The leaders of the blocs for an independent Montenegro and union with Serbia, Milo Đukanović and Predrag Bulatović, bear enormous credit for the fact that the referendum on the independence of Montenegro in 2006 was an example of a democratic solution to a very sensitive and serious issue.
This was stated in an interview with "Vijesti" by Slovak diplomat and former special envoy of the European Union (EU) for the implementation of the referendum, Miroslav Lajčák.
Which events and how did they affect the peaceful course of the referendum campaign, and which and how did they affect the outcome of the referendum?
When we talk about the referendum on independence, I must first emphasize that it was an exceptional process in that Montenegro approached the European Union and requested that the Union take over the supervision of that process. In that sense, it was a process led by the European Union, therefore both Montenegrin and European, and I was the man who was entrusted to lead it. We passed a special law on the referendum, the lex specialis, and the entire process and voting on the day of the referendum were prepared according to that law. As you know, the referendum process was very well organized, and voting on the day of the referendum took place peacefully, without incidents or any violations. This was confirmed by thousands of domestic, regional and international observers. However, there was a sensitive moment that I remember, when the independence celebrations started before we had the official results...
How did that worry you?
Well, I was worried because the leader of the coalition for a common state called me, Mr. Bulatović, and asked me to somehow stop those celebrations, because they are afraid that they could lead to a conflict. I then went to the DPS headquarters and spoke with Mr. Đukanović. I asked him, if possible, to stop those celebrations, because we really didn't have results, and that could have provoked something. He understood that and I think he gave some instructions, orders to stop it as much as possible, and that defused the situation. Then I went to the headquarters of the other coalition, to the headquarters of the SNP (Socialist People's Party), to inform them about it. I could see that it eased the tension.
Were you worried about some events from the campaign, such as the affair related to the video in which the activists of the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) allegedly bought the vote of a man from Zeta in support of the independence of Montenegro?
I had experts from the OSCE, ODIHR, people who deal with election campaigns, and the opinion of those experts was that it was a normal campaign, that there were no incidents that would put a question mark on the regularity of the referendum.
How did the 55 percent threshold for the referendum to be valid come about? When did you first hear about it and from whom?
That's my formula. And how did it come about - I had a team that I built, I had excellent experts from the OSCE, ODIHR, the Council of Europe, but especially people from ODIHR who followed every election in Montenegro, who had an excellent analysis of how many voters go to the polls, how many votes decide whether the party will win, etc. Then we had a discussion with my team and experts from the European Union about what is best. We had to, in fact, invent a formula. We went through a series of possibilities, but in the end it was clear that we needed to have a fairly large difference between the number of votes for and against independence, so that no one could dispute the result of the referendum. We sat for hours, counted, calculated, thought, and in the end we came to the conclusion that 55 percent of all those who went to the polls are ambitious, but it is not impossible, and it is fair. I had the opinion of the Venice Commission, which said that the then existing law in Montenegro, which states that the majority is 50 percent plus one vote of 50 percent plus one vote of those who came out to vote, does not violate international standards, but that, as said, the political forces in Montenegro might want to change the law due to the importance of that issue to either increase the limit for the number of those who leave or the limit for the number of those who make a decision. And we came to the point that 55 is a number that gives the same chances for one and the other coalition.
Of course, then I heard from the people who were in the coalition for independence - according to our law, the majority is 50 percent plus one, that's the standard. Then I told them - well, but we need the process to be accepted by everyone, and I can guarantee that if we were to follow your law, then the other side would not accept the results.
How did you view certain opinions from the other side that this limit should have been higher than 55 percent?
We are based on analysis, calculations, etc. reached the point that 55 percent is the limit, which is fair, because it requires both coalitions to achieve a result that they have never achieved in the elections, but which is not impossible. In this way, that border was a strong motivation for voter mobilization. So, both sides accepted it. Of course, the pro-independence coalition thought it wasn't fair at the time, but they accepted it and it turned out to be, in fact, perhaps the key moment of the referendum.
What instructions were given to you at that time by the then high representative of the EU, Mr. Javier Solana and the EU?
