Milo Đukanović, former President of Montenegro
by Darko Šćepanović
Although he formally withdrew from the political scene, Milo Đukanović remains one of the most influential political actors in contemporary Montenegrin history. His role in the country’s most pivotal phases of state development from preserving peace and multiethnic harmony in the 1990s, through the restoration of independence, up to Montenegro’s accession to NATO is deeply embedded in the nation’s political and social transformation. In this exclusive interview for “Diplomacy & Commerce Montenegro,” the former President of Montenegro speaks candidly about his life after politics, the calibre of today’s leaders, current geopolitical challenges, and the need for values-based politics in an age of populism and global instability. As an interlocutor unafraid of self-reflection or criticism, Đukanović offers a layered analysis of the past, present, and future both of Montenegro and the broader international context.
Mr. Đukanović, what does your life look like after withdrawing from the political scene? How do you spend your time?
First of all, I must say I’m living comfortably. For thirty‐four years I’ve had a very intense energy expenditure, thanks to the complex roles I performed in truth, I was in a continuous storm. During that time, so much happened enough for a lifetime and unfortunately, quite a bit was unpleasant and ugly. So, the strain was indeed very intense, and today I enjoy the fact that, after such a long period, I can manage my own free time and organize my life the way I want. Politics remains my preoccupation. I suppose it’s natural after spending thirty‐four years in politics not to forget immediately your previous vocation. Moreover, at my stage in life, it’s not easy to decide to start down an entirely different path. So, as my interest in politics endures, I still devote part of each day to it: meeting with various interlocutors or simply reading interesting texts and organizing the archive from my active political years. Next, it’s extremely important to me that I now have much more time for family and friends especially my three grandsons. They enrich me in contrast to the rather harsh rationality I had to adapt to in politics. This is now, I’d say, a beautiful counterpoint. Finally, there is a lot of travel often inspired by invitations from various quarters where people gather to discuss the geopolitical changes we’re witnessing. Certainly, I also do a fair amount of personal travel. So, this new phase of my life is divided into these three segments. Again, I repeat that spending time with the youngest family members makes me especially happy and content.
It’s well known that you’ve always had a special passion for basketball. Does basketball still play a role in your daily life? Do you still play?
I played basketball for a very long time. In fact, I continued with the sport even after ending my professional career, and I did so with a fantastic group of physically fit recreational players. For about thirty years practically every day we played solid, serious basketball, including two-hoop games. We regularly took part in European and World Veterans Championships, where we won gold medals. However, that came to an end during the coronavirus pandemic. Longer restrictions on gatherings followed, which coincided with the age-related limitations affecting a significant number of us. Many younger players those finishing their professional careers also joined us. Most were from basketball club KK “Budućnost“ and other top-tier teams. But there were also players older than me. Since during the pandemic we could not gather for a long time, that effectively marked the end of my more active involvement in basketball. Instead, I continued with individual training. I even improvised a small gym in my apartment. Now, if not every day, then every other day, I start my day by going through a workout routine that lasts an hour to an hour and a half. After that, I go to my workspace.
How do you view the quality of contemporary politics and politicians? Has politics lost the seriousness and sense it once had?
The quality of politics as a profession has been in free fall for years. Politics used to be a privilege reserved for the chosen few in the best sense of the word. That is, for those people who are capable, through their intellectual and energetic potential, of solving the social problems on which the quality of life for us and our children depends. That is why we go to the polls: to give our trust to such people, because we believe more in their ability to meet our needs in education, healthcare, culture, sports, and all other fields than in their competitors. Unfortunately, today politics has, in many cases, become a refuge for those who do not know what else to do. Since politics is a profession constantly under public scrutiny, you often see there people who are unsuccessful lawyers, doctors, businessmen, or scientists, who find it attractive to strengthen their failed careers with the publicity that politics as a profession brings. Therefore, it is no surprise why politics is poor in quality and why it is incapable of solving the serious problems that individuals and the world face today. That is why I say the world today has many more great problems than great statesmen. Dignity and importance must be restored to politics, as it once had, so it can again become a challenge for people who have something valuable to offer. By contributing to politics, they also provide solutions to the problems that burden us. I see a large part of the explanation for the most difficult problems from geopolitical to existential ones in the poor quality of today’s politics. For example, the political and security crisis in the territory of the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s was often described as a consequence of the end of the Cold War and the disintegration of complex states like Czechoslovakia or the Soviet Union. Although I still believe that the dominant origin of the Yugoslav tragedy was domestic, what is happening in our region today, in my opinion, is predominantly a reflection of geopolitical turmoil! Global politics can hardly sink any lower. The best proof of this is that the main topic of discussion today is whether, where, and when a nuclear bomb will be used.
