EX-EX-JUGO / 1: Oskar Kovac + links (in english)
LINKS:
The End of Yugoslavia (by Zivadin Jovanovic)
http://www.artel.co.yu/en/reakcije_citalaca/2003-01-12_2.html
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2239
Yugoslavia's End (by Nebojsa Malic)
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m-col.html
"I Was Born on Mars" (by Petar Makara)
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/mars.htm
===
ARTEL GEOPOLITIKA by www.artel.co.yu
office@...
BELGRADE FORUM round table:
Intervention of dr Oskar Kovac on
Constitutional Charter of Serbia and
Montenegro
BELGRADE FORUM FOR THE WORLD OF
EQUALS round table
Prof. dr Oskar Kovac
Belgrade, 12 December 2002
MEDIA CENTER
Constitutional charter of Serbia and Montenegro
ONE STEP BACK - TWO FORWARDS
Yugoslavia is now facing the grave of her vanishment. She
is frequently advised to take a step back and than two steps
forward.
The project of the Constitutional (?) charter is certainly a
step back. The whole world knows that it is only a
temporary arrangement invented by the US and EU to
delay the secession of Montenegro. Because they still did
not make up their minds about how to finish off former
Yugoslavia. Secession of Montenegro does not suit them
since secession of Kosovo and Metohija would follow in
order to create Great Albania. That would cause serious
difficulties inside NATO, in Greece and the FYR of
Macedonia. The presently NATO occupied southern part
of the western Balkans would in that case definitely turn
into the shithouse of Europe. Therefore they took a time
out of three years both in case of Kosovo and Montenegro.
The Charter has since the very beginning been constructed
so that it should not be able to function, but to legitimize
the already high degree of unconstitutional separation of
Montenegro. It is aimed in advance to legitimize the
secession of Montenegro after three years.
The charter has many built-in misconceptions which will
disable the functioning of the economies of the associated
states.
The Charter envisages separate economic systems of the
two states and only an undefined degree of their
harmonization. The two economies have two different
national currencies, two central banks, two customs tariffs
and revenue authorities, separate fiscal systems.
The Charter envisages a common market but makes its
functioning impossible. A common market can not exist if
there is no customs union (a single customs area, a single
tariff and common customs revenue). Having their own
custom areas, Serbia and Montenegro are not in a
common market but only in a free trade zone. Within such
a zone there is free movement of goods only for the
products made in Serbia and Montenegro. Such free trade
zones already exist between Yugoslavia and: Bosnia-
Herzegovina, Russia and Hungary although there is no
association between the states. In order to prevent the
smuggling of goods from third countries through Serbia
and Montenegro, between them there will have to be a
customs border where certificates of origin will be
presented. Only goods produced in Serbia and Montenegro
may cross the border customs free.
It is strange that intermediaries from the EU tolerate such
a misuse of the concept of the common market. The EU
countries defined it clearly some fifty years ago in the
treaty of Rome. They achieved it ahead of time. After that
they moved from common market to single market,
economic and monetary union. For two years they are
preparing their Constitution, not an association charter!
The principles of the Serbia- Montenegro association
agreement increase confusion by envisaging free
movememnt of capital. Since there are two different non-
convertible currencies (in respect of capital transactions)
and separate financial markets (Montenegro already has
its separate Securities Commission), it is clear that there
can not be fully free movement of capital like in a single
country. Securities denominated in foreign currency are
foreign securities, their movement is flow of foreign
capital. That is in any country regulated by the law on
foreign exchange and convertibility does not apply to
capital transactions. Anyway, it is inconceivable that the
euro from Montenegro could be treated in Serbia
differently than the euro from its countries of origin!
At the time countries of EU abandoned their own
currencies and intoduced the euro, one of the main
justifications was: one market - one money! The fact that
the EU now supports a meaningless construction involving
one market with two currencies only proves that the EU
acknowledges that Serbia and Montenegro are not a single
market and even less a single state!
The association charter envisages a single membeship of
Serbia and Montenegro in international monetary and
financial institutions but actually it prevents that.
