Generation M’s Australia Representative, Stefani Taskova Miteva got the full scoop on the Macedonian social enterprise, ESNAF.
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
The small landlocked nation at the heart of the Balkans recently made the transition from ‘the country formally known as’ to the ‘the country which shall not be named.’ One can now watch politicians and diplomats bend over backwards trying to avoid Freudian slips during speeches. Or releasing carefully crafted, emoji-filled, tweets, to avoid having to say the peoples’ chosen name for their country: Macedonia.
Despite what many internet debates and news headlines might have you believe, the Macedonian Issue, as it stands today, is not a 3000-year-old unresolvable historical debate. That debate may very well exist for the historians to have, but that debate has no business being the concern of politicians, or historians forced to work under the demands, and influence, of political treaties – such as the Friendship Treaty between Macedonia and Bulgaria, and previously the Prespa Agreement with Greece. The Macedonian Issue is a geopolitical issue, it should have never been characterised as a debate in the first place. Certain things are not up for negotiation, self-determination and human rights being at the forefront of that list. Yet, it is precisely these issues that are being debated in Europe today.
Recently Bulgaria threatened to block Macedonia’s EU accession talks (set to begin in December) over the fact that Macedonians regard leading revolutionary figure, Goce Delcev, as a Macedonian national hero. Bulgaria’s Deputy Prime Minister, Krasimir Karakachanov, declared that he found Macedonia’s treaty mandated cooperation, on the Joint History Commission, unsatisfactory. That declaration is among the tamer of things Karakachanov, and his far-right, ultra-nationalist party colleagues, have said. According to the Bulgarian government’s stance, the Macedonian identity, culture, and language were engineered under Yugoslavia, as an evil ploy by Josip Broz Tito to brainwash the Macedonian populace into thinking they were something other than Bulgarian. This claim is beyond laughable and is undeserving of a response; because there is no way of answering the accusation, without simultaneously entertaining the attack on self-determination that underlies it.
In a world where conflicts brew at the feet of dethroned statues because one man’s hero is another man’s oppressor, Macedonia’s friendly neighbour is playing a different game altogether. According to the Bulgarian political narrative, one man’s hero can only be one man’s hero, and so the Bulgarian and Macedonian people must be one of the same, thus it being impossible for the former to have once oppressed the later. Assimilation policies of the 21st century.
This is not about who can celebrate Goce Delcev, both nations can if they so please. This is about the fact that right now, and not in the foggy pages of history, there exist a people with a collective national consciousness, peacefully exercising their basic rights to self-determination and governance, as Macedonians. The reality of this cannot be debated by any self-respecting advocate and believer in human rights. Yet, this is a reality which Macedonia’s neighbours cannot come to terms with; instead, unreasonably demanding that their neighbouring people justify, and explain their national consciousness. As a result, a people which lost over 7000 of their fellow Jewish Macedonians, during WW2, are forced into the Orwellian nightmare, which is the ‘Joint History Commission’, with the very country responsible for that holocaust. But let us not speak of ‘fascist occupation’, because according to the declaration adopted by the Bulgarian Parliament, last year, Macedonia must stop using the term ‘fascist occupation’ in reference to Bulgaria, and remove such mention from its World War 2 memorials and documentation… apparently, the irony of this was missed in Parliament. By denying the Macedonians their unique and independent national consciousness, Bulgaria is seeking to absolve itself of liability as past occupier and oppressor, whilst becoming a modern-day oppressive gatekeeper, of a country desperate for European integration and collaboration.
So why is Bulgaria doing this? Outside of good old imperialism, and an attempted cover-up of its fascist past, the current political scene in Bulgaria is chaotic. There have been claims that the resurgence of the Macedonian Issue is a PR stunt by the Boyko Borisov government, to distract from the countrywide, anti-corruption and anti-government, protests. Either way, it is Bulgaria’s lack of European values, integration, and collaboration, as an EU member state, which is standing in the way of Macedonia’s EU accession – the real Macedonian Issue.
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
The first part of the ‘YOU DON’T EXIST’ series focused on the experiences of young Macedonians living in Greece. The second part of this series will focus on the activism of Macedonians living in Greece. Activists pursuing the recognition of Macedonian minority rights in Greece continue to be subjected to discrimination and xenophobic rhetoric by the media, state, Greek Orthodox Church and the broader society.
In the second part of ‘YOU DON’T EXIST’, a Macedonian activist from Greece will be interviewed by Generation M’s Melbourne Representative, Elena Sekulovska, on issues concerning the Macedonian minority in Greece. In order to protect the identity of this individual, and the possibility of them being targets of further xenophobic rhetoric, their identity has been disclosed as Anonymous C.
Anonymous C, Negush
1. Thank you for agreeing to do this interview. According to you, how many people have Macedonian origins in northern Greece?
Since the annexation of about half of the territory of Macedonia in 1912-13, there have been no censuses of ethnic groups in Greece. Thus, the data on the Macedonian population in Greece can only be approximate and based on old records of the Ottoman Empire administration and some non-official sources. For instance, according to the Hüseyin Hilmi Pasha census of the Ottoman lands of Europe in 1904, conducted in the Macedonian vilayets (districts) of Salonica and Bitola, it was found that, in the Vilayet of Salonica, 373,227 people belonged to the Greek Patriarchate and 207,317 people belonged to the Bulgarian Exarchate. In the Vilayet of Bitola, 261,283 people belonged to the Greek Patriarchate and 178,412 people belonged to the Bulgarian Exarchate. The above numbers give a total of 634,510 Greek Orthodox Patriarchate followers, of whom almost 250,000 declared themselves as ‘Bulgarian speakers’.* If we add these 250,000 Greek Patriarchate followers with the Slavic mother tongue to the 385,729 faithfuls of the Exarchate, we will see in this Ottoman census that approximately 635,729 Macedonians were living in a roughly larger area of what is now the Aegean part of Macedonia.
However, after 100 years of ethnic cleansing and cultural genocide conducted by the Greek authorities against the Macedonian population, we can only suppose that roughly 100,000 Macedonians are left in Greece. Most of these Macedonians keep some memory of their ethnic identity and speak in Macedonian dialects, although they do not have a separate consciousness than that of the Greek nation. But as we can notice, in the last 10 years, some thousands of Macedonians, even ones very young in age, are definitely becoming more aware of their Macedonian ethnic identity. It will take a lot of work and good organization to protect and promote this revival of the Macedonian national identity in Greece in many fields, like language teaching, local history recording, safeguarding of Macedonian cultural heritage, etc.
The National Liberation Front of Aegean Macedonia in the late 1940s.
2. How are Macedonian activists trying to push for the recognition of the Macedonian minority and their ability to express themselves politically, linguistically and culturally?
Macedonian activists should not push for the ‘recognition’ of the Macedonian minority specifically, they should push for the ratification and implementation of a framework of laws and treaties that gives the minorities — all minorities, being ethnic/national, linguistic and/or religious — the right to freely develop and promote their own identity, without any repression or discrimination by the state. We, the Macedonians in Greece, do not need to be recognized for what we are and declare we are. What we really need is the protection of our rights by laws that Greece needs to ratify and implement, like, for instance, the European Charter for the Protection of National Minorities which our country had signed in 1997 but never ratified to become a Greek law. All our efforts should be focused on this issue, nationally and internationally, and in collaboration with other minority groups in other countries.