Montenegro has marked 19 years since it restored its independence through a referendum nearly two decades that have shaped its modern identity in political, economic, and international terms. Looking back on that period, what do you consider the greatest achievement, and which aspects of state development, in your view, still remain to be fulfilled?
As I’ve already pointed out we generally faced unfavourable times for the economic and democratic development that was most urgently needed. Still, I believe I’m not mistaken in saying that many important and valuable efforts were made during that period. I’m especially proud that, in the early 1990s, we managed to preserve peace in Montenegro. Considering what was happening in our surroundings at the time, Montenegro was the only former Yugoslav republic on whose territory no war was fought. Taking into account Montenegro’s predominantly warrior history and tradition, I see this as perhaps the most significant achievement. It seems to me that within this generation living in Montenegro today, life itself is gaining in value. Throughout its history, Montenegro cultivated a culture of heroic sacrifice. Now, we are establishing a culture of life life is being held in higher regard. Of course, these are ongoing processes, and time will tell what the long-term results of the emancipation of Montenegrin society will look like. I am confident, however, that during this period a new phase began in shaping the consciousness in Montenegro regarding what the most important social values truly are.
Secondly, I believe we have learned to appreciate the value of social stability. Without stability, there can be no development and unstable societies are something everyone tries to avoid. Montenegro went through a very important phase of intensive economic growth, thanks to a dynamic influx of foreign investment. Capital is “a coward,” as the saying goes, and investors avoid unstable countries and economies. That influx of capital is proof that Montenegro was a stable and attractive investment destination.
During that period, we also strengthened the multiethnic and multireligious character of Montenegro. Historically, Montenegro has been a multiethnic state. We reaffirmed that identity when, during the wars that surrounded us, a large number of refugees and displaced persons came to Montenegro. These were people of various faiths and nationalities. At one point, they made up 20% of Montenegro’s total population an almost unimaginable figure. Just imagine if, over the course of a few years, the United States, Germany, or France took in a number of foreigners equal to 20% of their populations. And yet, this contributed to strengthening Montenegro’s trust in coexistence and in a multiethnic, multireligious community.
I believe it’s worth highlighting that, during this period, Montenegro achieved economic self-sustainability. Throughout its history, Montenegro had often relied on help from various sources. But from the early 1990s to the present, Montenegro has lived off its own labour and with its own capabilities, it has become an attractive investment destination. We began to see wealthy people coming here, and the results of their investments were not only facilities valuable in a material sense they also brought with them the establishment of new standards. Today, Porto Montenegro is fully competitive with the marinas in Monte Carlo, Cannes, or Porto Cervo. The same goes for the resorts in Portonovi and Luštica. And Aman needless to say is in a league of its own. All of this was important to accomplish with the right partners.
It is also important to note that, after using the German mark, we adopted the euro in 2002, which further strengthened investor confidence and marked a significant step toward Montenegro’s independence. It may well have been the decisive step! This move helped raise awareness of the urgent need to abandon an economic and financial environment that was deeply dysfunctional. Prior to that, we had lived through one of the worst periods of inflation in human history and a completely devalued dinar. We chose not to print our own currency the perper, our historical money even though there would have been traditional and emotional justification for doing so. Instead, we made a conscious decision to spare Montenegro the risk that, one day, someone irresponsible might try to solve economic problems by printing unsupported perpers. We understood that the Montenegrin economy needed a convertible currency in order to begin its recovery and to support the development of the state.
