ARTEL GEOPOLITIKA by www.artel.co.yu
office@...
Date: 12 January 2003
Zivadin Jovanovic: THE END OF YUGOSLAVIA
THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER OF A NON - STATE
Belgrade, 12 December 2002
Medija Center - Belgrade
Final Intervention on the round table of BELGRADE FORUM FOR THE WORLD
OF EQUALS
I thank to the professor Smilja Avramov for her brilliant, historical
retrospective bringing us to the present developments and helping us
to understand better possible consequences of the same.
Thanks also to the distinguish professors, scientists and public
figures who have all made great efforts and gave exceptional
contribution to the enlightening the meaning of the Constitutional
Charter and the dangers of accelerating of the state and social
crisis.
Allow me, please, in closing of this Round table, to bring to your
attention only a few brief comments based on the presentations of my
distinguish colleagues.
The present Constitutional Charter and the Initial Basis should be
considered as a whole. Those are not the documents on safeguarding,
even less on establishing of any common state of Serbia
and Monte Negro. Those are unique documents entering the history as
the documents on abolishment of the state of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia. Those documents do legalize and
consolidate separation of Monte Negro from Serbia. In addition, they
are proofs of the dislocation of the sovereignty of the State out of
its borders.
.
NON STARTER SOLUTION
The interpretations of the officials, particularly of those who have
participated in the Belgrade - Podgorica negotiations, are that the
Charter just reflects realism, opens the way to
democratization and Euro-Atlantic institutions. The participants of
this Round table have presented abundance of the facts to the
opposite. Such facts are available in all presentations especially
in the statements of the university professors Ph.D. Ratko Markovic,
Ph. D. Oskar Kovac, and Ph. D. Smilja Avramov. They have clearly
proved that the current developments in the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia that solutions offered by the Constitutional
Charter are contrary to the trends of integration Europe wide.
Therefore, this is not getting closer but further away of the main
processes in Europe. The Charter is without precedent in the
constitutional praxes in the world and proposed solutions without
prospects of functioning.
The European Union, organization that will soon have 25 member states,
is currently preparing own constitution. The authorities in Belgrade
and Podgorica at the same time are abolishing the
Constitution of the country, renouncing of the country's name and
history. Thus, regulation of the state functioning and organization
they have lowered from the Constitution to the provisional
three years Charter. Paradoxically all this is accomplished with the
direct engagement of the High Representative of the European Union.
How convincing it may be that realism, the way to
Euro-Atlantic organizations and democratization require the end of
Yugoslavia, unconstitutional abolition of the Country's Constitution,
disintegration of the country, amnesty of terrorists
and alike? Who would believe that citizens of this country, that
Serbian people, consider Yugoslavia, its Constitution, its name and
history to be more of an obstacle to the development and
better life than separatism, for example?
TERRITORIAL FRAGMENTATION OBSTACLE TO THE DEVELOPMENT
Divisions and fragmentation in the course of the last decade have
turned substantial part of the Serbian nation in national minorities,
refugees, and displaced parsons. Its economic and cultural
development has been harshly hindered. Firstly, by violent
separations, then by sanctions and finally by NATO bombardment in
l999. Passing of the time will certainly uncover what and whose
interest have propped up such developments and possibly confirm that
the same interest shaped the present Constitutional Charter abolishing
Yugoslavia.
It is quite clear that the Charter will further encourage separatism,
not only Montenegrin separation from Serbia, but also other separatism
in Serbia itself and in Montenegro. All this will cause
further deterioration of economic, technological and cultural
development in the region.
Why Constitutional Charter and not Constitution, why so many backward,
counter-logic solutions, built in blockades of decision making. Why
the three years grace period same as in the case of
Kosovo and Metohija. Referendum in Montenegro is prescribed by the
Constitutional Charter and the final political solution in Kosovo and
Metohija by the document called Constitutional
Frameworks. In first instance with predominant role of Xavier Solana,
the EU High Representative in the second of Hans HAKERUP, Chief of
UNMIK. In both documents, separatist provisions
are easily recognizable.
