Posts Tagged ‘Bulgaria’

Macedonia, A Plea for the Primitive, 1921

Friday, December 12th, 2008

(more…)

A letter to Serbian President

Wednesday, October 29th, 2008

Your Excellency,
Respected President of the Republic of Serbia

On occasion of the last important act in the relationships of Republic of Serbia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, namely, the forced recognition of a so-called independence of Kosovo and Metohija, integral parts of Serbia, the administration of Serbia led by you, did not, unfortunately demonstrated determination to use legitimate means in order to protect the state interests of Serbia.

With the decision of the Government of FYROM to give an illusion of international legitimacy to the alienated Serbian province, the tradition of friendship between peoples of Republic of Serbia and FYROM, which is based on centuries old common cultural and historical ties and great convergence that both peoples have one towards the other in various spheres of life, has been brutally trampled upon.

You are, as a politician and observer of the contemporary Serbian history, aware that with the recognition of independence of FYROM under the name “Republic of Macedonia” from the former totalitarian regime, that this decision, brought for resolution of petty daily politics, especially heavily damaged the dignity of the friendly Greek people.

Allow me to remind you, Your Excellency, that two centuries bear witness of cooperation in good and evil times between Serbia and Greece, strongly characterized by idealistic deed motivated by altruism from individual Greeks and from the Governments of the Hellenic Republic and Cyprus. Greeks, often in clash with their other interests, strongly stood in defense of Serbia, her freedom and dignity, representing a bastion of freedom at the Peninsula interwoven with tragedy.

Macedonia is indeed an ancient Greek land, where Greek language was spoken and written, Olympian deities were celebrated and from which the Hellenistic empire was created. Macedonia is a pride of Hellenism and Hellenes, which today are keen on their traditions. Macedonia is not spatially, nor historically, nor culturally related with FYROM and her Slavic demographic majority.

For the purpose of ideal solution which would partially payed the debt toward the friendly Greek people, for the purpose of establishing the truth that Macedonia is Greek and that the irredentism which is proliferated during the last years by Skoplje represents a danger to security of the Balkans, it is rightful and matter of principles that the Republic of Serbia recognizes FYROM under that very name. That is in same time, an adequate answer in opposition of the hostile act of support of tearing a Serbian state territory by official Skoplje.

Having faith in you, i present my proposal
convinced in its validity.

Sincerely yours,
Vasko Gligorijevi?

Skoplje, FYROM

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/user/Gligorow

Original letter in Serbian…

Vaša Ekselencijo,

Poštovani Predsedni?e Republike Srbije

Povodom poslednjeg bitnog ?ina u odnosima Republike Srbije i Bivše
Jugoslovenske Republike Makedonije, imeno, usiljenog priznanja
takozvane samostalnosti Kosova I Metohije kao integralnog dela
Republike Srbije, organi vlasti Srbije na ?elu sa Vama nisu, nažalost,
pokazali odlu?nost u upotrebi legitimnih sredstava za zaštitu državnih
interesa Srbije.

Odlukom vlade BJRM da otu?enoj srpskoj pokrajini da privid me?unarodne
zvani?nosti brutalno je pogažena tradicija prijateljstva koja postoji
izme?u naroda Republike Srbije i BJRM, a koja se temelje na vekovnim
zajedni?kim kulturnim i istorijskim vezama i snažnom upu?enoš?u koju
ova dva naroda imaju jedni prema drugom u raznim sferama života.

Vi ste kao politi?ar i posmatra? savremene srpske istorije svesni da
se svojevremenim priznanjem nezavisnosti BJRM pod imenom “Republika
Makedonija” od strane bivšeg totalitaristi?kog režima da je isti, u
cilju zadovoljavanja dnevno-politi?kih potreba, osobeno teško
povredilo dostojanstvo prijateljskog gr?kog naroda.