Ultimately, we restored independence as the lifelong dream of many generations of Montenegrins. We did so in a truly European manner without compromising the stability of Montenegro or the region for even a single moment. Moreover, we respected the strict rules set by the European Union throughout the process. After everything, we set Montenegro on a Western course one that, historically, both Montenegro and the wider region had often not followed. In other words, correcting the historical injustice that occurred shortly after World War I was not the sole objective of our policy. Alongside that, we wanted the renewed, independent Montenegro to belong to the cultural circle of modern Europe not just geographically, but in terms of civilization and values. But in order to move toward that goal, we must truly belong to it organically, and in terms of values.
That means we must adopt its standards through comprehensive reforms. Otherwise, we will stand out and appear as an “outsider” to that society. And once you set out on the path to Europe, then, quite logically, you are also on the path to NATO as part of Euro-Atlantic integration.
On the other hand, what could not realistically be completed in a short period of time was institutional development. When I first stepped down as Prime Minister after the successful referendum and the parliamentary elections that followed at the end of 2006 I said that the time had come for the historically rooted individual authority in Montenegro to be replaced by institutional authority. I wanted to emphasize that the stability, democratic progress, and economic development of any country depend heavily on the strength of its institutions. Countries with strong institutions can survive even poor governance. But for countries without such institutions, bad governance can be fatal. That is why institutional development is the most important priority for any newly reestablished state. And we were deeply committed to that process. However, what our critics fail to understand is that this is a task that never truly ends and that achieving even the first satisfactory results takes closer to a century than the 14 years we had in power, from 2006 until the change in 2020. Since democratic societies naturally involve changes in leadership, this should be a continuous priority for every government, regardless of party alignments. Do we see that in Montenegro over the past five years? My answer is no. But that, too, is a lesson that must be learned. At some point, Montenegro had to go through a change in government and it ended up with a cabinet that was, realistically, the only available alternative at the time. Today, Montenegrin citizens are better informed about what truly serves their future interests. I believe the most important thing now is for Montenegro to receive, as soon as possible, a nationally responsible government one that will patiently and persistently continue to build up institutions as the reliable foundation for the country’s future societal development.
When analyzing contemporary global trends and changes in the international economy, which sectors do you see as having the greatest potential for Montenegro’s further development? And what advice would you offer to young politicians when it comes to launching a new investment cycle and creating a sustainable and competitive business environment?
Montenegro is naturally predisposed to be a high-quality tourist destination, and as such, its economy has been largely shaped as a service-oriented one. Of course, events like the COVID-19 pandemic serve as a reminder that it is unwise to rely on a single path of economic development. It is crucial to have a diversified economy, while also maintaining a clear understanding of the country’s strategic direction for long-term growth. Over the past few decades, Montenegro has demonstrated that it is capable of evolving beyond the profile it held during the time of former Yugoslavia. Back then, Montenegro was already a solid Adriatic tourist destination. During the period of renewed independence, we recognized that Montenegro could become a highly competitive European and Mediterranean destination. Additionally, by assessing the broader context together with domestic and international experts we noticed that Europe was in search of new tourist destinations. Traditional hotspots, such as Saint-Tropez, which emerged in the post–World War II era, have largely saturated the global market and have become prohibitively expensive and inaccessible for many people. Moreover, the range of demands from today’s tourist clientele continues to expand, and smart policies in countries with strong natural advantages know how to recognize and seize that opportunity. Through intensive cooperation with foreign consultants and investors, we planned and built new infrastructure that helped position Montenegro among the recognized tourist destinations in Europe. This was acknowledged by the most reputable publications, including those issued by the World Travel and Tourism Council, an affiliate of the United Nations, which ranked Montenegro on multiple occasions during that time as one of the fastest-growing and most distinctive global tourism locations. In those years, with the construction of modern marinas, Montenegro added a new dimension to its tourism sector namely, high-quality nautical tourism. Projects like Porto Montenegro graced the covers of all the renowned European magazines, and the state of Montenegro had a strong international marketing presence. We proved that we could do it. Unfortunately, in the last five years, several steps have been