The whole procedure of long negotiations about the content of the
Charter was semi secretive, kept away of the domestic public.
Foreigners probably were better informed about what was going on
in ad hoc composed Constitutional Commission and Sub-Commission
drafting the Charter than domestic public which had no opportunity to
express own opinion and preferences about proposed
provisional arrangements supposed to last three years.
Prospects for Yugoslavia to become a member of the Council of Europe
(Council) has been exploited as an instrument of unprecedented
pressure to adopt the Charter with all obvious nonsense, to
accept abolishment of Yugoslavia both as a state and as a name.
It is about two years now since the Council had issued a list totaling
over 30 conditionalities to be fulfilled by the Yugoslav authorities.
Only recently, the Council officials have rather unexpectedly
added a new precondition - adoption of the Charter of Serbia and
Montenegro.
It is not clear who or what was prompting the Council to advance this
new precondition. This put many Belgrade politicians in awkward
position how to explain to the public why the country could
not be welcomed to the Council regardless to the Charter, under the
name of Yugoslavia, under which the country has already enjoyed the
status of the invited guest. For the time being it appears
that for the Council it was very important, to have the Charter
adopted. The Charter however marks the end of the state and the name
of Yugoslavia and establishes organization, which obviously
has no chances of functioning at all (separate banking and money,
separate customs, taxes, police etc.). It may not be necessary to
await the whole three years transition period to see that this
endeavor was non-starter from the beginning. The truth will be known.
Unfortunately, too late and without retroactive validity. Perhaps it
will be sort of repetition of the case of the second
Yugoslavia (SFRY) in Maastricht.
Hence, the authors of the Charter are on one side the political
oligarchy of ruling parties of Serbia and Montenegro and on the other
Xavier Solana. For the first ones the only aim is to safeguard
the power regardless of the size and viability of the state(s) and for
the second to establish the full control in the region.
Their individual contribution to the Charter is irrelevant for this
moment. However, there are two facts relevant to the present and for
the history. First - those federal and Serbian political
leaders who swore themselves only two years ago to be faithful to the
Constitution of Yugoslavia have now signed the abolishment not only of
the Constitution but of the state of Yugoslavia, in fact
of any common state of Serbia and Montenegro. Second - those who carry
responsibility for the armed NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in
1999, three years later, have received the power of
attorney signed by the highest representatives of Yugoslavia, Serbia,
and Montenegro, to be arbitrators in state and national the most vital
issues. They turned to be e above all state and national
institutions. Paradoxically - this is all interpreted to the public as
one more proof of strengthening the reputation and international
standing of the country.
The solutions provided by the Charter are not solutions. Their
consequences will be the expansion of the crises. The political
oligarchy will use the Charter to divide state territory and stay in
power - for some in Belgrade, for the others in Podgorica. Foreign
actors will secure political, economic and military control in the
region.
FEARING THE SCIENCE AND PUBLIC
While drafting the Charter, the political oligarchy has not respected
the valid Constitution under which it came to power. Political
institutions, the public, nor the science have participated in
shaping of it. In addition, the comparative constitutional law has
been ignored. All this with the purpose to avoid possible obstacles
regarding the abolishment of the state and its name
.
During the last two years, there have been many formal initiatives to
debate in the Federal Assembly, in the parliaments of both republics
and the public, the future of the FRY and the possibility of
drafting the new constitution. Although the Government has formally
accepted such initiatives, they have never been carried out. Now we
understand why. The democratic procedures, the
involvement of the public and the science were not convenient for the
political oligarchy and the foreign representatives, as such
procedures may hinder the abolishment of the state and the name
of Yugoslavia.
This led us to the present situation. The institutions of the
political system, Federal Assembly and the parliaments of member
Republics have been faced with fait accompli: to rubber stamp
previously taken decisions of the political oligarchy and their
foreign bosses. The citizens, the public, and the science have found
themselves grossly ignored. The most of the public has any way
been preoccupied how to cope with 30% of unemployment, low salaries
opposed to high prices and taxation.
"Take it or leave it" method has reached its peak: it has been
upgraded to the essence of democracy and European option!
CONSEQUENCES
The first - it recognizes and consolidates the separatism with all
possible consequences to the peace, stability and development. The
Charter has come on the wings of separatism supported form
the abroad. The equal tree year transition period for the
"reconsideration of the relations" between Serbia and Montenegro
(referendum) and also for the "political solution" in Kosovo and
Metohija is not a mere coincidence. These terms as well as the
temporary solutions have been created in the same power centers and
within the framework of the same strategy.
It may be concluded that the Balkans faces the stage of new redrawing
of international frontiers. The authors of the Constitutional Charter
(Serbia and Montenegro) and of the Constitutional
Frameworks (Kosovo and Metohija) are only seeking the forms of a
phased redrawing of the borders an exercise which hardly could be
limited to the territory of the present FRY.
The second - proposed provisional solutions are full of
contradictions, opposed to the international trends and objectives. On
many occasions in many international conferences, it has been
rightly asserted that Yugoslavia is a key factor of peace, stability,
and development in the Balkans. Provisional non-state called Serbia
and Montenegro caught in prolonged disputes could
hardly carry a part of that role. Institutional obstacles in the
economy, finance, domestic and foreign policy will absorb most o the
energy and time of those who are supposed to care about
development and cooperation. It is therefore almost certain that the
crisis may continue, as well as instability. Therefore, who will fill
the gap?
The third - blocking of decision-making and multiplication of disputes
between Serbia and Montenegro as well as within themselves and the
strengthening of the arbitration role of foreign
factors.
The fourth - decline of the economic and social development, further
deterioration of social and economic conditions.
With such perspectives, it is not difficult to foresee the future
which may not favor so much the state of law and democracy as much
autocracy and dictatorship. In any case, the conditions for the
continuous stability and development shall become even more difficult
and distant.
office@...
Date: 12 January 2003
Zivadin Jovanovic: THE END OF YUGOSLAVIA
THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER OF A NON - STATE
Belgrade, 12 December 2002
Medija Center - Belgrade
Final Intervention on the round table of BELGRADE FORUM FOR THE WORLD
OF EQUALS
I thank to the professor Smilja Avramov for her brilliant, historical
retrospective bringing us to the present developments and helping us
to understand better possible consequences of the same.
Thanks also to the distinguish professors, scientists and public
figures who have all made great efforts and gave exceptional
contribution to the enlightening the meaning of the Constitutional
Charter and the dangers of accelerating of the state and social
crisis.
Allow me, please, in closing of this Round table, to bring to your
attention only a few brief comments based on the presentations of my
distinguish colleagues.
The present Constitutional Charter and the Initial Basis should be
considered as a whole. Those are not the documents on safeguarding,
even less on establishing of any common state of Serbia
and Monte Negro. Those are unique documents entering the history as
the documents on abolishment of the state of the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia. Those documents do legalize and
consolidate separation of Monte Negro from Serbia. In addition, they
are proofs of the dislocation of the sovereignty of the State out of
its borders.
.
NON STARTER SOLUTION
The interpretations of the officials, particularly of those who have
participated in the Belgrade - Podgorica negotiations, are that the
Charter just reflects realism, opens the way to
democratization and Euro-Atlantic institutions. The participants of
this Round table have presented abundance of the facts to the
opposite. Such facts are available in all presentations especially
in the statements of the university professors Ph.D. Ratko Markovic,
Ph. D. Oskar Kovac, and Ph. D. Smilja Avramov. They have clearly
proved that the current developments in the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia that solutions offered by the Constitutional
Charter are contrary to the trends of integration Europe wide.
Therefore, this is not getting closer but further away of the main
processes in Europe. The Charter is without precedent in the
constitutional praxes in the world and proposed solutions without
prospects of functioning.