Dozvolite da Vas podsetim, Vaša Ekselencijo, da skoro dva veka svedo?e
o saradnji u dobru i zlu izme?u Srbije I Gr?ke, snažno okarakterisanu
idealisti?kim delima podkrepljenim altruizmom kako od pojedinaca Grka
tako i od vlada Helenske Republike i Kipra.Grci su, ?esto u
protivre?nosti sa njihovim interesima, snažno stali u odbranu Srbije,
njene slobode i dostojanstva, predstavljaju?i bedem slobode na
tragedijom prožetom Poluostrovu.

Makedonija jeste drevna gr?ka zemlja, gde se govorila i pisala gr?ka
re?, slavili olimpijski bogovi i iz koje je potekla helenisti?ka
imperija.Makedonija je dika Helenizma I Helena, koji I danas visoko
drže do svega tradicionalnog i vrednog poštovanja. Makedonija ni
prostorno, ni istorijski, ni kulturno nema veze sa BJRM i sa njenom
slovenskom demografskom ve?inom.

U cilju izvršenja idealnog rešenja koje bi poravnalo dug koji imamo ka
prijateljskom gr?kom narodu, u svrhu uspostavljanja istine da je
Makedonija gr?ka i da je iredentizam koji se posljednjih godina
proizvodi u Skoplju opasan po bezbednost Balkana, pravilno je i
principijelno da Republika Srbija prizna BJRM pod tim imenom, za sve
vrste upotreba. To je,ujedno, i adekvatan odgovor nasuprot
neprijateljskom ?inu podrške komadanja srpske državne teritorije od
strane zvani?nog Skoplja.

Uzdaju?i se u Vas, predajem Vam moj predlog
ube?en u njegovu ispravnost.

Iskreno Vaš,
Vasko Gligorijevi?

Skoplje, BJRM
————————————————————————–

Pseudomacedonia - The Fallacy Of A Cause

Friday, October 24th, 2008

Australian Macedonian Advisory Council (AMAC)
October 21, 2008

Pseudomacedonia - The Fallacy Of A Cause

Interlocutors of Slavic spiritual, cultural and biological origin, originating from the area of the former Vardarska Banovina, please give me your attention - even though it might not suit your contradictory, inconsistent, ignorant patchwork of information and its abuse via unorthodox methods.

I have stated my basic bibliography many times, but another one is not too much: I am a Serb, graduated archaeology in 2002, worked as volunteer at couple of dozen excavation and in laboratory work. Apart from Serbian, I speak FYROM’s Bulgarian dialect elevated in 1940´s by Communists into “Macedonian literature standard”, English, Russian, Bulgarian, Old Church Slavonic and Latin. From 2005 I am student of History at UKIM, with my last undergraduate year being 2008/9.

Just like most people from FYROM, I used to accept the “Macedonian truth” about our unity as a people and our victimization by neighbors, primarily by Greeks. I was more exposed to anti-Greek propaganda (”600,000 Macedonians under Greek slavery” etc, of that type),not least because I was a half-Aegean from a sociobiological perspective and I grew in “Aegean” household. But starting to realize that “Macedonism” is based on lies, conclusions which I reached via extensive contact with foreign historic, anthropological, linguistic literature, I rejected my Pseudomacedonian identity, accepted the Serbian one, as an authentic centuries old identity in the northern strip of FYROM from where my patrilineal ancestors originate from.

After that I confronted the establishment at UKIM, both during my first studies and now , more vigorously, during the second. I came to conclusion that this particular brands of lies that are produced by the Academia or are being produced by various individuals (Donski, Tentov et al.) and are condoned and praised by highest institutions represent a ferocious attack on our true Slavic, Bulgaro-Serbian being which includes a number of semi-assimilated Greco-Vlach and that such brazen ideology is generator of crisis in the wider Balkan area.

The number of opponents of the Pseudomacedonistic ideology is now small, but nonetheless visible. Among the Serbian community mechanisms of cultural conservatism and innovation are rich enough to secure distinct, non-pseudomacedonian ethnic identity. The Pseudomacedonian mass is decaying by the acts of Bulgarian irredentism (passports, radical VMRO fractions, annual festivities of Bulgarian history, Skopje students in Bulgaria). Greeks are starting with progressive tempo their own initiatives regarding the organization and stimulation of cultural and political initiatives of Greek type among Vlach population of Monastiri/Bitola, Gevgeli and Krusovo.

