Papović: Mandić's Serbianness has nothing in common with King Nikola's Serbianness

The Serbianness of Parliament Speaker Andrija Mandić and King Nikola have nothing in common, because what for King Nikola was violence, occupation and betrayal of Montenegro, for Mandić is the foundation of Serbianness in Montenegro, assessed historian Dragutin Papović.

He believes that the essence of the conflict between Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić and Mandić is that Mandić did not obey Vučić's order to leave the Milojko Spajić government at the same time as Milan Knežević's Democratic People's Party in order to, if not stop, at least slow down Montenegro's accession to the European Union.

"Nothing has changed in the anti-Montenegrin ideology and strategy of Andrija Mandić for now, and it is unlikely that there will be any change," Papović wrote in an author's text submitted to the media by the Democratic Party of Socialists.

"The small New Serbian party gathering in Fundina, dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the famous Montenegrin battle, attracted the most interest due to the political messages of the unconstitutional President of the Parliament of Montenegro, Andrija Mandić. The first message refers to the political-ecclesiastical schism in the 'Serbian World'. Mandić is in a serious feud with his and the President of all Serbs, Aleksandar Vučić, Patriarch Porfirije and their most loyal follower in Montenegro, Milan Knežević. The Diocese of Budimlje-Niksić and its Archbishop Methodius are with the Vučić-Knežević axis and for this reason they were given the honorary title of Metropolitan, while the Metropolitan of Montenegro and the Littoral is with Mandić and against Vučić and for this reason it has been punished with the loss, for now only, of honorary rights, and its territorial dismemberment is in the offing. This conflict is not ideological or strategic, but tactical and personal in nature. Both feuding Serbian groups inherit and carry out "Bjelaško-Chetnik ideology, with the Vučić-Knežević-Metodija axis having a touch of Stalinism (Putinism), while the Mandić-Joanikia axis increasingly relies on the 'rotten West' and the Israeli lobby," Papović wrote.

"The essence of the conflict is that Mandić did not obey Vučić's order to leave Milojko Spajić's government at the same time as Knežević in order to, if not stop, at least slow down Montenegro's accession to the European Union. Mandić correctly understood that EU membership is the main political issue in Montenegro and that it is a condition for his survival in power. The government provides him with control over many parts of the state and local administration and public enterprises (primarily in EPCG) on the basis of which he conducts party recruitment and maintains the party's rating. Mandić has not given up on his main political and ideological goal, which is the undermining and destruction of the independent state of Montenegro and the Montenegrin nation, but believes that this goal should be devoted to after Montenegro becomes a member of the EU. Then, Montenegro's internal politics will be significantly less or not at all under the control of Brussels, which will allow Mandić, with the leaders of other interested national parties, to raise the issue of constitutional changes and the reorganization of Montenegro according to the ethno(con)federal concept. Until then, he is also postponing proposals on changing state symbols, the status of the Serbian language and the withdrawal of recognition of Kosovo. That is why he is ready to endure various inconveniences, from appearing at the Independence Day celebration to approving the sending of a representative of Montenegro to the celebration of Operation Storm. From Mandić's perspective, these are necessary and small chameleon-like sacrifices in order to remain in power and realize his main political-ideological goal. He knows that only positions in power and lucrative positions in state administration and public enterprises give him a chance to achieve that goal," the text adds.

Vučić believes, as Papović said, that these issues should have been raised earlier and that Montenegro should not be allowed to join the EU before its statehood and identity are redefined.

"Montenegro's EU membership before Serbia would be, above all, a heavy defeat in Serbia's domestic politics for Vučić. That is the essence of the dispute between Vučić and Mandić. That is why Vučić is waging a political war against Mandić, and for the same reason, Vučić's regime and the leadership of the Church of Serbia are waging a special operation against their Metropolitanate of Montenegro and the Littoral and Joanikije, who prefer Serbian integralist Milo Lompar to Vučić. The regime media in Belgrade and their branches in Montenegro are fiercely attacking Mandić and accusing him of being a Serbian traitor, while at the same time highlighting Milan Knežević as a consistent Serb. That is the leader's side of this conflict, which is not invented or staged, but real. The time has passed when Mandić received a saber and a Military Memorial Medal from Aleksandar Vulin for his contribution to the Serbian defense system. The time has passed when Mandić, in his capacity as President of the Parliament of Montenegro, celebrated the electoral victory of Aleksandar Vučić and the SNS in the elections in Belgrade in December 2023, and when he Vučić's order, he quickly and with awe turned off his mobile phone. Now Vučić says that he has nothing to talk about with Mandić. After prolonged fraternal torture, Mandić's self-respect has begun to work. He replied to Vučić "that no one has the right to issue us in Montenegro a certificate of national correctness, no matter how powerful and strong" and that Serbian "cultural and historical identity cannot be limited by narrow political borders", so he brazenly told Vučić: 'Decisions about Montenegro will be made here, as they have always been made.' In addition, he emphasized that 'no one has a monopoly on Serbian heritage' and that 'Serbism in Montenegro was not imported from abroad, but has grown here for centuries'", Papović states.

He says that many have interpreted Mandić's words as "an indicator of a sovereign Serb from a sovereign Montenegro who is loyal to the traditional Serbian identity from Montenegro," but that this interpretation is wrong.

"First of all, the Serbianness of Andrija Mandić and the Serbianness of the Petrović-Njegoš dynasty, and especially of King Nikola, have nothing in common, except in name. The Serbianness of King Nikola was essentially political and propaganda, and in concrete state decisions it almost did not exist. During his 58 years of reign, King Nikola visited Serbia only once, in 1896, which was the first meeting of the rulers of the two states. Due to mostly poor state relations, Serbia and Montenegro established official diplomatic relations only in 1897, or almost 20 years after the Berlin Congress, and Serbia was the last state with which Montenegro established diplomatic relations in the 19th century. When the propaganda slogans and songs about the imperial crown of the Nemanjićs, Prizren and the revenge of Kosovo are removed, there is not much Serbianness left in King Nikola. The results of his concrete policy show that he was dedicated exclusively to Montenegrins. He never subordinated himself, his dynasty or Montenegro to the state, national and church interests of Serbia, except for "In 1866, when, under Russian pressure, he submitted to Prince Mihailo Obrenović in a secret treaty with Serbia. However, that treaty, dictated from Serbia, was never implemented," Papović recalls.

He points out that the identity of the state and the people is mainly defined by the highest legal act – the Constitution.

"In the Constitution of the Principality of Montenegro from 1905, there is not a word about the Serbness of the state and people. The Constitution mentions Serbness only once, in Article 45, which stipulates that one of the virli deputies in the Assembly is the Archbishop of Bar and the Primate of Serbia. The main identity determinants in this Constitution are Montenegro and Montenegrin citizens, and Article 40 states that the Montenegrin Church is autocephalous. The only concrete and authentic Montenegrin attempt at unification with Serbia occurred in February 1914 in the Assembly, when deputy Sekula Drljević proposed the conclusion of a customs, military and diplomatic union between Montenegro and Serbia. King Nikola and the Montenegrin Government rejected this proposal, and King Nikola's position was convincingly accepted by the parliamentary majority, so that 68 out of a total of 74 Montenegrin deputies voted against Sekula Drljević's proposal. They cared so much about the unification of Serbness."

Papović said that there are several other fundamental differences between the "Serbism of King Nikola and Andrija Mandić".

"King Nikola was a member of the autocephalous Montenegrin Church, and Mandić is not only a believer, but also a servant of the Church of Serbia. When the question of unification arose in 1918, King Nikola was against it. He fought to preserve an independent Montenegro and was only ready for Montenegro to be part of a confederal Yugoslavia in which Montenegro would preserve its statehood, dynasty and church. King Nikola did not treat it as a dynastic issue and refused the corrupt offers of the Serbian government to sell the throne of Montenegro. In his Christmas proclamation of 1918, King Nikola condemned the decisions of the so-called Podgorica Assembly and stated that it was 'violence, how can we not remember the history of civilized nations', and Andrija Mandić celebrates this violence. When the Christmas uprising against the Serbian occupation was raised in Montenegro, King Nikola said: 'Montenegro belongs to Montenegrins. That was, that will be... Montenegrins themselves, and no one else, will decide freely, legally, about the future of Montenegro'. It is obvious how much Mandić far from this kind of Serbianness of King Nikola. In a letter to American President Woodrow Wilson from April 1919, King Nikola stated that the 'Serbian army of occupation' had 'invaded my country' and that with the help of 'a small number of Montenegrin renegades on the payroll of the Serbian government... the Serbs could more easily continue to destroy our state institutions and suppress the independence of Montenegro'. What kind of Serb was King Nikola if he called the so-called Podgorica Assembly violence, if he described the Serbian army as an occupation army and if he stated that the Serbs destroyed the state institutions and the independence of Montenegro", adds Papović.

