Serbien und Montenegro: Ein virtuelles Land

Beim Eintritt in das dritte Jahr seines Bestehens scheint es
unwahrscheinlich, dass der Staatenbund zwischen Serbien und
Montenegro jemals besser funktioneren kann als
bisher – oder, in der Tat, noch lange bestehen bleiben
kann, schreibt Igor Jovanovic
in Transitions Online.

On 4 February, the state union of Serbia and Montenegro marked
the second anniversary of the adoption of its highest legal act,
the Constitutional Charter. But the country entered its third year
of existence without a flag, a national anthem, or a coat of arms,
and the constitutions of the two member republics have not yet been
harmonized with the Constitutional Charter. The charter itself has
been violated as many as seven times during these two years,
sometimes by just one of the republics, sometimes by mutual
agreement. 

Judging by current relations between the ruling elites of Serbia
and Montenegro, the third year of the common state could well be
its last.

How to leave a non-existent state

By its constitutional structure, Serbia and Montenegro is a
loose federation of two member states, with joint authority in just
four fields: defense, foreign affairs (even though Montenegro has
its own foreign minister), human rights, and international economic
relations. 

This is a union of vastly unequal partners: Serbia is a regional
giant with a population of around 10 million, while Montenegro is a
peripheral republic of 650,000 inhabitants squeezed between Bosnia,
Serbia, Albania, and the Adriatic sea. (It also borders the trouble
spot of Kosovo.)

The Constitutional Charter allows for a referendum on the two
republics’ independence three years after the charter’s adoption. A
referendum might therefore take place in early 2006, and the
Montenegrin government is already saying that date could mark the
beginning of Montenegro’s independence. 

The Constitutional Charter states that if one of the members
leaves the common state, the other member inherits Serbia and
Montenegro’s international legal status. This means that if a
referendum on ending the union passed in Montenegro, the republic
might have to reapply for membership in all international
institutions while Serbia would simply inherit the seat of Serbia
and Montenegro. Serbia would also regain constitutional control of
the province of Kosovo, which has been under UN administration
since 1999 and is technically still part of Serbia and
Montenegro. 

While many constitutional provisions have not yet been
implemented, the most important problem in Serbian-Montenegrin
relations right now is the matter of parliamentary elections.
According to the Constitutional Charter, the federal parliament is
elected in direct elections in both republics. A poll was planned
for this February. But the Montenegrin government put up strong
resistance against direct parliamentary elections, proposing
instead that the republican parliaments elect the delegations to
the federal assembly. This would virtually ensure that the ruling
coalition would retain a majority of the Montenegrin
delegation.

Montenegrin officials also say that elections would be a waste
of time and money since they’d be taking place just a year before
the referendum on Montenegro’s independence. 

Serbian officials and political parties say the Montenegrin
government is avoiding elections because it could face defeat due
to its anticipated difficulties in motivating pro-independence
voters to vote in an election for the union-level
assembly. 

The ballot has now been postponed indefinitely. The president of
the state union, Svetozar Marovic, told Belgrade media in early
February, “I will call elections only after Serbia and Montenegro
reach an agreement on them. Anything else would only lead to the
deepening of the problem.”

To read the article in full, visit the Transitions Online website.