In such vibrant situation upon which the emotions extrapolated from the ongoing negotiations are interwoven, many people from FYROM have chosen Pseudomacedonian nationalism as an answer to their thirst for national identity and national path after the collapse of Yugoslav Communistic ideology. In the name of aprioristic dogmatic “truths” which energize them, they are spending time in “hypermacedonization”: ad nauseum proclamation of the holy “truths” of the Pseudomacedonism, the crucial among which is the claim that today´s “Makedonci” of FYROM are direct descendants of Alexander´s Macedonians, which in turn were quite distinct from Greeks and from which today´s “Makedonci” inherited the genetic basis, their language (!), culture (including folklore) and a “right” to expand and embrace alleged 1,000,000 more of their kin, primarily in Greece, then Bulgaria, Albania and Serbia.

Well, let me disappoint you by raising these very valid points:

1.Ancient Macedonians were a conglomerate of Greek tribes and clans constituting a conservative monarchist military democracy , essentially an evolved extension of Dorian and on longer period, Indo-European system of social architecture.

2.Ancient Macedonians were present a long time before Philip and Alexander, and were considered Greeks by other Greeks as they were allowed to participate in the Olympic Games, an event in which only Greeks were allowed to participate. Persians used the term “Yauna Takabara” (Greek wearing a hat) for Macedonians already in the fifth century BC.

3.Dozens of epigraphic objects predating the epoch of Philip and Alexander show clearly a Greek language of North-Western type.

4. The names of Macedonians were not an import from the south since there is a marked deficit of names of eminent Athenians and other Greeks south from Macedonia.

5. From its prehistoric inception, Macedonia was an area which was for the most part, even more restrictive in size than today´s Greek Macedonia. Only 10% of today´s FYROM appears within the borders of Ancient Macedonia, probably without significant ethnic changes among native Paeonian stock, situated from ancient times North-Eastern from Macedonians, bordering on Thracians in Eastern FYROM, Dardanians in the line of Tetovo-Skoplje-Kumanovo and Illyrians proper from Ohrid to Kiev and Debar. As you may see, FYROM was essentially never Macedonia neither ethnically nor politically!

6.Expansion of Macedonia under Alexander the Great shows progressive patronage of a Hellenic way of life, culture and civilization (i.e. Hellenistic Period). The entire enormous opus of linguistic material on three continents was exclusively in Greek. Isn´t it strange that the dominating Macedonian element, if it was ethnically of alien nature vis-a-vis Greeks, did not left hundreds, if not thousands monuments in its alleged separate, non-Greek language as a sign of its prestige? From those times we have testimonies of the historians about Hellenic ethnic identity of chief historical protagonist among Macedonians.

10.Analysis of the entire corpus of Macedonian-authored inscription reveal a form of Greek which is quite different from the Ionic dialects and which has self-developed Greek features , thus proving that the Greek language among Macedonians is not borrowing.

11. There is a gap of 900 years from the Macedonia of Alexander to the arrival of Slavs, a North-Eastern agricultural people whose arrival is recorded by Gothic, Byzantine and Arab sources, confirmed with archaeology and attested with the extensive name changes of ancient geonymes. These Slavs, i.e. the part of them which overlapped Macedonia never took the name Macedonians for themselves, nor there was any mixture between the Greek and Vlach Christian population and the pagan newcomers. It would appear that from 7th and 8th century A.D. to the formation of Samuel Empire in 10th, that the people from FYROM were known as Bulgarians. The first Slavic text in the area of FYROM show Bulgarian features, while the Bitola text confirms the Bulgarian ethnology of the dynasty and people.DAI doesn´t mention Slavic Macedonians. Serbs in 13/14th century A.D. never mentioned Macedonians, but very often Greeks, Albanians, Vlachs and even the tiny Saxon community. The Macedonia proper during Serb rule was a separate province, with Greek as the official language.

