Montenegro did not face all aspects of the military offensive on Dubrovnik, an illegal, senseless and militarily futile operation, which represents a dark chapter in the country's recent history, which has not been sufficiently and adequately illuminated to date.
This is what representatives of the Montenegrin civil sector, who deal with human rights, assessed for "Vijesti", on the occasion of marking the 32nd anniversary of the attack on Dubrovnik.
On October 1, 1991, members of the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) and Montenegrin reservists launched an attack on Dubrovnik from the territory of Montenegro and BiH, which resulted in a large number of victims and material destruction.
Part of intellectuals, journalists and public figures, gathered mainly around the Liberal Alliance Slavko Perović and the Social Democratic Party, demanded an end to the war and accused the regime of aggression Slobodan Milosevic and the then Montenegrin government.
Only the JNA general at the time was convicted of war crimes committed during the attack on Dubrovnik Pavle Strugar and his subordinate commander Miodrag Jokić, and before the Hague Tribunal. To date, no criminal proceedings have been initiated in Montenegro due to war crimes committed during the siege of Dubrovnik.
Milo Djukanovic who was the prime minister of Montenegro during the war in 1991, in his capacity as president in 2000 in Cavtat expressed his regret for the events in Dubrovnik. The then Croatian president Stipe Mesic and Đukanović then agreed that individual responsibility for war crimes should be established. However, the questions of who from Montenegro committed war crimes and who issued orders remained unanswered. The official explanation of the Montenegrin authorities is that they had no authority during the attack on Dubrovnik, and that everything was coordinated and ordered from the political and military leadership in Belgrade...
Coping as a guarantee that it won't happen again
Executive Director of Human Rights Action (HRA) Tea Gorjanc Prelevic she assessed that the anniversary is an opportunity to remind that Montenegro did not face all aspects of that military offensive, which was illegal, senseless, and even, in a military sense, futile.
"Confrontation is the only guarantee that something like that will not happen again, and it is important for the establishment of the rule of law."
She reasoned that the attack was illegal, because the order for the use of the army was given by the truncated presidency of the SFRY, composed of only two republics (Serbia and Montenegro) and two provinces, although it consisted of six republics. In that attack, he notes, war crimes were also committed, of which only two JNA officers, Strugar and Jokić, were punished, and that exclusively by the Hague Tribunal.
"The indictment against ten JNA officers is pending in Croatia, and it is unknown why those cases are not submitted to Serbia and Montenegro for processing, because those countries have no obligation to extradite their citizens to Croatia."
She states that Montenegro did not deal with crimes on the Dubrovnik battlefield, because it allegedly could not investigate them on foreign territory, which, Gorjanc Prelević points out, is incorrect:
"Montenegro normally accuses and condemns people who stole and killed abroad."
She assessed that the attack was pointless because Croatia had already declared independence, like Slovenia and Macedonia before it, so it was clear that Yugoslavia no longer existed, that the future of new states and the protection of minorities should be negotiated, and not actually shot at own citizens. and a world-famous city under the protection of the United Nations.
"The attack was also in vain in the military sense, because it did not lead to any sustainable success. The JNA itself had considerable human losses, and in less than a year it had to withdraw all units from the entire area of Dubrovnik that it had conquered," said Gorjanc Prelević.
The prosecution can react
Coordinator of the Human Rights Program at the Center for Civic Education (CGO) Tamara Milas she assessed that the participation of Montenegrin forces in the attack on Dubrovnik, during the aggression of the JNA from October 1, 1991 to May 31, 1992, represents a dark chapter in the recent history of Montenegro, which is not sufficiently and adequately illuminated even today.
"Montenegro has so far prosecuted and punished only four people who participated in the abuse of Croatian prisoners in the JNA camp in Morinje, and we can freely say that they were low on the ladder, and the chain of command was never even the subject of an investigation." Milas pointed out.
She notes that the prosecutor's office has the ability to prosecute crimes committed during the war on its own initiative.
"However, we are witnesses that war criminals were not a priority for any structure in the prosecutor's office, and this had its reflection on the lack of performance. This is also the case with the attack on Dubrovnik and related events."
Miiš said that, unfortunately, expectations that changes in prosecutorial structures would lead to increased commitment to justice, when it comes to war criminals, turned out to be futile because, as far as they know, there are no activities of the Special State Prosecutor's Office (SST) in this area. .
"I would even point out that the level of transparency of the SDT when it comes to basic information on the handling of war crimes cases and the fulfillment of the criteria from Negotiating Chapter 23 - Judiciary and fundamental rights, as well as the guidelines from the Strategy on the investigation of war crimes, is lower today than it was a few years ago earlier, which is not an encouraging sign", said Milaš.
Program Director of the Civic Alliance Milan Radovic said that the attack on Dubrovnik was remembered as a shameful and unacceptable act in Montenegrin history.
"An attack that left behind numerous victims and crimes, but for which our judiciary has no judicial epilogue. The issue of individual responsibility was never raised in order to punish those responsible for the suffering of numerous victims," Radović pointed out.
He reminded that in the period preceding the attack, there was a strong propaganda campaign in Montenegro under the slogan "War for Peace". As he said, the campaign took Croats as its target, calling them Ustashas and genocidal people, with another important element:
"The claim that the Croats want to 'return' parts of Montenegrin territory, specifically the Bay of Kotorska, and that with this aim they have amassed around 30.000 soldiers on the border with Montenegro, which they will attack at any moment. This was precisely the motivation for a large number of Montenegrin volunteers to join the war," he said.
Radović emphasized that the consequences of the shelling of Dubrovnik were enormous, with human casualties on both the Montenegrin and Croatian sides.