The European Union, organization that will soon have 25 member states,
is currently preparing own constitution. The authorities in Belgrade
and Podgorica at the same time are abolishing the
Constitution of the country, renouncing of the country's name and
history. Thus, regulation of the state functioning and organization
they have lowered from the Constitution to the provisional
three years Charter. Paradoxically all this is accomplished with the
direct engagement of the High Representative of the European Union.
How convincing it may be that realism, the way to
Euro-Atlantic organizations and democratization require the end of
Yugoslavia, unconstitutional abolition of the Country's Constitution,
disintegration of the country, amnesty of terrorists
and alike? Who would believe that citizens of this country, that
Serbian people, consider Yugoslavia, its Constitution, its name and
history to be more of an obstacle to the development and
better life than separatism, for example?
TERRITORIAL FRAGMENTATION OBSTACLE TO THE DEVELOPMENT
Divisions and fragmentation in the course of the last decade have
turned substantial part of the Serbian nation in national minorities,
refugees, and displaced parsons. Its economic and cultural
development has been harshly hindered. Firstly, by violent
separations, then by sanctions and finally by NATO bombardment in
l999. Passing of the time will certainly uncover what and whose
interest have propped up such developments and possibly confirm that
the same interest shaped the present Constitutional Charter abolishing
Yugoslavia.
It is quite clear that the Charter will further encourage separatism,
not only Montenegrin separation from Serbia, but also other separatism
in Serbia itself and in Montenegro. All this will cause
further deterioration of economic, technological and cultural
development in the region.
Why Constitutional Charter and not Constitution, why so many backward,
counter-logic solutions, built in blockades of decision making. Why
the three years grace period same as in the case of
Kosovo and Metohija. Referendum in Montenegro is prescribed by the
Constitutional Charter and the final political solution in Kosovo and
Metohija by the document called Constitutional
Frameworks. In first instance with predominant role of Xavier Solana,
the EU High Representative in the second of Hans HAKERUP, Chief of
UNMIK. In both documents, separatist provisions
are easily recognizable.
The whole procedure of long negotiations about the content of the
Charter was semi secretive, kept away of the domestic public.
Foreigners probably were better informed about what was going on
in ad hoc composed Constitutional Commission and Sub-Commission
drafting the Charter than domestic public which had no opportunity to
express own opinion and preferences about proposed
provisional arrangements supposed to last three years.
Prospects for Yugoslavia to become a member of the Council of Europe
(Council) has been exploited as an instrument of unprecedented
pressure to adopt the Charter with all obvious nonsense, to
accept abolishment of Yugoslavia both as a state and as a name.
It is about two years now since the Council had issued a list totaling
over 30 conditionalities to be fulfilled by the Yugoslav authorities.
Only recently, the Council officials have rather unexpectedly
added a new precondition - adoption of the Charter of Serbia and
Montenegro.
It is not clear who or what was prompting the Council to advance this
new precondition. This put many Belgrade politicians in awkward
position how to explain to the public why the country could
not be welcomed to the Council regardless to the Charter, under the
name of Yugoslavia, under which the country has already enjoyed the
status of the invited guest. For the time being it appears
that for the Council it was very important, to have the Charter
adopted. The Charter however marks the end of the state and the name
of Yugoslavia and establishes organization, which obviously
has no chances of functioning at all (separate banking and money,
separate customs, taxes, police etc.). It may not be necessary to
await the whole three years transition period to see that this
endeavor was non-starter from the beginning. The truth will be known.
Unfortunately, too late and without retroactive validity. Perhaps it
will be sort of repetition of the case of the second
Yugoslavia (SFRY) in Maastricht.
Hence, the authors of the Charter are on one side the political
oligarchy of ruling parties of Serbia and Montenegro and on the other
Xavier Solana. For the first ones the only aim is to safeguard
the power regardless of the size and viability of the state(s) and for
the second to establish the full control in the region.