12. Not a single Turkish document mentions any “Macedonian” ethnicity nor do the books by Turkish travelers. Not a single local work of literacy mentions “Macedonians”, “Macedonian language” etc. There are hundred references from other Balkanites, Westerners, Russians all the way to 19th century A.D. about Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs, Albanians, Jews, Vlachs but no Macedonians!

13. The process of Bulgarian national awakening in FYROM, which began as a movement for Slavic-Bulgarian literacy, Church and school and ended with creation of VMRO (fmr. BMORK) is extensively studied and confirms that there was absolutely no proof of any authentic “Macedonian ethnic feeling” among the population.

14.Only in late 19th century A.D., conclusive with Yugoslav decision, based on the Commintern´s decision to establish a “Macedonian” nationality and state there are occasional and sporadic appearances of the Pseudomacedonian idea, in many cases by authors which renounced them later, like Misirkov. The population still considers itself Bulgarian, with lower percentage thinking of itself as “Macedonian” but not necessary in opposition with the broader Bulgarian national feeling. Most organization and eminent individuals fighting either for “Independent Macedonia” or Greater Bulgaria expressed their Bulgarian identity and that is extensively documented.

15. Even after the process of ethno-linguistic mutation, most folkloristic and lingustical features of the post-1944 “Macedonian” ethnos have strong analogies with Bulgarian vernacular.

So then, what are Pseudomacedonians doing constructively, excluding their opposition of overwhelming, rigidly scientifically analyzed evidence for the Greekness of Macedonia and Macedonians, their opposition to the fact that no significant cultural and biological admixture happened between Slavs and Greeks, that history doesn´t know for Macedonian identity of Slavic type attested in documents and other points which testify against their ideology?

They tend to use nothing much but stubbornness nurtured out of spiritual impoverishment of Pseudomacedonian culture and fanatical, extensive injection of pseudonationalism by VMRO-DPMNE and the attached crew of pseudo historians, together with other forms of indoctrination. All their “reasoning” is devastated by the use of brute logic in unity with fact and proper reasoning. In the attempt to gain some pleasure from playing “tough opposition”, they will most likely end up bitter and over-run by the political elite of FYROM, instead of emancipated beings capable of integrating and rationally judging all viewpoints, and intergrating in the European (EU) society.

Vasko Gligorijevic

(formely known as Wasilj Gligorov)

Skopje,FYROM

http://www.youtube.com/user/Gligorow

[email protected]

www.macedonian.com.au

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/78565
__________________
AMAC
(Australian Macedonian Advisory Council)
http://www.macedonian.com.au

The New “Macedonian” Question

Friday, October 24th, 2008

 

The New Macedonian Question

Australian Macedonian Advisory Council

October 23, 2008

The birth of the ‘People’s Republic of Macedonia’

In Europe there are many place-names which have strong historical associations, but none more so than Macedonia [1]. It is a measure of the fame of the ancient Macedonians, that their name has survived for over 2,500 years to describe a corner of the Balkan Peninsula, long after they themselves ceased to play any important part in European history.

Today the geographical boundaries of Macedonia are difficult to define, however, little is known about the new ‘Macedonian question’. For instance: How well known is it in the world that in the Balkans there are two Macedonias, separated by a common frontier?

How many people know that the northern small landlocked Slavonic Macedonia, known officially as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), has a seat at the UN, whereas the historical Greek Macedonia does not, because it is not a state but only a province of Greece?

How many people know how and when this multi-ethnic state was created?

In order to forge a new nation-state from a population, various parts of which possess a different national/ ethnical background or consciousness, you need three key elements: a political motive, fabricated history and a fabricated language.

Let’s examine how the state of FYROM was created. The geographical area which makes up FYROM today did not appear as ‘Macedonia’ on any map before the Second World War. Its population is mainly Slavonic and Albanian. In 1944 Tito announced the creation of the ‘People’s Republic of Macedonia’ in order to provide a launching pad from which to lay claim to Greek Macedonia and the warm-water port of Thessaloniki [2].

