Dear Europeans, 

Please close your eyes and sleep - it may be a terrifying scene to see how your arrogant executive leaders are trying to kill my country, Montenegro. Sleep well and have nice dreams! 

Geneva, 21.02.2006 
Dr Dragan Hajdukovic*

*Dragan Hajdukovic, PhD is a Montenegrin scientist (physicists) with a large number of publications in leading international journals for physics. He is well known in Montenegro as a pacifist, democrat and originator of the Project “Montenegro - The First Ecological State”. From the early beginning of the Yugoslav tragedy he was a persistent opponent to ultra nationalism and violence. As an independent candidate, he ran three times for the presidency of Montenegro, coming second as the best result. 

hajdukovic@greenambassador.org

P.S Those suffering from insomnia may read the attached paper “Basic facts and background of the problem of Montenegro”. 

Montenegro is a small State, but still bigger than a quarter of UN members. Montenegro entered the First World War as a much respected kingdom with a thousand-year tradition and epic history of successful resistance to different conquerors. It contributed to the victory of the Entente Powers much more than can be expected from such a small nation and army. For all contributions, sacrifices and suffering in the war, the Old Montenegro was “rewarded” in an original way: it was occupied by its allies! In fact, with the blessing of France and the shameful indifference of other powers of that time, Montenegro was simply occupied and annexed to Serbia. 

The Montenegrin uprising against Serbian occupation ended with a large number of killed Montenegrins, enormous crimes against the civil population and ethnical cleansing (i.e. a large number of refugees that never returned to Montenegro). 

For the Serbian regime of that time, Montenegro was considered to be the main obstacle in their aim to create a unitary state. In fact, Montenegro favoured a confederation of six south Slavic nations, based on principles that have an astonishing similarity to present day European Union! In fact, the tragic end of Yugoslavia has its historical roots in that time, when the founding of Yugoslavia was not based upon mutual respect, but on the Serbian domination of other south Slavic nations. I know these events not only from history but also from the tragic destiny of my grand-father and mother. 

At the end of 20th century, before and during the war in Former Yugoslavia, Montenegro held a very strong opposition to the Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic and his puppet government in Montenegro. During those difficult and, for the opposition, dangerous times, many opposed ultra nationalism and the war, promoting values of peace and democracy in a multicultural society, supporting the mutual respect of all nations and religions. During the worst days of the war, the threatening propaganda of a totalitarian regime, which had full control of the media, could not avoid that one quarter of the population had both the moral dignity and the courage to actively defend those values. In the beginning, the opposition was in favour of the continuation of Former Yugoslavia, but after the dismantling of Yugoslavia (1991), most Montenegrins chose the independence of their nation. We proposed Serbia and other former Yugoslavian countries; a union similar to Schengen which is the highest level of community inside the European Union. As pacifists, we remain determined to become independent through a democratic referendum, but both historically and considering the events at the end of Yugoslavia, it is not a democratic question, but an essential right of a nation, to be liberated from occupation. Nevertheless, we have accepted to apply democracy to change a situation that is the antidemocratic result of force and terror! 

Our totally pacific and democratic opposition must not be confused with that of Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic. The spirit for independence has strong roots within the Montenegrin population and it is wrong and unjust to identify independence with Mr Djukanovic and to use his scanty reputation as an argument against independence. The EU must not play with the destiny of a nation just because it likes or dislikes a temporary leader. Mr Djukanovic was for seven years one of the two key pro-Serbian leaders in Montenegro and the worst enemy of our opposition, but in 1997, with a calculated risk involving his political carrier and even his life; he opposed the politics of Milosevic. His party split into two. One part, lead by Djukanovic, gradually adopted our plan for a renewal and independence of a Montenegrin state. The second component, lead by hard ultra nationalists, directly or indirectly involved in the war and in war crimes, continued to support Milosevic and still dream a Greater Serbia. With the support of ultra nationalists still in power in Serbia and by an extremely intolerant Orthodox Church, they are an aggressive minority, insensible to the universal values of European civilization and remain the last obstacle to our independence. It is therefore beyond our understanding that the latter receive the indirect support of EU bureaucrats like Mr Xavier Solana, who has proven not to be impartial! It may be that the biased position of Mr Solana is the result of an incomplete understanding of a complex situation. However, the prevailing opinion in Montenegro is that Solana aims only to be personally successful in his mission in the Balkans. Consequently, being an opportunist, he knows that it is much easier to obtain results by exercising pressure on small Montenegro - which has cleverer and more flexible leaders - than on much bigger Serbia lead by rigid ultra nationalists. Therefore, justice and the destiny of a small nation are secondary to his personal interest and success. 

