Montenegro: Which Way Next?
Montenegro: Which Way Next?
Table of Contents
  1. Overview
Thessaloniki and After (III) The EU, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo
Thessaloniki and After (III) The EU, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo
Table of Contents
  1. Overview
Briefing 16 / Europe & Central Asia

Montenegro: Which Way Next?

The removal of the Miloševic regime is forcing the Montenegrin government to confront the contentious issue of Montenegro's future status, whether within or outside Yugoslavia, according to ICG's Montenegro briefing "Which Way Next" (30 November 2000).

I. Overview

The removal of Slobodan Milošević's regime, with its poisonous influence on the entire Balkan region, raises hopes that a host of inter-connected problems may now stand a significantly better chance of being resolved, including the future status of Kosovo and of Montenegro, both notionally still a part of the Yugoslav federation.

The changes in Belgrade have necessarily required both international policy makers and Montenegrin political leaders rapidly to adjust their positions on Montenegro’s future status. Since a split in the ruling party in 1997, Montenegro has increasingly distanced itself from Belgrade, and political life in Montenegro has for the last three years been dominated by the question of the republic’s relationship with Serbia. As the Montenegrin government adopted a pro-western stance, in opposition to Milošević, the United States and the EU were ready with support, including substantial financial assistance.

The principal aims of western support for Montenegro have been:

  • • to shore up the pro-western government of Montenegrin President Milo Djukanović in the face of a perceived security threat from Belgrade;
     
  • • to dissuade the Montenegrin authorities from provocatively moving towards independence for Montenegro; and
     
  • • to provide advice and technical assistance for reforms designed to promote democratisation, the rule of law, efficient administration and a market economy.

Clearly the altered circumstances necessitate a reassessment of the first two of these policy goals.

Podgorica/Brussels, 30 November 2000

Subscribe to Crisis Group’s Email Updates

Receive the best source of conflict analysis right in your inbox.