It is necessary to start a campaign for the referendum right now due to the specific nature of the integration process into NATO, a long process that allows a “slip in”, or “crawl in” accession based only on government decisions without any consultation or approval of the Assembly and the citizens. Also, the current government in Serbia, according to official NATO documents and the statements of the Secretary General of the organization, expressed its desire to exactly do that – to move step by step – towards the Alliance membership, despite their public narcotizing statements in Serbia, assuring that is still not the good time for that topic.

In order to understand the necessity of a quick referendum, it is necessary to understand the process of accession phase.

1) As a member of the Partnership for Peace, the State can make a step towards the further integration adopting the IPAP (Individual Partnership Action Plan), which enables more structured and more intensive cooperation with NATO, without binding any side to membership.

2) If a clearer decision is made to go towards the membership, the State expresses its ambition for the membership only with a letter solely issued upon a government decision, and in cooperation with NATO, manufactures the MAP (Membership Action Plan). An example for this is Ukraine, which, at the time of the former government, without any public support applied for membership or for a MAP. Montenegro has received a MAP in late 2009, and a MAP for Bosnia and Herzegovina was provisionally approved in a process of further centralization. During this process, the State is already committed to the membership, while NATO hasn’t still promised it. During the MAP process, States make public campaigns for a membership, which means that governments spend its tax payers’ money in order to promote NATO in debates, meetings, and any other pro-NATO attitude through the media. It is believed that a responsible government does not apply for a MAP if it does not have approximately the majority of people agreeing with a membership (at least about 40 percent, which can increase up to 50 percent during the campaign).

3) If there is a consensus of NATO members, and if the reform process are positively evaluated through the MAP, the state is invited to become a member. When the process is actually carried out the Assembly is called together or perhaps he voters are invited to a referendum to express their opinion. However, at this point the process is considered as irreversible because the state (government) has already voted for the membership, put into effect certain requirements and implemented reforms in line with NATO standards. So, at that point, there is no turning back.

Why is this question so important:

1) BECAUSE IT IS A DECISIVE QUESTION FOR THE SERBIAN SECURITY: This is a crucial issue, the question of the safety of all our citizens, no less important for the future of Serbia then the Constitution, on which citizens also had the opportunity to speak directly.The extent to which Serbia aspires to be a modern democratic state, no important decision can be issued without the voter’s opinion. It even represemts a minimum of democracy, the lower limit of fundamental democacy principles.

2) BECAUSE IT IS A BARRAGE TO THE “INDIRECT” CONTRACT WITH NATO: The current government wants to lead us perfidously to the Alliance entrance on a detour way with “international agreements with NATO”. Given that there is a real danger that the country is tied to NATO without the public approvement, because of individually signed agreements, and putting people before the fait accompli, the public answer in a referendum is necessary as soon as possible in order to avoid the current government imposing its will as if it was the public will. The government’s open commitment to NATO gives us a sufficient reason to assume that it could at some point sign a stronger and more general agreement with the military alliance, which could then be interpreted as an official international agreement. Given that our Constitution does not give the possibility to the citizens to vote in  a referendum on international treaties, Serbia could be in NATO, not by a democratic will, but by the desire of the current government. So, the wolf would be fed  and there won’t be any sheep  missing. Because of this risk, it is necessary to hold a referendum as soon as possible to prevent the logic of “fait accompli”.

3) BECAUSE SECRET TALKS, FARAWAY FROM OUR EYES, ARE DISMISSED: NATO in its official documents, points out that they respect Belgrade’s “expressed will” to further progress towards the membership. It shows that the current government in Serbia, outside the public eye, is conducting negotiations on the inclusion to NATO. Otherwise, how a support could be given  to something for which no one has expressed their will! In addition, it confirms that the current government does not respect National Assemly’s resolution on the Serbian military neutrality, that the government supported itself. The best example for this are  high officials’ statements, especially Defence Minister’s ones, affirming that Serbia’s place is in NATO. Formally such a commitment of the Government of Serbia is in contradiction with National Assemly’s Resolution from December 2007, which specifically requires a military neutrality of Serbia towards all existing military alliances, and practically the NATO alliance.

4) IN ORDER TO AVOID THE “TOO LATE” SITUATION: Apparently, the topic is (still) not on the agenda, although the NATO Secretary General in May 2010t, invited Serbian citizens to choose the “Euro-Atlantic future,” and said that he would “do the best” to help Serbia enter the Alliance step by step “as required by the Serbian side. The government’s tactics is to put this issue on the public agenda  when it is too late for any effective response of the opposition, the Parliament or the public opinion in Serbia. Such a referendum in these circumstances is the only way to prevent illegal activities of the Serbian government: the ones of the President and the Government  seeking to monopolize this important issue of Serbia’s foreign and defense policy. The problem is that our government, which often acts as if it was beholden to NATO and Western countries,  and not to its own people, can slowly “dip” in the organization, like a frog that is slowly heating in the water, without noticing it, until it becomes a frog soup.

5) IN ORDER TO DEFEND THE ASSEMBLY‘S RESOLUTION ON MILITARY NEUTRALITY: For a serious and effective democratic governance, it would be inconceivable that the highest officials, including ministers, despise the acts of the Assembly. It appears that they have less responsibility towards their own parliament and the will of the people than towards the NATO officials. Current government‘s actions show that it accepted the resolution on military neutrality under domestic political pressure, and only temporarily and insincerely. Now, when there is no such direct pressure from coalition partners, the Government openly shows its willingness to join NATO, and completely bypassing the democratic ways of decision-making about our membership in NATO.

6) IN ORDER TO CONTROL THE AGGRESSIVE LOBBYING FOR NATO: Some NGOs and analysts slowly simmer the idea about the necessity of this membership and create a more “attractive” image of NATO. Such a strategy  influences the public opinion without any campaign for membership and changes people’s consciousness.