifteen. People's Party leader Dragan Soc, one of the loudest
advocates of giving Brussels' a bigger role in the Yugoslav crisis,
remarked that Djukanovic had failed to even mention an independence
referendum in his statement after the latest meeting. Soc also said that
the Montenegrin president had finally realized that the international
community was against Montenegro's independence, and that support for it
was dwindling in Montenegro itself, and had consequently concluded that
the referendum was unlikely to be organized at all, particularly not
this spring.
By saying this Soc diverged from his vice president, Predrag Drecun, who
said a plebiscite on Montenegro's status ought to be held at the
beginning of spring, thereby growing closer to Predrag Bulatovic, the
leader of his coalition partner, the Socialist People's Party, and his
stance that regardless of how the negotiations between Belgrade and
Podgorica end, there will not be any referendum before next autumn. The
third party of the Pro-Yugoslav coalition, Bojovic's Serb People's
Party, remains where it has been all along -- preferring early
elections.
The Serb People's Party is probably the only party on a course the EU
would prefer. Although Solana himself mentioned the end of February as
the deadline by which negotiations between Montenegro and Serbia should
end, many in Montenegro believe that the timetable will not be
respected. They expect the dialogue in Montenegro, which should define
the conditions for holding the referendum, to drag on. Montenegro's
economic woes, coupled with anti-government propaganda, such as the
Nacional scandal, in their view will work to help the federation.
If the referendum is not organized before the tourist season starts,
public attention will focus on local elections. According to
pro-Yugoslav sources, this would be a welcome opportunity to further
undermine Djukanovic's power. A poll recently published by the
Podgorica-based Center for Democracy shows that supporters of
independence are loosing ground to the pro-federalists, and that the
Together for Yugoslavia coalition is leading by a three-percent margin
over the Victory is Montenegro's coalition. Brussels, therefore, is
avoiding a risky and compromising approach of direct pressure and
sanctions against Montenegro, but is doing everything it possibly can to
prevent Montenegro's independence.
The intentions of Solana and the circles behind him could easily be
comprehended even by politicians less skilled than the Montenegrin
president. It does not suffice, however, just to know what your opponent
has in store for you; one has to find an adequate response as well. If
the EU demands that the talks continue even after the end of February,
Djukanovic will have to decide whether to continue playing the game or
not. To continue would mean to delay the referendum, while interrupting
negotiations would mean risking accusations of "unilateral move." By
saying at a joint press conference with Solana and Kostunica that "the
second half is already in progress," that the expert negotiations "have
exhausted a number of issues," and that "by the end of February the
talks on the future of Montenegro and Serbia will end in a democratic
manner," the president of Montenegro has shown that he was well aware
that the talks have become a goal unto themselves and are no longer a
means for achieving compromise.
Judging by what his closest assistants had to say, and they all
reiterated that the referendum will be held in the spring, Djukanovic
has already decided to withdraw from negotiations if need be. It is
uncertain, however, whether Solana is prepared to participate in this
hypocritical political move. Especially having in view that Belgrade is
having a hard time concealing its nervousness over the procrastination
of negotiations with Podgorica. Drecun's claims that the referendum will
be organized soon are generally interpreted as his willingness to act as
Kostunica's mouthpiece. But Cedomir Jovanovic, a trusted ally of Serbian
Premier Zoran Djindjic, has also said that "Serbia has suffered too much
and too long because of unresolved relations with Montenegro." Finally,
Vladan Batic's Democratic Christian Party of Serbia can hardly wait for
an opportune move on Montenegro's part to begin gathering signatures for
a plebiscite in Serbia ("Serbia should also have a say in the matter").
Belgrade analyst Dusan Janjic believes that Serbian Premier Djindjic is
behind the initiative. Recent polls show a dramatic division in Serbia
over whether Serbia should be independent or a part of a federation with
Montenegro -- 42:41 in favor of the federalists!
The nervous Liberals are further reducing Djukanovic's maneuvering
space. Liberal Alliance of Montenegro leader Miodrag Zivkovic believes
that a new round of expert negotiations is an ill omen for Montenegro's
independence. "Brussels and Belgrade are taking advantage of Montenegrin
negotiators' indecision to indefinitely postpone a solution. This is
weakening the forces advocating international recognition for
Montenegro," says Zivkovic. Montenegrin premier Filip Vujanovic says:
"We'll see what the two meetings in February will bring and whether it
will be necessary to organize a referendum. We can make a deal only if
Serbia accepts a union of two independent states. I am convinced that
this is the best model and that we can resolve the crisis by doing what
Czechoslovakia did. If Belgrade fails to show understanding for our
offer, we will organize a referendum," Vujanovic firmly said.
According to the Montenegrin constitution, the Legislature is in charge
of calling a referendum at the proposal of the Montenegrin president. A
plebiscite has to be held 45-90 days from the day of its scheduling.
Darko Sukovic
(AIM)
|
 |