taken backwards. The greatest damage, it turns out, was caused by the ill-considered decision to abolish the national airline, which led to the tragic transport isolation of Montenegro. For a tourist country to be considered prestigious, one essential condition is its ease of access. As I recall, in 2019, Montenegro had three times as many daily international flights as neighbouring Albania. Today, Albania has four times more such flights than Montenegro. This is a major disservice by the current government to the country. When we think about the future development of tourism and the full realization of Montenegro’s potential especially in the tourism and service sectors we must think about accessibility, meaning the development of the entire transportation infrastructure. Primarily, I’m referring to the development of airports and strong agreements with airline carriers that will establish direct flights connecting Montenegro with key source markets, particularly across Europe. In my opinion, this is a realistic and achievable goal. Additionally, we need to return to sound practices in our relations with investors in order to continue the sustainable development of the country’s most attractive tourist locations and to provide new, high-quality accommodation facilities. Today, when a major tour operator appears and requests several thousand accommodation units with five or more stars, we face a problem. Of course, I am not advocating the concreting of our coastline, but I also don’t agree with what I hear from certain loud but unqualified voices in some local NGOs and media circles that Montenegro must be saved from construction. I ask them: saved from what? From the smart and sustainable use of its resources? Resources are there to be responsibly utilized by sound policy! I believe that is where we need to place the emphasis when it comes to Montenegro’s future development alongside the diversification of economic activity. For example, when you look at agricultural land in absolute numbers, it may not seem impressive because Montenegro is a small country, but it’s astounding how much arable land remains uncultivated in Montenegro to this day. On the other hand, we have a steadily growing food import bill, amounting to hundreds of millions of euros, most often from regions that are geographically closest to us. This clearly indicates that climate is not the limiting factor for producing these goods. It’s a human factor. To those willing to hear my advice, I would say: it is essential to stay strongly focused on development. Also, it seems to me that the current state policy is infected with the virus of populism and operates under the belief that the most important thing is to promise people what they want to hear that high wages, pensions, and social benefits can be distributed regardless of actual economic performance. Even if you are able to deliver on those promises in the short term, it is merely a political trick lucrative for a while, but very quickly exposed as a deception, because two realities inevitably collide: a growing appetite for consumption and an economy that simply cannot support it. That’s why a wisely designed and sustainable development strategy for Montenegro and for other Balkan countries that have long been historically behind must be the top priority of national policy. The guiding idea of every smart policy must be the accelerated development of the country, and the most rational way to achieve that is through partnerships with quality investors. From my experience, to attract good investors, the government must be a reliable partner. The government must not act merely as an authoritarian regulator, free to do whatever it wants including driving investors away by constantly deteriorating the investment climate. Let me share something from my own practice. For years, I tried to interest investors in developing tourism in the north. It wasn’t easy. Progress only began once the state decided to build the first section of the highway, which cost more than 800 million euros. Only then did private investors realize that the state believed in the project and had committed to doing its part. Today, in Kolašin, private investors are building around twenty new hotels. Such partnerships must be nurtured, and every government’s guiding principle must be the daily improvement of the business environment in the country. When you realize that other countries have recognized what makes you attractive to investors in our case, that was primarily the tax system and the 9% corporate tax rate and that some have begun copying your model, the government must immediately respond by further reducing tax rates. Competition exists everywhere, including between countries. Every country wants to attract quality capital, and that capital will flow to the environment that offers the best conditions from the lowest taxes, to the most efficient administration, to the most reliable rule of law. This must always be kept in mind, and governments must remain unwavering in their efforts to attract investors. To conclude: only in this way can we, within a foreseeable time, bridge the deep development gap that has historically existed between the Balkan countries and modern Europe.
The world is entering a new phase of international relations with Donald Trump’s return to the head of the U.S. administration, while the European Union faces internal challenges and a redefinition of its geopolitical priorities. In such a context, where do you see Montenegro’s position both in terms of European integration and in terms of foreign policy maneuvering among key international players?