While the Western Allies were busy planning the future of the Balkans, others had already shaped it. By the last quarter of 1944, the communists were the indisputable rulers in Yugoslavia and were working hard to become so in Bulgaria too. POLITICALLY Tito had turned the old “Southern Serbia” (named as Vardarska Banovina) into the “People’s Republic of Macedonia”, without taking the trouble to consult his Bulgarian or Greek comrades as he entertained designs for the incorporation of all parts of geographical Macedonia into his new federal unit [3].

The ‘People’s Republic of Macedonia’ was a political creation only, since its population, a polyglot conglomeration of nationalities, had no substantial “Macedonian” national consciousness. Tito’s Macedonia, with Skopje as its capital, was created in the same manner as Stalin’s Belorussia after the end of the Bolshevik revolution.

ETHNOLOGICALLY, Tito’s new “Macedonian” republic was to be forged out of a population with ethnic and linguistic ties to Albania, Bulgaria or Serbia. The 1940 official Yugoslav census recognized only two large ethnic groups in Vardar Province: Slavs at 69% and Muslims at 31%. In 1945, three years after the formation of the ‘People’s Republic of Macedonia’, the Slavs disappeared from the census and were replaced by 66% ‘Macedonians’! By recognizing the existence of a separate ‘Macedonian’ nation, the Communist Party of Yugoslavia was able to gain control of Vardar Macedonia and justify retaining it as part of the Yugoslav federation [4]. In order to accomplish this it was necessary to eliminate the sense of Bulgarian national identity shared by many inhabitants of the area. Since this was clearly not in the interests of Yugoslavia, and since the inter-war policy of Serbianization under the Yugoslav Kingdom had failed, the only alternative was to recognize the Slavs of Vardar Macedonia as neither Bulgarians nor Serbs, but as something else as………..”Macedonians”.

Recognizing the ‘Macedonian’ nation and establishing the ‘People’s Republic of Macedonia’ was the most effective way for Yugoslav officials to integrate Vardar Macedonia securely into the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Another motive behind the Communist Party of Yugoslavia’s decision to recognize the existence of a separate Macedonian nation was its desire to extend Yugoslav control over Bulgarian and Greek Macedonia as well [5].

LINGUISTICALLY the new nation needed a language and script. Initially the spoken dialect of northern geographical Macedonia was chosen as the basis for the “Macedonian” language. To sever the linguistic bonds between the “Macedonians” and the others slavic speakers (Serbs and Bulgarians), this new language was fabricated and touted as a separate Macedonian language, the language, it was said, of Alexander the Great!

Hupchick explains: “The new ‘Macedonian’ literary language intentionally was based on a dialect spoken in the central Vardar area (Prilep-Bitola region) to remove it geographically as far as possible from Bulgarian and Serbian linguistic ‘contaminations’. A separate ‘Macedonian’Cyrillic alphabet (including wholly new letters & a few Serbiancharacters) was devised to make the language different from Bulgarian.

‘Bulgarianisms’ were replaced by folk substitutes, and modern Bulgarian, Serbian or Russian technical words and modern expressions intentionally were avoided in favor of Western (including American) terms. Literary Macedonian was as different as humanly possible from other slavic languages, being a veritable linguistic hodgepodge approaching the French meaning of macedoine when referring to a mixed salad” [6].

To complete the charade, Tito’s regime commissioned the linguist Blago Konev (he changed his name later to Blaze Koneski) to devise an new alphabet. Koneski modified the Serbian version of the Cyrillic alphabet and called it the “Macedonian alphabet”. Koneski and his linguistics also modified the Old Church Slavonic, (now named in the FYROM as “old Macedonian”), and fabricated the lexicon of the “Macedonian” language from a mixture of Bulgarian, Serb, Croat, Slovenian, and other Slavic languages. The alphabet was accepted on 3 May 1945 and the orthography on 7 June 1945.

