QuotMonitor Our Freedomsquot How the Emancipation Movement Was Born

Teacher Miodrag Perović's book "Display of our liberty", which will quickly be released, brings a photo of a time via the tale of three years of the Montenegrin independent weekly Screen as well as the individuals that made it possible The promo of guide will certainly take location on May 14 at 5 pm at guide Fair in TC Delta City.

Excerpts from guide that speaks regarding the birth of the emancipatory movement in Montenegro are released in "Vijesti" Campaign for the prep work of resistance After the January 1989 stroke of genius, at PMF, where I functioned, the division that existed earlier, when some coworkers jokingly called Duško Gvozdenović as well as me Montenegrins, magnified.

Mostly all mathematicians at PMF (Professors of Science and Math) finished their basic researches in Belgrade Because 1973, when Mišo Obradović as well as I place ourselves ahead of the initiative for the development of the Faculty of Science and Mathematics, we developed participation with the Faculty of Mechanics as well as Maths MGU (Moscow State University) and also the faculties of Scientific research and Math in Belgrade and also Zagreb.

After the development of PMF in 1984 (for the first 10 years we called it the Institute of Mathematics and also Physics since it joined all mathematicians and also physicists at the College), we proceeded with the formation of staff for the ambitious programs that we took over from MGU for the Division of Math That's why MGU was our primary facility for training existing and future teaching team.

A few years before the coup, I felt that a variety of instructors desired us to consider that duty to the Belgrade PMF Prior to leaving for the United States (as director-dean), I prepared the opening of postgraduate researches.

When in August 1987 left, all that was left was for the Self-Governing Rate Of Interest Neighborhood for Education and learning to make an official choice in the spring of 1988 to fund the couple of students with whom we prepared to begin Upon my return, I was stunned when I was told that the director who prospered me, at the last moment and in the last instance, stopped the treatment with the description that it is much better to go to Belgrade for postgraduate education and learning.

That decision of his changed my mathematical career I had to send my trainee (assistant) Peđa Raspopović, whom I had started to introduce to algebraic topology while he was still a pupil (he finished from the faculty in much less than three years), to do doctoral research studies in the U.

S A

From the University of Florida (Tallahassee), at the end of 1989, they sent me a letter thanking me for sending them Peđa Raspopović, since he is "the most effective doctoral trainee this generation of teachers has had" Peđan obtained his doctorate in less than three years.

When the battle began, I also sent my second aide topologist, Aleksandar Poleksić, to Florida Aleksandar and also Peđa are American researchers today.

Peđa had returned from the United States in 1991 When the Montenegrins progressed Dubrovnik, he got an invitation to visit battle.

He came to my residence and also informed me approximately the following: "Teacher, I returned out of a sense of obligation to you, to develop a topological institution at PMF Currently I see that absolutely nothing will certainly come of it.

Besides, I'm not mosting likely to most likely to this pointless battle " I sustained such a decision.

During the evening or the next day, Peđa, the only kid, left the country His mother, Milka Raspopović, took care of the bookkeeping for me at Monitor for several years, cost free.

Dragiša Giša Burzan worked at the Department of Physics, who was hired as an assistant at approximately the same time as me (1970) After returning from the USA, I updated him about the situation at the university, Montenegro and Yugoslavia.

At the end of the spring of 1989, Giša told me that he and a group of friends, who have similar political views as the two of us, occasionally meet to discuss the political situation in Montenegro He suggested that I meet them and a few days later we went to a meeting with the composer Žarko Mirković.

There were also Dr Zdravko Uskoković from the Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Dr.

Dragoljub Perović, urologist, and Dr Branko Rašović, dentist (Žaro, Zdravo, Dragi and Baća).

I don't remember if two more, later almost permanent members of this circle - Žarko's brother Brano and Peđa Marinković attended that first meeting Their friend Mihailo Miško Vujošević also came often.

Žarko and Zdravko said that they (this society) think that Montenegro has sunk into nationalist darkness and that they intend to establish communication with people who have similar views on the current situation The purpose of establishing these contacts was some discreet recruitment of like-minded people, which could one day be useful in the differentiation that must take place in the future.

They judged that I could be one of them My answer was affirmative, but I thought that the most effective would be to create an organization immediately, which would publicly come forward with its views.

However, they thought that at this moment few people from the University would join such an organization After being quiet and thinking for a while, I said that I thought otherwise.

To believe that we can gather about thirty of our colleagues, in titles from assistant professor to full professor, if we offer them a paper with a clear program They shook their heads suspiciously, but we agreed to start making a program and carry out consultations.