Mr. Solana, when he received me for the first time to officially appoint me, told me - I am not interested in the result, for me the key thing is that no one will ever challenge the process, which must be fair and transparent. That was his key instruction. And then, during the process, I regularly informed him, at one stage we had separate meetings with Mr. Đukanović and Mr. Bulatović. This was after the adoption of the referendum law, the lex specialis, which, as you know, was practically accepted without any votes against, which was also a strong signal. Then I had a very detailed discussion with him, when I had to explain to him why 55 percent. He supported me, and followed the process to the end, received information from me. I think that in the end the turnout of over 86 percent clearly showed that the process was credible and that we achieved what he (Solana) was looking for.
What did the EU advise you and why was it initially against the idea of Montenegrin independence, only to change its position as the referendum approached?
In the beginning, the European Union was for the state union of Serbia and Montenegro. You know, I was the ambassador in Belgrade from 2001, so I followed it well, but when the negotiations on EU accession started, it already became clear that the structure of the economies of Serbia and Montenegro is different, and that it is quite difficult to a negotiation model is agreed upon, which would suit both parties. The decisive moment was in 2003, when the federal republic changed into a state union and when it was decided that there would be a moratorium on the referendum for three years. In other words, this meant that after three years the referendum was legitimate. It was actually something given by the European Union, so nobody could be against it. I regularly informed the member states about the process...
What was their attitude?
My experience is, not only then but also today, that if the member states see that you have a plan and that they can believe in that plan, then they accept it. And they saw that we had a plan, that we had a good analysis of the situation, so there were no problems - all member states supported the process every time I informed them.
What was the attitude of the USA and Russia?
Again, as part of my engagement, I met regularly with the ambassadors of both the US and Russia. It was important to me that they know the process, because, again, my experience is that you can hardly support something if you don't know the details or if you are not part of it. They were not part of it, but for me transparency was always very important, and I kept them informed regularly. Let's say, once a month, about where I am in the process, what it is like, what the philosophy is... They listened, I didn't have any problems, so they supported that philosophy.
What was the most difficult moment for you when agreeing on the conditions for holding the referendum?
The first difficult moment was when I came to Montenegro... I visited all the political parties to hear their opinion, and then we agreed to form two coalitions - for independence and for a common state, and that they participate in the negotiations. Negotiating the special law was a sensitive phase, but once you are already in the process, then, of course, everything goes easier.
The second sensitive moment, perhaps the most difficult and sensitive, was when I came to present that 55 percent. I had long conversations with Mr. Đukanović and Mr. Bulatović. I had to explain to them why exactly 55 percent, and that was not easy. In the end, they accepted it, because in fact they read that formula 55 as something very difficult, but not impossible, and that it is fair.
What kind of conversation partners were they and how did they differ?
I think it was my luck, but also for Montenegro, that those two coalitions were led by Mr. Đukanović and Mr. Bulatović. I had very open and fair communication with each other. Of course, they fought for the interests of their coalitions and for the best conditions for the referendum, but they were aware of their responsibility and did not run away from it, so they could make decisions. This is not always the case, they also had radicals in their ranks, but really my communication was very fair with both of them until the end. I think they bear enormous credit for the fact that the referendum passed as an example of democratic resolution of a very sensitive and serious issue.
Is there any politician with whom you could not find a common language?
(Laughs) There were politicians who refused to participate in that process, but I accepted it and respected their decisions, and I worked with those who were ready to be in the process.
Today, 18 years later, how do you view the accusations from the block of Mr. Bulatović, that the results of the referendum would never have been announced had it not been for you and Mr. František Lipka, who was the head of the referendum commission?
I am convinced that these accusations are not founded, that they do not drink water. First, the referendum was a domestic decision of Montenegro. Secondly, it was a plea of the bloc for the survival of the common state: they turned to the European Union and said - we don't believe that we can solve this process by ourselves, we don't trust the local people, we don't believe in their neutrality, etc., so they asked the European Union to lead the entire process. Second, I came here with a clear mandate, and my goal from start to finish was to have a credible process. My personal and professional credibility was tied to having a process that was credible, and that was the main principle. Third, that the president of the Republic Referendum Commission should be a foreigner, a citizen of an EU member state, was a decision of domestic actors. I proposed three names in the first round, however, the representatives of both blocs could not agree, and they did not accept any of them. Then in the second round I suggested only one name, Mr. Lipko, who was the ambassador in the former Yugoslavia, the last Czechoslovak and the first Slovak, who speaks your language, knows excellent opportunities and whom I knew, that I have a guarantee that he is objective. It was accepted and voted in parliament by the votes of deputies from both blocs.
