Montenegro Might Keep on Issuing ‘Golden Passports’ Despite EU Criticism

In some countries, one of the ways to obtain citizenship is through the so-called economic citizenship programs. These programs allow investors to become citizens of a given country in turn for investing in it. Such schemes are considered to be controversial by many, as they can contribute to increasing inequalities, and the process often lacks transparency. On the other hand, it is believed that they can have a significant economic impact, especially on small countries.

Montenegro has had its economic citizenship strategy since 2019, colloquially known as ‘golden passports’. The main condition for potential investors is to invest either 450,000€ in the north or 250,000€ in the south. Although the limit of 2000 citizenships a year was set, few people have applied for it, and only a fraction of the applications have been granted. Since 2019, 108 foreigners, mostly from Russia and China, have been granted Montenegrin citizenship. The European Commission voiced its reservations to Montenegro as it finds these schemes rather problematic. The bloc argues that ‘golden passports’ go against its principles, although there are the notoriously known cases of Cyprus and Malta offering citizenship in return for an investment.

Montenegro is not an outlier in this regard in the region either, with North Macedonia having a similar program, while Albania is about to introduce one. The EU shows consistency in its position on the matter, with its recent criticism of Albania in which it stated that “such schemes pose risks as regards security, money laundering, tax evasion, terrorist financing, corruption and infiltration by organised crime”. Keeping this program running could be a problem for Montenegro as an aspiring EU member. However, despite the plans to terminate the program originally at the end of 2021, the government prolonged it by one year.

Recently, in December 2022, Finance Minister Damjanović announced that Montenegro will not phase out the scheme this year either as it brings necessary economic development. This goes against multiple statements by Prime Minister Abazović from earlier this year in which he reassured the EU that the program will end this year. As the discrepancy between the statements of the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister shows, the future of ‘golden passports’ in Montenegro is unclear, and so is the speed of Montenegro on its path to EU membership.

The upcoming chairmanship of North Macedonia in OSCE

On December 1 and 2, a ministerial meeting of OSCE Member States was held in the Polish city Łódź. It was the last meeting before North Macedonia took over the OSCE Chairmanship from Poland for the year 2023. In Łódź, North Macedonia was represented by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bujar Osmani.

During the meeting, Osmani made a speech. In his remarks, he focused mainly on current security and political challenges. As the meeting also focused on the main goals and ambitions of North Macedonia during its presidency, Osmani highlighted, among other things, the country’s readiness to face the current demanding international and security situation caused mainly by the Russian aggression in Ukraine. He affirmed that North Macedonia would continue to prioritise Ukraine and support its territorial integrity and sovereignty during the chairmanship. This way, the country has again reaffirmed its clear foreign policy position. Another vital ambition of the countries’ chairmanship will be to develop relations with Asian countries further and to coordinate joint action with these partners to face common problems.

North Macedonia’s ambition is also to cooperate with the other OSCE Member States and to consider their recommendations, if any. Also, with this objective in mind, Osmani had two important bilateral meetings in Łódź. One took place with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Dmitry Kuleba, which was primarily concerned with the current situation in Ukraine. Osmani’s second important meeting was with Victoria Nuland, Deputy, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs of the United States. Based on this meeting, Osmani announced close cooperation with the United States during the OSCE chairmanship.

Serbia – “Darkness in Serbia without free media”

On December 6, two private Serbian TV stations, N1 Srbija and Nova S, stopped broadcasting their regular programme for 24 hours and displayed a black background with the message “Darkness in Serbia without free media”. The same notice was posted on their social media. 

The move demonstrated poor media freedom in Serbia since both stations did not receive a broadcasting license for 2023 from the national regulator earlier this year. Furthermore, the stations accused the regulatory body of being under the influence of political parties in power, as both N1 and Nova S frequently criticise President Vučić and the Serbian government and allegedly have close ties with the opposition parties. As a result, the broadcasting licences were only awarded to four pro-government TV stations – Happy, Prva, B92 and Pink. In a statement issued on the same day, N1 furthermore stated, “in this way, we highlighted years of pressure we’ve had to put up with, as well as attempts to curb our visibility and cut our financing.”

Several opposition Members of Parliament showed their support by holding up a sign with the same message displayed by the TV stations during a Parliament session. Moreover, MP Stefan Jovanović handed in a document to the Committee on culture and media of the Council of Europe, in which he expressed that Vučić’s government represses media freedom and threatens journalists by labelling them as enemies and traitors. Vučić briefly commented on the TV stations’ protest, claiming, “if they say they have a problem with the freedom of expression and cannot speak freely, then it’s a problem for their owner who is not allowing them to do so.”

Serbia has been criticised long-term for the government’s involvement in media control and lacks of support for independent media. According to the 2022 World Press Freedom Index, Serbia is ranked 79th out of 180 countries for its media freedom. 

Will Serbia deploy police forces and military to Kosovo?

On December 10, 2022, Serbia requested to deploy a thousand of its police forces and soldiers to the north of Kosovo to protect Serbian communities and monasteries first time since the 1999 war. President Vučić refers to the fact that Serbia has the right to send its forces based on the UN Security Council Resolution no. 1244 from 1999. The resolution says Serbia can deploy up to 1,000 military, police, and customs officials to Orthodox Christian religious sites, areas with Serb majorities, and border crossings if KFOR’s commander approves such a deployment. Serbia sought NATO approval, but the NATO international KFOR force with almost four thousand members refused it. 

Vučić’s remarks came after incidents between Kosovo authorities and local Serbs, who constitute a majority in northern Albanian-majority Kosovo. Everything started with the refusal to exchange Serbian KS license plates for the Kosovo RKS (Republic of Kosovo) ones ordered by the central government in Prishtina. Because of this rejection, barricades are being built in the north of Kosovo and shooting is heard. 

Tensions also rose after the announcement of new elections for mayors in four Serb-majority municipalities in northern Kosovo scheduled for December 18 after the incumbent mayors resigned. In the meantime, the planned elections were postponed by April 23, 2023, by the Kosovo administration. A group of Serbs attacked several election commission offices in northern Kosovo on December 6 to disrupt the upcoming vote. One of the perpetrators was former Serbian policeman Dejan Pantić, who was arrested by the Kosovo police. They accused him of terrorism and violation of the country’s constitutional order. Serbs expressed dissatisfaction and started protesting. 

Kosovo Prime Minister Albin Kurti said that the deployment of police military forces by Serbia would be “an act of aggression” and an indication of “Serbia’s tendencies to destabilise the region”.