3. What is the response of the Greek state and the Greek society more broadly, to Macedonian activists who try to push for the recognition of the Macedonian minority, and for them to be able to express themselves?
The new policy of the Greek state now is to simply ignore all of the formal requests of the Macedonian activists. While in the past, any of our formal requests were rejected immediately, by not even accepting any of our applications, with the excuse that “a Macedonian identity except the Greek one does not exist”. Now that the Prespa Agreement was ratified by Greece, this excuse cannot be used anymore. As a result, we can now formally apply to the Greek state institutions as Macedonians, yet still, we never get an answer to our requests. We will need to find a solution to this problem by filing a legal case to the Greek courts of Justice for each case, but this is an expensive way to claim our rights and the procedure takes a very long time. As for the Greek society, the larger part of it ignores our situation, because the Greek media is manipulating the public opinion by presenting any activity of minority groups in Greece as a danger to the public security. If the Greek people had the possibility to know our real situation, the majority would have a positive attitude toward us, for sure.
4. In your opinion, why doesn’t the Greek state, a democratic country and a member of the European Union, recognise the Macedonian minority and grant them the right to express themselves?
It is not just the Greek state in the EU that is not willing to grant any minority rights to its citizens. For example, France also has the same policy, although in France minorities are not repressed like they are in Greece. There are 50 million people belonging to ethnic minorities in all the 27 EU countries, who struggle for protection rights at EU level. However, the EU Commission that takes the final decisions on laws and directives is negative on such issues, the reason being that some states will use the right of veto to such decisions. The paradox here is that issues on minority rights usually get a large majority approval in the EU parliament voting procedure, but the EU Commission blocks them due to the veto power that each EU member state has on Prime Minister level. Thus, the veto of one person representing his/her country can block the will of hundreds of EU members of EU Parliament, democratically elected by the EU citizens. The Lisbon Treaty signed and ratified by all EU member states in 2009, foresees a change of the decision-making procedure in the EU, giving more powers to the EU Parliament and limiting the veto power to very few issues. This procedure on decision-making in the EU is expected to start after 2022. Hopefully, things will improve for all minorities in the near future, but this will not be automatic in every country. Minorities must be ready and organized to claim their rights from EU institutions, if a member state is reluctant to implement EU laws on minority rights.
5. How can the Macedonian diaspora help the Macedonian activists and the Macedonian minority more broadly?
The Macedonian diaspora must be in a continuous dialogue with the Macedonian activists, trying to understand the issues the Macedonian minority faces in each one of the countries that they live in. It should have a closer look at the real problems that Macedonians as a minority face in preserving and promoting their Macedonian national identity. They should help them in their projects on education such as Macedonian language classes, sponsoring meetings of representatives of Macedonian cultural associations of all the Macedonian minorities, in order for them to exchange information on good practices to promote Macedonian culture, and many other activities that will give the possibility to the younger Macedonian generation to come together. It would also be good for the diaspora to have a fundraiser for specific cases of legal procedures that some Macedonian minority organizations or activists undertake against state abuse. Unfortunately, this occurs often, but most Macedonians don’t have the financial means to undertake such expensive legal procedures themselves.
6. Is there anything else that you would like to add?
I would like to suggest to the Macedonians to get more realistic on many issues that concern the Macedonian nation today. Our past as a nation was a dramatic and a painful one but we need to have a vision of a bright future for our people and we need to work hard on this together, having always a positive attitude for any challenge we face. We need to take the best of any situation we find ourselves in, leaving all negativity behind.
*In the Ottoman Empire, ethnicity was not considered as defining identity, religious affiliation was. In official records, Macedonians were referred to as ‘Bulgarian’ and their language as ‘Bulgarian’ due to the fact that most Macedonians were subjects of the Bulgarian Exarchate Church. [1] Similarly, Macedonians who belonged to the Greek Patriarchate were referred to as ‘Greeks’. [1] The Macedonian Church was abolished in 1767, hence why they were subject to the Bulgarian and Greek Churches.[2]
Sources: [1] Blazhe Ristovski, Macedonia and the Macedonian People, Vienna: SIMAG Holding, 1995, 127-155.
[2] Иван Снегаров, История на Охридската архиепископия-патриаршия. От падането ѝ под турците до нейното унищожение (1294 – 1767 г.), София: Печатница П. Глушковъ, 1932, VI.
—
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
In the discourse of the Macedonian naming dispute, a range of issues are discussed by the two conflicting sides, ranging from Alexander the Great, to medieval history, and to early modern history. Internationally and domestically within the two countries, this issue is regarded as a bilateral dispute. However, what many fail to realise is that at the centre of this issue is the ethnic Macedonian identity in northern Greece, and that this is not a bilateral dispute – it is a domestic issue within Greece.
Historically, Greece occupied the territory of northern Greece (Aegean Macedonia) in 1913 for the first time, and this area was predominantly populated by Macedonians. Following forced Hellenisation, ethnic cleansing, and cultural genocide, the status of the Macedonians was changed from a majority to a persecuted minority. Today, Greece, a member of the EU and NATO, continues to pursue ultra-nationalistic policies rooted in 19th-century romanticism and denies basic human rights to its Macedonian minority.
In this article, Elena Sekulovska from the Australian Generation M team attempts to give a voice to the silenced Macedonian minority by conducting interviews with Macedonians that live in Aegean Macedonia. She has chosen to not disclose the identities of the interviewees, as there are serious repercussions for Macedonians living in Greece who speak out against the Greek state.
Thank you for agreeing to do the interview. What made you realise that your identity was Macedonian and not Greek, in a country where identifying as an ethnic Macedonian is stigmatised?
Anonymous A, Solun:
Growing up I didn’t really feel different. I spoke Greek as a mother tongue, alongsideMacedonian, at home. At school we got taught propaganda on Macedonia. For example, they teach children that Macedonia is a ‘gypsy-skopian’ and ‘Albano-Bulgarian’ nation with a ‘gypsy’ language.I openly identify as a Macedonian, and in discussions, I stand up for the truth about Macedonia, in a non-provocative and respectful manner. Some of my Greek friends have thanked me for helping them understand the truth about the Macedonian issue as they got taught propaganda at school. As a young Macedonian in Greece I believe in mutual respect and friendship, and I want the Greek public to understand the truth on Macedonia without behaving uncivilised. Through positive discussion and respectful presentation of arguments there could be a positive difference.
Anonymous B, Lerin:
My Macedonian identity was built from an early age, I owe it to my family. My family told me the truth about Macedonia and how the Greeks had oppressed us and continue to silence us. I wish that every family spoke to their children about Macedonia, if they did, Macedonians would be organised and standing up for their rights. In my village, our school operated in the Greek language and we received a Greek education. Macedonian language schools are not allowed to exist here. After having grown up, I got involved in the Macedonian cause and many of my friendships have diminished. It is not easy to be a Macedonian in Aegean Macedonia.
Historically, the Macedonians in Aegean Macedonia were heavily persecuted by the Greek state. Today, Greece is a democratic state and a member of both the EU and NATO. Why is it still difficult for one to publicly express themselves as an ethnic Macedonian?
