Damaging Narratives

By Miljan Vešović

2023 is almost over, and Montenegro still finds itself under gravest threat to its statehood, national identity and security. While these threats have been explained many times, some aspects still need clarification.

The narratives that aim to destroy Montenegro’s state and national identity are propagated and disseminated by both pro-Russian and pro-Serbian media, think-tanks, members of academia, intelligence operatives and “agents of influence” and people who unwittingly parrot their talking points or invent damaging narratives on their own. Roughly, there are three types of narratives that cause the most damage.

Firstly, the most famous one – the narrative propagated by Serbian nationalists and pro-Russian politicians, media and other public figures in Montenegro (naturally, Serbian nationalists and pro-Russian public figures are often the same people). This narrative has also been endorsed many times by Serbian and Russian officials and is used as a hybrid warfare tool by Serbian and Russian intelligence networks.

It is also endorsed and propagated by Serbian Orthodox Church which is unfortunately (as explained many times) not only a religious organization, but also a main center for Russian and Serbian intelligence and “black ops” activity in the Balkans.

According to this narrative, Montenegro is a “false state” or “100% Serbian state”, Montenegrins as ethnicity “do not exist” and are “bastard nation” (these are all quotes from Serbian officials and high-ranking SOC clergy) and Montenegro should either be abolished altogether and annexed by Serbia or should exist as a Serbian puppet state (similar to Republika Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina).

Propagators of this narrative also actively spread fake news that Serbs who live in Montenegro or SOC clergy in Montenegro have been threatened and in danger (they have absolutely never been threatened or in danger) or historical falsehoods that people who live in Montenegro have always been Serbs, that Orthodox Church in Montenegro has never been autocephalous (which is a blatant lie, as even SOC in its official documents admitted the autocephaly of Orthodox Church in Montenegro several times) and that Russia has, throughout history, always been a “natural ally” of Montenegro (another historical falsehood).

The main goal of this narrative is to keep Serbs in Montenegro radicalized and attempt to make them more loyal to Serbia and Russia than to Montenegro. Having in mind that about 30% of citizens of Montenegro are ethnic Serbs, it is clearly visible how their constant radicalization can keep Montenegro destabilized. Serbian intelligence services, with support of their Russian brethren, are thus using the same playbook that has been used by Russia in Ukraine and Baltic States.

The second extremely damaging narrative is the one propagated by several so called “moderate”, “green” or “civic” political parties in Montenegro, prominent media (especially outlets affiliated with “Vijesti” media group) and plethora of think-tanks, NGOs, activists, members of academia and social media influencers. The main talking points here are that danger from Serbia and Russia is “overestimated” (some of them even claim there is no danger) or that “Montenegrin and Serbian nationalism are equally damaging for Montenegrin society”.

This is, of course, a blatant falsehood, as Montenegrin aggressive, expansionistic nationalism does not exist – Montenegro and number of ethnic Montenegrins are too small to even think about such a thing, let alone implement it.

Other talking points here are that Montenegrin patriotism is actually either anachronism or bigotry – for example, the favorite activity of social media influencers belonging to this group is to make fun of Montenegrins who raise flags of Montenegro or organize celebrations on Montenegro’s Independence and Statehood Day, or of people who publicly celebrate successes of Montenegrin national sports teams.

The propagators of this “relativization” narrative try to present themselves as “the cool kids” who are “above primitive, jingoistic patriotism” and who want to make Montenegro focus on “real problems” - such as corruption, organized crime or “Montenegrin nationalism”.

It is clear that these people are, either deliberately or unwittingly (dare we say, mostly deliberately), doing the bidding of Serbian and Russian intelligence services. One of the main targets of this narrative are young(er) people in Montenegro, the ones who supported Montenegrin independence – the propagators are trying to show them that being a proud, patriotic Montenegrin “is not cool”, that participating in politics and/or political debate in Montenegro is not something that should be encouraged and that there are many more interesting jobs and things that they could and should be doing instead.

The aim of this influence operation is, of course, to clear the way for Serbian nationalists and pro-Russian political forces by minimizing the threat from them and making people disinterested to participate in politics. The inadequate reaction from successive Montenegrin governments to all aspects of hybrid warfare coming from Belgrade and Moscow can partially be explained by successful dissemination of this narrative among Montenegrin voters.

