The aggression against Dubrovnik was carried out by the Montenegrin side, so a resolution condemning it and all the crimes committed would be a good gesture towards Croatia.
This was told to "Vijesti" by the Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of Croatia, Gordan Grlić Radman.
In an interview conducted via email, he stated that Zagreb finds the Resolution on the Genocide in Jasenovac and the Dachau and Mauthausen camps, which the Montenegrin parliament adopted last year, unacceptable because, as he said, Croatia has clearly condemned “all totalitarian systems and crimes committed in the name of their ideologies” and “every year the entire Croatian state leadership participates in the commemoration held at the Jasenovac Memorial Site”. However, Grlić Radman did not answer an additional question from “Vijesti” - whether this means that Zagreb believes that the Independent State of Croatia (NDH) committed genocide against Serbs, Roma, Jews, Croats and people of other nationalities that it considered undesirable.
Asked what Croatia is prepared to do to shed light on the case of the Split "Lora" camp, in which 14 members of the former Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) from the so-called Nikšić-Šavnik group were killed, the Croatian minister replied that "there is no such thing as a 'Lora camp' and there never was", that it is not an open question, but rather "a narrative that aims to equate aggressor and victim".
"Everything about the events in the Lora prison has been processed and adjudicated, and is in the domain of judicial proceedings, which is neither possible nor necessary to comment on," said Grlić Radman, in response to additional questions - what is "Lora" if not a camp, and how shedding light on the suffering of people who were prisoners of war - who, in accordance with international humanitarian law, deserved protection from torture and killing - can be "a narrative that aims to equate aggressors and victims."
Speaking about the memorial plaque on the site of the former Morinje camp, the Croatian foreign minister said that for them it is "a statement of the consciousness of the people of Montenegro", that it is "the starting point of new relations after the change of government (in Montenegro) in 2020", and that just as it is, for them it represents "a place of reverence and remembrance".
"Any interference with it would be the destruction of the relations built between our countries," said Grlić Radman, without answering an additional question - is it not an escape from facing the past, as some war crimes researchers have warned, that the plaque displays a narrative about "misled Montenegro, a victim of Greater Serbian aggression", and not an active participant in the attack on Dubrovnik and its surroundings.
The Croatian Foreign Minister also told "Vijesti" that open issues with Montenegro have always been on the table in bilateral relations, that perhaps they were not emphasized enough because Zagreb believed in "promises of their positive resolution", but that a lot of time has passed and that they have now decided to "only intensify" their expectations more openly. He did not, however, answer - what was the obstacle for Zagreb to "intensify" its expectations more openly during the government of the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS), during whose mandate most of these contentious issues were created.
After "Vijesti" sent them additional questions, Grlić Radman's office said that the minister had answered all the questions through the content of the interview, and that unfortunately, given the number of obligations, there was no time for additional questions.
Grlić Radman is coming to Montenegro for the conference "European People's Party as the driver of the enlargement of the European Union (EU) to the Western Balkans", which will be held today and tomorrow in Podgorica, and will be hosted by the Bosniak Party.
Has anything concrete been achieved in the recent bilateral consultations between Montenegro and Croatia on open interstate issues? If not, why not?
Political bilateral consultations in this context have a special significance, primarily due to the fact that the Republic of Croatia and Montenegro are neighboring countries. At the recent political consultations held on 27 January this year, political dialogue was renewed, supported by a detailed elaboration of further steps on numerous topics important for bilateral relations and for the continuation of cooperation in areas of interest. The state of open issues was discussed, as well as the further dynamics of work and the way to resolve them, in order to achieve concrete results as soon as possible. Both sides expressed their readiness for an open and active dialogue.
We believe this is important, especially in the overall positioning of the two countries on the international political scene, which we see becoming more complex and unpredictable every day.
Why, after the first meeting held on January 27th in Zagreb, have there been no continuation of the consultations? If that is the plan, when will they be continued?