Their individual contribution to the Charter is irrelevant for this
moment. However, there are two facts relevant to the present and for
the history. First - those federal and Serbian political
leaders who swore themselves only two years ago to be faithful to the
Constitution of Yugoslavia have now signed the abolishment not only of
the Constitution but of the state of Yugoslavia, in fact
of any common state of Serbia and Montenegro. Second - those who carry
responsibility for the armed NATO aggression against Yugoslavia in
1999, three years later, have received the power of
attorney signed by the highest representatives of Yugoslavia, Serbia,
and Montenegro, to be arbitrators in state and national the most vital
issues. They turned to be e above all state and national
institutions. Paradoxically - this is all interpreted to the public as
one more proof of strengthening the reputation and international
standing of the country.
The solutions provided by the Charter are not solutions. Their
consequences will be the expansion of the crises. The political
oligarchy will use the Charter to divide state territory and stay in
power - for some in Belgrade, for the others in Podgorica. Foreign
actors will secure political, economic and military control in the
region.
FEARING THE SCIENCE AND PUBLIC
While drafting the Charter, the political oligarchy has not respected
the valid Constitution under which it came to power. Political
institutions, the public, nor the science have participated in
shaping of it. In addition, the comparative constitutional law has
been ignored. All this with the purpose to avoid possible obstacles
regarding the abolishment of the state and its name
.
During the last two years, there have been many formal initiatives to
debate in the Federal Assembly, in the parliaments of both republics
and the public, the future of the FRY and the possibility of
drafting the new constitution. Although the Government has formally
accepted such initiatives, they have never been carried out. Now we
understand why. The democratic procedures, the
involvement of the public and the science were not convenient for the
political oligarchy and the foreign representatives, as such
procedures may hinder the abolishment of the state and the name
of Yugoslavia.
This led us to the present situation. The institutions of the
political system, Federal Assembly and the parliaments of member
Republics have been faced with fait accompli: to rubber stamp
previously taken decisions of the political oligarchy and their
foreign bosses. The citizens, the public, and the science have found
themselves grossly ignored. The most of the public has any way
been preoccupied how to cope with 30% of unemployment, low salaries
opposed to high prices and taxation.
"Take it or leave it" method has reached its peak: it has been
upgraded to the essence of democracy and European option!
CONSEQUENCES
The first - it recognizes and consolidates the separatism with all
possible consequences to the peace, stability and development. The
Charter has come on the wings of separatism supported form
the abroad. The equal tree year transition period for the
"reconsideration of the relations" between Serbia and Montenegro
(referendum) and also for the "political solution" in Kosovo and
Metohija is not a mere coincidence. These terms as well as the
temporary solutions have been created in the same power centers and
within the framework of the same strategy.
It may be concluded that the Balkans faces the stage of new redrawing
of international frontiers. The authors of the Constitutional Charter
(Serbia and Montenegro) and of the Constitutional
Frameworks (Kosovo and Metohija) are only seeking the forms of a
phased redrawing of the borders an exercise which hardly could be
limited to the territory of the present FRY.
The second - proposed provisional solutions are full of
contradictions, opposed to the international trends and objectives. On
many occasions in many international conferences, it has been
rightly asserted that Yugoslavia is a key factor of peace, stability,
and development in the Balkans. Provisional non-state called Serbia
and Montenegro caught in prolonged disputes could
hardly carry a part of that role. Institutional obstacles in the
economy, finance, domestic and foreign policy will absorb most o the
energy and time of those who are supposed to care about
development and cooperation. It is therefore almost certain that the
crisis may continue, as well as instability. Therefore, who will fill
the gap?
The third - blocking of decision-making and multiplication of disputes
between Serbia and Montenegro as well as within themselves and the
strengthening of the arbitration role of foreign
factors.
The fourth - decline of the economic and social development, further
deterioration of social and economic conditions.
With such perspectives, it is not difficult to foresee the future
which may not favor so much the state of law and democracy as much
autocracy and dictatorship. In any case, the conditions for the
continuous stability and development shall become even more difficult
and distant.