Montenegro must apply its sanctions policy inside public institutions. Alignment with European Union decisions carries obligations that cannot end with a government announcement. The recent visit of Russian academics to the Historical Institute of the University of Montenegro exposes a serious question of institutional responsibility: how could cooperation with a sanctioned Russian organisation be proposed at a public university without its status becoming the central issue?
On 21 September 2026, Mark Entin and Ekaterina Entina delivered guest lectures at the Institute. According to the Centre for Civic Education, Entina, an adviser to the Gorchakov Fund’s director, proposed cooperation between the Fund and the Institute. Russia’s ambassador attended the event. A publicly funded academic institution thus became a venue for promoting a relationship with an organisation subject to EU restrictive measures.
The EU sanctioned the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund on 21 July 2022. The Council’s reasons describe its financing by Russia’s Foreign Ministry and its role in advancing Russian foreignpolicy objectives. The Fund also appears in Montenegro’s own published sanctions documentation. Its institutional background and sanctions status were available for scrutiny before the visit.
Academic freedom creates no exemption from sanctions law. Montenegro’s May 2025 implementing decision assigns responsibilities across public authorities, financial institutions and other relevant bodies. Restrictions on making funds or economic resources available to a listed entity cannot be dismissed because a proposed activity is described as research or educational cooperation. Nor does a visitor’s admission at the border authorise transactions involving a sanctioned organisation. The legal assessment must establish what was provided, to whom and under which applicable restrictions.
This is where academic diplomacy can weaken the practical effect of sanctions. A guest lecture can open the way to recurring exchanges, funded visits and joint programmes. Each activity can appear ordinary in isolation, while the relationship gives its sponsor continuing access to researchers and institutions. Public visibility does not guarantee meaningful scrutiny. Civil society should not have to identify a sanctioned partner after an event has already begun.
The regional infrastructure for such engagement is visible. In April 2026, the University of Belgrade’s
Faculty of Law advertised the Gorchakov Fund’s Balkan Dialogue programme, scheduled for June in
Belgrade. It targeted students, researchers, public officials, NGO representatives and journalists aged 20–35. Workshops and meetings with Russian and regional experts offered opportunities to build relationships with people entering influential professions. The Podgorica proposal should be assessed against this wider pattern of institutional outreach.
The Fund’s reach also extends into professional training. An InteRussia medical–fellowship announcement names Montenegro among participants’ countries and identifies the Gorchakov Fund as a programme partner. Participation alone establishes neither political loyalty nor a sanctions violation.
It does show why screening must follow the sponsoring organisation across different programme names and academic fields.
The University must disclose who initiated the visit, who financed travel and accommodation, what institutional resources were provided and what cooperation was discussed. Competent authorities must determine whether any arrangement involved prohibited support for the Fund. Establishing a violation requires evidence; the documented proposal already warrants a formal examination. Institutional autonomy carries responsibility for these decisions.
Every proposed partnership involving a sanctioned body should undergo a recorded legal assessment before resources are committed. Any prohibited arrangement must be stopped, and responsibility established where the evidence supports it. Montenegro cannot measure the credibility of its sanctions policy solely by the decisions it adopts. It must demonstrate that those decisions govern the institutions financed by its citizens.
Danilo Kalezic. Montenegrin political scientist
The articles published in the “Opinions” column reflect the personal opinion of the author and may not coincide with the position of the Center
