Brussels drew who should leave

The European Union (EU) has introduced an informal balance clause to Montenegro, although the government is trying to present how the country is progressing in integration, said the Executive Director of the Center for Civic Education (CGO) Daliborka Uljarević.

She claims that the EC reports pointed out the neuralgic points blocking the process of Europeanization and practically drew officials who have to leave their positions.

"Through the Communication of the Expansion Strategy and Key Challenges for 2014-15, the EC, in the part of the recommendations related to Montenegro, reminded of the existence of the so-called balance clause within the negotiation framework and stressed that progress in meeting the interim benchmarks related to the rule of law will determine the dynamics of the negotiations. It seems that the Montenegrin authorities did not learn anything from the then threat of the balance clause, or they forgot it too quickly. We are witnessing that Montenegro ends 2019 with institutions that have been destroyed by party interests and therefore cannot even produce the necessary results. Only the naive and politically limited can think that the EU can pull its nose and that such things are not noticed, especially in European capitals that are traditionally wary of enlargement. The logical consequence is the informal balance clause that is now in force," said Uljarević in an interview with "Vijesti".

Why is there no stronger reaction from Brussels due to the stagnation of Montenegro in reforms?

There is a reaction, although, in my opinion, it is late and therefore insufficiently effective. We, together with some critically oriented colleagues in the civil sector, warned that Montenegro is a leader in simulation and not in reforms. We knew even then that the government would not willingly enter the demanding phase of real cuts, so we proposed to the EC to use the existing mechanisms in order to dynamize the entire process in a high-quality manner. And if the EC had only threatened Montenegro a year and a half ago with the balance clause, it would have had a greater effect than what it has practically introduced now. After all, this is evidenced by the never sharper unofficial document of the EC, which directly points the finger at the neuralgic points of blocking the process of democratization and Europeanization and practically draws those who must leave their positions in order for the Montenegrin government to prove the existence of elementary readiness for this process to continue properly.

Despite the clear criticisms in the EC's "non-paper", the chief negotiator said that it was an encouragement, while the prime minister said that part of the public selectively reads the reports from Brussels. How do you comment on that?

It should be emphasized that accession negotiations are our chance to organize ourselves as a society, establish responsibility and build a state where individuals cannot be above institutions. The assessment of the fulfillment of assumed obligations is nothing more than an assessment of our credibility. Montenegro's shaky credibility in the negotiations was pointed out by the last annual report of the EC presented in the spring, and the "non paper" we received recently is an additional cold shower for those who have managed to delay things even more since the spring. And this is confirmed by the reactions of the authorities, which are inconsistent and mutually inconsistent, with the intention of only reducing the damage caused by the public publication of the document. My impression is that these people do not even believe their own publicly expressed optimism, but they seem to hope that others will.

What does that tell you?

The essential problem is that seven years after the opening of negotiations, the authorities demonstrate a lack of understanding of the negotiation process. If the EU tells you that something is not good, it is telling you that it is not the standard or the best democratic practice that they adhere to in that club of states. And it is not up to the one standing in line to enter a club to change the standards from the outside, but to say in what time frame he will be able to reach the standard and correct the indicated irregularity. That is why it is said that the biggest negotiations are conducted in the country itself and that European affairs are essentially domestic affairs.

These are documents that are written very carefully and for a long time on the basis of various sources of information with many professional and political readings. Those standards that the EU insists on are the minimum we must have in order to organize ourselves as a society. By refusing to apply it, with the additional announcement that they will try to convince the EC that they misunderstood something, the Montenegrin authorities are harming the otherwise burdensome and slow accession process.

All of us who have intensive communication with representatives of EU institutions and member states also know that what came out in that document is the most washed-up version of what the key players in the EU think and say in closed meetings. And the prime minister himself should know that, or else he has an even more serious problem that requires a thorough reconstruction of the negotiating team.

The report specifically points to shortcomings in the area of ​​media freedom and cooperation with NGOs. How do you comment on the Government's attitude towards the critical part of the public?

The government is most irritated by the critically oriented media and NGOs, because it is precisely this part of society that continuously and with arguments points out the inadequacies of its policies and practices. This lack of democratic capacity is most evident in the government's inability to conduct a dialogue with dissenters, easily labeling those who point out problems even when they propose reasonable solutions. Just like in the dirty campaigns promoted through the pro-government media, but also through the institutions of the system themselves, as well as numerous other less visible but dangerous and lasting pressures.