Political consultations are generally a form of cooperation and coordination between two countries, and they involve work and preparation that takes place both before and after the meeting itself. The continuation is planned, a workflow has been created and intermediate steps that will follow before the next meeting of the delegations have been agreed. We are guided by the principle of efficiency and focus on results.
Does Zagreb intend to block Podgorica on its path to the EU until all outstanding issues are resolved?
Croatia does not block anyone's European path, especially not Montenegro, because it is Croatia that opens the door to Montenegro, supports it and in a way introduces it to the European Union. Croatia strongly advocates the EU enlargement process and supports Montenegro's accession process. It is Croatia that has shown throughout all these years that it sincerely supports Montenegro on its European path and that it wholeheartedly helps with its experience, knowledge, expertise and political support.
Wasn't the last remaining chapter, Chapter 8, opened during the Croatian Presidency of the Council of the EU, which allowed the process to focus on the next step towards the chapter closure phase? Let us remember how important it was then. We supported obtaining a positive opinion on the fulfilment of the interim benchmarks in Chapters 23 and 24 in June. In June 2024, Croatia gave its consent to the IBAR (Interim Benchmark Assessment Report) for Chapters 23 and 24, convinced that the only way forward is to maintain the focus on EU reforms, while understanding that good neighbourly relations constitute a key element of the enlargement process.
We all know what moves Montenegro made that took things in an unwanted direction.
What does Montenegro need to do to enable Croatia to close Chapter 31, which Zagreb blocked at the end of last year?
We have agreed to close three chapters. There are no blockages there, except that Chapter 31 (foreign, security and defence policy) has not been closed, as have most of the other chapters in the Montenegrin negotiations. This is a rather important chapter, because its content includes both political and value-based elements, and I think that for the two neighbouring countries it is extremely important in the area of good neighbourly relations, which is the overarching principle of European values.
That is why I believe it is important that Montenegro, in this sense as well, recognizes and accepts the hand of cooperation that has been extended to it.
Croatia reacted violently when the Montenegrin parliament adopted a resolution on the genocide in Jasenovac and the Dachau and Mauthausen camps at the end of June last year. You called that document unacceptable and meaningless. What is your position and Croatia's position on the genocide in Jasenovac?
The Republic of Croatia reacted in accordance with diplomatic practice and responded to attempts to involve Croatia in internal political relations and to instrumentalize it for certain political goals, which we consider unacceptable, inappropriate and unnecessary. Croatia cannot consider such a move to be well-intentioned and good-neighborly.
This was precisely the intention of the resolution on Jasenovac in the Parliament of Montenegro, because it instrumentalizes the victims of Jasenovac for political purposes. We know the background and reasons for the adoption of that resolution, with which Montenegro, in a historical and political context, has no common ground, except that it was necessary to relativize and diminish the significance of their support for the Resolution on Srebrenica.
Such malice towards both the victims and Croatia is unacceptable to us, because the Republic of Croatia has clearly condemned all totalitarian systems and crimes committed in the name of their ideologies, and every year the entire Croatian state leadership participates in the commemoration held at the Jasenovac Memorial Site. However, Montenegro has much more important things to do than deal with resolutions on events from the distant past. On the other hand, it is a well-known fact that the aggression on Dubrovnik was carried out by the Montenegrin side. A resolution condemning the aggression and all the crimes committed would be a good gesture towards Croatia.
Are the key problems for Croatia in its relations with Montenegro open interstate issues or the composition of the Government in Podgorica, given that this is what Croatian MEP Tomislav Sokol claims? He says that the main problem is not bilateral issues, that "they exist" and that "they need to be resolved", but that the problem is "that within the ruling majority there are political forces that are anything but pro-European and anything but pro-Western"...
It is not my intention to comment on the internal organization of political relations in any country, including neighboring Montenegro. What is crucial for me, as Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of the Republic of Croatia, is that such relations, internal political competition or friction do not fall on the shoulders of the Republic of Croatia in any sense. This is precisely what I elaborated on in my answer to the previous question.