Anonymous A, Solun:
There is a heavy opposition from the deep Greek state, Church and media. During the anti-Macedonian demonstrations in Solun and Athens, discriminatory promotional material was handed out to students. In the demonstrations, they burned Macedonian flags and called for the Republic of Macedonia to be renamed to “Monkeydonia”. The three biggest football ultras groups from Solun, who usually beat each other up, united and demonstrated against Macedonia – this says a lot. This is clearly hate-speech, yet nobody pressed charges against them. The point itself that a nation demonstrates proudly not for itself, but because it wants to deny the rights of another nation on self-determination is the clearest indication that there is indeed a problem in the Greek society. We are fighting for our existence, and they are fighting for their “greatness”, as if it is a matter of survival.
The fascists who are openly anti-Macedonian are not the biggest threat to us, as one can easily identify them for what they are, fascists. The biggest threat is anti-Macedonianism sponsored by those on the left who claim to stand for multiculturalism, democracy, LGBT rights, liberalism and yet deny us the right to self-identification and continuously tell us we don’t exist. Anti-Macedonianism is the only legal and state sponsored type of racism in Greece.
Anonymous B, Lerin:
This is a result of the systemic assimilatory policies of the Greek state. They have used different methods to assimilate us and give us fear. In the not so distant past, this was through imprisonments, assassinations, ethnic genocide, terror. When the monarcho-fascist system fell in 1974, Greece became democratic and the method in which they silenced us changed from physical to psychological. This means that the only way in which we can preserve our heritage is through songs. Prior to 1992, we weren’t even allowed to sing our songs. In 1992, following heavy pressure from Macedonian activists and the European Union, the Greek police stopped going after those who sang Macedonian songs. Apart from this, politically, the Macedonian cause in Aegean Macedonia, and political activism in general, is in stagnation.
According to you, what is the number of those with Macedonian origins in Greece?
Anonymous A, Solun:
It is very difficult to estimate as under the Greek propaganda, even if we are aware of our ethnic origins, we can keep our language, culture and traditions but only if we are ‘slavophone’ Greeks. You cannot be both a ‘slavophone’ and a Greek, as language is part of ethnicity. The same people who once prohibited our language are now trying to assimilate us peacefully. The Macedonian consciousness has many layers as it is a taboo subject. There are some who are openly Macedonians and want minority rights for the Macedonians. On the other hand, some are extreme Greek loyalists and nationalists, and hate their own people and culture. Whilst others are aware of their heritage but want to leave it in the past, as to them, the ‘dopika’ (local) language is some weird language spoken by their grandparents. This is the most extreme form of assimilation.
Anonymous B, Lerin:
It is very hard to say. There are many types of Macedonians here. A large percent of them are ‘grkomani’ – Macedonians in origin with a Greek consciousness. From a young age, Macedonians are taught in schools that they do not exist, that their ancestors were Greeks who had their identity changed to ‘Bulgarian’ and now again to Greek. There is also a great number of Macedonians who don’t believe the propaganda, they know who they are but fear to publicly declare themselves as Macedonians because they will lose their jobs and have various bureaucratic problems with the Greek state. There are also Macedonians who are not scared of anyone and openly declare themselves as Macedonians. A really small percent of the Macedonians engages in Macedonian activism.
Is there anything else that you would like to add?
Anonymous A, Solun:
Things are slowly getting better. The Macedonian heritage is still present all-over Aegean Macedonia. People have started singing Macedonian songs in the village festivals. There are more associations promoting the Macedonian identity. The diaspora must help us. It needs to be an outspoken representative for the rights of our people and offer us moral, financial and especially legal support. Macedonians should not be afraid to tell the truth about Macedonia, no matter what. We need to expose the lies and propaganda. The fight for Egej is not lost, our people still live here.
Anonymous B, Lerin:
The Macedonians need to wake up. Every Macedonian who respects his heritage and origin has a sacred obligation to never denounce his language and Macedonian origin.
—
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
Generation M, the United Macedonian Diaspora’s (UMD) young leaders program is proud to announce its new crowdfunding initiative We Can #TogetherFromHome.
“We Can #TogetherFromHome” is a crowdfunding initiative, which aims to unite the public support for the Macedonian healthcare system in the fight against the COVID-19 virus. We strive to simplify and improve the donation process through raising and funneling financial and material contributions by both individual and corporate donors.
We compiled a list of priorities for fundraising in accordance with current requirements, which is regularly updated as per indications from the health authorities and domestic suppliers. The equipment and materials from the list will be shared on our platform and we will begin fundraising to secure those items.
In collaboration with Macedonian (and local) suppliers and according to the published fundraising targets, the donated means directly address the urgent needs of the Macedonian healthcare system. To ensure transparency, you will be able to track the achieved targets on our platform as long as civil support is necessary to satisfy the institutional needs in the fight against COVID-19.
The continuous success of this, as well as like-minded campaigns, will be reflected in improved conditions and supplies of the Macedonian healthcare system and, subsequently, a prompt recovery around our world.
Guided by Mother Theresa’s words: “if you cannot feed 100 people, feed one person”, we place confidence in making a difference together, united in the fight against the invisible enemy. We cordially thank you for contributing to strengthen our healthcare system, both directly and indirectly, and kindly ask you to help spread the initiative.
Any donation will help those who are working tirelessly to protect us. Please consider spreading the message that We Can provide support and assistance #TogetherFromHome.
You can donate and help Macedonia combat this crisis on the following link: https://secure.everyaction.com/zEJGvK370EaDPjhISFvsPw2
You can also follow us on Instagram: @zaednooddoma
For quite some time, members of the Greek society have held a commonplace belief that Macedonians are constantly “stealing” the history of Ancient Macedonia, which is “rightfully Greek,” and that nobody could believe or support the opposite. Unfortunately, to some extent, this has permeated throughout parts of Western society, for example within areas of academia and politics, where philhellenism prevails. This is a sorrowful double standard, which not only accepts but embraces Greek 19th century romantic nationalism, whilst at the same time it marginalises and attempts to deconstruct its Macedonian counterpart.
History teaches us that both the modern Macedonian and the modern Greek nation are relatively modern social constructs as a result of the “Rise of Nationalism” throughout the Ottoman Empire. Moreover, that both nations gradually differentiated themselves from the Rum Patriarchist Christian “millet,” and respectively formed their own nations in the late and early-middle 19th century. It is a clear and well-established fact that since modern nations are not tribes, neither the Greek nor the Macedonian nation can claim to be the direct and only descendants of the Ancient Greeks or the Ancient Macedonians.
As much as modern Greece has the right to base part of its nation’s historiography and patriotism on the glory of Ancient Greece, on genetic and cultural grounds, so too does the modern Macedonian nation attain that same right in regards to Ancient Macedonia. Indeed, as it was the Ancient Macedonian people who gave us their land and name.
How can it thus be possible for a Macedonian not to feel at least a small amount of connection to Ancient Macedonia when K.P. Misirkov was born in Postol, ancient Pella. Or when one personally has roots from Bitola in Lynkos, from Voden-Edessa or Lychnid- modern day Ohrid, or somewhere near Bylazora?
What people believe about the past is a million times more important than the past itself, for this affects the way they perceive the world. It is therefore important to revisit what the Founders of Greece and Macedonia truly believed about the heritage of Ancient Macedonia.