What for King Nikola was violence, occupation and betrayal of Montenegro, as the historian said, for Andrija Mandić is the foundation of Serbianness in Montenegro.

"Therefore, Mandić's Serbness has nothing in common with the Serbness of King Nikola. When we consider the policies of King Nikola since 1918, we can conclude that he renounced his Serbness and that it has since been archived and part of the history of Montenegro. That part of history cannot be forgotten, but it must not be enslaved. Montenegrins will not be enslaved to the Serbness of King Nikola, which he rejected. For Montenegrins, this is an important lesson because it serves as a lesson and a reminder of what happened when many Montenegrins subordinated their state and identity to their 'brothers'. Almost the entire 20th century in Montenegro, that is, until 2006, was spent in an effort to restore Montenegrin statehood and independence and to emancipate the Montenegrin nation. That struggle is still relevant today, especially for the autocephalous Montenegrin Church, which was abolished in 1918 as uncanonical. Today, efforts to hypnotize and intimidate Montenegrins with the Serbness of the dynasty are futile and almost ridiculous. Petrović-Njegoš. Montenegrins are no longer hostages of that part of the past."

Papović also states that there was an authentic Serbian identity in Montenegro, but that Mandić's Serbian identity is, nevertheless, "imported and of recent date."

"It was created on two ideological foundations. The first is Bjelaška, and the second is Chetnik. Neither was formed in Montenegro, although both had supporters in Montenegro. The Bjelaška ideology was conceived in the cabinet of Nikola Pašić based on the 'Načertanije' of Ilija Garašanin, while the Chetnik ideology was conceived by the Banja Luka lawyer Stevan Moljević, and the Chetnik movement spread from Serbia to Montenegro. Today, the Bjelaška-Chetnik ideology is at the heart of every Serbian or pro-Serbian party in Montenegro. This is the main ideological characteristic of today's Serbness in Montenegro, which has almost nothing in common with the Serbness of the Petrović-Njegoš dynasty."

He says that Mandić's "intra-Serbian quarrel with the authorities in Belgrade" is nothing new either.

"Many of his ideological role models, the founders of the Bjelaš movement, soon after 1918 became disillusioned with the arrogant and chauvinistic attitude of the Belgrade regime towards them and Montenegro. That is why some prominent Bjelaš, such as Savo Fatić, changed sides and in 1945 were at the top of the People's Liberation (Partisan) Movement, which restored the statehood of Montenegro and contributed to the emancipation of the Montenegrin nation. Mandić's voivodeship ancestor, Pavle Đuršić, also fell out with Draža Mihailović due to tactical differences, so that Draža declared him a traitor, although in an ideological and national sense there was no difference between them. Mandić can easily recall a more recent example. He was an official of the People's Party when its president was Prof. Dr. Novak Kilibarda. The slogan of the People's Party, which intended to restore the Serbianness of King Nikola, was: With Serbia always, under Serbia never! When it became obvious that this was unachievable, "Kilibarda joined the Montenegrin sovereignists, and the People's Party joined Serbia, and then disappeared. Mandić then separated from the People's Party and declared Kilibarda a traitor due to his conflict with the Milošević regime," Papović writes.

Today, Vučić's regime, he adds, has attached the same label to Mandić.

"However, Mandić is nowhere near the intellectual, humane and emancipatory potential of Novak Kilibarda. Mandić is on the first step of that possible turnaround. For now, it does not seem like he will go in that direction. For all those who interpreted Mandić's tactical move as a change in strategy and ideology, a small test is enough to realize that they were wrong. Has Mandić renounced the white ideology whose goal is the destruction of the Montenegrin state? No. The NSD Statute still states that the main party decoration is the 'Marko Daković' Charter. Has he renounced the genocidal Chetnik ideology? No. The title of Chetnik voivode is still next to his name. Has he changed his position on the 2006 referendum? No. At Fundina, he said: 'This year marks the twentieth anniversary of the referendum in Montenegro, which severely divided and divided Montenegro in 2006.' For Mandić, the referendum is not the beginning of renewed Montenegrin independence, but a tragic event. Nothing has changed in Andrija Mandić's anti-Montenegrin ideology and strategy for now, and it is unlikely that there will be any change. In his words: "The goal is the same, only the path is different," the text states.