The establishment of a commission in Croatia to address the succession of military assets signals a calculated institutional response rather than an unexpected development. According to retired Admiral Dragan Samardzic, this initiative reflects the complexity and political sensitivity surrounding issues like the military training vessel Jadran. Samardzic emphasized that these matters require a serious, strategic approach rather than vague or absolute messages.
The commission includes key representatives from the foreign affairs and defense sectors, underscoring Croatia’s commitment to addressing the issue through a framework of international law, security policy, and European considerations. Samardzic remarked that this is a clear indication that disputes over military assets will be managed in a long-term and institutional manner. He noted that such an approach could have implications for Montenegro‘s negotiations with the European Union, particularly regarding Chapter 31, which deals with foreign affairs, as well as broader issues related to legal certainty and the rule of law outlined in Chapter 23.
Samardzic pointed out that the challenge does not lie in the bilateral disputes themselves, as other candidate countries face similar issues. Instead, the focus should be on how these disputes are resolved. He stated, “The European Union does not wish to ‘import’ unresolved issues among member states, and such instances serve as a test of the political maturity of candidate countries.” For Montenegro, returning to a dialogue based on international law and consistent state practices is crucial, as further escalation could weaken its negotiating position in the EU integration process.
He advocated for Montenegro to engage established and recognized experts in international law to thoroughly and critically analyze the SFRY Succession Agreement. This analysis would assess the country’s legal standing regarding the succession of military property. Samardzic expressed concern that reliance on partial interpretations and insufficiently grounded arguments has proven costly and politically risky, undermining Montenegro’s negotiating power.
“A serious, expert, and depoliticized legal analysis can provide the foundation for a responsible and sustainable resolution to this matter,” stated Samardzic. He reiterated his earlier position that Jadran should serve as a unifying symbol of shared maritime heritage rather than a point of division. He called for diplomatic efforts to focus on finding an optimal model for its joint utilization, asserting that only agreements based on consensus can benefit all parties involved, including the vessel itself.
In conclusion, the formation of the commission in Croatia represents a significant step towards addressing the intricate issues surrounding military asset succession. With a focus on legal analysis and cooperative dialogue, both Croatia and Montenegro have the opportunity to navigate this sensitive terrain effectively.
