| No 4 | August to September 2007

MONTENEGRO | Trends in Conflict and Cooperation

In the past two months, the political leaders of Montenegro have been unable to reach a consensus on the content of the new constitution. The ruling Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) insisted that they will not separately negotiate with the and urged them to come to a mutually acceptable position over contentious key issues. The Social Democratic Party (SDP), DPS’s coalition partner, in turn, announced that they will negotiate with the opposition only if their proposals are in accordance with the civic character of the state confirmed during the referendum on independence in 2006. Consequently, in the negotiation process opposition parties agreed to negotiate a common platform on joint activities and attitudes with the ruling parties, which was signed in September. Among the twenty key questions contained in the platform, is the demand that the should not be the only official language; however, no consensus could be reached on the country’s official main language. In addition, the platform contains a requirement, which stipulates that all minority nations should have equal rights and receive equal status in the constitution. Towards the beginning of October, negotiations between the ruling and the opposition parties intensified in the hope to achieve a consensus in the near future on the new Conflictive and Cooperative Events (relative) constitution and have the constitution approved by the parliament rather than through a referendum. These intensive bargaining efforts led to the final breakthrough at the beginning of October. Svetozar Marovic, the deputy head of the DPS, announced on 10 October that the ruling parties and the opposition Movement for Change (PzP), the (AA), and the had been able to resolve the contested issues and therefore a two-thirds majority required to pass the constitution in parliament was secured. The agreement assures that the preamble of the constitution will define the civic character of the Montenegrin state by mentioning the different minority nations living in Montenegro. With this

Source: FAST event data agreement a compromise on the language issue was also found – whereas the Montenegrin language will be listed as the official main language, Serbian, Albanian, Croatian and Bosniak languages will have equal status. As the graph depicts, the number of conflictive events decreased during September. Notwithstanding the significant progress made on the key issues of Montenegrin identity, the issue of dual citizenship remains unresolved. Although the question of citizenship has caused controversy since the dissolution of the union with Serbia, in the past two months it has increasingly gained weight on the political agenda. The reason for the growing interest in the citizenship policy was the Serb Parliament’s amendment to the citizenship law in September. According to the new law, Montenegrin citizens who were registered as residents of Serbia by the time of the termination of the union will receive Serbian citizenship upon request. Montenegrins as well as all other citizens of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia who were not registered as residents of Serbia, in turn, will get the citizenship through a simplified procedure. The new Serbian law on citizenship, while not formally targeted at Montenegro, might constitute a particular challenge to Montenegro because of the potentially high number of citizens who feel dual loyalty to both countries and because the current Montenegrin law on citizenship does not allow dual nationality for its citizens. Filip Vujanovic, the , requested the Council of Europe (CoE) to check whether the new amendment to Serbian law is in accordance with CoE principles. Also, CoE representatives warned the Prime Minister of Serbia, Vojislav Kostunica, that the language issue must be negotiated with the Montenegrin side as well. The opposition party, Liberal party of Montenegro (LPCG), expressed its fears concerning a dual citizenship for Montenegro’s citizens by pointing out that the signing of a bilateral agreement with Serbia would endanger the vital national interests of Montenegro. Similarly, Bozo Nikolic, a MP from the Croat Civic Initiative, claimed that Serbs in Montenegro did not want the dual FAST Update | Montenegro | No 4 | August to September 2007 citizenship because of the civilizational aspects but because of their aspirations to demolish the independent Montenegrin state. The , an opposition party, responded indignantly by accusing Nikolic of extreme chauvinistic statements against the Serb people in Montenegro.

Montenegro continued to develop its international relations during the reporting period. Together with eight other West Balkan states Montenegro signed the agreement on visa facilitation and re- admission with the EU on 18 September. Towards the end of the reporting period discussions on the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) with the EU intensified and an agreement was signed on 15 October. In general, Montenegro has maintained good relations with its regional neighbors. However, the protracted conflict between Montenegrin authorities and the Serb Orthodox Church (SOC) makes an exception to its modest political course. The conflict with the SOC has affected Montenegro’s relations with the Serbian state as well. After Montenegrin authorities refused to allow Bishop Filaret (SOC) to enter Montenegro and his subsequent hunger strike, the Serb Orthodox Patriarch Pavle requested President Vujanovic to stop the persecution of the bishop. Nevertheless, President Vujanovic responded that he could only request the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) to lift the ban on Bishop Filaret’s entry, since the Bishop is on the ICTY’s list of persons who have assisted some of the ICTY indictees. This issue contributed to the increased tensions between Montenegro and Serbia to the extent that even Velimir Ilic, Serbian Minister of Infrastructure, cancelled his visit to . Tensions slightly decreased when Montenegrin Foreign Minister Milan Rocan and Serbian Deputy Prime Minister Bozidar Djelic asserted that the two countries should try to solve their dispute. Consequently, at the beginning of September the Montenegrin government adopted a decision, which allows Bishop Filaret to enter Montenegro for religious purposes with Montenegrin police escorts. Despite the decision, Bishop Filaret filed charges against the Montenegrin government. This, in turn, may stir-up new troubles between the countries adding to already tense relations.

Now that the ruling parties, the DPS and the SDP, and the opposition parties the PzP, the AA and the Bosniak Party have reached an agreement on the contents of the new constitution and ensured its adoption by a two-thirds majority vote in parliament, it is expected that those parties that excluded themselves from the process will try to renegotiate their position within the newly created political constellation. This will particularly affect the Socialist People’s Party (SPP) facing two important opposition blocks, the PzP and the Serbian List, it will try to race with the latter in gaining support from the ranks of the Serbian oriented citizens of Montenegro. However, no such change is anticipated in voters’ preferences that would change the political course significantly. Since the PzP has been one of the biggest winners through the agreement on the new constitution, it is highly probable that it will entrench its position on the Montenegrin political scene, wishing to become the leading political force. This would further weaken the position of the DPS whose credibility has already suffered from corruption scandals, nepotism and political favoritism.

Contact FAST International is the early warning program of swisspeace, FAST International covering 25 countries/regions in Africa, Asia and Europe. Based in Country Team: Montenegro Bern, Switzerland, the program is funded and utilized by an Sonnenbergstrasse 17 international consortium of development agencies, including the 3000 Bern 7 Austrian Development Agency (ADA), the Canadian International Switzerland Development Agency (CIDA), the Swedish International Development [email protected] Cooperation Agency (Sida) and the Swiss Agency for Development and www.swisspeace.org Cooperation (SDC).