Sources indicate that the Greek nation’s stance on Ancient Macedonia throughout the early stages of its development in the early to mid 1800s was “mixed.” Dozens of prominent Founding Fathers of the Greek nation considered Ancient Macedonians not only non-Greek barbarians, but conquerors of Ancient Greece as well. Professor Saripolos, for example, considered Macedonians the first enslavers of Greece after whom the Roman and the Ottoman yoke followed.[1] Yakovakis Rizos Neroulos, in the same spirit, proclaimed in 1841 that the biggest crime that Philip committed against Greeks – even bigger than defeating them at Chaeronea – was to give birth to Alexander![2]
Greeks finally started accepting Ancient Macedonians as their “ancestors” in the mid to late 1850s, the exact same time, suspiciously, when the Imperialist “Megali Idea (“great idea”) concept had rooted in the Greek society. This is roughly around the same time when Miladinov commented that “they (the Greeks) want Macedonia to become a Greek land but they cannot understand that She cannot be Greek.”[3]
Furthermore, one can find Macedonian activists mentioning ancient Macedonia and considering them as Macedonian’s ancestors throughout the entirety of Macedonia’s ethnogenesis. For example, when they fought against Greek Patriarchist supremacy, Bulgarian and Serbian assimilation, and during the armed National Liberational Struggle of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation (VMRO).
The Russian Slavist V.Gligorovich, who visited many places in Macedonia in the 1840s, mentions that “in all places I’ve been I’ve not heard other names except from those of Alexander the Great and Marko Kralievich.”[4]
The Miladinov Brothers on their collection of folk songs (1861), include two folk tales; one about “Czar Alexander” and one about “Voden, the capital of the Macedonian Czars.”[5]
Kuzman Shapkarev would teach Macedonian schoolchildren in the 1870’s that “the place where we live is called Macedonia,” and “in the old times Macedonia was a strong kingdom that, under Alexander the Great conquered the whole known world.”[6]
Prominent Bulgarian national activist P.R Slaveykov, in 1871 opposed that Macedonians reject Bulgarian assimilation by clinging to Ancient Macedonia. “Many times we have heard from Macedonists that they are not Bulgarians but Macedonians, descendants of the Ancient Macedonians.”[7] Around the same time, Stefan Salgadzhiev mentions a Solun teacher who proclaimed that “I am neither Bulgarian nor Greek, nor am I Cinzar. I am a pure Macedonian as were Philip and Alexander of Macedon and the philosopher Aristotle.”[8]
Macedonia’s VMRO војводини (revolutionaries) also embraced the heritage of Ancient Macedonia and considered Her one the same, as the Ottoman Macedonia they were trying to liberate. Nikola Karev, the president of the Krusevo Republic admitted to a Greek reporter who was ironic to him that, yes, he considers himself to be a descendant of Alexander the Great.[9] Jane Sandanski believed that “the inhabitants of Macedonia are only Macedonians, descendants of the ancient Macedonians of Philip and Alexander, who were not Greeks but a special Macedonian nation that fought against the Greeks and defeated them”.[10] Furthermore, George F. Abbott in 1903 also emphasized that “in their proclamations the leaders of the Slavo-Macedonian Committee appeal to Alexander the Great as a national hero.”[11]
Of course, this list is just illustrative and not exhaustive. There remain hundreds, if not thousands, of other examples one could find.
Ultimately, it should considerably be acknowledged that Macedonia’s history and indeed, 19th century Macedonian romantic nationalism, has been widely appropriated by Greece. I would like to emphasize the following point; Greece’s denial in recognizing Macedonia’s ancient past, and its mistreatment of Macedonia as an alien migratory nation that came from “somewhere afar,” hides only one goal. That goal is the delegitimization of Macedonian’s connection to Macedonia, and furthermore, the moral justification for the displacement and exodus of Macedonians in the 1940s. Not to mention the ongoing political aggression deployed by Greece against the Republic of Macedonia, countlessly discriminating and denying its fundamental rights in the 21st century.
In order to win the propaganda war that has been inflicted upon Macedonia, all possible means must be used to advance the Macedonian cause within the West. This is especially considering that the future and security of Macedonia in many ways depends on how favorable the West is towards Macedonia. Unfortunately, in the past 30 years the West has proved not be so favorable.
Whenever the so called “name issue” gained media attention, it was presented as primarily a bilateral difference between the two countries. For instance, a border dispute, where both countries stand on equal grounds with equal rights. Indeed, this issue suddenly emerged when Macedonia appeared out of inexistence in 1991 and claimed a “historically Greek” name. It is evident that this stance is fallacious on many grounds.
We, as Macedonians, need to present ourselves within the international sphere as a nation like the Uyghurs, the Tibetans, the Kurds, the Armenians, the Israelis and the Palestinians. This is considering that these nations, although mostly portrayed as small, are proud people who fight for their existence against those powers who have actively sought to wipe them off the world map. Similarly, Macedonian’s face their own David vs Goliath battle and therefore, although different from the above-mentioned peoples, nonetheless withstand similar experiences and struggles. This makes our causes for human rights and recognition more alike than different.
What is important for the Macedonian youth now, both in the Republic of Macedonia and the Diaspora, is to cultivate a stance towards our ancient past, which is healthy and in accordance with scientific truth. Both claiming direct bloodline from Ancient Macedonians – the extravaganza Greeks are prone to – and ignoring them completely, are wrong. After all, modern Macedonia, what all Macedonians are, was formed in a complex historical process of the amalgamation of the Paleobalkan, Slavic, and Christian culture over the course of hundreds of years.
—
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
[1] Roumen Daskalov and Tchavdar Marinov: Entagled Histories of the Balkans. Volume 1, page 284
On March 25, 2020, the Council of the European Union issued a written procedure providing updates regarding the enlargement process and potential inclusion of Macedonia and Albania within the EU. In this brief four-page procedure, Bulgaria details several conditions required to be met before approving Macedonia’s future negotiating framework for EU accession. Among these conditions, the most notable is a peculiar implementation of the “language clause” previously utilized in both the Macedonia – Bulgaria Joint Declaration of 1999 and 2017 Friendship Treaty. More specifically, Bulgaria requested the following:
“Implementation of the “language clause” agreed between Sofia and Skopje in the agreements of the Republic of North Macedonia with the EU, including in the future Negotiating Framework. Thus, the linguistic norm spoken by the population of the Republic of North Macedonia should only be referred to as “the official language of the Republic of North Macedonia” in EU documents/positions/statements, including the future Negotiating Framework. No document/position/statement by the EU and its institutions can be interpreted as recognition of the existence of a separate so-called “Macedonian language”.[1]
In simpler terms, Bulgaria is declaring that the language clause utilized in previous agreements permits an omission of the Macedonian language from future EU correspondence and records. However, this assertion does not seem well-grounded. Even when considering Macedonia’s controversial name change, the language clause itself does not imply that the country’s official language must be called “The official language of the Republic of North Macedonia” instead of the “Macedonian language”. For clarity, the language clauses from both the 1999 Joint Declaration and 2017 Friendship Treaty have been provided below:
Joint Declaration of 1999
“Done at Sofia on 22 February 1999 in two original copies, each one in the official language of both countries, the Bulgarian language, in accordance with the constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria and the Macedonian language, in accordance with the constitution of the Republic of Macedonia, each text being equally authentic.”[2]
Friendship Treaty of 2017
“Signed in two original copies, each in the official languages of the Contracting Parties – Macedonian language, in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia and Bulgarian language, in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, with both texts equally important.”[3]
As shown by the above language clauses from 1999 and 2017, the wording states that documents will be printed in the official language of each party in accordance with its constitution – and in both cases the Macedonian and Bulgarian languages are listed. Thus, there is misapplication of the language clause on the part of Bulgaria. Many may wonder why this issue has come up, and the reality is that historical disagreements and political maneuvering have played a factor. Bulgaria has not officially recognized the Macedonian language and continues to deny basic rights to ethnic Macedonians in Bulgaria, often rejecting their existence. For example, a 2019 U.S. State Department Human Rights Report on Bulgaria noted the following: “Authorities continued to deny registration of the Macedonian activist group OMO Ilinden, despite a January judgment and 10 prior decisions of the European Court of Human Rights that the denials violated the group’s freedom of association.”[4]
Stepping back to the language issue, even after contentious passage of the Prespa Name Change Agreement between Macedonia and Greece, it did not cause Macedonia to alter its official language. Thus, Bulgaria has little substance to support an exclusion of the Macedonian language from being mentioned in EU documents. Claiming that “No document/position/statement by the EU and its institutions can be interpreted as recognition of the existence of a separate so-called “Macedonian language”is a significant provocation and goes against the concept of “good neighborly relations” often championed by the Bulgarian government. One fundamental reason the Bulgarian argument lacks merit is because the Macedonian language has been widely recognized for several decades. Additionally, a denial of the Macedonian language by one country should not diminish Macedonia’s presence within the EU. Trying to impose such censorship of the Macedonian language across the EU not only shows poor form but further strains an already delicate relationship between the two countries. Macedonia and Bulgaria have previously addressed their disagreements through the integration of the language clause within the 1999 and 2017 agreements mentioned earlier. With this clause, Bulgaria has been able to bypass official recognition of the Macedonian language, and Macedonia has been able to maintain relative stability with an important strategic partner – even if the actual agreements have been unjust in some respects (e.g. no protected minority status for ethnic Macedonians in Bulgaria who do not have Macedonian citizenship).