Montenegro is irreversibly on the path of European and Euro-Atlantic integration. What the European Union will look like once Montenegro and all Western Balkan countries become its members is, in my opinion, not something we need to imagine too vividly at this point. I believe the European Union will endure, as that is a prerequisite for European states to remain geopolitically competitive. It is difficult to imagine any individual European country securing competitiveness vis-à-vis the U.S., China, or Russia on its own. I believe the unification of Europe will be completed and that Montenegro will become its next full member. It is important to emphasize that this vision inspired our state policy even before the restoration of independence. Let me remind you that we introduced the German mark into Montenegro’s payment system seven years before independence, and the euro was adopted in 2002. These were significant steps toward a European future. Although we are now seeing a certain wavering within some segments of the current ruling majority, I do not believe this political stance has the strength to divert Montenegro from its European and Euro-Atlantic path. It is crucial for Montenegro to gain, as soon as possible, a nationally responsible government one fully focused on achieving this strategic political and state objective. Of course, that depends on the will of the citizens. On August 30, 2020, citizens chose the current government. But at some point, they will need to make a decision that leads Montenegro toward a nationally responsible state policy, entirely dedicated to its European development. Therefore, I believe Montenegro will fulfill its strategic goals. I am a proponent of a clear foreign policy orientation. I do not support a policy of equilibration between that which is fundamentally different and irreconcilable. I understand that, in one period more precisely during the Cold War such balancing was a necessity. Tito’s non-aligned policy, during the deep division between East and West, gave countries like Yugoslavia immense geopolitical importance. But the Cold War is over. Today, especially in Europe, we more clearly see the emergence of a new line of demarcation. I wouldn’t say it’s a line between East and West many Central and Eastern European countries that were part of the Warsaw Pact are now NATO and EU members. Today, the dividing line is one of values. On one side, we have market economies, democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. On the other side, authoritarian systems of governance. Not only do I not see it as a virtue, but I see it as self-deception or even manipulation when certain individuals in Montenegro and the region boast of their ability to “successfully balance.” Between what, exactly? We all must ground the policies we promote in values. If a political strategy is not based on the values one consistently fights for, then it is not serious policy it is politicking. That’s when you promise people what they want to hear, even if you yourself don’t believe it’s achievable. In doing so, you spend their future just to stay in power that is selfish “politicking.” I genuinely believe in the values of Western democracy. I believe Montenegro should be a part of that value system. That is why we undertook socially painful reforms believing they are worth enduring so that one day we can live under the conditions of a developed and prosperous market economy, the rule of law, and continue to advance our multiethnic character, uphold human rights, and develop democratically. I don’t believe this is a time for diplomatic or political balancing acts. I believe that Montenegro, both before and after the referendum, made the right choice in aligning with the value system where it sees its future.
Although you are known as a strong advocate of Western values and the Euro-Atlantic course, you have often pointed out certain weaknesses that have accompanied Western policy in recent decades. What exactly do you mean when you speak of those shortcomings, particularly in the context of the Balkans?
I firmly believe that Western policy, after the end of the Cold War, likely in a state of excessive self-satisfaction, revealed certain weaknesses that have now become a weight dragging down its competitiveness. To that, we must add a serious delusion one increasingly turning into self-deception that is becoming ever more prevalent in key Western centers: the claim that democracy has become an obstacle to development. Today, the truth is being twisted to suggest that autocratic models of governance provide a better framework for progress. If we speak of quality of life as the guiding idea of any responsible policy, it’s true that it depends on decent salaries, pensions, and humane working conditions but it is also deeply tied to the sense of freedom, legal security, and all other values upheld by democratic societies values that autocracy, by its nature, suppresses. I believe that, following the Cold War, there was a prolonged period of Western complacency a sense of monopoly and superiority which inevitably leads to error. It’s no coincidence that, whether in commerce, science, or politics and geopolitics, competition is a valuable force. When someone is breathing down your neck, you perform better. When there’s no competition, you’re already halfway to a mistake. In this context, two particular missteps stand out. The first lies in the EU’s selfish indecision over whether to complete the unification of Europe, or to first focus inward on resolving dysfunctions within its current structure. While Europe hesitated, others with opposing interests settled into the Balkans. Once again, as so often in history, the region was misused not for the benefit of its own people, but to serve the ambitions of external actors whose goal was to harm Europe, to undermine its unity and its system of values. The aggression against Ukraine is a direct consequence of that political reality. The second mistake stems from the American and European conviction that they had crafted a universal formula for democracy, and could simply export it elsewhere. That is a complete illusion. Every society has its own history and socio-cultural fabric that must be respected. There is no one-size-fits-all model of democracy. That’s why it’s essential for Montenegro and all the Balkan states to cultivate a strong sense of national ownership. You heard me right, and it’s not contradictory: each Western Balkan country should be part of the European cultural sphere and the Euro-Atlantic integration process, but first and foremost, we must remain our own. We must never allow the partnerships we choose to become disproportionate influence whether that influence comes from the East or the West. We must safeguard our states as sovereign and enter into partnerships as equals, with those with whom we see a future of shared interests.