According to their Articles of Agreement, in the IMF and
the IBRD each country is represented by the governor of
the Central bank and the minister of finance, respectively.
The association of Serbia and Montenegro does not have
any of them. It is also unlikely hat the IMF and the IBRD
would be going to adjust their Articles of Agreement to
this strange situation.
The fact that the association of Serbia and Montenegro
does not have its own property (except for some buildings
of the administration) nor foreign exchange reserves or
state budget, will greatly hinder their access to
international financial markets. That is because there is no
collateral to be supplied. Without a state budget, a central
bank and foreign exchange reserves, the association of
Serbia and Montenegro cannot have credibility in servicing
foreign debt.
Without the mentioned necessary conditions, potential
foreign investors cannot know who is going to guarantee
their rights. According to the Charter, that is not even
envisaged!
Without a central bank and ministry of finance with a
state budget with own revenues, there are no instruments
of monetary and fiscal policy. Without them there cannot
be a macroeconomic policy of Serbia and Montenegro.
Anyway, there will not be other necessary segments of
macroeconomic policies either. It only seems as if two
ministers of the Council of ministers had any relation to
the economy. The Charter envisages that the minister od
foreign economic relations is responsible for negotiating
and coordinating the implementation of international
agreements, including those with the EU. He may act only
after consultations with the relevant ministers of the states
of Serbia and Montenegro! There is no prerogative for him
to propose laws regulating international economic
activities of the economy.
The minister for domestic economic affairs also only
coordinates the harmonization of the separate economic
systems of the two states, but he does in no way carry out
any economic policies or proposes legislation.
It is clear that there is not going to be any legislation
concerning the economy of Serbia and Montenegro, like a
company law, foreign exchange law, laws on taxation,
banking, securities and financial markets.
After all it is a legitimate question to ask; what kind of a
state is an entity which has no name of its own, no
property, no single economic area, no national currency, no
central bank, no state budget and no economic and
development policies?
The answer is: it is no state!
LINKS:
The End of Yugoslavia (by Zivadin Jovanovic)
http://www.artel.co.yu/en/reakcije_citalaca/2003-01-12_2.html
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/message/2239
Yugoslavia's End (by Nebojsa Malic)
http://www.antiwar.com/malic/m-col.html
"I Was Born on Mars" (by Petar Makara)
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/mars.htm
===
ARTEL GEOPOLITIKA by www.artel.co.yu
office@...
BELGRADE FORUM round table:
Intervention of dr Oskar Kovac on
Constitutional Charter of Serbia and
Montenegro
BELGRADE FORUM FOR THE WORLD OF
EQUALS round table
Prof. dr Oskar Kovac
Belgrade, 12 December 2002
MEDIA CENTER
Constitutional charter of Serbia and Montenegro
ONE STEP BACK - TWO FORWARDS
Yugoslavia is now facing the grave of her vanishment. She
is frequently advised to take a step back and than two steps
forward.
The project of the Constitutional (?) charter is certainly a
step back. The whole world knows that it is only a
temporary arrangement invented by the US and EU to
delay the secession of Montenegro. Because they still did
not make up their minds about how to finish off former
Yugoslavia. Secession of Montenegro does not suit them
since secession of Kosovo and Metohija would follow in
order to create Great Albania. That would cause serious
difficulties inside NATO, in Greece and the FYR of
Macedonia. The presently NATO occupied southern part
of the western Balkans would in that case definitely turn
into the shithouse of Europe. Therefore they took a time
out of three years both in case of Kosovo and Montenegro.
The Charter has since the very beginning been constructed
so that it should not be able to function, but to legitimize
the already high degree of unconstitutional separation of
Montenegro. It is aimed in advance to legitimize the
secession of Montenegro after three years.
The charter has many built-in misconceptions which will
disable the functioning of the economies of the associated
states.
The Charter envisages separate economic systems of the
two states and only an undefined degree of their
harmonization. The two economies have two different
national currencies, two central banks, two customs tariffs
and revenue authorities, separate fiscal systems.
The Charter envisages a common market but makes its
functioning impossible. A common market can not exist if
there is no customs union (a single customs area, a single
tariff and common customs revenue). Having their own
custom areas, Serbia and Montenegro are not in a
common market but only in a free trade zone. Within such
a zone there is free movement of goods only for the
products made in Serbia and Montenegro. Such free trade
zones already exist between Yugoslavia and: Bosnia-
Herzegovina, Russia and Hungary although there is no
association between the states. In order to prevent the
smuggling of goods from third countries through Serbia
and Montenegro, between them there will have to be a
customs border where certificates of origin will be
presented. Only goods produced in Serbia and Montenegro
may cross the border customs free.
It is strange that intermediaries from the EU tolerate such
a misuse of the concept of the common market. The EU
countries defined it clearly some fifty years ago in the
treaty of Rome. They achieved it ahead of time. After that
they moved from common market to single market,
economic and monetary union. For two years they are
preparing their Constitution, not an association charter!
The principles of the Serbia- Montenegro association
agreement increase confusion by envisaging free
movememnt of capital. Since there are two different non-
convertible currencies (in respect of capital transactions)
and separate financial markets (Montenegro already has
its separate Securities Commission), it is clear that there
can not be fully free movement of capital like in a single
country. Securities denominated in foreign currency are
foreign securities, their movement is flow of foreign
capital. That is in any country regulated by the law on
foreign exchange and convertibility does not apply to
capital transactions. Anyway, it is inconceivable that the
euro from Montenegro could be treated in Serbia
differently than the euro from its countries of origin!
At the time countries of EU abandoned their own
currencies and intoduced the euro, one of the main
justifications was: one market - one money! The fact that
the EU now supports a meaningless construction involving
one market with two currencies only proves that the EU
acknowledges that Serbia and Montenegro are not a single
market and even less a single state!
The association charter envisages a single membeship of
Serbia and Montenegro in international monetary and
financial institutions but actually it prevents that.
According to their Articles of Agreement, in the IMF and
the IBRD each country is represented by the governor of
the Central bank and the minister of finance, respectively.
The association of Serbia and Montenegro does not have
any of them. It is also unlikely hat the IMF and the IBRD
would be going to adjust their Articles of Agreement to
this strange situation.
The fact that the association of Serbia and Montenegro
does not have its own property (except for some buildings
of the administration) nor foreign exchange reserves or
state budget, will greatly hinder their access to
international financial markets. That is because there is no
collateral to be supplied. Without a state budget, a central
bank and foreign exchange reserves, the association of
Serbia and Montenegro cannot have credibility in servicing
foreign debt.
Without the mentioned necessary conditions, potential
foreign investors cannot know who is going to guarantee
their rights. According to the Charter, that is not even
envisaged!
Without a central bank and ministry of finance with a
state budget with own revenues, there are no instruments
of monetary and fiscal policy. Without them there cannot
be a macroeconomic policy of Serbia and Montenegro.
Anyway, there will not be other necessary segments of
macroeconomic policies either. It only seems as if two
ministers of the Council of ministers had any relation to
the economy. The Charter envisages that the minister od
foreign economic relations is responsible for negotiating
and coordinating the implementation of international
agreements, including those with the EU. He may act only
after consultations with the relevant ministers of the states
of Serbia and Montenegro! There is no prerogative for him
to propose laws regulating international economic
activities of the economy.
The minister for domestic economic affairs also only
coordinates the harmonization of the separate economic
systems of the two states, but he does in no way carry out
any economic policies or proposes legislation.
It is clear that there is not going to be any legislation
concerning the economy of Serbia and Montenegro, like a
company law, foreign exchange law, laws on taxation,
banking, securities and financial markets.
After all it is a legitimate question to ask; what kind of a
state is an entity which has no name of its own, no
property, no single economic area, no national currency, no
central bank, no state budget and no economic and
development policies?
The answer is: it is no state!