To presume that the language clause now changes focus to include only the new (and many would argue illegitimate) name,“The official language of the Republic of North Macedonia”, but not the language recognized by the UN and Prespa Agreement is counterintuitive. Perhaps more curious is the fact that an additional condition set forth by Bulgaria is the “Full implementation of treaties between the Republic of North Macedonia and EU Member States”. This would imply that the Prespa Agreement between Macedonia and Greece (an EU member state) must be fully implemented. If so, then the following clause within Article 1(3)(c) of the Prespa Agreement cannot be disregarded:
Article 1(3)(c)
“The official language of the Second Party shall be the “Macedonian language”, as recognised by the Third UN Conference on the Standardization of Geographical Names, held in Athens in 1977, and described in Article 7(3) and (4) of this Agreement.”[5]
As shown within Article 1(3)(c), the Prespa Agreement recognizes the Macedonian language, as previously established by the UN in 1977. This further accentuates Bulgaria’s misstep – it cannot simultaneously require implementation of the Prespa Agreement while also lobbying against the Macedonian language, a key feature within the Prespa Agreement.
There is a clear contradiction between the Prespa Agreement and recent demands made in the EU written procedures from March 25, 2020. This situation displays the vast challenges for a smaller country like Macedonia who is simply vying to become more stable and economically secure. Macedonia has been forced to sacrifice vital national interests to unlock the doors to NATO and the EU, yet still finds itself being taken advantage of by neighboring countries. This situation poses important questions regarding what obstacles lie ahead for Macedonia and whether EU membership is ultimately worth the tradeoff. As has often been the case, the principles of self-determination and mutual respect from neighboring countries seem to be overlooked in the case of Macedonia, and this can only contribute to increased tension and instability in the Balkans.
—
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
[2] “Review and Implementation of The Concluding Document of The Twelfth Special Session of The General Assembly Strengthening of Security And Cooperation In The Mediterranean Region Sustainable Development And International Economic Cooperation.” United Nations General Assembly 53rd Session. March 1999. https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/A/53/855
[3] “The Text of the Agreement on Friendship, Good Neighborliness and Cooperation between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Bulgaria”. July 2017.
[5] “The Prespa Agreement” Full text of the Final Agreement on Resolving the Macedonian-Greek Name Dispute and Strategic Partnership. 2018. https://vlada.mk/node/17422
Macedonia has a history spanning over 4,000 years, and the region has changed hands between many powers since time immemorial and has been a bone of contention between the Great Powers and Balkan states since the turn of the 20th century. For the sake of convenience and political relevance today, this summary will focus on the past 120 years, and mostly on relations with Greece.
At the turn of the 20th century, Macedonia
was still directly controlled by a rapidly declining Ottoman Empire. Greece,
Bulgaria, and Serbia had just gained independence and were still finding their
feet as independent regional powers. As each of these newly emergent states
were vying for more territory, they all had their sights set on gaining
Macedonia for themselves. Macedonians were the targets of large propaganda campaigns,
mostly coming from the churches in the region. Each of these states sought to
win over the hearts and minds of Macedonia’s people using a variety of methods
and varying degrees of persuasion and force.
To represent Macedonia before independence, a revolutionary organization was created by the name of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization and was responsible for creating the resistance movement against the Ottomans. The IMRO led the Ilinden Uprising of 1903 and created the very first, but short-lived Krusevo Republic, which is considered the first independent Macedonian State. The republic was overrun and crushed by the Ottomans ten days after the republic was established, and it is still an extremely symbolic event in Macedonia’s history.
Several territories, including Macedonia, temporarily formed an alliance to drive the Ottomans from the Balkans once and for all in what would be known as the First Balkan War. At the end of the war, the Great Powers the territory of Macedonia was divided. The region known as Vardar Macedonia which is today’s Republic of Macedonia was given to Serbia. Aegean Macedonia was given to Greece, and Bulgaria took the smallest portion of Pirin Macedonia. Bulgaria was not content with the arrangement and instigated the Second Balkan War to take back the whole of Macedonia, but was defeated. The Treaty of Bucharest ended the Second Balkan War.
During each states’ tenure of holding their respective
portions of Macedonia, the people of Macedonia had their ethnic identities
extremely repressed. In Greece, Macedonians underwent a process of forced
Hellenization, or assimilation, and were not allowed to speak their own
language. All Macedonian cultural activities and organizations were suppressed
by the Greek state. Many villages and towns, as well as Macedonian families
also had their names forcibly changed from Macedonian to Greek names. In Vardar
Macedonia, Macedonians suffered a similar fate at the hands of the Serbian
government, and even the name Macedonia itself was banned. The Serbian and
later Yugoslav government resorted to referring to the region as the Vardar
Banovina.
Following WWI, the Macedonians were forced to accept their fate as being citizens of the respective states they were living in, and during WWII, they were split between joining resistance movements to the Nazis in Greece and Yugoslavia, and collaborating with them in Bulgaria. A large portion of the Greek Resistance Movement was comprised of roughly 12,000 Macedonians, who later became a large contributor to the KKE’s manpower in the Greek Civil War just after WWII. After WWII, Vardar Macedonia was given the status of a constituent republic of Yugoslavia under Josip Broz Tito, and eventually became today’s Republic of Macedonia. In Aegean Macedonia, people were not so lucky. The Macedonians of Aegean Macedonia found themselves brutally oppressed during the years prior to and during WWII by dictator Ioannis Metaxas, and thousands of Macedonians were forced into prison camps on Aegean Islands. Many people were brutally beaten, tortured, and forced to drink castor oil simply for identifying as Macedonian or speaking the Macedonian Language.
During the Greek Civil War, the Macedonians sided with the KKE after being promised that they would be united with Vardar Macedonia and allowed a fully united, and independent state of all ethnicities within Macedonia. Unfortunately for the Macedonians, the KKE lost the war, and Aegean Macedonia remained in the hands of Greece. Following the war, over a hundred thousand Macedonians were forced out of Aegean Macedonia and are still no longer allowed to return by order of the Greek government. Minority status still has not been given to Macedonians, and they still are not allowed to conduct business in their own language. Assertion of Macedonian identity is still cause for extreme harassment in Greece, and human rights are still violated in Aegean Macedonia to this day.
Following the independence of the Republic of Macedonia in 1991, Greece placed an economic embargo on the country over the name of the country, as well as the use of Macedonian cultural symbols in their flag. Due to Greece’s continual veto of Macedonian accession to NATO and the European Union over the use of its name, the Macedonian government filed a lawsuit against its neighbor. Both states testified in the Hague in 2011, and fifteen of sixteen judges ruled that Greece had violated international law, as it had earlier agreed to allow Macedonia to join the European Union.
Though Macedonia and Greece have had tension between state leaders and politicians in the past, most Macedonians and Greeks wish to be reconciled and cooperate with each other in peace. The global Macedonian community has been extremely disappointed by the lack of accountability for Greece’s actions in the past, and continued discrimination imposed upon Macedonians today. The Macedonian Community humbly asks that the Macedonian minority of Greece gets the recognition it has long been denied and that those who were exiled be granted permission by the Greek government to return to their homes.
Source of feature photo: Painting of the Macedonian Struggle found in The Museum of the Macedonian Struggle in Skopje, Macedonia
—
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
The European Union once again shunned Macedonia’s integration aspirations. Despite positive recommendations by the European Commission and the European Parliament, EU leaders failed to reach an accession decision on Macedonian membership. For 15 years and counting, Macedonia has been stuck before EU’s doors. As disappointing as it is, the latest EU letdown has important ramifications for the future of Macedonian politics.
At least three things became clear after the latest membership fiasco. For one, we must understand that in the absence of meaningful reform, no amount of naïve bargaining with the national interest will be enough to bring Macedonia into the EU. Second, multiple rejections and failures to consolidate EU unanimity demonstrate that the EU is unsure about the benefits from Macedonian membership. Finally, the failure to substantively distinguish Macedonia from Albania in terms of accession progress is a reflection of a broken accession process that undermines EU’s credibility.
You cannot substitute lack of meaningful reforms with naïve idealism
Despite the disappointing decision, there is merit to Macron’s resistance to Macedonia’s EU bid. Whereas the government led by Zaev gave in to virtually every demand by our neighbors, little was accomplished in relation to reform priorities. In fact, Macron’s decision to block Macedonian membership was partially driven by the failure of Macedonian officials to successfully reform the country’s institutions and to strengthen the country’s rule of law.
Macron said that new EU members must demonstrate a range of reforms in economic policy, human rights, rule of law and anti-corruption measures. As he made clear, Macedonia has a long journey before substantive progress in these areas is even possible.
The Macedonian leadership, led by the naïve idealist Zaev, believed that satisfying the ultra nationalistic demands of Greece and Bulgaria would be enough to convince European leaders of our readiness to become an equal member of the bloc. At least one European leader was not convinced.
When strategic vision and planning are replaced by naïve idealism and caving to foreign demands, the result is failure. That much became clear after Macron said no to Macedonian membership in the EU.
Zaev focused the entirety of his reign of power on undermining the Macedonian identity according to the demands of our neighbors. We ended up humiliated by aggressive neighbors interested in hijacking Macedonian national heritage and identity.
Zaev believed that bargaining away our Macedonian identity would have surely opened the way for Macedonian EU accession, by demonstrating the country’s readiness to embrace EU values. But without substantive reforms, his rosy idealism quickly turned gray.
Is It to EU’s Benefit to Welcome Macedonia?
The membership rejection has deeper roots than simply citing failures to implement sufficient reforms. After all, what is it that the EU can gain from Macedonian membership?
Of course, enlarging the Union would allow a more cohesive political bloc, one that is capable of deterring outside influences. It would consolidate a region prone to conflict and instability, and would provide ample opportunity for regional development.
But in order for the gains from potential Macedonian EU membership to be felt by all sides, the EU must envision tangible benefits from Macedonian membership. In a situation in which a country has one of the lowest GDP/capita rates in Europe and one of the most corrupt institutions on the continent, it is difficult to imagine what benefits the EU can reap.
Macedonian leaders must stop and consider this question very carefully. We ought not to see the EU as an ultimate goal or as a reward for foreign policy concessions. EU membership should be based on mutual benefits, where both Macedonia and the EU gain from Macedonian entry. As it stands, adding Macedonia to the EU would create another problem child for the Union, with little benefits for existing member states.
Our path to prosperity does not begin and end with EU membership. Becoming a member state is only one stop on the way to progress. The path to becoming a prosperous country depends on the ability of Macedonia to embrace change and to fundamentally reorient its institutions and its entire system toward democracy, rule of law, and free markets.
If Macedonia hopes to win the approval of European leaders, our nation’s leadership must build successful strategies for addressing all outstanding issues that stand in the way of Macedonian EU membership. Only by doing so would Macedonia unanimously convince Europe that Macedonian EU membership could be beneficial for all sides.
A Broken Process: EU Needs to Decouple Macedonia and Albania
The fact that Macedonia and Albania were lumped into the same category is tragic. It is true that Macedonia has its set of problems, but Albania is in a league of its own. The country has endemic issues with domestic violence, terrorism, torture, a state sponsored drug industry, corruption, police brutality and an openly anti-LGBTQ culture.
At the very least, the naïve Macedonian leadership demonstrated a wholehearted verbal embrace and dedication to European values, even if they failed to translate any of that in practice. Their Albanian counterparts did not even get that far.
Some European leaders, such as Merkel, recognized that Macedonia has done more on its path to
EU membership. Yet this distinction fell short of decoupling Macedonia and Albania as one and the same in terms of EU ambitions. The EU must clearly separate the two countries if we hope to avoid stalemates in Macedonian accession as a result of Albania’s lack of readiness.
In Summary: Upcoming Elections and Macedonia’s Future
Macedonia is left hanging once more. It appears as though we are stuck in a cycle of perpetual political crises, failed EU attempts, and inconsistent governmental mandates. As disappointed as we all are, there is a lot of work to be done. Macedonia has an upcoming election on April 12th 2020, and it will be interesting to observe the political rhetoric and campaigning that happens.
The elections will be a great opportunity for Macedonia to institute substantive changes into the election model and improve its representative parliamentary system. An idea that has received a lot of traction recently is the establishment of a single-member district, which will make parliamentarians more accountable to the electorate as opposed to their political parties. In addition, an open list proportional representation system will give Macedonians a say in selecting candidates directly, as opposed to political parties choosing their own.
Furthermore, Macedonian politicians should prioritize updating the voter registration lists, in order to decrease the possibilities for election fraud. These changes will improve the state of democracy in Macedonia and will strengthen our country’s commitment to democratic norms and values. Instituting these changes will help Macedonia break free from an endless cycle of early elections and will make politicians closer and more accountable to the electorate.
On a broader level, Macedonia has to remain committed to fighting corruption, strengthening the rule of law, and upholding political rights and freedoms. Joining an organization like the EU would certainly aid our efforts to create a prosperous and free country, but substantive changes must come from within.
Macedonia’s dysfunctional institutional system and its difficulties in improving the rule of law are major obstacles on our path to the EU and to general prosperity. Before we see meaningful reform being implemented, our dreams for joining the EU and becoming a thriving country will remain unfulfilled.
—
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author or interviewees alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
It is a new day in the Balkans, as many have applauded the “historic” Prespa Agreement reached between the Republic of Macedonia and Greece to officially change the name from Macedonia to “North Macedonia”. To many in the United States and other western countries, this agreement has been applauded for being a great example of how bilateral disputes can be overcome. However, before drawing such a conclusion, we should consider the whole picture of what happened, how it happened, and what it truly means for the Macedonian people. Let’s start by looking back at how the Prespa Agreement was approved.
On Friday, October 19, 2018 two‐thirds of the members of Parliament in Macedonia voted in favor of constitutional changes as required by the Prespa Agreement with Greece, which effectively led to changing the name of Macedonia to “North Macedonia” for domestic, bilateral and international use (or “Erga Omnes”). Given that the turnout of the Macedonian referendum failed to reach the required 50% threshold, one would presume that the country’s democratic allies might be puzzled that two‐thirds of parliamentary members took matters into their own hands as opposed to respecting the majority of voters who elected not to participate in the referendum.
In the Macedonian name referendum on September 30, 2018, there were approximately 1,800,000 eligible votes and just over 666,000 people went to the polls, garnering a turnout of just below 37%. Even with this being a consultative (i.e. non‐binding) referendum, there was little excitement from the people for this deal – as shown by the small turnout. These figures present the reality that most citizens (over 60%) had reservations about the Prespa Agreement and did not believe it was in the country’s best interest.
A supporter of the boycott movement celebrates the low turnout of the referendum – Skopje, Macedonia, US News.
Ultimately, lawmakers in any democracy must recognize when the citizens are sending a message. Even with months of intense lobbying and campaigning by foreign officials such as Federica Mogherini and Johannes Hahn of the EU, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, United States Secretary of Defense James Mattis and several others, the referendum failed. It is also important to mention that all these visitors to Macedonia made a point to say, “There is no alternative, you cannot enter EU or NATO without the Prespa Agreement”. This is not what modern‐day democratic principles should entail. Attempting to influence a referendum outcome by intimidating the people with an ultimatum is the exact opposite of what “European Values” mean. Not only this, but even after the referendum results did not land in the favor of the governing majority and foreign officials, they continued to push for constitutional changes as if the referendum was a success. From a neutral perspective, this is the most difficult aspect to grasp – does this not cross the line of infringement upon a nation’s sovereignty and the will of its people?
Stepping away from the questionable events at the time of this referendum, let’s revert to Friday, October 19th, 2018, when the vote on constitution changes took place. In the week leading up to this vote, there was little belief that the ruling coalition had enough votes, as the SDSM‐led governing majority possessed only 72 votes and required an additional 8 votes from the opposition party, VMRO‐DPMNE, in order to reach the two‐thirds majority required to approve changing the constitution. Then came Friday, when the parliamentary session and vote was slated to take place around 3PM but had been delayed 6 hours until approximately 9PM. Seemingly out of nowhere, the government coalition got exactly 8 more votes to reach the amount needed to approve constitutional revision. There have been suspicions that several of the MP’s were bribed or blackmailed to flip their vote in favor of constitutional changes. A few of these parliamentary members had even been incarcerated for events related to violence in the Parliament the previous year on April 27, 2017, when Talat Xhaferi (Former KLA/NLA commander) was controversially elected as Speaker of the Assembly. More specifically, 3 members of VMRO‐DPMNE, Krsto Mukoski, Ljuben Arnaudov, and Saso Vasilevski who had been charged for their role in events taking place on April 27, 2017, were all released from house arrest just days before this vote. Interestingly, all 3 of them voted in favor of constitutional changes, which their party did not support. All these happenings seem too coordinated to be taken as pure coincidences. It is evident that both externally and internal there was immense pressure to approve the constitutional changes. Even the Defense Minister of Greece, Panos Kammenos, believed this to be the case, having claimed that politicians in Skopje were bribed to push the vote through.
With such important questions asked of the citizens and no mandate provided, it is irresponsible for lawmakers to move forward with changes to the country’s constitution.
Now that we have touched on the controversies surrounding this vote, let’s examine the thoughts and minds of the actual citizens who did vote in favor of the agreement, as they still make up a significant chunk (609,000+) of the nation’s voters and should not be overlooked. For a Macedonian citizen (of any ethnic background), being put to the test of voting to change the constitutional name of the country in exchange for potential EU and NATO membership is not an easy decision. Though most would not accept an Erga Omnes (i.e. for all purposes) solution to the problem that Greece has with Macedonia’s name, there were still a fair number of citizens were willing to make that sacrifice in the referendum. In their position, it is difficult to live in Macedonia under the current conditions; citizens are desperate and trying to find any way to gain economic prosperity – including leaving the country. In other words, some citizens view acceptance of the Prespa Agreement as a ticket out of the country. Given that multiple countries within the EU today experience problems with stagnant population growth and negative migration (i.e. Bulgaria, Romania), this is not a farfetched theory. The true question here is whether Macedonia would fare any better than nearby countries such as Bulgaria and Romania, who are larger economies with bigger populations.
Below are the Total Populations, Net Migration, and Population Growth Rates for the three countries mentioned above. A positive net migration indicates there are more people entering than leaving a country, while a negative net migration shows that more people are leaving a country than coming in within the year. The population growth rate is annual population growth shown as a percentage (regardless of legal status or citizenship).
As displayed in the table above, two countries situated near Macedonia who are also EU and NATO members continue to struggle with negative net migration and shrinking populations. In fact, when considering the figures above, Bulgaria and Romania appear to be in slightly worse condition than Macedonia when it comes to these two statistics. Net Migration and Population Growth Rates tell only part of the story, but certainly offer a benchmark to compare the overall population stability of these three nations. When considering population totals, Romania (nearly 10x larger) and Bulgaria (approximately 3.5x larger) both have greater bandwidth to tolerate negative net migration and a diminishing population than does Macedonia. Moreover, this evidence does not suggest that entrance into the EU and NATO will keep people in Macedonia, and neither do the motives of Macedonian citizens who supported the Prespa Agreement, as a number of them are trying to escape the stagnant economic conditions at any cost. Now, there are potential benefits to joining the EU and NATO, such as better prospective long-term stability and potential for greater trade and investment opportunities, but it should not come at the cost of Macedonian national interests – especially when citizens did not provide a mandate through the referendum.
So, many of you are probably wondering what is in the “Prespa Agreement”. Thus, we should take a moment to analyze its most critical contents, which have been highlighted below (*Please note that the “First Party” in the agreement is Greece and “Second Party“ is Macedonia).
Within Article 1, Section 11 the agreement states the following:
As one can see, this section states “…ratification of this agreement by its Parliament or following a referendum, if the Second Party (Macedonia) decides to hold one.” Because Macedonia decided to hold a referendum, the results undoubtedly hold merit – but this was ignored by members of the Macedonian Parliament and other global actors.
The clause shown above, within Article 1(3)(b), notes that the nationality of the citizens for all travel documents will read “Macedonian/Citizen of the Republic of Northern Macedonia”. If the identity of Macedonians was protected, as many defenders of the agreement have claimed, then why must there be the addition of “/Citizen of the Republic of Northern Macedonia”? This is a clear case of Greece seeking to minimize Macedonian self‐identification. When denoting nationality in a travel document, stating that a person is a “citizen of…….” does not make logical sense in this case. If the Macedonian identity were truly intact, the travel documents would continue stating “Macedonian”, as no other people in the globe call themselves Macedonian in an official manner, and there is no other state name that contains the word “Macedonia”.
Greeks from the northern portion of Greece (also known as Aegean Macedonia) are no exception – their passports state “Greek/Hellenic” under nationality, not “Macedonian” or “South Macedonian”. Because of this fact, there is little confusion nor is there an actual need for additional verbiage after “Macedonian”. This is one of many reasons why the Prespa Agreement does not solidify the Macedonian identity, but fragments it.
Article 1(3)(e) above is a technical clause that is simply designed not to provoke Greeks when Macedonian vehicles enter Greece. If the country code remains MK or MKD, what is the purpose of the name change in the first place? This section suggests that the country is to be informally called “Makedonija” or “Macedonia”. It appears to be somewhat open-ended and could lead to future disputes due to name use at sporting events like the Olympics, World Cup Qualification, or Handball Championships. Greeks could very well cite provocation by Macedonia for using banners, signs, or apparel that says “Makedonija” or “Macedonia”. Overall, it seems unlikely that the Prespa Agreement has fully solved this aspect of the issue.
The above paragraph, within Article 4(3), may seem like basic rhetoric, but is quite crippling to those of Macedonian descent in Northern Greece. With this paragraph, Greece has effectively erased the connection between Macedonians in the Republic of Macedonia and in Northern Greece. This is important because of the ethnic suppression that took place against Macedonians in Northern Greece since the Balkan wars concluded in the early 20thcentury. To put it into perspective, most of these folks were either forcibly assimilated (i.e. names changed, forced to speak Greek instead of Macedonian), tortured or killed. Keep in mind that this was all before Macedonia had a country of its own, and thus, citizens of its own. This clause provides Greece with a clever way of evading the reality that there is a Macedonian minority in Greece, because it eliminates the Republic of Macedonia’s right to fight for protection against discrimination of the Macedonian minority in Greece. Keep in mind that vast majority of ethnic Macedonians in Northern Greece are not Macedonian citizens, therefore cannot be protected as a minority within Greece because of this portion of the agreement.
The above clauses within Article 7 dangerously attempt to make historical assertions in a political agreement – assertions that are not well‐grounded. Macedonia is far from being “One and Greek” – just ask Greek parliamentary representative Nikos Filis, who explicitly said this when addressing the Greek assembly on January 22, 2019, stating: “When it is heard that Macedonia is one and is Greek, it is perceived as irresponsible. Maybe it does not sound good but it is a reality. And to be more specific, Macedonia became Greek because Macedonian population up to 1912‐22 that came to refugees had a majority Greek only in some zones in the South”. Ultimately, this clause in the agreement displays a negligent attempt by the Greeks to monopolize ancient Macedonian history.
Article 8, parts 1, 2 and 3 shown above are some of the most inflammatory portions of the agreement, whereby the old Macedonian national flag symbol (the 16‐ray sun) which has been a historic symbol of Macedonia for centuries, cannot be used in any public space. Further, the agreement makes note that “Archaeological artifacts do not fall within the scope of this provision”. In other words, though there may be historical artifacts, symbols, findings and other indications that this symbol is connected to the very land it sits on – the 16‐ray sun cannot be shown in public. If readers want to truly get to the crux of the name issue, Macedonian identity, and bilateral dispute with Greece, this is where it lies. At no juncture has the Republic of Macedonia claimed exclusive rights to ancient Macedonia, its symbols, or its history. The stance of the Republic of Macedonia has always been that the country is one part of that rich history, and therefore has a right to celebrate it.
Let us use an example. There is a Macedonian man named Marko. He was born in Bitola, just a few miles from the ancient Macedonian city of Heraclea. He is proud of this fact and feels he has a connection to ancient Macedonia. The real question is: Does Marko, or any other Macedonian citizen who feels a connection to ancient Macedonia, have the right to proudly express these symbols and lineage? Any scholar, lawyer, judge or even the writers of the Prespa Agreement would say “Yes”.
If this is the case, then why does the country where many people like Marko live not have ITS right to be proud of that history?
This is the heart of the problem. While Greece seeks to control Macedonian history from antiquity to present, it is destroying its neighboring country’s future. Many Macedonians understand that they have a significant Slavic element in their culture and are mixed between Slavic cultural heritage and that of the ancient Macedonians in some way. It is through no fault of their own that the Ancient Macedonian language was not fully written and standardized. It is through no fault of their own that they have been ruled over by Turks, Bulgarians, Serbians and others, undoubtedly undergoing assimilation just like many other ethnic groups throughout the Balkans. It is through no fault of their own that Macedonians in Greece had their names forcibly changed and were tortured or killed. No, none of this is the fault of the Macedonian people. Even with all these challenges, it is impossible to negate one thing – that Macedonians exist. No one can take away the fact that Marko and his family live on the very soil where Filip II of Macedonia (Alexander the Great’s father) ruled and where his statue lies.
Article 8(5) shown above is yet another provocation within the agreement. This clause is a prime example of Greece exerting pressure to extract additional concessions. The Prespa Agreement IS about identity, no matter how much Nikola Dimitrov, Zoran Zaev, Radmila Sekerinska or anyone else denies it. If all of this is simply about renaming the country and accepting that Macedonians are allowed to self‐determine, then why are all these additional stipulations included from a historical, education, and symbolic standpoint? Teaching children an altered past of their own country and changing the materials they learn from sets a dangerous precedent. It will be interesting to see if there will be any alterations to Greek textbooks, though that seems quite unlikely…
Article 19(2) – Greece’s trump card. The true meaning behind this paragraph is to say, “If they don’t hide the old flag, change schoolbooks, change all official documents and government buildings to state “North Macedonia”, then the deal is off and the doors to EU and NATO are closed.”
There are several troublesome sections within the Prespa Agreement, and it seems to raise more questions than it answers. It is about much more than switching the name from “Macedonia” to “North Macedonia”. If that were the case, the document would have been a single page in length. To an average person trying to make sense of this issue, please remember the international rights of self‐determination and the right to name one’s own state. How would you feel if a foreign nation was taking a vote to verify the name of your own country? Most would feel embarrassed, as many Macedonians currently do.
Nonetheless, the final step towards ratification of the Prespa Agreement took place when Greece’s Parliament narrowly approved of the agreement with 153 members voting in favor out of the 300‐seat assembly. This changed Macedonia’s official name to “North Macedonia”.
Though this agreement has passed and it may take decades to reverse it, we must all be aware of the conditions under which it was approved, its inflammatory contents, and most of all, understand that this was not what the majority of Macedonians both in Macedonia and around the globe wanted. It is imperative that all political and social actors respect the will of the Macedonian people and continue referring to the country as “Macedonia” – the name which has been recognized by nearly 70% of U.N. states.
—
Any opinions or views expressed in articles or other pieces appearing in UMD Voice are those of the author or interviewees alone and are not necessarily those of the United Macedonian Diaspora and its young leaders’ program Generation M; the appearance of any such opinions or views in UMD Voice is not and should not be considered to be an endorsement by or approval of the same by UMD and Generation M.