Can such an approach be harmful to the government?

That approach turned out to be reckless and harmful to the authorities themselves. This is also indicated by relevant public opinion surveys, as it is clear that the critical circle has been strengthened in terms of public trust, while the Government and other institutions have been weakened.

I am not sure that the authorities themselves, and primarily the representatives of that hard-line approach, have an understanding of the damage they have done to themselves as well as a willingness to change it. This is bad because precious time and resources are being spent on internal calculations instead of initiating and conducting a dialogue on how to achieve the state we stood for through the restoration of independence. Finally, "non paper" shows that among the most critical areas are those that are persistently problematized by critically oriented NGOs in Montenegro and are well followed by critically oriented media. It is clear to me that this only intensifies the anger of the authorities whose Potemkin villages can no longer hide, but it would have been politically more rational if they had heard those criticisms better here before they came back to them in that circle that passed through Brussels.

Precisely "non paper" shows that among the most critical areas are those that are persistently problematized by critically oriented NGOs in Montenegro and are well followed by critically oriented media.

How dangerous is France's announcement that the negotiation system will change for the integration process? Do you think that the rules should be changed for countries that are already in negotiations?

This is not a sports match in which two teams compete based on established rules. The process of European integration has always been like a moving target. Simply put, it is a policy that is based on the existence of interests and decision-making based on interests. And the interest of EU member states, including France, is to integrate the Western Balkans into the Union as an organized society. However, it is increasingly clear that it is not in the interest of the ruling elites in the region to organize ourselves as a society, and that is why the internal veto players who use various actions to "mine" the accession process are increasingly active. And that justifiably requires a change of approach, while the big question remains whether it will go exactly according to the framework methodology proposed by Emmanuel Macron or whether the EC will still develop it a little differently during the detailed elaboration.

It is quite certain that the new rules will apply to everyone so that they can be followed comparatively.

In DPS, hardliners are getting stronger

Do you expect program changes in DPS after the congress?

The Eighth Congress of the DPS was prepared for a long time, and as expected, the battle was not about program changes, but about winning or maintaining positions within the party structure. Therefore, the program interventions are cosmetic and in the direction of what is a socially and politically desirable story, without a vision of revitalization of society or obligations that carry clearly defined and measurable results. Some of the determinants are cynical, such as the one about DPS's commitment to a more decisive fight against corruption by ensuring the implementation and improvement of existing laws and strengthening state leverage.

It is through the system that the DPS completely controls that corruption flourished so much that it is described as endemic in the relevant international reports, and the state's interest is overlapped with the party's interest to the extent that we are labeled a captive state. Equally cynical, if not insulting, is the accentuation of anti-fascism by the party that leases and repurposes the places of suffering of anti-fascists for several decades. Thus, the Mamula camp in the new guise of a hotel complex will offer guests everything except the traces that testified to the suffering, pain and trauma of the prisoners of that place of suffering. That luxurious all-inclusive offer will exclude the most important thing - our right and obligation to remember anti-fascist victims and to honor them through commemorations, all with the blessing of DPS whose anti-fascism is clearly expressed in euros even though that price list is not part of their program.

On the level of symbolism, my impression is that the Eighth Congress of the DPS, like the famous Eighth Session of the Communist Party of Serbia, strengthened the hardliners, and tightening the party and the entire system could lead to years of unraveling. On the other hand, for someone from a democratic country, the eighth congress of the same party in power for 30 years may remind one of the sci-fi horror "The Eighth Passenger".

Technical government is a bad experiment

Is it realistic to expect negotiations on a technical government by the end of the year and is there a possibility that this issue will be resolved in a package with the election of the VDT and members of the Judicial Council?

Technical government can help DPS the most. We already had that experiment three years ago, in far more favorable circumstances for the opposition. Even in those conditions, the government had limited effects. In the meantime, the DPS and its coalition partners have completely closed the system to party cadres at all levels, so there is no elementary permeability for the purposeful work of ministers who would come from the opposition.

International actors do not take this topic into serious consideration for discussion, let alone their own involvement.

Instead of insisting on a losing idea, the opposition should come up with a way to participate in the final constitution of the Judicial Council, which includes the election of distinguished lawyers in the Assembly, as well as in the election of the VDT. I think that those two issues should be linked to the adoption of solutions agreed upon within the Committee for Comprehensive Reform of the Electoral System, which has potential if the opposition uses it wisely.