A number of colleagues suggested that we make a party The summer vacation always slows down all activities at the University, so we only cleared the main things in September.

None of us initiators wanted to be professionally engaged in politics, so we decided to create an association that would be a group for exerting pressure on public opinion and parties, but not to fight for power The minimal goal of the initial activities was to challenge Momir Bulatović and Branko Kostić to speak on behalf of the University, which they regularly do in order to create the impression that everyone at the University supports the new management's bizarre policy.

By coincidence, we achieved that goal before we formally founded the association October 1989 - the anniversary of the rally October 8, 1989 was the anniversary of the student rally at which it was planned to overthrow the old regime.

The students organized a meeting where they will discuss what has and what has not been achieved from what was demanded in 1988 They invited Momir Bulatović and Milo Đukanović to speak on the subject, but they refused to come.

Branko Kostić came on behalf of the entire management Unfortunately, we had not yet managed to found an association and the meeting should have gone well for Branko and the government.

I decided to spoil it for them I came to the meeting and listened to Kostić's presentation in the large amphitheater of the technical faculties.

The 400-seat amphitheater was packed, an additional hundred students sat on the stairs Branko Kostić spoke positively about Milosevic and his politics, about the focus of the Montenegrin leadership on closer cooperation with Serbia than with other republics, etc.

Several times during the presentation, he said their favorite "we from the University" When it was time to ask questions, I took the floor and gave a ten-minute speech.

I accused Branko Kostić and Momir Bulatović of creating a false impression in the public about unity at the University, which is foreign to his being and the academic environment In the amphitheater, chaos reigned.

I pointed out that it is difficult to find a couple of teachers at the University who have less right to speak on behalf of the university than the unsuccessful assistant of Bulatović and the lecturer of the minor subject at the technical faculties Kostić Both of them remain there at the request of the Central Committee and now they have the audacity to say "we from the university", and they did not even humanly deserve the title of teacher.

Journalists and cameramen came running to film my presentation I continued with the accusation of the new leadership for political abuse of their positions, which they won not in free elections, but in the January coup.

I attacked them for their uncritical attitude towards the nationalist policy that is conquering Yugoslavia and Montenegro and pointed out that there are a lot of people at the University who do not approve of their policy, but that the new leadership has put so much pressure on the university public that people are forced to keep quiet Although the report from the meeting given by TVCG did not convey the content of my presentation, word about this event certainly spread throughout the University, but even today it is not clear to me how much, and if at all, my presentation was useful in recruiting members for our association.

In any case, it hinted at his character During the next ten days, we completed the final tasks before going public.

We decided to call the association Democratic Alternative (with the meaning: democratic alternative to nationalist conflicts in solving the Yugoslav issue) First, we came forward with the Initiative for the formation of the Democratic Alternative.

We published the document on November 8 or 9 It condemns the policy of the Yugoslav and Montenegrin leadership because it uses the various interests of the Yugoslav peoples, which are of marginal importance, as a means in the struggle to preserve power, and demands that Yugoslavia urgently embark on democratization and European integration, which were imposed as a historical imperative.

Experimentation with non-party pluralism within the Socialist Alliance, which was advocated by Milo Đukanović and the Montenegrin leadership at the time, is rejected as a waste of precious time, and freedom of political association is sought.

Democratic Alternative Association We first came forward with the Initiative for the formation of the Democratic Alternative We published the document on the eighth or ninth of November.

In a few days, we collected signatures and on December 12, 1989, the Founding Assembly of the Democratic Alternative was held There were 55 founders, 35 of whom were university teachers.

The UJDI (United Yugoslav Democratic Initiative) branch for Montenegro was established two weeks earlier Unlike UJDI, which was a kind of government-approved initiative of intellectuals from Belgrade and Zagreb, DA (Democratic Alternative) was an authentic rebellion of professors at the University of Titograd.

The founding assembly adopted a political platform called the Declaration of the Democratic Alternative, Program of the Democratic Alternative and elected the Executive Board and its president I suggested that Žarko Mirković be the president of the IO.

He refused it with a reproach: "This is your association" He and Uskoković were elected deputy presidents.

Members of the Democratic Alternative (in the order they signed the founding document): Dragiša Burzan, Ph D.