In the fifteen years after destruction of Yugoslavia, Montenegrins have never obtained the right to make a free decision about their future. Presently we live in a state created by Milosevic against our will. After the end of Milosevic, this state (we call it “Solania”) was artificially kept half-alive only because of the enormous pressure exercised by Mr Solana. There is even a rumour in Montenegro that Mr Solana was efficient only because he managed to threaten and intimidate Prime Minister Djukanovic, who is vulnerable because of his past, before he turned against Milosevic. So, we live now in a country which doesn’t exist from a moral and even a legal point of view, since it is not the result of a freely expressed will of both federated states, Montenegro and Serbia. 

It must be noted that during his rule, in order to change the ethnical structure and assure better control of Montenegro, Milosevic intentionally sent a large number of Serbian refuges to Montenegro who immediately obtained voting rights, in total violation of the law. Consequently, instead of the “ethnical cleansing” which Milosevic performed in other regions, in Montenegro he carried out an “ethnical filling”. Presently, Montenegro holds a world record in the number of refugees compared with the size of the population. Just imagine an EU overrun by the sudden arrival of sixty million people (mainly extremists) who immediately obtain citizenship and full rights. In spite of this, we still hold a majority, but if there had been no “ethnical filling” our majority would have been much larger. Of course, we will not subtract already given voting rights to Serbian refugees, even if it was done in an illegal way. Confident that Solana never thought about this and other aspects, it is nevertheless dangerous and damaging to dictate solutions for a situation one doesn’t grasp well. 

EU experts have officially judged that the Montenegrin law concerning referendum is in full agreement with that practised in EU member states. In spite of this, Mr Solana, who knows that we are the majority, wants us to change the law and to introduce a higher threshold that doesn’t exist in any other European country. The goal is clear: to impose a threshold that is higher than our majority, in order to assure victory of a minority! In my opinion, such an attitude and the psychological structure of the personality of some EU leaders, is a still greater danger for the future of Europe than for the future of Montenegro. When in 1992 the Serbian ultranationalists took full control in Montenegro, we didn’t hear a single EU voice in our support. But now, when we want to organise a highly fair and democratic referendum, we are subject to pressure by the EU. After all the “ethnical cleansings”, “ethnical fillings” and other violent changes in the region, it is unfair to change an already good law, only to favour the ultranationalist opposition, an opposition that doesn’t shout for more justice and democracy, but only for privileges. Presently, in the regions of Montenegro where they hold a majority, our supporters will be under enormous pressure, even afraid to go to vote. Just let me give a small example of the attitude of our antidemocratic opponents: in 1993 the same Serbian leaders that oppose independence today had enough power and absence of moral dignity to be intentional liars, and accused me for inviting the international community to bomb Belgrade. It was a very dangerous accusation, and I am far to be their major victim. Nevertheless, with which right does Mr Solana support them against me? With which right does Mr Solana work to ruin my future and the future of the majority of Montenegrins? 

As a European, I dream of an EU that is a world leader and unlike the USA, a leader capable to build a better and more humane world. It is sad to see, by the example of small Montenegro, how the EU is still far from such a dream. 

I will be very happy to present my excuses to Mr Solana, should his evident mistakes prove to be unintentional and just the result of insufficient knowledge and awareness, but it would be terrible if the mistakes prove to be intentional, with the single purpose of achieving personal success without any concern about the destiny of a small nation. Never before have I had such a strong aspiration to be wrong.