Writes: Dusko JOVANOVIC, a representative in the Parliament of the Republic of Montenegro (Wednesday, 9th June 1999. “DAN”)

Or how did work and how does work the union of NATO and the incumbent Montenegrin government

The content of the document which was signed by the Yugoslav part, as a base for the permanent solution of the conflict in Kosovo, can be this or that way, more or less beneficial, but one thing is sure, that document could made neither us nor aggressor the winner or the looser in this war.
As much as it concerns the contribution of Montenegro to this agreement, one thing is completely clear.
All the positive things in that agreement are contributed by the patriotic parties in Montenegro, regardless the political or religious affiliation. The Yugoslav Army has given the great contribution; but its position in Montenegro, as much as it concerns the incumbent government, was unfortunately similar to those in Slovenia and Croatia, in the 90-ies.
For all these, what is negative in the agreement, what is not productive, is responsible the Montenegrin regime, especially through the activities of the President, and all the Montenegrin executive government.
Everything has been done for the personal interests. It hasn’t been done for the sake of these people for sure.
Direct and indirect movements of the incumbent Montenegrin government used to be and still are a kind of support to the aggressor. That support in the preparation and during the aggression itself, had few different dimensions, but it is easy to see the difference between the political, military and informative support.
There are many evidences which can prove this thesis. It is necessary to make their individual analysis, as the public can have a clear picture of the regime’s character, which is unfortunately the government of Montenegro.

Political support to the aggressor – THE FIRST EVIDENCE
- The text which Milo Djukanovic and Zoran Djindjic have published together in “New York Times” -
The text which was signed by Milo Djukanovic and Zoran Djindjic together was published on Saturday on the 8th May 1999. in “New York Times”.
Now it is clear that the mentioned gentlemen, having sensed the peace, tried to direct that peace, and gain something for themselves from it.
In the mentioned text they are stating:
“For the permanent peace the outer world has to do more than solving the crisis in Kosovo”.
By this statement these “pro-Europe democrats”, are telling America and whole West that according to their opinion, the cause of the crisis is not in Kosovo, but it is the government in Belgrade, the republic one and the state one without difference. That means that solving the problem in Kosovo is not solving their personal problem, which is violent alternation of the government.
Djukanovic and Djindjic continued:
“Yugoslavs should make intensive efforts to return the moral status lost because of Kosovo”.
This statement should make its authors blushed, if they had no courage to apologies to the Yugoslav citizens.
Making this statement to the aggressor means public admitting the guilty, humiliating in front of those who have killed so many innocent people, not mentioning the material
destroying.
They deliberately forget or they cannot see that Yugoslavs are enjoying the support of all free minded, progressive people in Europe as never before.
Almost every big city in Europe gave support to Yugoslavia, and judged NATO aggression. The strongest protests against the NATO aggression were in the NATO countries members.
In the further text in “New York Times” Djukanovic and Djindjic claimed:
“Democracy can be established by the isolation of the undemocratic parties and forming the outer body which would help in following of the political changes”.
With this attitude about the establishing democracy in Yugoslavia the authors are sending few messages to the aggressor and to domestic public:
- All the citizens of Yugoslavia who don’t think like them have to be isolated, because the pro–Europe parties can be diseased. They do not suggest the method of isolation, if it should be the reservation system (well known and applied in America), or some other appropriate to Balkan mentality.
- Aside the isolation of the undemocratic parties, it is recommended the special outer body which would look after the parties which are not isolated, because the individual development cannot guarantee sure political alternations.
One cannot forbid these two to humiliate them personally, but they have no right to humiliate their own country and their people; they cannot have mandate for that.
The purpose of this statement in “New York Times” is not contributing to stopping the war but destroying the legitimate and federal government.
For the western public opinion Mr. Djindjic is unimportant person followed by the marginal political parties.
Is Djukanovic the same?
For us and our Yugoslav circumstances he is marginal too. According to the real political power which he has, he is also marginal. However, for the manipulative purposes, as this letter’s purpose was to the aggressors’ countries, Milo Djukanovic was the statutory half of Yugoslavia. That statutory half is running across the aggressors’ capitals, asking for help to destroy the government in Belgrade.
This is the first evidence of the political support to the aggressor in the aggression against our country.