, Mitar Čvorović, Ph , Dušan Dragović, Ph

, Janko Janković, Ph , Zdravko Krivokapić, Ph

, Radomir Laković, Ph , Žarko Mirković, Ph

, Miodrag Perović, Ph , Dušan Petranović, Ph

Vladeta Radović, PhD Ranko Šćepanović, PhD Zdravko Uskoković, PhD Milan Vukčević, PhD Milan Perović, PhD Staniša Ivanović, PhD Vladislav Damjanović, PhD Dragan Hajduković, PhD Milan Popović, PhD Rajko Vujičić, PhD Stevo Nikić, PhD Vučić Dašić, PhD Bogoljub Bajić , Milan Martinović, Ph , Arsenije Vujović, Ph.

, Dragan Dragović, M Sc

, Mladen Ulićević, M , Eng

Dušan Dragović, Vuko Domazetović, Ph , Borislav Ivošević, Ph.

, Refik Zejnilović, Ph , Vojo Stanić, Živko Andrić, M.

, Milena Vujošević, Aleksa Šćepanović, M , Milan Karadaglić, Ivan Đurišić, Ph.

, Sreten Savićević, Ilija Vujošević, Ph , Miodrag Babić, Ljubiša Stanković, Ph.

, Vladimir Čejović, Ph Slaven Ivanović, Milo Perović, Vlatko Vučinić, Irfan Kurpejović, Milisav Jočić, Danica Hajduković, Branko Hajduković, Dragan Đurišić, Branislav Dašić, Rade Dašić, Jugoslav Šekularac, Aleksandar Jovanović, Rajko Mijailović, Ranko Sekulić, Branko Pejović, PhD Branko Rašović, PhD Dragoljub Perović, Dragan Sekulić and Mihailo Vujošević.

Executive Board: Dragiša Burzan, PhD, Vladimir Čejović, Žarko Mirković, MSc (deputy president), Milan Perović, PhD, Miodrag Perović, PhD (president), Dušan Petranović, PhD, and Zdravko Uskoković, PhD (deputy president) DA's views on the state and national issue On the Yugoslav issue: "At the time of epochal changes in Europe, the Yugoslav leaders are increasingly isolating Yugoslavia, trying to save power.

Instead of accepting a program of reforms analogous to those in Eastern European countries and working to include Yugoslavia in European integration, they are discording peoples and fueling the fire of national conflicts The fact that after hundreds of years of mutual warfare, the European nations are creating supranational forms of association, while the Yugoslav nations are in a state of semi-war, after a hundred years of voluntary interweaving and identification of their historical destinies, sounds paradoxical.

There are no evil and good nations, but only evil leaderships that use different interests of marginal importance as a tool in the struggle to preserve power " On the Montenegrin issue: " Although it stands for the preservation of the Yugoslav state, the Declaration was aimed at the future of Montenegro.

It is specified that our goal is "a federal state that affirms the rights of citizens and the rights of federal units, the rights of all minorities and reaffirmation of the European identity of Montenegro" In its announcements and statements, DA affirmed the conception of Montenegro as an open multicultural, multi-confessional and multi-ethnic civil society, based on the values ​​of European civilization.

We rejected experimentation with non-party pluralism, etc Before the New Year, TVCG organized a show whose goal was to introduce new political subjects to the public.

I remember that event as the first public dispute over the Montenegrin national and state issue after the coup The President of the Democratic Party Dr.

Slobodan Vujošević (my colleague from the Department of Mathematics) advocated democratic principles regarding the organization of the state, but he was a fierce denier of Montenegrin identity and preached about national and state Montenegrinism as a branch of Serbia Journalists Velibor Čović and Vaska Ždralević - Joksimović conducted the conversation in such a way that Vujošević's views were implicitly understood.

When it was my turn, I said that I disagree with these views: "The right to national determination belongs to the sphere of personal freedoms The establishment of democracy will create the conditions for a democratic discussion on the Montenegrin issue".

I told Vujošević: "You are a Serb, and I am a Montenegrin; what is controversial? We will build a democratic state and a successful economy so that everyone can live freely and inherit traditions as they see fit When we [from DA] say Europe, we do not mean renouncing our own state tradition.

When we talk about federation, we have in mind that federation is the closest form of community, but not a means to overcome differences We have in mind the following federations: Canada, USA, FRG, Australia, Switzerland, which are so decentralized that some of them are called confederations.

It seems that I messed up the script, in a conversation with my colleagues the next day at the university, Vujošević threw an ashtray at me On the anniversary of the coup, on January 10, 1990, a round table of the government and the opposition was organized.

The DA suggested that one topic be a national issue, and DA vice-president Žarko Mirković, MSc, said: "The centuries-old ties and closeness of the Montenegrin and Serbian people are the inevitable essence of all good-faith talks " "National feeling as well as confessional affiliation is, after all, above all, a matter of personal experience.

Imposing one's own conviction on another in this sphere never arouses a friendly reflex, but leads to nationalistic escalation and conflicts, the high price of which is paid today by the citizens of Montenegro and Serbia The specific question we wanted to address here does not belong to the type of whether Montenegrins are Serbs; whether Muslims are a nation, but: Do the citizens of Montenegro still have the right to their own state and independent decision-making about their own future.

Our unequivocal answer is that they have ” Mirković and I affirmed these views in a series of interviews that we gave to the media in Serbia and other republics.

In the continuation of 1990, in the public discourse, it was more and more explicitly discussed whether, in the event of the dissolution of Yugoslavia, Serbia and Montenegro should remain in one state The leadership of the DA has more and more energetically affirmed the position that in that case they should be independent states.

For several members of the association, this was unacceptable, so during the summer of 1990, four members left the DA DA's position on the media: "We demand that within the public media, which are currently controlled by SK and SSRN, a certain space, that is, time, be given to the alternative, that is, the opposition, so that the problems of current life can be illuminated from multiple angles and from various sides.

That would contribute to the democratization of political life, and if we don't get that, we will work on launching a joint newsletter for all the opposition" Support for the Alliance of Reform Forces In July 1990, federal prime minister Ante Marković began to form the Alliance for Reform Forces.

Following the example of the Union of Communists of Yugoslavia, a republican organization of this union should have been formed in each republic Sometime in September, Ljubiša Stanković suggested that I go with him to Belgrade with Marković to discuss the formation of the Alliance of Reform Forces of Montenegro.

Based on the success of the Democratic Alternative (and the large number of prominent university professors in it), he thought that I could contribute to it We traveled and spent the whole day in the Federal Government building.

Prime Minister Marković proposed that Ljubiša and I be co-presidents of the Montenegrin organization I refused and informed them that I was launching a weekly whose conception would be against the policies of Milošević and the Montenegrin leadership.

I thought that there are a lot of people in Montenegro who can be good leaders of the party, but few who are ready to maintain an independent paper Since we have not yet formally extinguished the Democratic Alternative, I said that my leadership colleagues authorized me to say that the DA would support the Alliance by joining it as a collective member.

I also promised to support the paper we are establishing At the meeting in Titograd, which was held in front of the founding assembly of the SRSCG on October 6, when we were considering which organizations should be included in the Alliance of Reform Forces, a problem arose.

The leaders of the Socialist Party, headed by President Ljubiša Stanković, considered that the Liberal Alliance was to a large extent a nationalist party Therefore, they wanted to establish distance in relation to LSCG and Slavko Perović.

Ljubiša suggested that the Liberal Alliance should not be a constituent element of the SRS I did not agree with that.

I said that the Liberal Alliance sincerely supports the survival of Yugoslavia, but he is of the opinion that if this is not possible, then Montenegro must have the same status as the other republics To join the Union of Yugoslav States (at that moment the socialists believed that the formation of such an alliance was out of the question) as an independent state.

I did not say that the Liberal Alliance and I believe that Yugoslavia will disintegrate All members of the leadership of the Socialist Party were AB revolutionaries, so they shared the characteristic of prominent members of that movement - their political career was at least as important as their convictions.

Although they parted ways with Bulatović and Đukanović and left SCMG because of his support for Milošević's nationalist policy, they were extremely wary of the open expression of independence ideas That's why I had to push through the Liberal Alliance and Slavko Perović.

I said that if the Liberal Alliance was not accepted as a collective member, that the Democratic Alternative will also withdraw and that the paper we are launching will not support the Alliance of Reform Forces There was also a proposal that I be on the electoral list of the SRSCG.

I asked to be replaced with Slavko Perović, because I cannot run an independent media and be politically exposed Marković accepted my position.

The leadership of the Socialist Party withdrew to decide whether their party will give up on joining the SRS Aware that it is unlikely that they will enter the parliament on their own, they reluctantly agreed to my proposals, which Marković had already accepted.

So my goal was achieved Slavko and the liberals will vigorously speak against Milošević and the anti-Montenegrin policy of the Montenegrin regime.

And our weekly newspaper will multiply energy and contribute to strengthening the idea of ​​the independence of Montenegro (Excerpt from M.

Perović's book) At the promotion of the book, the following will speak: prof Dr.

Miodrag Perović, founder of Monitor and Vijesti; Željko Ivanović, president of Borda Vijesti; Esad Kočan, editor-in-chief of Monitor; Milka Tadić Mijović, Director of the Center for Investigative Journalism of Montenegro; Balša Brković, writer and columnist of Vijesti Vijesti.