If the composition of the Government in Podgorica is not the main problem, why did Croatia not raise open issues earlier, most of which existed during the former Montenegrin government led by the DPS?
The long-standing and unchanged position of the Republic of Croatia is that in relations with Montenegro, solutions to open issues should be found through bilateral dialogue, in the spirit of good neighborly relations and on the basis of international law. Open issues have always been on the table in our bilateral relations. Perhaps they have not been emphasized enough, because we believed in the promises of their positive resolution. However, a lot of time has passed, and now we have decided to intensify our expectations more openly.
You attended the unveiling of the memorial plaque at the former Morinj camp in October 2022. Before the unveiling, did you know what was written on the plaque, namely that it did not mention Montenegro's responsibility for its role during the wars of the 90s? Why was that not controversial to you?
The text that Montenegro wrote on the plaque speaks of the Greater Serbian aggression. It is a project and ideology that should definitely be condemned. Montenegro has been compromised by participating in that project and has not yet fully faced that part of the past, because otherwise such questions would not be asked and there would be no key places in Montenegrin history that are bypassed, or rather, kept silent to the detriment of its own people.
For us, the memorial plaque in Morinje represents a statement of the consciousness of the people of Montenegro and is the starting point of new relations after the change of government in 2020, and it, just as it is, represents a place of reverence and remembrance for us. Any interference with it would be the destruction of the relations built between our countries.
In January, after meeting with your Montenegrin counterpart, Mr. Ervin Ibrahimović, on board the ship “Jadran” in Bar, you reiterated that Croatia considers the sailboat to be its own. On the other hand, the Montenegrin authorities claim that the ship does not belong to Croatia, citing the Agreement on the Succession of the SFRY. Since, apparently, there is no agreement on this issue, will Croatia initiate international arbitration in the case of the “Jadran”?
You are right, the training ship "Jadran" is Croatian and should be returned to Croatia. We have been insisting on this for decades, with the strength of arguments of legal and historical foundation, and we offer an amicable solution on the modalities of that return.
Our position and argumentation is so strong that we are ready, with a high level of self-awareness, to test this issue internationally, based on international law.
The Montenegrin side persistently avoids international confrontation of arguments, aware of the fact that if it agrees to such a path - it will lose the ship, and with it its international credibility! That this is so is evidenced by the public statement of the Montenegrin Minister of Defense (Dragana) Krapović, who in an official response on the website of the Government of Montenegro, on January 15, 2024, stated that he accepts bilateral talks, but that he rejects international negotiations "... because accepting negotiations means accepting the possibility that 'Adriatic' will not be Montenegrin, and I say this openly - I will not accept it. It is a matter of principle and national pride".
One of the open issues between Montenegro and Croatia is the issue of the “Lora” camp in Split, where 14 members of the former JNA from the so-called Nikšić-Šavnik group were killed. What are you prepared to do to resolve this issue? When will the County State Attorney’s Office in Split announce the results of the investigation it has been conducting in this case for over 16 years?
First, there is no such thing as a “Lora camp” and there never was. Second, what you are talking about is not an open question. It is a narrative that aims to equate aggressor and victim. Everything about the events in the Lora prison has been processed and adjudicated, and is in the domain of judicial proceedings, which is neither possible nor necessary to comment on.
I believe it should be clarified that this is an attempt at equalization, and to put it mildly, it is a provocation and is not conducive to any significant steps forward in our relations.
Data on Janović's citizenship is not relevant to relations between the two countries
Since when did the new head of the Montenegrin National Security Agency, Mr. Ivica Janović, have Croatian citizenship, when did he request to be deported and why?
Such data fall under the provisions concerning the protection of personal data, and are therefore not relevant to the issue of relations between Montenegro and the Republic of Croatia.
Bonus video:
