The donation of two million euros to Nikšić is not a gift from Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić to that city, but his investment in his rating and his political positions - said the leader of the Democratic Party (DS) and former ambassador of Serbia in Podgorica, Zoran Lutovac.
He called Vučić's donation a move by an autocrat who privatized the state and uses its resources for personal needs.
"This time, in defiance of the Constitution and the law, he is donating money from the citizens of Serbia ahead of the elections, counting on the support of voters from Nikšić, as well as the whole of Montenegro, supporting his allies in Montenegro at the same time, and he will probably present it to Brussels as solidarity with his neighbors. That's how he works, he doesn't give away, he invests. He does not donate his money, he invests the money of all citizens of Serbia in his rating and building his political position in Serbia and the region. It was the same in the case of 'donating' money to Banja Luka, Srebrenica, Drvar, or donating vaccines to neighbors," said Lutovac in an interview with "Vijesta".
Speaking about the current relations between Serbia and Montenegro, he said that they depend all the time, even now, solely on the personal relations of the state and political elites. Therefore, according to his words, the relations between these two countries are presented either as the best in history or as never worse, depending on the current political needs.
"Relations must not depend on who is in power, nor on the personal relationships of politicians. They must be at the highest possible level in all areas, because it is in the interest of the citizens... When this is understood and accepted in both countries, relations will be much better than they are now," said Lutovac.
Why are the relations between Belgrade and Podgorica bad even after the removal of the three-decade regime of the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) and the arrival of a new political set in power in Montenegro? What is the generator of misunderstandings between the two countries and did you expect them to disappear with the dethronement of Milo Đukanović's party?
The relations between Belgrade and Podgorica depend all the time on the personal relations of the state and political elites, and not on the real needs and interests of the citizens of the two countries. There is the generator of all the misunderstandings that were manifested publicly or were presented as such. In other words, sometimes these misunderstandings were real, and more often they were faked for internal political needs. Since these needs have not disappeared, the public manifestation of these misunderstandings has not disappeared either.
Why did the new Montenegrin Government - personified primarily in the image of Prime Minister Zdravko Krivokapić - repeatedly go through the "hot rabbit" of Belgrade tabloids close to the Vučić regime?
Precisely because of the internal political needs of the Vučić regime and support for political allies in Montenegro. Both are wrong. Neither will it gain support among the citizens of Serbia, nor does it do the allies in Montenegro a favor. On the contrary. I think that a completely different approach would benefit both of them, but also everyone in Montenegro and Serbia.
How did you, as a former ambassador, experience Krivokapić's recent official visit to Belgrade, which remained in the shadow of the welcome that Serbian Agriculture Minister Branislav Nedimović gave him at the "Nikola Tesla" airport in that city, wearing jeans?
It was an act of disrespecting the guest, and whether it was involuntary or whether it was a message - we can argue about that. Based on what followed that gesture, I conclude that it was a message after all. When such visits are planned, there are no more important things than welcoming a distinguished guest. The excuses here cannot justify such a gesture. In addition, the dress code for such occasions is also violated. This is inappropriate in diplomacy.
Then the statement made by Vučić during the visit - "I want a decent relationship with Montenegro, but I don't have high expectations", is offensive and indicates that the relations are not decent and that the guest is to blame. In addition, Vučić does not yet have high expectations that he will improve. Basically, it is an inappropriate and ill-intentioned statement.
Finally, the regime media, all but one, completely ignored the first day of the official visit of the Prime Minister of Montenegro, which obviously indicates that they received such an instruction. All this indicates that it was not an oversight but a message. A bad message that fell on Serbia, not the guest who came to visit.
Before the adoption of the famous Law on Freedom of Religion, which was the reason for a serious tightening of interstate relations, Đukanović and Vučić's emissaries claimed that Montenegro and Serbia had excellent relations. What, in your opinion, was the reason for such assessments and do you believe that they were at least partially based in reality?
As I said, the relations of these two countries are portrayed as either the best in history or the worst ever depending on the current political needs, not what they really are and what they should be. In reality, those relations are better than they are now, but at the same time significantly below the possibilities and potential, that is, the expectations of the citizens of both countries.
You almost said in one statement that you do not know what the current relations between the Montenegrin and Serbian presidents Đukanović and Vučić are, stating that during your mandate (from 2008 to 2013), all politicians who would come to Podgorica, except for Vučić, reported to the Embassy in Montenegro. and the former president of Serbia, Tomislav Nikolić, who, you claim, had direct contacts with Đukanović. What do you think their relationships were based on?
If they were initiated and implemented outside of official protocols, they were certainly not based on interstate interests - especially since some represented the government and the other the opposition in their country.
Do you believe the media speculation that Djukanovic helped form the Serbian Progressive Party?
Such speculations are based on some facts that may point to it. Let's say, contacts and cooperation that are not inter-state, and at the same time not inter-party, because we are talking about two parties of different ideological and programmatic character - one is socialist and the other is populist. Therefore, if neither interstate nor interparty cooperation is involved, it is logical that there are such speculations.
Vučić's critics in Serbia often say that he copied Đukanović's way of governing. What, in your opinion, are the key similarities and what are the differences in their management models?
That's a question for a PhD, not a short answer in an interview. As short as possible - the similarity is that both are stabilocrats who prioritize stability over freedom and democracy, and the difference is in the political style, manners and ideologies that they formally represent, but in reality they do not hold too much to them.
The Montenegrin opposition, headed by the DPS, accuses Vučić of interfering in the internal affairs of the country through the Democratic Front, stating that his goal is the realization of the large-state project "Serbian world". What are Vučić's interests in Montenegro?
I see this again as an internal Montenegrin politicization of identity - some attack him because of a large-state project, while others refer to him (Vučić) for the sake of creating the impression that they have Belgrade's support. Both politically benefit from it, but I think it is not useful for improving the relations between the two countries.
"Serbian world" is not a strategy; it is a marketing-propaganda project intended to mitigate accusations coming from a part of the public that the Vučić regime is pursuing a policy of betrayal of national interests, primarily in relation to Kosovo.
How do you view Vučić's move to - on behalf of the city of Belgrade and the state of Serbia - donate two million euros to Nikšić?
It is the move of an autocrat who privatized the state and uses its resources for his own needs. This time, in defiance of the Constitution and the law, he is donating money to the citizens of Serbia ahead of the elections, counting on the support of voters from Nikšić, as well as the whole of Montenegro, supporting his allies in Montenegro at the same time, and he will probably present this to Brussels as solidarity with his neighbors. That's how he works, he doesn't give away, he invests. He does not donate his money, he invests the money of all citizens of Serbia in his rating and building his political position in Serbia and the region. This was also the case in the case of "donating" money to Banja Luka, Srebrenica, Drvar, or donating vaccines to neighbors.
What do you think is the reason that Vučić, since coming to power, has not yet made an official visit to Podgorica, despite the fact that he persistently emphasizes that he is the guardian of the interests of Serbs in Montenegro?
In order to come to visit, he should be invited and express his intention to come. The fact that he presents himself as the "guardian of the interests of Serbs in Montenegro" is perhaps the key reason why he was not invited or why he did not express his intention to come. It was probably not in the interest of both of them, who use identity issues for political purposes, to make that visit happen.
How do you explain the fact that Serbia has not extradited Svetozar Marović, the former president of the state union, to Montenegro for more than four years?
Because partial political interests are above state protocols and proclaimed cooperation.
To what extent does the fact that neither Serbia nor Montenegro currently have ambassadors in Podgorica and Belgrade affect poor interstate relations? Vladimir Božović from Belgrade continues to serve as ambassador to Montenegro, although he was expelled in November 2020, while Montenegro has had no ambassador since February 2021, after the impeachment of Tarzan Milošević.
The fact that Podgorica and Belgrade do not have ambassadors is a consequence of cold relations, not the other way around. Belgrade's insistence on an ambassador who was denied hospitality is completely inappropriate and undiplomatic behavior, regardless of the reasons and justification for that act, and the fact that Montenegro does not send its ambassador is a response to such behavior by Belgrade.
What needs to be done by one side, and what by the other, in order for the situation to relax as much as possible and bring it to a normal level?
First and foremost, the relations between Serbia and Montenegro must not depend on who is in power, nor on the personal relations of politicians. Relations must be at the highest possible level in all areas, because it is in the interest of the citizens and they expect it from those who represent them. States exist because of citizens, not citizens because of states. When this is understood and accepted in both countries, relations will be much better than they are now.
Lithium can run the same as lithium
Citizens of Serbia repeatedly blocked roads throughout the country during November and December last year, demanding that the international corporation Rio Tinto not be allowed to exploit lithium in Loznica. Could the Rio Tinto issue cost Vučić the way the adoption of the Law on Freedom of Religion cost Đukanović - by losing power?
These were not only protests against Rio Tinto, but environmental protests in a broader sense. They started out as ecological, but they became massive when the police used excessive force and took shelter in Šabac so that thugs and criminals who got out of their official cars could beat the people unhindered.
Just as in Montenegro, lithium was the driving force behind the unification of various dissatisfactions, so lithium can be the driving force behind the unification of wide and varied dissatisfaction in Serbia. Whether that will happen will depend a lot on whether that dissatisfaction will be articulated in an appropriate way.
Recently, a broad alliance was formed, the backbone of which is the DS, the Freedom and Justice Party, and the People's Party, which also includes the Movement of Free Citizens, the Sloga union, and many other organizations and associations, independent intellectuals... Thus, a political force emerged that spectrum of citizens can accept as an alternative to Vučić. The breadth and strength of that alliance allows those who have been undecided or abstainers to join it, and to turn that majority dissatisfaction into a political will that would lead to fundamental changes.
Bonus video:
