This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Since it Montenegro has become a new nation, some changes must be done to the article. We need to address curency, GDP economy, and military changes in organization and what not.

Also there needs to be a good time table of events like admitance into the UN, WTO, maybe EU and such

• • Hey, if Montenegro is the newest state in the world, shouldn't it be just right that it shares this distinction with the Republic of Serbia, which also became independent of Serbia-Montenegro?

• • • No, because according to the treaty which established the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro, if one of the constituent states declares independence, the other state becomes the legal successor of Serbia and Montenegro. In this case, Montenegro declared independence FIRST, so Serbia became the successor state.

I doubt Germany and the EU formally allow Montenegro to use Euro as an official curency

• currency: euro - even though Montenegro is not part of the Eurozone, it uses the euro after Germany and the EU allowed it to use the German mark years ago. Now, since the German mark was superceded by the euro, the euro is the official currency of Montenegro.

They'd have to formally allow Montenegro use the Euro. Since Montenegro is buying the banknotes from Germany; if Germany didn't want to sell them they wouldn't. Ironcorona 02:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

How do they buy their banknotes and coins from Germany? Anyone could buy euros from any commercial bank or exchange office in Sweden (and I guess also in Germany), although it might take some extra time if you want to buy a very large amount of money. Do they have some kind of agreement with the German central bank? ( Stefan2 05:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC))

Obviously, anyone can USE the Euro, the Swiss Franc, or the US Dollar, and many countries do so de facto if not de jure. Some go so far as to declare one of these their official currency. What they can't (without really asking for trouble) do without the EU's permission, is print/coin Euros. The Monster 00:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The ECB is neutral on the issue of other countries using the Euro, so that is not an issue. OTOH, that is not an accepted path to joining the Eurozone.

Although Montenegro have not fullfilled the so-called "Maastricht criteria" required for entering in euro-zone, the EU allowed the usage of euro because Montenegrin economy is so small it can not affect so much bigger European economy

Some Montenegrins have in recent years shown a desire to separate Montenegro from the federation with jist of the separatist movement being among the Slavic Muslim and Albanian minorities who make up some 20% of the population -- what does this sentence mean? -- Zoe

I don't know, but it seems to make some kind of sense if you assume "jist" is a typo for "most"... Paul A

I'd say it's typo for "gist". Nikola 05:59, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

In recent years, some Montenegrins have shown a desire to separate from the Yugoslavian/Balkan/Serbian(?) Federation. The separatist movement consists mainly of Slavic Muslim and Albanian minorities, which consist of 20% of the Montenegrin population. --More sense?

No, it makes no sense at all. I thought the seperatist movement was started by the Montenegrin Parliament and Montenegrin Government, right?

Actually you are wrong. The separatist movement started in 1990 with the Liberal Party of MOntenegro (LSCG) which has constitently had about 5-10% of support among the population (among both Orthodox, Muslims and Catholics). In 1992 when the question of Montenegro's future was at stake (referendum on federation with Serbia) the LSCG called on Montenegrins to boycott. Aside from their voters (5-10%) the bulk of the Slavic Muslim and Albanian population boycotted as can be seen from the results on this page [1]. The turnout was 66% of which 95% voted for the union (some 62% with 70% Orthodox Slavs). Each county basically matches with its ethno-religious make-up. Bar with 60% Orthodox Slavs had a 48% turnout, Ulcinj with 73% of Albanians had a 17,54% turnout, Plav with an 80% Slavic Muslim and Albanian population had a 27,63% turnout and finally Rozaje with 87% Slavic Muslims and 4% Albanians had a 10,85%. All of the other counties (with clear ORthodox Slavic majorities) all had majority turnouts. I personally find this exercise redundant, trying to 'prove' what is obvious to anyone who has ever set foot in Montenegro. But I guess that from now on I will not have to discuss the subject. Furthermore if you are interested I can get you poll results which basically point out what I am talking about. Just quoting one from 2001 (VREME) that I have, 5% of declared Serbs support an independent Montenegro, 83% of those who said they were Croats, 89% of those who said they were Slavic Muslims and 87% of Albanians. -- Igor 22:00, Sep 23 2004

And as far as I recall, neither the Montenegrin president nor prime minister are Muslim nor Albanian.

No but the controversial speaker of the parliament Rifat Rastoder is. -- Igor

Are you trying to say that Gjukanovic is in some way an Bosniak/Albanian agent, representing Bosniak/Albanian interests? Let me put in more straightforwardly, did Bosniaks and Albanians bring Djukanovic & Co. to power? No Montenegrin voted him in? Well, I thought Albanians had their own political parties, and so do the Bosniaks.

That is the interesting part, the Slavic Muslims have their own parties ( SDA etc.) however none of them have been in parliament since 1992 and then maybe one or two seats? The Slavic Muslims adore and vote (can be proven with the help of any opinion poll) Milo Djukanovic, his DPS party and especially his junior partner SDPCG party (which has about 40% of Slavic Muslims in its ranks which you can see for yourself as soon as they fix their rotten page http://www.sdp.cg.yu if you go to 'Organizacija'). -- Igor

How long will iditos like yourself continue to blame just about everything on Bosniaks and Albanians? When will you wake up and understand that now even your formal brothers Montenegrins can stand you and your Serb superiority policies any longer.

Montenegrin Orthodox Church is not recognised by any other orthodox church. However, the USA likes these little games of making new cultures and dividing nations so what can one expect.

The main church is the Serb Orthodox Church, though there is also a splinter Montenegrin Orthodox Church established in 1993. The faithful reportedly remain close to the Serb Orthodox Church regardless of the new church as can be witnessed by the attendance of sermons and booming monastic life at the Serb church none of which the other side can boast of.

This seemed rather biased toward one church, especially the second sentence. I'll strike it and revise the first part to try for a more NPOV.

That's just factual. If you have any information suggesting otherwise please come forward with it. As far as I know, the autocephalists have no spiritual support whatsoever, for one thing they have not built a SINGLE shrine in Montenegro or anywhere else in the world. They are nothing more than a political pressure group used by the government of Milo Djukanovic. -- Igor

---

The article states that "Montenegrins are mostly Eastern Orthodox Christians. The two major branches are the Serb Orthodox Church and the Montenegrin Orthodox Church, which was re-established in 1993.". MOC is not a major branch of Eastern Orthodoxy, nor was it re-established in 1993. Nikola 12:36, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

---

The previous comment of the article states that MOC was not re-established in 1993, which is a fallacy. The MOC has been legally registered in Montenegro in line with the valid legal system of the state of Montenegro and in line with the laws in Montenegro - which is clearly apparent from the MOC page on Wikipedia. The MOC Church is called the Montenegrin Orthodox Church in its formal registration in Montenegro, so there is no space for speculation here. The Church was re-established after a separate existence until 1920 and a ban by the Serbian (then Yugoslav) autocratic King Aleksandar. The article does not claim that MOC is a major branch of Eastern Orthodoxy outside Montenegro.

I thought that this is an old comment.

The MOC was not banned, and hence can't be re-established. Anybody can register a religious cult-the fact that it is registered doesn't give it any legitimacy. In fact, if MOC's highest "claim to fame" is that it managed to become registered, it has a long way to go until it becomes a church. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

The statement "over 74% of Montenegrins are Eastern Orthodox Christians, most of whom belong to the Serb Orthodox Church" is anyway a fallacy, as there is no accurate census that can prove this. One may say truthfully say that "most Montenegrins are Eastern Orthodox Christians, most of whom belong to the Serb Orthodox Church", but a large number of Montenegrins are atheists, agnostics, or otherwise, myself included. Being a Montenegrin does not mean that you are part of the 74% of Eastern Orthodox Christians. Sorry, this is the 21st century.

The censa registered religion. Of course, the government of Montenegro is afraid of the results, so they are nowhere to be found. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

You can not just delete the fact that MOC followers claim that "all of the existing churches in Montenegro were once part of an autonomous Montenegrin Orthodox Church that was abolished following the union with Serbia in 1918." This is the explanation why shrines are not being built en masse in Montenegro by the MOC, as it claims to inherit the churches currently in the hands of SOC. If we put only one viewpoint in "its following is small to the point of non-existence and it has not been recognised by any other Orthodox Church" it is not balanced. Also, the statement "its following is small to the point of non-existence" needs to be based on fact not fancy. Do you have an official census of followers or is this your speculation? - user 20:28, 04 Oct 2005 (UTC).

Emperor Milo and his Milovision are doing a great deal of propaganda, but that doesn't help the MOC one bit. Do you have an official census of followers? Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

The fact is that the Serbian Orthodox Church claims the ownership of the churches in Montenegro, most of which have been built during the years when Montenegro was an independent country with its autocephalus church. Many Montenegrins feel that this is not just and fair. Montenegrin believers also do not want to go to the church that is seen as being no more than Serb ultra-nacionalist political organisation in disguise. Those were the reasons for the formation of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church. Momisan 11:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

What does the statement that the Montenegrin Orthodox Church isn't "recognised" mean? Who needs to recognise it? Several national Orthodox churches accept and cooperate with it: Bulgarian, Macedonian, Romanian, Italian, to name a few. Momisan 11:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

---

Anybody has ANY idea why is the international name of Montenegro in Spanish? I haven't been able to find this peace of information. Thnx. -- Marianocecowski 13:29, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The name comes from the Italian (not Spanish) for "black mountain", probably referring the dark wooded mountains. Jonathunder 17:55, 2004 Nov 22 (UTC)

I thought about it, but no, it's Spanish. In Italian it would be Montenero, without G. Which really puzzles me, as Spain is not so close. It's not Portuguese either nor French. Weird, huh? -- Marianocecowski 04:46, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'd say it's originating from Latin. This name was made back in the early second millenium when the Venetians sailed the eastern Adriatic coast and noticed the Lovćen mountain covered in black pine... -- Joy [shallot] 10:45, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Monte Negro/Montenegro is Veneto, a dialect(?) of Italian which is the word most of the world uses today when referring to Crna Gora - Black Mountain - MonteNegro. Some nations do not use Montenegro but translate literally Black Mountain: Slavs (Cerna Gora, several variations), Greeks (Mavrovunion), Albanians (Mal i Zi) and Turks (Karadag).

- What puzzles me is why would these countries copy one another because it would be a big coincidence if all of them, seeing for themselves, call the country "Black Mountain". And why don't we have the name that the aboriginals called their land since Slavs arrived there after antiquity. Thus Cerna Gora can't be a possible candidate. Thus I think it either comes from Albanian "Mali i Zi" or Greek "Mavrounion". - user

Eh, what are you talking about? It's like Ivory Coast - the name is a phrase that means something, so other languages took over a translation rather than a transcription. -- Joy [shallot] 13:04, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Why isn't the Albanian version of the name listed at the beginning? I would also say the Greek version, but there are no Greeks there I believe. - user

Good questions, and, if you believe there are no greeks there, you are wrong. There are "registered" Greeks - mosly refugees after Greek civil war in 1949 and there are many "Greek looking" people that consider themselves Montenegrins too. - user

- Spanish kingdom of Aragon ruled the mediterraean seas during the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries, having even territories in Sicily, Southern part of Italy, Crete, Sardinia and some greek territory... The name should come from that period.

In any case:

• in latin, black is: niger-nigri (italian "nero" is probably a later derivation).
• Aragonese and/or Venetians sailors probably mixed in crews, speaking a rather similar language mixture.
• In Herceg Novi (Montenegro), a medieval fortress town, exists a site called Spanish Tower.

No! This name (Montenegro) has no direct connection to Spanish origin at all. It is Venetian dialect a bit different from official Italian! In Florentine dialect of Italian (became official language in Italy), it is Montenero, but Venice has been for a long period adjacent to Montenegro and they influenced its international name. It is not just Ivory Coast that is called this way. USA is also mostly translated in the most of the Languages. Name of romanic France originates from germanic people of Franks and is broadly accepted as international name.

On the other side, Germany is called totally differently in different languages (e.g. Deutschland, Alemania, Tedesca, Njemacka etc.). That are totaly different meanings (e.g. slavic Njemacka/Nemcia means "dumb country", originating from the fact that German language was unintelligible to adjacent Slavs at that time!).

Other translated (rather than transliterated) foreign names for the country/region are Svartfjallaland (Icelandic for "Land of the Black Mountain"), Mali i Zi (Albanian) and Karadağ (Turkish) . For related discussions about the use of geographic names in an English-language context see Talk:East Timor, Talk:Côte d'Ivoire, Talk:Faroe Islands, Talk:Myanmar, Geographical renaming, List of country name etymologies, Placename etymology, and Wikipedia Geographic naming conventions. // Big Adamsky 05:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi every body. About the dicussion on to the "spanish or not origin of the name MONTENEGRO only a date for your reference : I am spanish ( as you know... from my English) I was really socked when a ear a song in the montenegrin language about its country. They call them, in the song: MONTENEGRO with a perfect Spanish pronuntation!!!. Really I found those articles looking for the reason about. So them no way to the thesys of traslation. The USA people, sure that the USA citizen never use in a song "Los Estados Unidos de America" like that, in spanih. Best regards friend

Dears,

I'd like to report that the figures shown in these pages are somewhat different from point to point. As for total population there are two different (but not so much) figures and the same holds for ethnic minorities' percentages. Albanians are reported to be the 5% (main page)and 7% (link to demographic history) of total pop.

Thanks,

Eniel

The article states that "Montenegrin and Serb identities are not exclusive", but this is not true. They are exlusive acording to the constitution of Montenegro, the constitutional charter of Serbia and Montenegro, and half a dozen separate censuses since the mid 20th century - all of which allow only one national identity to be declared.

No, they are not. The constitution doesn't mention any such thing, nor the constitutional charter, and the census is irrelevant. The fact is, nearly all people who have declared as Serbs on censa also consider themselves Montenegrins. Nikola 06:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

The constitution guarrantees "Protection of rights of members of national and ethnic groups". This means that every citizen belonging to each ethnic group in Montenegro has the right to declare his or her ethnicity freely, without subsequent "ethnic engineering" as you are attempting to do.

I don't attempt to do such a thing, the rest of what you are saying is true but irrelevant to the issue of exclusivity of ethnic identity. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

There is no significant group of citizens that declared a joint Montenegrin and Serb ethnic background in the official census, as you keep insisting upon.

I have never insisted upon such a thing. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Nor has there been any attempt to invalidate the census in front of the Montenegrin courts. So, the sentence "Montenegrin and Serb identities are not exclusive", is a fallacy and not simply true according to the latest census and the rights of ethnic groups as specified in the constitution.

- user 17:30, 05 Oct 2005 (UTC).

As I said, nearly all people who have declared as Serbs on censa also consider themselves Montenegrins. This is why the identities are not exclusive. They don't need to invalidate a census or to declare dual nationality in order to do so. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps, however, not many Montenegrins would declared themselves as Serbs. So, the Montenegrin identity IS exclusive, the Serbian perhaps is not. Montenegrins have distinctive surnames from Serbs, a bit like Scotts vs. English, by looking at yours, I can wouch you are not Montenegrin anyway. It sounds Macedonian or Russian. -user

These are the raw and unbiased facts (not speculation). On the other hand, it is true that a number of Serbs and Montenegrins may believe that they have both identities - but there is no modern census nor constitutional basis that can support a statement such as "Montenegrin and Serb identities are not exclusive". Many Montenegrins do not feel to be Serb, and never pronounce themselves as such. You can not force national groups to "be Serb" if they do not feel so and never declare as such.

Who has ever said so? However, the opposite is also true - you can't force Serbs from Montenegro not to feel Montenegrins as well. Nikola 06:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Serbs from Montenegro ARE Montenegrin citizens. Nobody disputes that. But, here you claim that they have Montenegrin ethnicity too?? And then you also dispute the existence of Motnenegrin ethnicity. Although they do not declare themselves Montenegrin?! So this claim is based on your feelings or intuition? The census clearly states that almost one-third of Montenegrin citizens claim to be of Serbian ethnicity - and now you disregard this fact by saying that they "feel Montenegrin as well"?

- user 17:30, 05 Oct 2005 (UTC).

Yes, you summed it quite well. Serbs from Montenegro are Montenegrins by ethnicity too, and they feel that way. However, they are not Montenegrins by nationality. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

"However the number of Montenegrins does seem to be in steep decline since the introduction of the category by the Communists on the 1948 census" seems to imply that the Communist regime declared the nationality of citizens in polls. This is not true, as citizens declared their nationaility in polls, individually.

AFAIK, they did not - they had to select from a list (which included "undeclared"). Nikola 06:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

You are talking about the methodology of the poll, not the free will of the citizens. The methodology (since 1909) has improved by including and reflecting the evolution of the state and general/global democratic principles. Having a list to choose from - does not mean that you do not have free choice. It means that the methodology is imperfect, but you still freely choose among the available options. This argument also holds for 1909, as I am sure that there was no "Montenegrin" ethnicity as an option on the census - but this does not mean that there was no free choice. In fact, I can almost vouch that there was certainly a "Serb" option in the post-WW II census - while there certainly was no "Montenegrin" option in the 1909 census.

- user 17:30, 05 Oct 2005 (UTC).

Almost vouch? :) It is oftenly alleged that Communists have rigged the census. I haven't put that in an article because I don't have exact information on how did they do it, but it's the only thing that makes sense. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

In fact, the Communists - for the first time allowed citizens to declare their nationality as Montenegrin - by introducing the category, which is more important. If it stands like the previous user wants it to stand, then we must add a sentence stipulating that the "Serbian ruling dynasties in the pre World War II Yugoslavia banned Montenegrin citizens from declaring their nationality as 'Montenegrin'" This is as true as the Communist quirp, as the Montenegrin option was obviously not allowed before World War II.

By saying that Yugoslavia banned Montenegrins from declaring their nationality, you assume that there were any who wished to do so. In 1909 the Principality of Montenegro conducted a census on its own. How many Montenegrins did the census record? Nikola 06:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

You yourself have pointed out the tight linkage between the political realities in the country and the format and rules of the census. It is well known that King Nicholas I of Montenegro aspired to the joint throne that would unite Belgrade and Cetinje, and he put all his efforts behind a policy of shamelessly promoting himself and his dynasty as the best unifying dynasty/ruler for a joint state of Serbia and Montenegro. In this scenario, which was the political reality of Montenegro in 1909, it is not surprising to me that King Nicholas I wanted to promote the fact that Montenegro was the "defender" of Serbdom and the Sparta of the Balkans. Of course, that a census with only a "Serb" option was usecd as there was 0.00% of Montenegrins. But as history has showed, this census never was repeated - not even in the fully free and democratic (non-communist) Montenegro of 2002.

- user 17:30, 05 Oct 2005 (UTC).

Yes, Nikola did aspired to the joint throne, and he did put his effort behind such a policy, and promoted the fact - and nothing of this shows that "Montenegrin" option was needed at all. And, by the way, Montenegro of 2002 is not at all free, democratic and non-Communist. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

The sentence "The validity of the referendum was not confirmed by international observers as the allegedly free and democratic vote, in fact took place during wartime in the former Yugoslavia." is true. So I leave it. Of course, I agree to change "international" into "OSCE, EU and US" - as the referendum may have had international monitoring from Cuba, Iraq, North Korea, Byelorussia, and Russia. - user 20:28, 04 Oct 2005 (UTC).

I don't know whether it is true, but it surely is irrelevant. The validity of the referendum has never been questioned - by OSCE, EU or US.

By the way, these Communist censa which you are talking about above - did they have international observers too? Nikola 06:17, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Of course it is relevant. Poll, elections and referendums in conducted during wartime under undemocratic conditions of media control are always of very questionable legitimacy. You don't even need foreign observers to question this. It's just plain sense.

The war was not actually fought in Montenegro, and turnout and result were so high that legitimacy of this census is unquestionable, and no one has actually questioned it. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

By the way, the population censuses are different from the elections and polls as regards international monitors. However, I concede the point that the censuses in post-WW II Yugoslavia probably had no more true legitimacy than the 1909 census in the old autocratic Montenegro. Things have changed, fortunately to the better. (P.S. you forgot to react to the church-related changes - see above!)

- user 17:30, 05 Oct 2005 (UTC).

I have never said that "the censuses in post-WW II Yugoslavia probably had no more true legitimacy than the 1909 census in the old autocratic Montenegro". Putting words in your opponents' mouth is a telltale sign of trolling. Nikola 20:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Note that recent edit by 70.131.167.113 is copyvio of [2]. Nikola 13:26, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

What is the status on the 2006 referendum on independence? Is it still 2006 or has it been moved to a later date. The article should reflect whatever the lastest news is. Constantzeanu 05:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

The statement that all Albanians living in Montenegro are muslims is false. In fact, most of them are Roman Catholics. Only Ulcinj has a significant number of ALbanian muslims. PLease correct this. Momisan 11:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Does the statement that the Croats living the Bay of Kotor are autochtonous mean that the other inhabitans of the Bay are not? To remind you, today's Montenegro was first inhabited by Slavs in the sixth century. The Croats reached the Adriatic a century or two later. Momisan 11:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The introductory paragraph says:

It is a democratic, social, and ecological state.

"Democratic" I suppose refers to the form of government; I think it would be better to be more precise, e.g. a parliamentary democracy. "Social" is unclear. Does this mean that it is currently governed by a party that calls itself "socialist"? Does it mean that it has social programs? And what does "ecological" mean here? That is a mystery. -- Macrakis 19:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

For "democratic" you are right. "Social" means that it has social programs and take care about the citizens that are not able to take care to about themselves. "Ecological" means that its environment is quite preserved and that its regulation protects such environment from future damages.

I have no particular problems with "democratic state". "Social state" is quite unheard of (by me); Welfare state is better, if that's what is meant. As for "ecological", I would prefer the precise explanation given here over a simple "ecological state", which is also quite unheard of (by me). -- Jao 17:44, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

These terms are used in the very constitution of Montenegro [3]. I agree they're pretentious, and it should be noted that these terms are defined there, and should not be taken per se. Also, welfare is a better term indeed. by I'll edit the article to reflect that. Duja

'La France est une république indivisible, laïque, démocratique et sociale.' (Article 1 of the French Constitution), so there is a well-known precedent for 'social' at least. [4] The planned European Constitution (now on a back burner) also talks about a social-market economy. This is quite a common concept in continental Europe. Maybe all that's needed is to make clear that this definition comes from the Constitution. Will peters

I know Serbia and Montenegro is currenct SCG...but is there an existing or planned code for Montenegro? Would it be CGR..? Or is this just idle speculation? doktorb | words 17:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Totally idle speculation at this point, but I have to confess to doing some checking on my own. To the best of my knowledge, nothing has been set or reserved. There are a fair number of available three-letter options that compress either Montenegro or Crna Gora. Two-letter options (for things like a ccTLD) are where there are real problems. "ME" is the only combination of "M" with a letter from "ontenegro" that is available, while there are no available combinations of "C" and something from "rna Gora". The Tom 19:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

There is a vote on Wikipedia to see whether Wikipedians believe Montenegro should be independent or not. The vote can be accessed at Wikipedian Vote for Montenegrin Independence.

Wikipedia is not a polling organization. This is inappropriate. -- Macrakis 15:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

there's something wrong with the statistics. Aren't bosniaks the same as muslims ? --- User:Unixer 07:31, 30 March 2006

Not quite. Apparently at the 2003 census, some people in Montenegro declared themselves Muslims by nationality. Andrei 13:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

They are same peoples, Bosniaks=muslims this is political decision of they leaders, everithing is funny and complicate

Bosniak is a nationality, used mostly by the muslims in Bosnia and Sandzak. However, there are also muslims in Montenegro that do not feel they have anything to do with Bosnia. They declare themselves as Muslims or muslim Montenegrins. -- user

Hello! Given ongoing discussions and recent edit warring – and with the hope of resolving this issue – you might be interested in a poll currently underway to decide the rendition of the lead for the Republic of Macedonia article. Please weigh in! Bitola | talk | 01:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Should the Montenegrin naming be used in the pretext? The language isn't internationally recognized as a distinct from the Serbian language. If we name it, we should also name Croatian, Bosnian and Albanian. -- HolyRomanEmperor 21:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

This is ridiculous, there is no "Montenegrin language"!!! The only difference between the language in the Republic of Serbia and Montenegro is the dialect which involvs changing e's to ij's (i.e. lepo becomes lijepo). This is the Ijekavian dialect. Same dialect used in most of Croatia. Montenegrin independence is a difference in political identity not cultural. There never was a Montenegrin identity independent of the Serbian identity. One could argue along the same lines as was done for Montenegro that the people of Sumadija or the Serbs of Bosnia are an independent people. back onto the language issue. To proclaim Montenegrin as an independent language would be the same as calling for the language of Austria to be changed to Austrian rather than German. Or to have the language of the USA changed to American rather than English. Political separation among an ethnic group is not basis for creating artificial languages and forced cultural identification as the separtist government in Montenegro has attempted to accomplish and the USA is accepting so enthusiastically. Seriously, why not changed the official language of Austria to Austrian. Considering that they have never been part of the German nation (excluding Nazi occupation during the second World War) and that they in fact were always a fully independent nation long before the formation of a unified Germany. If "Montenegrin" can be so easily self-proclaimed as a language why not do the same with the "American" and "Austrian" as they have far greater merits for creation than "Montenegrin". Montenegro is culturally a part of Serbia. - Milos Pantelic. Podgorica, Montenegro.

• True, but Montenegro switched its official language from "Serbian" to "Montenegrin". However, I am not familar with the Wikipedia policy on this matter, so I will not change it. -- Helmandsare 01:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

• No, it is not true. There is only ONE language system between Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks and Montenegrins. The four could never come to an agreement as to what would be the single "brand name" everyone could accept (Serbo-Croat was an unsuccessful attempt). With new political reality, every nation will simply call the same language in line with their nationality. The best analogy would be with what happened with Scandinavian countries/languages. A Montenegrin dialect is fas closer to Croatian, especially Dalmatian, than to anything coming from Serbia, and you know it. Finally, your surname has nothing to do with Montenegro, it is purely Serbian anyway. -- Momisan 10:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Eh, no it didn't. The end.-- estavisti 10:22, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Wat are you doing hier serbian, albanian, ... language. Wer is Montenegrin language!!!!!. watr are you maken her. Do you want to asimilet the Montenegrin language!!!-- Hipi Zhdripi 02:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

The Government of Montenegro's official website at http://www.gom.cg.yu/eng/ now describes the local language as Crnogorski, which translates as Montenegrin in English Skinsmoke 00:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Cyrillic is an official alphabet (the referendum 2006 question is in cyrillic) and more than 60% declared they speak Serbian in teh census). -- Pockey 17:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Will Montenegrin independence now mean that we need to create a “Montenegrin-language” version of Wikipedia? Is it necessary? Somebody’s bound to ask this question sooner or later.

Not necessarily. There are enough countries not having their 'own' language. Take for instance Belgium as an example. This is a country with three official languages: French, Dutch and German. All of them originate from times that they were together with other countries, or something like that.

No argumet!!! please dont inteprete the documents

Sombody have putit this Kosovo place in Serbia stub or category or template here with out argumet. We dont have a argumet that Kosovo is part of S/M. We have tha Constitution of this countrie but we have the rez. 1244 wich is more importen for the Wikipedia and is saying that Kosovo it is a part of Yougoslavia and is prototoriat of UN. Till we dont have a clearly argument from UN, aricel about Kosovo must be out of this stub or category or template. Pleas dont make the discution with intepretation or the Law wich are not accordin to 1244. Everybodoy can do that but that is nothing for Wikipedia.-- Hipi Zhdripi 06:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

This is ridiculous, there is no "Montenegrin language"!!! The only difference between the language in the Republic of Serbia and Montenegro is the dialect which involvs changing e's to ij's (i.e. lepo becomes lijepo). This is the Ijekavian dialect. Same dialect used in most of Croatia. Montenegrin independence is a difference in political identity not cultural. There never was a Montenegrin identity independent of the Serbian identity. One could argue along the same lines as was done for Montenegro that the people of Sumadija or the Serbs of Bosnia are an independent people. back onto the language issue. To proclaim Montenegrin as an independent language would be the same as calling for the language of Austria to be changed to Austrian rather than German. Or to have the language of the USA changed to American rather than English. Political separation among an ethnic group is not basis for creating artificial languages and forced cultural identification as the separtist government in Montenegro has attempted to accomplish and the USA is accepting so enthusiastically. Seriously, why not changed the official language of Austria to Austrian. Considering that they have never been part of the German nation (excluding Nazi occupation during the second World War) and that they in fact were always a fully independent nation long before the formation of a unified Germany. If "Montenegrin" can be so easily self-proclaimed as a language why not do the same with the "American" and "Austrian" as they have far greater merits for creation than "Montenegrin". Montenegro is culturally a part of Serbia. - Milos Pantelic. Podgorica, Montenegro.

1. After independence, first visit to Belgrade | 15:55 April 25 | Beta [5]
2. Lajcak in touch with campaign | 10:35 April 26 | B92 [6]
3. Montenegro adopts EU declaration | 15:27 April 28 | B92, Beta [7]

How would you pronounce it in English? Crena Gora?

Petrovic-Njegos 13:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

['tsr.na 'go.ra], more or less. The "cr" part is its own syllable. — Nightst a llion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 20:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

It's pronounced tsr-na-go-ra. No duh. CrnaGora ( Talk/ Contribs/ E-mail/ Edit Count) 21:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

-- Greasysteve13 09:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

CrnaGora, as a prominent member here, please have the honour to apply the necessary changes in this document, as Montenegro is OFFICIALLY independent now. Cheers and congratulations to those that are happy with this news. To those who are not, take a beer :). ilir_pz 07:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

yes, it is! "Greater Serbia" is falling apart! Kosovo is next

Montenegro is FINALLY FREE AND INDEPENDENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Crna Gora je KONAČNO SLOBODNA I NEZAVISNA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CrnaGora ( Talk/ Contribs/ E-mail/ Edit Count) 21:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I hate to rain on your parade, but no it isn't. The final results have not even been declared. Legislation must first be passed in Belgrade and Podgorica, dissolving the union. Only then will Montenegro be independent.

Following that, some sort of constitutional committee and provisional government will have to draw up plans for the administration of the new republic. Elections will probably follow.

I suppose that will make Montenegro the first new state since The Democratic Republic of Timor Leste in 1999. Congratulations anyway! Rednaxela 21:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm trying to maintain the Montenegrin independence referendum, 2006 currently and at the moment there is no official recognition of independece. But on a side note and sorry to all you above, but this is a sad day indeed, the one thing the world does not need is more nations and it is a shame to see the dream of a multi-ethnic state finally collapse to the rampant power of sectarianism. Horses In The Sky ^{talk contributions}

You want a Multi ethnic state? There is one, its called Canada. Anglais and Francais have lived together for centuries, in peace, tension and insurection, and yet we have persevered. The way the Yugolslavian union was put together doomed it to failure, people were forced into it with a gun to their head. New France on the other hand felt freed when the English took over in that they gained rights they didnt have under the dictatorial rule of the sun king. A Multi ethnic state can never be a reality under cohersion, and the leadership of such monsters as slobadon Melosevich. -- 24.222.65.32 23:27, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Or Belgium?-- Greasysteve13 04:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, or Belgium, there are plenty of multi ethnic states that became so without having a gun placed to their head, they are multi ethnic, but not against the will of their people. -- 24.222.65.32 14:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I hate to break it to you pal, but Montenegro is now practically an Independent state. Everything you mentioned earlier is a formality.Any attempt by Serbia to delay the Independence of Montenegro will be neutralized swiftly. Congratulation to all those who voted to free Montenegro from the chains it has been living with. Ferick 21:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

the chains it has been living with, I didnt realise the chance of greater economic performance, the ability for families to easily see each other and the belief in different groups of people living together were chains. -- Horses In The Sky 21:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

(off-topic and offensive comments removed by Mark 23:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC))

Hey now, this page is for the discussion of the Montenegro article, not the referendum (at least not outside of the context of the article), and particularly not for offensive comments. That said I'm pretty impressed by how quickly the article's being updated and I eagerly await its reaching of the quality expected of country articles. PoptartKing 23:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Referenda don't cause countries to become independent: actions of their governments do. So can someone please remove the date of independence from the country's infobox? It's not independent yet. By the sounds of things, the official results of the referendum have not even been officially announced. I love having articles updated very quickly, but not pre-emptively. - Mark 23:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, Montenegro is not yet independent, but this article assumes that that is the case. 68.147.71.92 00:35, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

НАЖАЛОСТ,МОРАМ ДА ВАМ ПОКВАРИМ СЛАВЉЕ ,ПОСЛЕДЊИ РЕЗЛТАТИ КАЖУ 54-46!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ЦРНА ГОРА И СРБИЈА ТО ЈЕ ЈЕДНА ФАМИЛИЈА Dzoni 01:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Consider this, when a presidential candidate wins an election, are they instantly president? No, they are not. Not untill they are sworn in are they President. Likewise, while this referendum has been won by the independence movement, it has not yet been put into action. Therefore, the nations have not yet split. Rangeley 01:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I HEARBY PROCLAIM THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE REPUBLIC OF MONTENEGRO.

RESULTS SEEMS TO BE 54-46 AND IT SEEMS LIKE REFERENDUM FAILD,BUT WE WILL KNOW AT 10 AM WHEN OFFICIAL RESULTS WILL BE KNOWN.BUT AT THIS MOMENT IT LOOKS LIKE ITS LESS THEN 55 PRECENT FOR INDEPENDENCE,MOST LIKELY 54.7 OR 54.8 Dzoni

Deleted offensive msg. Sigurno neprimjereno mjesto za takve poruke, al cestitke iz hrvatske nasim novim susjedima na nezavisnosti :) Well, only one voice that said such a number, and it was the loosing party. And they didnt even claim either that they processed all the wotes or that it was a representative sample. And a institution claiming that they did process really all wotes, said again 55,5%. Btw, would montenegro really have respected the 55% imposed EU condition? Its a horrible, imperialist, undemocratic condiditon (GWBush would certanly not have been elected on either elections that way, and Romano Prodi just won by a tenth of a percent). If I were there, and if it really were 54% Id defenately be against submitting to such bullying.. aryah -- 89.172.232.205 06:38, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

HAHAHAHAHA There is no losing party,there are two sides,both of them gave their results and both are different.But who gives a damn what you think,you are just a croat,and everyone knows that Croats are the ones that started the war in ex Yugoslavia,I dont wanna even start with mentioning all of croats crimes in Vukovar 1991,Slavonija 1993,and THE GREATEST ETHNICAL CLENSING IN EUROPE SINCE WW2: CRIMINAL ACTION "OLUJA' WHEN MORE THEN 300.000. SERBS WERE MADE TO RUN FROM CROATIA FOR THEIR LIVES........Thats why you should be quiet and not comment on this Dzoni

I think it was an independent study, and I simply ment loosing in those (and all previous) information. I may be ethnicly a croat, but have little love for croatian politics. Now I might consider some of your assertions here extreme, but I do beleive there were at least some crimes commited in Oluja; in any case, well see what the Hague says about it.. In any case, my nationality has little do do with this, and i find it amazing you would say that on the grounds of my ethnicity, my opinion doesnt count. wtf? aryah -- 89.172.232.205 07:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

@Dzoni: ANTE GOTOVINA, ANTE GOTOVINA!!! ZNA SAD SVAKO GDJE SE SKRIVA, ANTE LEGENDA JE ŽIVA, ANTE GOTOVINA!!!

remember Srebrenica...

???? what the hell does Gotovina have with any of this?? Btw, another, this time official though incomplete, report just affirming the succes of the referendum , and the final official 'verdict' is to be at 17h till then, according to all data, independent, partisan and official, exept by the sef-admittadly undrepresentative and heavily incomplete results of the party losing by all other acocunts, the referendum for independence is a success - hence; cestitke na nezavisnosti svim crnogorcima, and have fun celebrating ! :) -- 89.172.232.205 08:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

--Gotovina was in command during Operation "Oluja" that Serb mentioned..

idiote, toliko bi o Domovinskom ratu valjda trebao znati..

:) pa nisam tolika budala, nego govorim kako to ionako nema nikakve veze s nezavisnoscu crne gore, a ne da mi se ulaziti u nacionalisticka prepucavanja s njim... -- 89.172.232.205 08:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations to Montenegro, I'm really happy for them, but we won't forget Dubrovnik and Konavle..

Ovaj Džoni je pravi primjer zašto smo se odvojili od Srbije.

--sorry brate.. jebiga, ja nisam mogao odoljeti.. moram ga malo podjebavati :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cro ed ( talk • contribs) 09:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC).

Well, Montenegro is not de jure independent, but it's de facto, I think! But soon! I am happy to see that the world will have a new country soon! Montenegro will soon be officially independent! Yugoslavia is no more. To the disscusion about multi-ethnich state, i think a multi-ethnic state could work, but it can not work without the support of the people. But Montenegro has voted YES to independence, so I say God save Montenegro and Good luck! Dr.Poison 20:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

• Džonika je budaletina i ne obraćajte pažnju na njega kao što to čine svi pametni. -- Pockey 12:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

POV-pushing and predicting is not to be conducted on wikipedia. -- HolyRomanEmperor 12:57, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

In the first section titled "Montenegro" in the following paragraph: "Between 1945 and 2003, Montenegro was a Republic of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia respectively. It is now one of two constituent states of the state union of Serbia and Montenegro. On May 21, 2006, Montenegro held a referendum to determine whether or not to terminate the union with Serbia. The next day, state-certified results showed voters favoring independence, with 55.4% of voters in favor, just above the 55% mandate required by the referendum.", quotes the correct vote result.

Whereas in the section titled "History", the last paragraph states "On May 21, 2006 Montenegro's citizens voted by referendum for independence from the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro, ending dissolution of former Yugoslavia's states. 55.3% voted for independence, just over the 55% the referendum required to succeed." which is incorrect.

Correct result was 55.4% as stated at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5003220.stm

Politics and Culture. Politics of Montenegro and Culture of Montenegro. Skinnyweed 15:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. This article does not look like a complete article for an independent country right now. (Economy is also missing.) And same goes for the Serbia article. -- ran ( talk) 07:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Since last night (right after the referendum) I've noticed a constant fight of changes within this article. One of the most relevant disputes here is the map of Montenegro- sometimes still the old one with Montenegro together with Serbia, sometimes Montenegro as a clearly separate country in Europe. I suggest users to stop reverting to the old map. Montenegro is still oficially a part of Serbia-Montenegro, but it's useless to have the map of a union that is now virtually extinct. Life goes on, folks.

I agree, it should be the new independent map from now on.

As noted above, Montenegro is not an independent country yet. First, the results have to get validated and recognized by the EU and Serbia-Montenegro. Then, a few weeks later the government has to officially declare independence. After that, more then 100 already independent countries in the wolrd have to recognize it as such and only then can Montenegro be said to be independent.

So the old map should stay but meanwhile, someone should be working on a newer map and everything since all the steps mentioned above are just a formality and likely to take less then 1 month to compleete.

Constantzeanu 05:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

što se tiče svih, Crna Gora je nezavisna.. stoga, ne jebite više, već stavite kartu nezavisne Crne Gore..

according to everybody Montenegro is independent.. so, don't be assholes and put on the map of free Montenegro..

Cro ed 08:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Montenegro is not independent yet, though it will soon be. Rather than worrying about the map, why don't you expand the Politics, Economy and Culture sections of this article, so that Montenegro has a complete country article on the day it does become independent? -- ran ( talk) 15:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Whether it's free or not, this article is about Montenegro, and not about Serbia and Montenegro, so just show a map of what this article is about. If I make an article on California, would I put in a map of the USA? - TR Blom

Actually, there is a map of the U.S. in the article on California. -- ran ( talk) 15:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL, I figured. Too late though. Anyway, I hope I made my point... - TR Blom

Any idea what ccTLD they're going to get now? .yu will probably be inheirited by Serbia, and .cs is evidently not even in root. Any ideas? 68.39.174.238 03:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I mentioned above that this is going to be a bit tricky. You can get "me" out of "m" + "ontenegro" and nothing out of "c" + "rna gora". The Tom 05:27, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

If it did become ".me", that could be quite a useful little money-spinner (like ".tv" turned out to be for Tuvalu) – a snappier alternative to ".name" for individuals' domains (compare .me.uk). Vilĉjo 10:37, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

They have reserved .cs Ferick 18:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

The CS ISO 3166-1 was reserved for the federal union of Serbia-and-Montenegro (CS meant "Crna Gora & Srpska"), but was it really used since the last 3 years it was assigned ? Note that the past agreement with the European Union that created the Serbia-and-Montenegro federation was valid for 3 years, so the referendumjust comes at end of this transition period ? (Formerly CS was Czechoslovakia)

It seems that .yu was still used everywhere for Internet TLD, but CS was the only new official code in ISO 3166 (the YU was unassigned but kept in reserve).

So I think that

• Montenegro (Crna Gora) will probably use CS for its ISO 3166-1 code (CG and MN are already used as weel as most but not all other combinations of letters from "Crna Gora" or "Montenegro".) and .cs for the Internet TLD, (But note that "Crna Gora" contains the letters GO and if it gets it from ISO 3166-1, it will have the .go TLD which willreflect well its current economic activity ("a place to go") as tourism is its main resource (but independance could mean more money for Montenegro, if it accepts the Serbian marine in its harbours and wants money for the internationalized corridor this would mean)!
• Serbia+Kosovo+Voivodine will keep the .yu Internet TLD and will be reassigned the YU ISO 3166-1 code (unless Serbia opts for another code that forgets its former yugoslav name and opts for a newcode starting by S, but SR is already assigned to Suriname and would not be appreciated by those living in Kosovo and Voivodine)...
  • Anyway, the Kosovo with a majority of ethnic Albanians now wants its independance too from the Serbian Federation (and does not want to be called a "province"); it is already virtually separated from it (despite the resistance of a Serbian majority still in North Kosovo similar to the resistance in North Montenegro) ; the problem is that Kosovo can't organize an autodetermination referendum for now, as long as UN recognizes Serbian authority on the Kosovar territory (even though Serbia currently does not administrate it), and as long as the territory is fully demilitarized and pacified. For Kosovo, the choices of free codes is more open: KO, KS, KV...
  • But I doubt that the name "Serbia" alone will be appreciated in Voivodine (it may pave the way for another authonomous movement in Voivodine which currently is an autonomous province of Serbia). If Voivodine separates, it will claim the VV ISO 3166-1 code and .vv as an easy alternative to www !
  • Serbia will remain a federation after the Montenegro separation. So if Serbia splits again, it could use SP which is the nearest abbreviation looking like Srpska (latn script). It may also want CP (which is exceptionally reserved for the small Clipperton island, a minor outlying possession of the French Republic in the Pacific between French Polynesia and Mexico without any living inhabitant, if France resigns the code, and just refers to it using FR-CP in ISO 3166-2, or if France accepts moving the code of Clipperton to CJ or CT).

verdy_p 19:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Conventional wisdom is that Vojvodina is going nowhere (the non-Serb population is too small and too divided) and Kosovo is (per rumblings in diplomatic circles) as good as gone.

As was noted above, .me has some nice ancillary benefits, and as far as Montenegro's concerned is probably preferable than CS or YU, especially based on the pro-Western orientation there these days and the ubiquity of those letters in Western European language terms for the place. (CS seems to be a somewhat cursed ISO-3166, no? Two splits on its hands, the homewrecker!)

.sj is another possibility for Serbia (Srbija), which would involve doing a deal with Norway to free it up from Svalbard and Jan Mayen. I'm a little curious how the Solomon Islands got SB back in the day rather than SI (which, weirder still, later landed on Slovenia) but I think a major reshuffle involving substantially-used ISO-3166s would be more trouble than its worth. A simpler move scenario that comes to mind is Suriname moving to SU and Serbia taking SR, likely after 5 years had elapsed. The Tom 20:33, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't SU be a problem because it previously referred to the Soviet Union? In that case .su would be the ccTLD for Suriname, but this is not possible because .su still is in use for the USSR (maintained by some Moscow organisation), so Suriname would have to keep .sr until .su is released, and Serbia would have to use something else. Maybe it would just mean that they'd continue using .yu. ( Stefan2 05:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC))

I seriously doubt there's going to be reshuffle. Serbia is going to get one of the 2LA not yet assigned that start with S (likely SP), it's been done before with the Solomon Islands (no B anywhere in that name...). — Nightst a llion (?) 21:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, a reshuffle involving SJ seems doable simply because it's used in the odd statistical column for the UN and nowhere else... no active domains, no currencies. And it's not completely unknown for ISO-3166s to change (for instance, Romania's TLA was, for no obviously-pressing reason, bumped from ROM to ROU a few years ago). Incidentally, I would guess Serbia gets first crack at both YU and CS, as under the terms of S/M Constitution the state that didn't vote to secede inherits all the State Union's recognition-related paraphenalia. The Tom 21:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

To me CS looks quite good - C is cyrillic for S, so it would be S for Serbia on both scripts!-- 193.81.246.3 09:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

The latest update is that the Independence movement won 55.5 % of the electorate. According to Koha Ditore (Daily Times), the 55% threshold was passed by only 2000 votes, which also was the number of Albanians that came from all over the US to vote for the Independence. I think this fact is significant and should be noted. Ferick 15:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it should also be noted that attempts, other than the above, were also made in order to try to sway the election results. For example, Serbia organized free travel to vote in the referendum for Montenegrins living in Serbia, the majority of whom were expected to be against independence. [8] Another example, based on speculations of Serbian officials, is that 2671 Montenegrins from Serbia, who were not eligible to vote, were illegally allowed to vote for independence. [9]

I also think it should be noted that Serbia has just recognized the results of the referendum and said they want to remain friends with Montenegro - if Serbia can accept the results I am sure we all can - rej4sl May 23 2006 14:02 CST

What should the date of independence from Serbia be? -- HJV 16:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Montenegro isn't part of Serbia like Kosovo is, and isn't gaining its independence from Serbia. As mentioned above the dissolution of Serbia and Montenegro needs to be formalised by the governments. Obviously the date of this future event is as yet unknown. -- Phil 19:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Completely true (Kosovo, unlike Montenegro, has no State Constitution and is still a Serbian autonomous province): there lots of legal acts to perform first:

• the consitutional amendments in the Serbian Federation to allow such split

Current (Milošević's) constitution of Serbia has some provisions for Serbia to be an independent state, and Constitutional Charter of Serbia and Montenegro explicitly allowed it, so it's not quite an issue. Serbian constitution has been an issue since 2000, since all parties agree that it should be changed, but never agreed or done substantial effort to make it so. One problem with it is that it proclaimed itself almost unchangeable (2/3 vote in Parliament + referendum), so parties quarrel whether that provision should be ignored or obeyed (at least on the surface). Duja

• the definition of a new or amended Montenegrin Constitution

Not sure, but I think current Constitution already has provisions for independence. Duja

• the transfer of responsabilities between both governments and their respective legal institutions

That will take some time; however, Montenegro already has some ministries which also existed on union level. Duja

• the redefition of citizenship

Apart from S&M citizenship, all citizens already had separate Serbian and Montenegrin citizenships (used only internally so far). The biggest issue will probably be the status of Montenegrin citizens in Serbia (~40-200,000), many of which might opt to seek for Serbian one. Duja

• the separation of armies, and security forces (including the police)

Shouldn't be a problem. Polices are separated already. The army is officially not, but financing, personnel and recruits already were local to member states, and Montenegro had its own corpses. Duja

• the case of the Serbian marine in Montenegrin harbours: will the Serbian marine subsist, or be transfered to Montenegro, or will there be a joined marine between the two countries, or will the Serbian marine have to pay to use the Montenegrin harbours, and use a corridor through Montenegro?

You mean navy? Serbia AFAIK does not claim any parts of the navy, nor I can see what it would possibly do with it. As for commercial ships, Serbia doesn't have any (apart from river ones). Duja

• amendments of lots of laws that refer to the current Federal constitution
• border controls

Alrady split, and being transferred from Army to polices in both states. I think Montenegro did it already, while it's in progress in Serbia. Duja

• the case of Serbian citizens or their family living in Montenegro, and the reversed case too...
• the case of the legal language and other ethnic minorities which are currently still protected by the federal constitution, and must be preserved under the Montenegrin constitution (includes negociation with Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and Albania)

Both countries' constiutions have such provisions, but the Ministry of Human Rights (and minorities) was on Union level before. I think (not sure) that Montenegro already has one. Duja

• tax collection

Taxes were completely split before. Duja

• the repartition of debts and resources.
• the mutual economical compensations caused by the split and loss of access to the sea by Serbia

I doubt there will be any; what would be the basis for such claims? Duja

• the fees for the railways and airports
• international affairs and representants

Yep, it will. Duja

• international recognition and the establishments of ambassadors at least in the respective two countries, in the European union, and all major countries where Serbia-Montenegro has ambassies and consulates (or negociating the representation by other the embassies of other friend countries, a service often offered by the Swiss diplomacy, notably in far troubled countries)
• a referendum or law validating the new constitutions

See above for Serbia, not sure for Montenegro.

• new presidential and local elections with the new citizenship

See above for citizenship.

• a vote at the United Nations to recognize the new countries (this will come soon after a few major countries at the Security Council recognize the new countries; Russia is already accepting it, as well as the countries of the European Union, given the >55% support for independance)

I think pretty much everyone accepts the results of referendum, but it can't be done until Montenegrin Parliament officially proclaims it. So, we'll have to wait at least a couple of weeks. Duja

All these measures won't be necessary at once, but most of them will need to be finalized for the UN to recognize the new countries. For now, there are State constitutions but they still refer to the Federal constitution and Serbia-and-Montenegro is a party in international treaties that led to its creation (notably with the European Union). This will require lots of discussions, and full independance may take about one year to complete; look at the time it took for Chzechoslovakia to split effectively peacefully; but we are still in atroubled region with lots of ethnic and religious problems. Will Serbia remain a federation? or will it integrate more closely the Voivodine and Kosovo? I doubt of the second option,and think that Serbia will remain federal-like, even though it will have only one State and one Presidency (unless Voivodine and Kosovo split from Serbia). verdy_p 20:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

In sum, Serbia and Montenegro were a looser union before than it might appear to a casual observer. The reactions in Serbia (apart from emotional ones) were rather weak to the results, and it is generally foreseen that the separation will not change much. Duja 08:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I have a small question: Which script (aplhabet) is used in Monte Negro? I have visited internet pages of the Pobjeda (or Победа?) news [www.pobjeda.cg.yu] and those are written in Latin but titeled in Cyrilic. There is also picture of printed version and it is in Cyrilic. I'm little puzzled. Probably very easy question for some Montenegrin. Thx Đonny 22:18, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

While we're awaiting an authoritative answer, it's worth noting that the website of the Government of Montenegro seems to be exclusively in Latin script (whereas that of the Government of Serbia is available in both scripts but defaults to Cyrillic.) Vilĉjo 23:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

• Officialy both scripts are in use. In schools there is more cyrilic, buth in every thay life latin because of globalization.

-- 212.200.210.224 02:01, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather go with the latin script for the Montenegrin language, because cyrillic is kind of confusing. Duke Nicholas 02:25, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Have a look at this, it's the actual ПОБЈЕДА title-page, in Cyrillic. What the hell is going on? Which alphabet do they use? + Hexagon1 ( talk) 10:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

We use them both.But younger population use almost exclusively latinic,and street signs are 95% in latinic.Older people and Serbs from Montenegro tend to use cyrillic script.In constitution,both are official and on institutions,both are used.Pobjeda newspaper is pro-governament but it is more then 60 years old,so they don't want to change their style.Other pro-governament(pro indepentend,pro western)dailies are in latinic.Ewery Montenegrin that can read has no problems with reading in writing in both scripts,not only Montenegrin language,but Croat,Serbian and Bosnian as well,since it is basicly one language,different as much as American and British English are.

• To add to that, it might look strange, however,if you know both scripts, just like about everyone in Montenegro, you don't really pay much attention if the scripts are mixed. That is why noone noticed, or cared, that internet version of Pobjeda (not Pobeda as you quoted) is written in latin script with the letterhead in Cyrillic. I even possess an old birth certificate, where the form itself is in latin and the data typed in with Cyrillic letters. Most Montenegrins like me feel richer for knowing and using both scripts, and see nothing wrong in that. Momisan 22:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, Isn't the official language of Montenegro, Serbian of Ijekavian Dialect? Duke Nicholas 02:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

• Well, it has been called all sorts of names through history. Since 1992 constitution it is indeed called Serbian of Ijekavian Dialect, mostly due to the political pressure from Serbia and the fact that civil war was taking place at its doorsteps. The fact is, and you very well know it, if you want to know, that we all speak the same language. We cannot agree on the name. Momisan 22:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Someone mentioned above that according to the SiM constitution the state that DOES NOT cede from the union retains all international memberships and treaties of the Union. Is this correct? I have heard the opposite thing - that if either republic (Serbia or Montenegro) votes to leave the Union both of the republics have to re-negotiate all memberships and treaties (including UN membership).

Only in UN Security Council resolution 1244 is mentioned that Kosovo, albeit administred by the UN/UNMIK, remains sovereign territory of the "State Union of Serbia and Montenegro" (then "Federal Republic of Yugoslavia") and that in the case that one of the State Union's republics (federal subjects then) - Serbia or Montenegro gets full independence, in this case Kosovo's sovereignity would be passed to independent Serbia until the question of Kosovo's final status is resolved in the UN framework.

No, Serbia is the automatic successor. [10] [11] [12]. One aspect of this I haven't seen mentioned in the press is the potential impact of that ICJ lawsuit brought by Bosnia and Herzegovina against S/M as a unitary body. Does that land purely in Serbia's lap now? The Tom 22:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

There is no such thing in Resolution 1244.Please double check facts before you make conclusion like that. Serbia will be a successor state only because Montenegro agreed to that kind of arrangement. This is nothing to do with International Law whatsoever. If Montenegro had not agreed to such arrangement, Serbia would have had to apply to all International Institutions. The main reason Serbia wanted this agreement with Montenegro was because of Kosovo. They thought this would somehow negate Resolution 1244 which says Kosovo is a part of Yugoslavia. Their line of reasoning is out of whack because you cannot overwrite International Law with local laws. Resolution 1244 still stands as it is: Kosovo used to be a part of Yugoslavia, while its final status is to be determined. Ferick 12:32, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

But NOW there is no Yugoslavia (FRY at the time of SCR1244) - in whatever name - nor FRY, nor the new name of Yugoslavia - Serbia and Montenegro, nor somewhat other. Also Kosovo was NEVER "federal subject" of Yugoslavia. It was as part of Yugoslavia, as the Budva Municipality (region in Montenegro) and many other subdivisions of the Yugoslav republics. It was aways a subdivision of Serbia. So, Kosovos CURRENT STATUS UNDER INTERNATIONAL (and any other, including its own) LAW is as part of Serbia. Administred by the UNMIK, somewhat authonomous, but anyway part of Serbia. Its future status MAY BE that of an independent sovereign state, but it is not such YET.

If Serbia will be a successor state in international treaties and organizations realy looks like internal issue between it and Montenegro. If both agree, I don't see a reason for the third parties to disagree. OK. But the issue with SCR1244 and Kosovo has nothing to do with Montenegro. SCR1244 states "Kosovo of [Federal Republic of] Yugoslavia[/Serbia-and-Montenegro]", because that was an easy way to put albanian resentment over Serbia at the time. But again, this is like saying "Chicago of USA" without explicitly mentioning the State of Illinois. Also why there isn't an article Future status of Kosovo with all this explained, plus positions of Kosovo people, Kosovo government, UNMIK, Serbia, EU, etc.? Alinor 09:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

why is this still mentioned? it should be changed by now: Montenegro [ˈmɔntɛˌnɛːgrɔ] (Montenegrin: Crna Gora) is a republic in the Balkans, currently one of the two constituent states of the state union of Serbia and Montenegro. -- Makedonia 22:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

It's there because it's true. Montenegro is not yet independent. Don't worry. We'll know when it is. The Tom 22:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Now it's independant. Cameron Nedland 17:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Serbia agreed to the referendum three years ago.

I think that the mostly bitter are those who depend on two countries. For instance those with a 'double nationality' (parents from Serbia and Montenegro), or who live in Montenegro and work or study in Serbia and vice versa... They have a problem now...

the whole "we lost everything and the world is laughing at us" is pretty embittering as well.

I think we should start working on a new page for Montenegro that will replace the current one at the day of independence, maybe at one of the subpages like Montenegro/temporary (curently holds a copy of the article as of the time of my post), or something. It would be better then modifying the Montenegro page, as it is not yet independent. Anyone think this is a good idea? + Hexagon1 ( talk) 10:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

What substantial would be changed? Only the infobox and few words, and that could be done in half an hour — it's easier to do that than to merge two pages when the time comes. Duja 12:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually we'd have to incorporate the new legislative structure of the country, talk about the economy that would now be totally distinct from the Serbian one, and expand the history section to include the current events to some extent. It's better to have the new page for all this, as we can't keep it here, as it technically isn't accurate just yet. The article needs to be open for peer review before we place it here too. It's better to have the article ready when the independence comes then create it over the following weeks, in my opinion. + Hexagon1 ( talk) 12:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I am not stopping you from doing that, just saying it wouldn't be practical. Very little linked Montenegro with Serbia even before, and I don't see the union and Serbia being mentioned too much in this article. I can agree with you that it's in poor shape, but both Serbia and Montenegro articles should have been written as if they were (almost) independent states — because they de facto were. My point is: if you can do 95% of things on the article, why would you work on a fork? Duja 13:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It's true that a lot of the politics, economy, culture info is missing from the current Montenegro article, but we can do all of that on the existing Montenegro page. The Economy of Montenegro is already separate, the History section is already being updated as we speak, and as for things that will soon change, like governmental structures -- we can always write about them in the future tense, and then spend ten minutes changing them when independence arrives. On the other hand, if we have a forked page, what's going to end up happening is that we will have two versions of the same article, and it will take us more time to merge them when independence arrives. In short, I think that Montenegro/temporary should be re-merged back into this article before it diverges too much. -- ran ( talk) 15:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, the two pages are already diverging, and I'm manually keeping them synchronized. I would suggest deleting the temporary page immediately in order to avoid any more forking. -- ran ( talk) 23:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I concur. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, the two pages have diverged again over the space of a few hours and I've once again had to reincorporate the differences manually into this page.

This is clearly not sustainable. It is unrealistic and unreasonable to have to keep two pages synchronized each and every day, for the next one to two months. So I've decided to delete the temporary page once and for all.

-- ran ( talk) 11:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

As I've stated, you've got my full support in this. — Nightst a llion (?) 11:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Well I thought it was a good idea. The point was NOT to keep the pages synched, instead, all edits pertaining to the Montenegro (nation) would have gone into the temporary article, and the Montenegro (part of S&M) would be kept here for accuracy's sake. Technially Montenegro isn't a nation yet, and having a subpage to work on the article would give us more time, we'd be able to release the page when Montenegro goes independent instead of working on it in the following few weeks. Everyone kind of missed the point of this, but never mind. :( + Hexagon1 ( talk) 12:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

But what edit would apply to only one page but not the other?

Edits made to this page while the temp page existed: [13] [14]

Edits made to the temp page that were synched into this page: [15] [16] [17]

My point is that, had we allowed the two pages to "evolve naturally" so to speak, we would have two months' worth of forking to merge together when independence does come... I understand your rationale behind having two pages, but what ended up having is that people were adding content applicable to both pages to either of the two pages, resulting in unneeded forking... -- ran ( talk) 12:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I get it! People are stupid! :) That's why I tried to include a prominent notice at the temporary page, never mind now, all the Serbia and Montenegro references need to be replaced over time. + Hexagon1 ^{( t)} 13:21, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

On a related note, this might be a good time to start depopulating and deleting Category:Serbia and Montenegro stubs and Category:Serbia and Montenegro geography stubs. -- ran ( talk) 12:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

All nine of them :-)? Wow, that'll be a job... Duja 13:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Which is why it's good to get cracking. =)
Also, Category:Geography of Serbia and Montenegro and all of its subcategories... I would suggest depopulating all of these categories now while leaving the hierarchy intact (i.e. "cities of Serbia" and "cities of CG" still comes under "cities of SCG", just that "cities of SCG" is empty), and then rearranging the hierarchy on the day of independence.
Category:Cities in Serbia and Montenegro -- not 9 articles anymore, I believe. ;) -- ran ( talk) 13:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

All the Serbia and Montenegro references need to be replaced over time, this should be done semi-automatically, for example a script which shows the page and gives a selection of Montenegro or Serbia or a manual edit. Or at least we should do pages that still reference Serbia and Montenegro in the title. + Hexagon1 ^{( t)} 13:21, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Do the links to tourism guides contribute towards a goal of writing an encyclopedia? Andjam 13:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Dunno; personally I find them useful, but it may contradict with the policy. What's the practice on other articles? ( Malta, Cyprus etc.) Duja 14:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The part of the article that talks about margin of victory (2000) and then allegations of Illegal votes is a mess and needs to be changed. Word of advice: Don't add two lines to a paragraph if it doesn't flow with it. Also words like: also, but also, additionally should not be used on the same paragraph THREE TIMES. Its bad writing..04:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

A note to the also-ers: Phrases that could be used alternatively (depending on the sentence): "as well", "in addition", "along with", "additionally", "besides", "likewise", "moreover" and so on. :) HJV 01:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Can someone please edit this because it is not true.Only smaller part of Bokelji are Catholic-Croatian:"Finally, there are a small groups of Croats and other Catholic inhabitants, who live mostly in the coastal areas, particularly the Bay of Kotor. It's necesarry to point that these Croats, which are named "Bokelji", hence they are living in Boka Kotorska bay and around it, are autochthonous population of this region for centuries."

If they are Croats, then they are not Bokelji, you can be one, or the other, there can be no subdivisions of what is already a subdivision of the Slavs, particularly where people share a prolonged proximity stretching thousands of square kilometres. If in Kotor, one is a Croatian Bokelj, what is a Croat in Mostar? A Croatian-Croat? It need not be said since the term Croatian is applied once as part of the adjective, the question is, what is the noun? If the noun is 'a Croat' whilst in Kotor, he is a 'Bokelj' then what is Croatian about the Bokelj? Otherwise, you can turn the arguement on its head and say, all Slavs subdivided; Montenegrins are a subdivision, Slovenes and Macedonians and Poleszuks are all modern day Slavic groupings and so they are Montenegrin Slovenes, Montenegrin Macedonians and Montenegrin Poleszuks, and in Podgorica, they are Montenegrin-Montenegrins. Once upon a time, they all used the same name, and people in turn spread, split and change, Bokeljs, like Bunjevs are today a seperate people. Celtmist 1 Jun 06

SLOBODA ... This is what we wanted.... Our own counrty . Montenegro has its own history away from Serbia and the rest of the former Yugoslavia. Montenegrins were the first Slavs to reach the Adriatic in the 6th Century and the Croats and Serbs followed much later in the 7th Century. We have every right to have our own new counrty. We have been there a long time. In time we will be ok alone...it will take time. RE Boka people..this is open to debate..are they Serb?? are they Croat???...that was ancient history...today Boka is Montenegrin and so are the people...Please don't devide our people with ancient origins. If you look back enough we all came from Africa or Adama and Eve right... We don't need Serb or Croat Pov here thanks..

Evergreen Montenegro1 05:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Some users like illir_or crnagora are manupilatin this whole descussion here. They aren't real Montenegrins they are some albanians, wich want to provite of the Montenegrin Independance. Check them profiles too. They are thankfull to NATO and the US for killing our people with munition with uranium. Much people still has cancer, and still dies. Was it worth to attach Serbia and Montenegro and to kill unquilte Serb and Montenegrin people? NO!!! The answer is NO!! And these guys support that some pratices in the world. Well how will they think about an attack @ albania or kosovo albanian people? Will they support NATO and the US then too? I don't think so. You can see it at crnagora's/illr_pz writing style some of these two says in these discussion next is kosovo. This article goes NOT ABOUT KOSOVO. The UN have already said they don't look at the Montenegrin Independance results for a decide for KOSOVO. Boka is of Montenegro, and always it will be. People here say Boka and Hercegovina are officialy part of Bosna and Hercegovina. False! Before the ottomans came in the Balkans in Bosna and Hercegovina, the most and greatest population were Orthodox Serbs, Montenegrins or other Katholice people. After ottomans time, most of these people where being transformed in islamic people,or did it by hiselfs.

Now the most (muslim) Bosniaks say, boka is an opart of BiH. Wuahaha what an good joke. Before the ottomans montenegro had already an great part of boka in hands.

Who are the real Montenegrins? Orthodox people that came from Kosovo (not always from Kosovo)centuries ago....and always lived in Monetnegro. Montenegro is an Orthodox state and you can see it at and by our flag.

That simbol stands for an Orthodox community too. Slovenians, albanians and Croation people can say im real Montenegrin but they're not.

Much bosniaks in Montenegro or albanians vote for independance. Many of these people without an Montenegrin nationality. They vote with only Licna Karta. These is not correctly in my eyes.

Without all these people we were't independance of Serbia. Yes im a real Orthodox Montenegrin that don't support these situation.

Excuse me for my bad english, im trying still to learn it.

Wait a minute. Who says I'm Albanian? I am partially Albanian, only a little part (like 5%!!!). But I am mostly Montenegrin (About 95%!!!) Look, I mostly write about Montenegro. Look at the articles I've created. Also, Montenegrins don't have to be Eastern Orthodox to be ethnically Montenegrin. I am ethnically Montenegrin but I am not of Eastern Orthodoxy. Crna Gora ^{( Talk/ Contribs/ Edit Count)} 19:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

CrnaGora, are you going to set up a Montenegrin language version of Wikipedia? - Phil 22:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Trying to, but so many Serbs are opposing it. You can see it on meta:Requests for new languages. Crna Gora ^{( Talk/ Contribs/ Edit Count)} 23:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Or rather not enough people are supporting it :-) Only 9 at the moment. - Phil 23:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It's actually 11 if you count the votes. Crna Gora ^{( Talk/ Contribs/ Edit Count)} 23:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes you are correct I was only looking at the headers. My mistake. - Phil 00:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Montenegrin parliament today at 20.00 proclaimed Indipendent state of Montenegro - it is official! I hope that now people won't revert page to earlier "Serbia and Montenegro" version, because it cannot anymore be justified by reason "idnependence not declared" and "results of referendum not official".

Possible reason by nostalgic people might be "not internationally recgognized", but that fact does not put Montenegro back to Serbia and Montenegro. No more excuses... Nije bitno... 19:06, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I changed the wording of the first paragraph. I changed "republic in the Balkans" to "country in the Balkans" this is the usual wording in almost all European country articles. And it helps to prevent confusion about Montenegro being an independent country now and its former status a republic in Yugoslavia / Serbia-Montenegro.

-- 84.153.55.216 19:17, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

---

I changed the location in the first paragraph from "country in the Balkans" to "country in southeastern Europe" as I think this is the better form for the article. Balkans is a well known term in the English world but its geographic meaning is not all that well known. Most articles on European countries give the country location in Europe and all use the word Europe in the first one or two sentences. There are many people who have no idea that the Balkans refers to a place in Europe (beleive it or not), not to mention the many people who have no idea where in Europe the region is. Southeastern Europe is the better form to indicate position and continent of the country. I looked at the articles for some of Montenegro's neighbours and they also tend to use the form ".... Europe" in their introductions and not simply Balkans. Just trying to avoid an edit war over something so minor and would like to know if or why somebody maybe dissagrees. -- 84.153.55.216 19:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your change. Not only because it is more specific, but also because calling the region the Balkans is offensive to a quite a lot of people in that region. Joffeloff 20:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Why is Balkans an offensive term? It's mainly a geographical term for the peninsula in southeastern Europe named for the main mountain range in the area. Does it have a subversive meaning I'm not familiar with? 82.2.161.242 21:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it does. It means "mud" or "muddy" in turkish. It is a name given to the region by invading turks and is fairly offensive. Some have proposed the use of "Dinaric peninsula" instead, reffering to Dinaric Alps —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.240.3.188 ( talk • contribs) 04:05, 4 June, 2006 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the meaning of the name itself wasn't the offensive bit. It's more the disgusting connotations of naming the area by what the Turkish invaders called it, a hundred years after the end of the Ottoman Empire. Joffeloff 09:44, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Now that the Montenegrin parliament has officially proclaimed the independence of Montenegro, may other countries already start recognizing it? I suggest the creation of an article containing a list of countries as they recognize Montenegro. I've seen that before for other newborn countries.

Sure.

See here for the first mention in the article of Montenegro being internationally recognized. I've been browsing the State Department website to see when the U.S. will recognize CG, but I can't find anything. - Fsotrain09 19:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Should there be a wikipedia article on anti-Montenegrin sentiment now since there are articles about anti-Croatian sentiment, anti-Bosniak sentiment, and anti-Serbian sentiment?

Montenegrins are so newly independent that nobody hates them yet. Serbians are hated for stealing candy from Bosnian and Croatian babies; Croatians are hated for being Croatians, and Bosnians are hated for being Muslims. But why would anyone hate a Montenegrin? They're so cute and cuddly! -- Node 07:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

hahahahahaha - u r so right!!! we're irresistible- Jelena

The three Balkan anti-pages are just pitiful examples of playing the victim and trying to label all criticism of the own ethnic group as something akin to anti-Semitism. Sure, som Crots, Serbs and Bosnian Muslims hate each other and try to put each other down, but that doesn't mean it's some kind of institutionalized ideology. Heck, Norwegians and Danes have jokes about us Swedes (and vice versa), but we don't go off writing long articles about anti-Swedish sentiment. Osli73 12:30, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

So true Osli. Actually I would prefer to see three of Balkan anti-pages deleted and I see no reason for yet another one. So no, there is absolutely no need for a page on anti-Montenegrin sentiment. -- Westee 11:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Some! There was a wart with thousands killed. alot of these people hate each other

Well, there were plenty of wars between all sorts of peoples during history. Almost all of them initiated from whoever was the ruller at the time. That is not the proof of hatred. It looks like someone really, really wants us to hate each other. Sorry, its not going to work! --user

it's no newer than Serbia.

Serbia is a successor state, which can tie its international legal personality back to the initial Yugoslav breakup or thereabouts The Tom 04:01, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Serbia may be a successor state, after all it where the Capital was. But it is still new nonetheless.-- Greasysteve13 09:41, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not recognized as such by the UN or the US. The Secretary of Funk 06:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is. Serbia is the legal successor of the FRY, so it dates back to the breakup of the SFRY. — Nightst a llion (?) 20:06, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

The BBC says Serbia will declair it's independence next week http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5043462.stm. I'm assuming that means Serbia and Montenegro officially still exist even though Montenegro is gone kind of like the USSR existed officially for a while even though all the republics had declaired indepedence. So I withdrawl my complaint, Montenegro is the newest country but soon Serbia will be. Does anyone know that that's wrong? As to Serbia being the successor of Serbia and Montenegro, first of all, as I just said, Serbia and Montenegro might still exist, and even if it doesn't, has there even been time to offically designate it as the successor? Has the UN said anything? The US and UN didn't recognize the FRY as the successor to the SFRY. The Secretary of Funk 08:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

sighs No, simply *no*. Serbia and Montenegro is the legal successor to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, as it was just a name-change, and in the constitution of SiM, Serbia is *officially* the legal successor to SiM and inherits the membership in all international organisations, all treaties, and so on. So *yes*, Montenegro *is* the newest country in the world, and will remain so until Kosovo becomes independent. SiM does not exist any longer, it's just a matter of Serbia recognising that officially. — Nightst a llion (?) 09:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I accept your point about succession, I didn't know it was in the constitution. Serbia should be recognized as the world's newest country though. They just declaired independence, why did that word even come up if it was just "recognizing that officially"? It was both. There's a discussion in the talk section of Serbia, I'm sure you've already read, it was pointed out that even though Russia is the successor of the USSR it is not said that the Russian Federation was founded in 1917. Also, the president of Serbia and Montenegro didn't resign until Sunday, the day after independence. Montenergo is sighs *not* the world's newest country. The Secretary of Funk 01:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

They didn't declare independence. They accepted the dissolution of SiM. I don't know what news reports you've been reading. — Nightst a llion (?) 13:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Well for one thing it says they declared independence on the front page of wikipedia! Look at the BBC article I already linked, it says independence too. Just about every other ariticle as well. Now you're just denying reality. The Secretary of Funk 21:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I know international law. This is not independence, this is just a namechange from "Serbia and Montenegro" to "Serbia", period. — Nightst a llion (?) 05:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Well most of the people here disagree with you. References to Serbia declaring independence are all over the place and no one has been trying to remove them. It must be hard being the only person who knows international law. You should work for the BBC, you could straighten those people out. The Secretary of Funk 09:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

This is less widely discussed on: Talk:Serbia#Now_we.27ll_have_to_change_all_the_maps_that_dont_include_the_border_between_Serbia_and_Montenegro

-- Greasysteve13 09:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

This is going to be a painful job. If the job is as long as I think it is, I suggest whoever makes the new maps, simultaneously prepares and saves maps for Kosovo's independence. It seems likely that it will be the next new country. Dmn € Դմն 11:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Imposeble to predict. Various african countries areas have defacto independance, in europe there is Transnistria and there are various other odds and ends floating about. Geni 14:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Ive updated the main map that was on Europe; Image:Europe countries map en.png. at least thats a start -- Astrokey 44 15:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

There's lots more, I'm afraid... ::sighs:: It's going to be a long, long way until we've updated all of them.

Also, I would agree with the Kosovo comment; it's virtually assured that Kosovo will become independent. — Nightst a llion (?) 15:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Could be enough political messing around to result in some other area getting there first. Geni 18:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Highly, highly unlikely in the European context. Somewhat less unlikely, but still quite unlikely, in the global context. I say plan for Kosovo and nobody else. The Tom 19:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Western sahara again there are vairous parts of africa that have de-facto independance. In europe Transnistria is de-facto independant. South Ossetia is another candidate. Geni 20:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

But our maps, rightly or wrongly, generally don't represent the boundaries of de facto states, and international acceptance is no more likely to occur tomorrow for them than it did six weeks ago, or six months ago (after Kosovo becomes independent, mind you, things might change, but that's not what's under discussion). Right now, we need Montenegro boundaries, and it would seem prudent and more efficient to prepare (but not publish) maps that also include Kosovo boundaries while people are mucking about with pixels in that corner of the world. The odds of some state coming into being in the interim, especially in Europe, are miniscule. I think before East Timor got independence we'd gone something like eight years without a new line on any map. The Tom 20:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

To be precise, it was nine years between Eritrea in 1993 and Timor-Leste in 2002; and I agree whole-heartedly that no other nation anywhere in the world is likely to become independent before that date. Around 2010, we could have a bunch incoming (Palestine, South Sudan, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Bougainville, Nevis, Scotland, ...), but in the short term, only Kosovo is likely to attain official independence. — Nightst a llion (?) 20:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

To be nit-picky, I think the newest before Timor-Leste was Palau, in 1994, but it didn't require "a new line on the map" like Timor-Leste, Eritrea, and Montenegro did. --

There was Namibia somewhere in between there........... Canuckguy 00:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Damn, out-witted. ;) Yep, you're right... Well, we won't need new lines for Bougainville, New Caledonia or French Polynesia in the 2010's, either, but we'll need new dots on the world and pacific maps. =] And South Sudan will require some new lines. — Nightst a llion (?) 10:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the location maps (in the infoboxes of country pages) for most countries in Europe and the Middle East that show the border. Did it by copying the border from LocationMontenegro.PNG to other pics in MS Paint. I was unable to fix the border for some small countries (San Marino, Liechtenstein) that have a 'zoomed-in' view in the map, and I might have missed a few. Rain74 17:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Remaining to change (with the LocationMontenegro.PNG scale): Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Tunisia. With some odd scale: Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino, Switzerland, Svalbard and maybe others. With World-scale: Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kazakhstan, Sudan and others... 212.36.8.100 18:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you can zoom in on an already made map and highlight the countrie in question.-- Greasysteve13 05:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Still left: With some odd scale: Liechtenstein, Monaco, San Marino, Svalbard and maybe others. With World-scale: Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kazakhstan, Sudan and others... Alinor 15:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

-- Greasysteve13 11:57, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe it would be [ˈtsrnɑ ˌgɔːrɑ], or close to that. — Nightst a llion (?) 20:12, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Should we add that?-- Greasysteve13 01:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd prefer it if someone who knows both Serbo-Montenegrin ;) and IPA to check it before we add it. — Nightst a llion (?) 09:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know IPA but I do know Montenegrin. Literally, Crna Gora is pronounced tsr-na go-ra. Just making sure you guys know that. Crna Gora ^{( Talk/ Contribs/ Edit Count)} 02:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

There. Strictly speaking, the brief schwa in ['tsə̆rnaː 'gɔra] should not be there (or [] changed to //), as it's not phonemic, but I added it to indicate that it's preceding rather than succeeding /r/. Duja 09:40, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Just a slight correction to Crna Gora's description of the pronounciation. It sounds more like tsrr-naa go-ra ('r' and 'a' are longer and more pronounced than in a Serbian dialect) --user 11 August 2006

This is the "First" time i heard that Bosnia is claiming Boka region in Montenegro. Good luck hahhaa Bosnia can claim Boka like a Bosnian can claim inventing Pizza. No chance. 1,0000000 to 1 chance. Boka region was once part of Croatia and had a big Croat population prior to 1910. Today things have changed and Croats are long gone and in came the Serbs....and lest we forget Montenegrings have always been there. So I can't see Bosnia claiming Boka in anyway. Unless maybe they are saying Bosnian Croats.....well thats another long debate.... Evergreen Montenegro1 06:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Wuahaha they claming Boka so what? But we never will give it to them. An invasion will have an massive reaction to montenegrin people and they will come up to protect there father / motherland.

---

@ Evergreen Montenegro1: You know history very bad. Boka was never Croatian, it was Montengrian and Serbian from 6 century. I would also like to add that whole Dalmatia never was Croatian till nowadays. They had Dalmatia till Makarska. Further was Serbian land. It is wellknown, for example that tzar Dusan Silni gifted Dubrovnik with Konavle, etc.

CrnaGora im not talking about "ethnic" Montenegrins...but im talking abpout real Montenegrins before 1918....in the time of King Nikola and Petar Petrovic Njegos 1 & 2. That are real Montenegrins that brought my beautiful land like we know it now.

You say you're just 5% Albanian. Succes but it's not possible to be just only 5% Albanian. Or one of both of your parents are albanian. You can only be or 100% albanian (living in Montenegro) or 75% or 50% or 25% but not 5%.

That your most articles goes about Montenegro that doesn't mather. I can write a lot of propaganda about albania in the wikipedia about albania but that don't make me albanian.

Im sorry to say but for most Montenegrin people you be still and for always an siptar.

Inaccurate, ill-mannered and offensive. Montenegrins do not use a Serbian derogatory term 'siptar' for Albanians. They use the term 'Malisor' - meaning a highlander. Montenegrins and Malisors have very similar customs and ethics and by and large respect each other enormously, as equals. This coming from a true-blue Montenegrin. --user 11 August 2006.

Even another subject:

When Montenegro (21 may 2006) became indenpendance there where siptars (they say they're Montenegrin) celebrating Montenegrins independance with albanian flags!!!??? Sorry but what the f**k does albanians and theyre flags have with Montenegrin victory?! Celebrating is good with only Montenegrin flags but not with siptar and albanian flags. Thats not acceptable.....you can see it like claming Plav and Ulcinj. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.126.152.198 ( talk • contribs) 19:36, 6 June 2006

That is not on the topic, Wikipedia is not a free exchange of ideas. Any further off-topic subjects will be DELETED. Wikipedia is not a medium for unregulated free-speech, it has never been and never claimed to have been. Also I must ask for all contributions to this page to be in English from now on. Visit here to contribute in Serbian. Thank you. + Hexagon1 ^{( t)} 10:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Im answering to CrnaGora's....questions and comments. If jou believe it or not but there are here more thing that are not correctable by the wikipedia rules. Im just a user like you....and this here is an discussion board. Not the information page about Montenegro. Im just trying to realize people that most users here manupilating these wole information page by their own ideas, rules and etc.

Reading your post, I don't see anything that could be taken as constructive critique of the article, just irrelevant personal attacks. This is a Wiki, if you don't like something, change it. If the change is according to the rules, and if it is of superior quality then the previous text, we'll keep it. And sign your posts using four tildes '~~~~'. Like this: + Hexagon1 ^{( t)} 11:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

You say: if you don't like it, change it. I can change it but there will always somebody be that will change it to hes own idea's. Im just changing something because it's the truth, because it are the faits. No lies. It's no personal attack against the wiki user CrnaGora, i just want to view you all these user hase reasons to manupilate this wiki to his own ideas.

Oh for crying out loud... I give up. + Hexagon1 ^{( t)} 11:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Technically dude, that is a personal attack to CrnaGora if you read your first post on this header. Milo 08:49, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I added a link to the article concerning the foreign relations of Montenegro, where I just included a table listing the countries that have granted recognition to Montenegro. So far only Iceland has. As the recognitions increase, please help me keeping the table up-to-date.

So far, 2 more countries and counting have recognized Montenegro as a Soverign and Independent Country. Also, the foreign relations page should be updated because it doesn't include all the info that should be in there. Milo 08:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Within a few weeks there will be dozens of countries on this list. The big table doesn't belong here - we should keep it down to mentions of recognition by, say, Iceland (as the first), European Union, other ex-Yugoslav countries, United States, Russian Federation and the United Nations. Morwen - Talk 16:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I just think that naming a state "looser" is POV except when describing for instance a sporting event. Shouldn't it be changed? 'Course I'm new to Wiki so I might be comletely wrong :) TheLigerGirl 00:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)TheLigerGirl

So "looser" ->> "loser"? More sense in the latter. And yes, LigerGirl, calling a state a loser would be POV. - Fsotrain09 00:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh God, I'm terribly sorry, I just thought that looser was a spelling mistake of loser completely forgetting it has a meaning of its own. Sorry TheLigerGirl 08:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)TheLigerGirl

We list these as separate ethnic groups. What's the difference between them? john k 14:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Probably the same as between Montenegrin Serbs and Montenegrin Montenegrins :-). Duja 15:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

A Slavic Muslim is a much broader term, however, it should relate to someone's religion, not ethnicity. Slavic Muslims in Bosnia and the border area between Serbia and Montenegro feel that their culture is so distinctive from their Christian neighbours that they wanted to identify themselves in ethnic terms as Bosniaks. There are other Slavic Muslims that do not have this need and they tend to identify themselves according to the country they are from, the example being muslims living in the southern part of Montenegro. They largely declare themselves as Montenegrins of muslim faith. -- user 11 August 2006

I don't think there is much difference except that Bosniaks originate from Sandžak, while Slavic Muslims originate from Slavic coutnrues, hence the name "Slavic Muslims", but most Bosniaks are technically Slavic Muslims if you think about it. Milo 08:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

What rubbish! The difference is in self-identification and nothing more. -- estavisti 00:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Not to be pedantic, but wouldn't the first country to recognize Montenegro's independence actually have been Serbia? -- Jfruh ( talk) 22:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Nope. Because of the simple fact that Serbia didn't recognise independent Montenegro (yet). Serbia recognised the results of referendum, but that doesn't mean Serbia recognised independence of Montenegro... -- Dijxtra 10:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

There, only now Serbia has recognised Montenegro [18]. -- Dijxtra 18:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Why is there still a Serbia And Montenegor team? If they won,who would get credit? Dudtz 6/12/06 6:52 PM EST

Because the process of qualifying for the World Cup lasts years, and Serbia and Montenegro had already qualified, it was decided to compete as a single team for the tournament. It's not unlike the way that the former USSR competed as a group " Unified Team" in the 1992 Olympics, only a few months after it broke up.

If they win, both countries share the credit, I guess. I believe that there is actually only one Montenengran on the team -- which makes sense, as Montenegro had only about 10 percent of the population of the old union of the two. -- Jfruh ( talk) 00:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

From the article: "The European Union and the United States recognised Montenegro on June 12, as have various member states of the EU and other European countries."

If the EU as a whole recognized Montenegro, is it necessary (legally) for every EU member state to recognize it independently of the EU recognition? ☆ CieloEstrellado 23:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Yup. Basically, the 25 foreign ministers said "we'll all recognize it, here's a joint statement" but legally the EU doesn't have its own state-to-state foreign policy capabilities. Thus far, about a third of those ministers have gone home, done the needed paperwork, and fired off the diplomatic notes. All 25 should be in by the end of the week, I imagine, but it hasn't happened yet. The Tom 00:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Let me add a "yet" to "doesn't have its own state-to-state foreign policy capabilities". ;) — Nightst a llion (?) 06:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Is this edit accurate? -- Telex 13:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is. -- Dijxtra 14:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Anybody have a source for that? The Tom 22:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Montenegro became de facto independent in 1042 after battle of Bar,and it was recognised by Pope as Kingdom of Doclea (old name for Montenegro) in 1077. Also, it was unified (anexed) by Serbia on 26 November of 1918,there is no reason for puting this 1917. date.

While I realise that the euro is Montenegro's de facto currency, is it also their currency de jure. That is to say: (I know the EU doesn't have an agreement with them) are there laws within Montenegro which name the euro as legal tender (people and businesses are obliged to accept it as means of payment) - ^Рэд _хот 16:44, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think the article implies that the adoption of the currency is in any way unofficial, merely that the Montenegro isn't officially part of the Eurozone...its central bank does not play any role in the ECB, for instance. The Tom 16:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

From the article Economy of Montenegro, which according to several editors needs a good deal of work: "adoption of the euro as Montenegro's legal tender" followed the creation of Serbia and Montenegro as a loose union in 2003. - Fsotrain09 19:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok thanks. I didn't know that article existed yet. The last time I checked (which wasn't too long ago) it didn't exist. - ^Рэд _хот 19:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi,

In Hong Kong public (newspaper and TV news), we called it 黑山. But only in textbook and in public examination such as HKCEE and HKALE, we called it 門特尼哥羅.

Souce: Prepared by the Curriculum Development Council, Issued by the Hong Kong Education Departement in 1991.

by Pentium Kwok, Hong Kong 17 June, 2006

I have heard that the Montenegro declared war on Japan along with some of their allies (I think Russia), and also that peace was never officialy declared. Is this true?

Um. Yugoslavia might have declared war on Japan sometime during World War II, but at the moment, unless CNN is taking part in some vast right-wing conspiracy or cover-up we don't know about, Japan isn't at war with anyone. -- Fsotrain09 01:07, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm not talking about that. I think that one of their kings or rulers or whatever declared war on Japan just becouse Russia did so. It was both before World War II and World War I. That war was only war on the paper, as there was no fighting at all. However peace still hasn't officialy been declared... Adamantum 22:13, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Accurate. The war in question was 1905 War between Russia and Japan, that Japan won. At that time, Montenegro had very close financial, political and royal family connections with the Russian court, so it made a gesture by declaring war on Japan.I have heard anectodes that there were Montenegrins that actually fought in Manchuria on Russian side,however, I can not substantiate this claim at the moment. -- user 11 August 2006

More information about the war, if you can read Montenegrin Momisan 13:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, it's impossible for montenegro to have declared war in WW2 because it didn't exist other than a nazi satilite state that nobody recognized.

Japan is also in war with the Soviet Union (later Russia) since 1945. ( 218.228.195.44 06:20, 28 September 2006 (UTC))

"Montenegro was recognised as an independent nation by Serbia on June 15"

This sentence mentioned in the first paragraph is ridiculous. Many countries recognised Montenegro as independent, not only Serbia, so why only Serbia is mentioned here? Is that sentence another example of accusing Serbia for territorial expansionism? Why Serbia would not recognise independence of Montenegro? Serbia and Montenegro were two members of the state union and Montenegro had right to become independent and Serbia did not had intentions to deny that right. So, why somebody think that it was important to mention here that Montenegro was recognised as an independent nation by Serbia? I do not think that Serbia would do anything else in this case, and the sentence imply that it would. Thus, I will remove this ridiculous sentence. PANONIAN (talk) 14:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I think you're overreacting. Zazaban 02:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

About 3 quarters of it is just the last 14 years and a huge section is just dealing with about 1 month. come on. Montenegro's history can't be THAT dull!

The current elections for the Montenegrin government are actually the second semester of the Montenegrin referendum. Why is there nothing in the article? Appearently, the Democratic Party of Socialists of Montenegro- Social Democratic Party of Montenegro won 41 mandate in the Republican Assembly; while the Serbian Paper got 12, the Coalition Serbian People's Party of Montenegro- People's Party of Montenegro-[{Democratic Serbian Party of Montenegro]] and the Movemend for Changes each got 11. The Liberal Party of Montengero and the Bosniak Party of Montenegro each got 2, while 1 got the 4 political Albanian factions. -- HolyRomanEmperor 15:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

The ISO code, and therefore Wikipedia template, of {{MNE}} is now official =)

I have found a number of maps that do not show the Serbian-Montenegrin border: [19] [20] [21]

And also some maps at [22]. ( Stefan2 13:20, 6 October 2006 (UTC))

This talk page is waaaay too big. Zazaban 18:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)