"In addition, the city also suffered numerous damages, especially on December 6, 12, which is considered the most difficult day for the Old Town, when about 1991 percent of the buildings in the city were completely burned or destroyed, while about 10 percent were severely damaged."
It is unacceptable behavior of our prosecution that it has not raised the issue of responsibility for the attack on Dubrovnik. This shows that there was no political will and that politics also affected the work of the prosecution. We know the huge number of victims on the side of the people of Dubrovnik, but also our citizens who lost their lives, who were misled and incited to war, deserve to be held accountable, says Milan Radović (GA)
Radović also reminds that Montenegro has not initiated any criminal proceedings for the attack on Dubrovnik, although it is generally known which war crimes took place during the period of the siege.
"Also, none of the Montenegrin officials who held important positions at the time were prosecuted. We only have an apology from the President of Montenegro, who apologized to the citizens of Croatia for the participation of Montenegrins in the attack on Dubrovnik."
He pointed out that unsolved crimes in themselves represent a burden both for society and for those injured in those proceedings, and therefore, because war crimes do not have a statute of limitations, it must not be allowed that important evidence and witnesses continue to be lost due to the passive attitude of the competent authorities. .
War reparations - a separate issue
Gorjanc Prelevic assessed that war compensation is a special issue, which was actualized by the Prime Minister in his technical mandate Dritan Abazovic, but with insufficient information. She notes that Abazović should have published more precise data, which the Government would have to dispose of, about what has so far been specifically returned to Croatia or paid for in the name of the equipment stolen from the Tivat airport.
Abazović announced last week that during the inventory of assets of the Airport of Montenegro, equipment was found which is suspected to have been stolen from the Dubrovnik Airport Ćilipi in 1991-1992. years. On this occasion, the Basic State Prosecutor's Office (ODT) in Podgorica formed a case.
"The equipment was listed 20 years ago. It was determined what was to be thrown away, and what could be returned, so whether it was returned or paid for or none of that," asks Gorjanc Prelevic.
She pointed out that this equipment is a "grain in the sea" of stolen private and public property in the Dubrovnik area.
"Many buildings were destroyed in the shelling, the damage to the Old Town was listed in the judgment of the Hague Tribunal against Pavlo Strugar. On December 6, 1991 alone, 52 individual buildings and structures in the Old Town were destroyed or damaged, as well as the walls that surrounded it. It is necessary to know what was paid and what was not, and what Serbia is obliged to pay, and what Montenegro is obliged to pay", said Gorjanc Prelevic.
She stressed that we should not forget that theft and destruction of property without military necessity are also war crimes, which do not expire, and which should also be punished in accordance with the legal order of Montenegro.
Tamara Milaš emphasized that clumsy or deliberately uttered statements by politicians can have serious consequences for the state and its relations with its neighbors.
"For example, Prime Minister Abazović's statements about the memorial plaque in Morinje or about the allegedly first list of equipment from the Ćilipi airport located at Montenegrin airports are not a contribution to solving open issues between the two countries, but rather the misuse of issues from our past for the sake of daily political points, which the serious issues of the prosecution of war crimes and dealing with the past are being trivialized," Milaš said.
She assessed that politicians must have an awareness of what their words can produce, knowledge of what and how it is resolved in direct communication and what through the media, but also responsibility for the consequences of statements that can further complicate international relations and the reputation of the country.
"I am afraid that we do not yet have a mature political structure to properly deal with these issues, and they are much more complex and require greater sensitivity and responsibility than tweets and mere confrontation with previous political opponents."
Regarding the found equipment from Ćilipo, Milan Radović states that questions are being raised as to why there was no earlier reaction from the authorities when, according to the former adviser to the director of the Airport, the same equipment was already listed almost 20 years ago, and why the equipment is still with us. and it could then be delivered to Croatia.
"Also, bearing in mind the length of time that the equipment is at the airport, it was important that it be communicated to the public on time, because it is obvious that the public was not aware of these facts," said Radović.
He pointed out that they expect that all relevant facts and responsibility will be determined in the case of the newly formed case in the ODT, i.e. that there will be a judicial epilogue as it should have been 20 years ago when the equipment was found out.
"It is important to determine who had access to the goods and whether there is anything else besides what was formally listed. The answer should be heard from the other side, that is, from the director of Ćilipi Airport, to whom the letter about the found equipment was sent. This could benefit the prosecution, but also speed up the process of returning the goods in question to Croatia, and at the same time reminds us of the importance of regional cooperation in solving open issues from the past".
No one has apologized to the citizens of Montenegro for the tragic policy
Gorjanc Prelevic reminded that, according to the data presented by the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Montenegro testifying at the Hague Tribunal, up to 30.000 people were mobilized in Montenegro for the attack on Dubrovnik, which was a huge number for Montenegro at that time.
"Although in the meantime the state officials, Milo Đukanović and Svetozar Marović, apologized to Croatia for the attack and for all that the Montenegrins unfortunately did to them as part of the JNA, I am not aware that they have publicly apologized to their fellow citizens for the tragically wrong policy by which they caused a huge number of people to believe the lie that Croats are attacking Montenegro, that Montenegro needs to be defended from 30.000 Ustasha, that Yugoslavia needs to be defended from Croats, that it is a war for peace, that they are doing any good by going to steal and shell their neighbors.”
Prosecuting those responsible for war crimes is an obligation of the state
Tamara Milaš assessed that the lack of concrete steps or visible efforts to investigate certain events can only further complicate the resolution of open issues with Croatia.
"This should be put in another framework - our path to the EU and a clear message from the EU that it will not accept as new members those countries that have open issues with the EU member states, and in our case it is Croatia." So, prosecuting those responsible for war crimes is an obligation of the state according to domestic and international law, a task in the EU accession process and a moral debt to the victims."
Bonus video:
