Mandić's Mladić Condolence: A Test for Montenegro's European Future

Montenegro faces a crucial decision regarding its European Union path. Some actions by public officials are not private; they carry state and international significance. Andrija Mandić, Speaker of the Montenegrin Parliament, recently sent condolences for Ratko Mladić, a convicted war criminal. Mladić was found guilty of genocide in Srebrenica and other grave crimes during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Mandić offered condolences to Darko Mladić, Ratko Mladić's son, in his own name and as leader of the New Serbian Democracy party. As a high-ranking official, Mandić's public message honoring a convicted genocidaire has serious political and international implications, far beyond a private sentiment.

Montenegro states its commitment to EU membership, which means upholding international law, justice, and European values like human rights and the rule of law. The EU requires a clear stance on such issues. The central question becomes: Can an official who respects a convicted war criminal truly represent Montenegro's European aspirations? If so, the meaning of Montenegro's "European path" is undermined.

This action by Mandić is not isolated. He has a known history of supporting Serbian nationalist views. Therefore, his message about Ratko Mladić cannot be dismissed as accidental. State officials must distinguish between personal feelings and public political messages. When this distinction is blurred, the entire state faces consequences.

Croatia has reacted strongly to Mandić's actions. After previously declaring him unwelcome, Croatia has again criticized Montenegro following his condolences for Ratko Mladić. Andro Krstulović Opara, head of Croatia's Foreign Policy Committee, warned about the negative impact on Montenegro's European prospects. As an EU member, Croatia's concerns about a top Montenegrin official undermining European values demand serious consideration from Montenegro's government.

The core problem extends beyond Mandić himself; it is the normalization of such behavior. Democracy allows for diverse opinions, but not for silence when crimes are downplayed or court judgments are politicized. Society must not get used to glorifying war criminals or treating genocide as a political debate. Tolerating these actions for political gain compromises human rights and obstructs reconciliation.

The Bosniak Party also bears responsibility. While its Foreign Minister, Ervin Ibrahimović, condemned the glorification of Ratko Mladić, the article questions the effectiveness of this condemnation if the party continues to politically cooperate with Mandić. This calls for the party to translate its European and civic commitments into decisive political action, not just words.

There is no collective guilt for Mladić's crimes; guilt is individual. However, societies and institutions are responsible for how they address these crimes. Any policy that elevates war criminals to hero status must be opposed by all. Montenegro cannot credibly pursue EU membership if its parliament honors war criminals. Srebrenica is a civilizational issue, not merely a political controversy, grounded in facts, court judgments, and the enduring suffering of victims. Countries aspiring to uphold international law must respect its judgments.