When we talk about voting on the day of the referendum and the credibility of the results, the most important are the minutes from the polling stations. In fact, they are the only official document on the voting process. Minutes from all polling stations were signed by all members of the commissions, one block and the other, and no facts were recorded in those minutes that would dispute the voting process and its result. If there were serious problems, violations, then the minutes would not have been signed. The fact that at the level of the Republican Commission there was a six-to-six vote and that the vote of the president of the commission decided, it does not change the result of the referendum, and it was in accordance with the Referendum Law and general standards. That is why I think that the referendum on the independence of Montenegro was perhaps the most positive, the best example of preventive EU diplomacy in the Western Balkans.
Which predictions, warnings and promises of one side and the other regarding the outcome of the referendum came true, and which did not?
I think that the way the referendum passed, that there were no incidents, violations, that the European Union and the OSCE said that it met all standards, that the state union was divided in a European, civilized way - that it was a huge positive impulse for Montenegro as a new state. This helped a lot for Montenegro to soon become a member of the United Nations, the OSCE, and the Council of Europe. The referendum and the way it was carried out was a sound basis that helped all of this.
I have to give credit to Mr. Boris Tadić who was the president of Serbia, and who came in a week to visit Montenegro and thus gave symbolic political support to that process. That was very important. So I don't think it really could have gone any better. There was speculation about the so-called gray zone, what would happen if we had over 50 and under 55 percent of votes. I had an answer for that then, but there is no point in dealing with it today because it didn't come.
The irony is that I have done a lot of things in my life, but people often forget to mention the referendum in Montenegro, which was perhaps the most sensitive, difficult, and significant in my career. But because everything was so civilized, peaceful and European, it was perceived as a non-event, as if it was very simple. And it is enough to look at the region and see that it was absolutely not guaranteed that it could end like that...
And what about the warnings of the two sides that came true today?
I am not aware of any warnings. I led the strategy of that process, and we had institutions that deal with the observation of details. But, as I said, the European Union and the OSCE said that the process was fair, and by European standards, the results were accepted, the European Union and the international community reacted very positively, so if there was a fear of what would happen after independence - none of that happened. The earth stood on its feet and went its own way. Today, Montenegro is the most advanced of the entire region in the process of European integration. And that is some testimony.
Why would today, judging by all relevant public opinion surveys, more people vote for the independence of Montenegro, and not less?
I can only guess that. First, it is good to have your own country. You have your flag, your anthem, your national team members who perform at world championships in sports, you have your embassies, you have your identity. You learn about your future yourself. Second, 18 years means that a generation has grown up here that only remembers independent Montenegro, and for them it's something normal. It would be weird to ask them if they want anything else. So I think that's the answer to the question - that it's a very normal feeling.
I also went through that process in my country, I spent almost half of my life in Czechoslovakia and then came the division into two states, it was not easy for me then, but I remember well that feeling that we got something. And that you have responsibility for yourself, that you cannot blame anyone for mistakes. So I think it's a very natural reaction.
What could Montenegro have done in 18 years and didn't?
You can always do it faster and better, but we live in real life. It is a fact that Montenegro is a champion in the process of European integration, but it is also a fact that in the last four or five years, in fact, very little, if anything, has been done in this direction. Fortunately for Montenegro, that European journey was so slow, that you can remain champion even though you haven't moved for four years.
Today, Montenegro is in a situation where it has the greatest chance of becoming the next member of the European Union. First, this government made some decisions that were almost impossible to make, such as appointments to the judiciary. Second, the European Union has become serious about the issue of expansion to the countries of the Western Balkans. And what was almost taboo for the last ten years, is now a geopolitical priority. And the European Union wants to show that we are serious. I can say that in my 25 years of dealing with this area, perhaps for the first time the European Union is more ready for the region than the region for the European Union... And what else is important to you - unlike other countries in the region, everything is in your hands . You are not dependent on external actors, and almost every other country in the region is. For me, the story of emancipation and independence of Montenegro will be successfully completed on the day it enters the EU. And that day could happen very quickly. We didn't believe that five years ago, but today we do.
See more:
Download the app and follow the news
FOLLOW US ON