The Western Balkans remains a crossroads of interests not only of regional, but also of global actors. At a time when the need for a “new approach” to this part of Europe is increasingly being discussed, what vision of the region’s future do you see as achievable?
Everything I’ve said about Montenegro equally applies to the Western Balkans. The Western Balkans must become part of modern European integration. The prerequisite for this is the revival of reforms within Western Balkan societies reforms that once defined the era of strong Euro-enthusiasm, that is, before the EU became “fatigued by enlargement.” I don’t believe that entering through the “back door” is a serious option. You can formally be included in an integration process if those already inside allow it, but you’ll still feel like an outsider in that community. I see the European future of the region as a mutual interest both for the Western Balkans and for the EU. As I’ve already emphasized, Europe now faces some of its most serious challenges with regard to shaping a new geopolitical model. The Cold War model is over, no matter how much some might wish to revise it. Likewise, the geopolitical era of a single superpower holding a monopoly has also ended whether some recognize it or not. We are witnessing the emergence of a new geopolitical order, one that will pose particular challenges for Europe. That is why Europe must act swiftly on several pressing priorities. First among them, in my view, is reigniting the momentum for its own unification completing the process of integration in the Western Balkans. There is no such thing as a geopolitical vacuum: wherever Europe is absent, others step in often those with intentions toward Europe that are far from benevolent. At the same time, the EU must address its even more urgent needs, such as the clearer definition of two key European policies: defense and security, and foreign affairs. No one has prevented Europe from developing these policies in a more distinct way despite being part of the North Atlantic alliance. But since it has failed to do so until now, it will have to take action especially in light of the pivot that Trump’s America has made, shifting its focus from the Atlantic to the Pacific. However, Europe will find it more difficult to strengthen its global role if it remains burdened by instability within any part of its own continent.
There have been public reports suggesting that certain NATO member states had considered the possibility of your candidacy for the position of Deputy Secretary General of the Alliance. At a time when, in the opinion of many, we are witnessing the formation of a new world order, how do you currently view NATO’s role in preserving international security?
NATO is an exceptional asset the world gained after the Second World War. NATO has become a guarantor of peace globally, and Europe has reaped significant benefits from the creation of this organization, as it helped overcome some of the traditional European conflicts. We found ourselves on the same side that guarantees stability and prosperity to Europe. I consider it a great achievement, and I do not understand any questioning of whether we need NATO or not. NATO has brought the greatest benefits to Europe and America, and for that reason, I believe both sides should approach the preservation of this, historically speaking, most powerful political, military, and security alliance with special responsibility. I first read the news about my candidacy for the position of Deputy Secretary General of the Alliance in the media initially on a Romanian portal, and later on a Turkish one. I want to believe that, in some circles within the NATO community, there was consideration that someone from Central or Eastern Europe could appear in a prestigious position within NATO. Naturally, such thinking would be flattering to me. I believe the time has come for people from this region to hold such important roles. I haven’t looked into that news in detail, as I have planned my life in a different direction. Meanwhile, I was very pleased that Radmila Šekerinska, whom I know and greatly respect, was elected to that position. I consider that a fulfillment of our regional interest, and I believe it will be very beneficial for all our countries.