The third damaging narrative unfortunately comes from people whose patriotism and loyalty to Montenegro and firm belief that Montenegrin statehood and nation are not “false” cannot be questioned (with rare exceptions, as unfortunately Russian/Serbian agents have infiltrated all parts of Montenegrin political spectrum). However, some parts of pro-Independent, patriotic, civic and (at least to some degree) pro-Western oriented political and media forces in Montenegro have in the last 4-5 years started pushing nostalgic, far-left narratives about former communist Yugoslavia.

According to these narratives, internal and foreign policy and way of life in Tito’s Yugoslavia is idolized and presented as the only possible counter-narrative to Serbian nationalism. Hand in hand with these narrative goes the idolization of culture of Communist Yugoslavia – such as organization of concerts where Yugoslav Partisan songs are performed or reverence for brutalist architecture and “socialist realism” in literature and film. It is not uncommon to, in private conversations, hear from such people that they view independent Montenegro as a state that should have been formed in order to escape Serbia’s clutches, but which is definitely not as good a solution as “Great (socialist) Yugoslavia”.

This narrative has unfortunately spread to foreign policy and national security as well, especially among some former prominent decision – makers, diplomats and intelligence chiefs/operatives who started their careers in former Yugoslavia. The hallmark of this narrative, when it comes to foreign policy, is (rightful) criticism of appeasement Western policy towards Vucic’s Serbia but also unhealthy and counter – productive distancing from the West as a result and propagation of ideas of old Tito – Nasser – Nehru “Non-Aligned Movement” instead.

For example, if you ask these people, you need to be “cancelled” if you take the neutral or pro-Israeli view in current Middle Eastern conflict – you need to support Palestine in order to “fight for the oppressed against the oppressors” and “be on the right side of history”. Or, in multilateral diplomacy, their idea is that Montenegro should equally support both Western and non-Western initiatives and candidates for international organization so that it is not perceived as an “American lackey”.

It is true that a hefty dose of carefulness should be applied to criticism here – again, we are talking about people whose patriotism and loyalty to Montenegro as well as contribution to restoration of Montenegrin statehood are beyond doubt. However, there is also no doubt that the narrative they are pushing is very damaging for Montenegro, and useful for its enemies.  First and foremost, it is based on nostalgic childhood memories of a group of people born in 1940s, 1950s and 1960s and therefore falls flat with almost anyone younger than that.

It falls flat even more among people whose ancestors suffered from Communist oppression in Yugoslavia (and it needs to be admitted – there is a fair amount of those). It is also anachronistic and not suitable for year 2024. It creates instability by exacerbating divisions in Montenegrin society, and instability suits Belgrade and Moscow.

It also fails to distinguish the epic struggle of Montenegrins and other nations of former Yugoslavia, led by Yugoslav Partisans, against Nazism and Fascism in WW2, the struggle that should always be celebrated and revered, with what came later – a Communist dictatorship. “Soft” dictatorship, and much more lenient dictatorship than in the Soviet Union, China, Romania or, God forbid, North Korea or Cambodia (under Khmer Rouge), but dictatorship still.

Moreover, it is also harmful to Montenegro’s foreign policy and pro-Western societal and cultural orientation. Our Western allies, when confronted with such things, see them as a foolish pastime at best and as the proof that pro-independence Montenegrin are actually unreliable partners and not pro-Western at all and that therefore US, UK and EU should seek other partners in Montenegro at worst. The “at worst” view is of course heavily propagated in Brussels, London, Berlin, Washington DC and Paris by Serbian and/or Russian lobbyists.

Therefore, this narrative is not a good counter – argument to two openly damaging narratives described above. In order to survive as a proud independent nation, a NATO ally devoted to freedom, Montenegro needs a new narrative. Montenegro needs patriotism suitable for the 21st Century and, to paraphrase a certain former US President, it needs to make patriotism great again.

More on that in the next article, which is planned to be published on January 9th. Until then – we wish all our dear readers a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2024!