The writing of a history for the ‘People’s Republic of Macedonia’ had the same goal as the creation of the language - to de-Bulgarianize the Slavs of Vardar Macedonia and create a separate national consciousness. Since Marx claimed to have discovered the immutable laws of history, communists have considered the “correct” interpretation of history as the foundation of all social science and a key element of nationality. As usual in the Balkans, history is a primary ingredient in the development of national consciousness. Hence, the Yugoslav communists were most anxious to mould the history of the Macedonian region to fit their conception of Slav-Macedonian consciousness.

In the 1960s and 70s, the Yugoslavs established committees to concern themselves with the “Macedonian” language and ethnicity in Yugoslavia and abroad, trained teachers in the language, and sent linguists to America, Canada, and Australia to teach the language and present lectures on the existence of a special Slavic race, related to ancient Macedonians.

According to a 1944 U.S State Department Airgram, the U.S considered, “talk of Macedonian “nation”, Macedonian “Fatherland”, or Macedonia “national consciousness” to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece” [7].

What has changed so that the USA and the Bush administration, through its recognition FYROM as ‘Macedonia’ in 2004, now supports these aggressive intentions against Greece?

To be continued……..

by Akritas

for www.macedoniaontheweb.com

http://modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com/

1] http://www.etymonline.com. English term of “Macedonia” derived from the Latin Macedonius “Macedonian,” from Gk. Makedones, lit. “highlanders” or “the tall ones,” related to makednos “long, tall,” makros “long, large”

(see macro-).

2] International Organization, Vol. 1, No. 3, (Sep., 1947), pp.

494-508. Appointed under the Security Council resolution of December 19, 1946, the “Commission of Investigation Concerning Greek Frontier Incidents” on May 27, 1947 submitted a report, to the Security Council.

The general conclusion of the UN Commission as about Macedonia issue, was that Yugoslav and Bulgarian Governments themselves revived and promoted a separatist movement among the Slav minorities in Macedonia.

In making this finding, the Commission pointed out that some 20,000 Greek citizens had fled to Yugoslavia and some 5,000 to Bulgaria — most of them Slavs — and that the treatment of this group by Greek officials had “provided fertile breeding ground for separatist movements.” In Yugoslavia, Macedonian separatism was the special goal of an organization called the NOF (National Labor Front) which had its headquarters in Skopje and Monastirion(Bitola).

3] The Macedonian Question, Britain and the Southern Balkans 1939-1949, Dimitrios Livanios, page 245.

4] Yugoslav Communism and the Macedonian Question, Palmer and King , page 199.

5] The Macedonian Conflict, Loring Danforth, page 66.

6] Dennis Hupchick, The Balkans from Constantinople to Communism, 2002, p.430.

7] US Department, CircularAirgram(868.014/26 Dec. 1944)

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/78775

www.macedonian.com.au

Time’s Up for “Macedonian” Perverse Nationalism

Thursday, October 23rd, 2008

September 30, 2008

Time’s Up for “Macedonian” Perverse Nationalism

By Nicolas Mottas“For all of us who love History, and know History, Macedonia is as Greek as the Acropolis”. What Mike Rann, the current Premier of South Australia, said during an interview (1) is what most people in the world know: simply, the impregnable fact that the term ‘Macedonia’ is an inextricable part of ancient Greece’s historical heritage. However, modern diplomacy’s cynicism doesn’t recognize History (and its truth) as a tool of Foreign Policy - on the contrary, its is fully based on the concept of realism. Therefore, the 17-years long naming-dispute between Greece and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia couldn’t be an exception on that.

In a recent commentary in the Washington Times, U.S. senators Bob Menendez and Olympia Snowe put the whole issue in its right context analyzing with distinctness its recent backround (2). A significant part of the above article refers to the assumption that the recognition of the name “Republic of Macedonia” by the Bush administration in 2004 was, indeed, a wrong decision. The result was actually even worse than Ms.Condoleezza Rice could imagine: the rapid increase of Skopje’s intransigence which was expressed in various forms. One of them was their perverse refusal to accept Greece’s reasonable proposition: one compound name with a geographic qualifier, for all uses, including international organizations (U.N., EU, NATO) and bilateral relations.

The above unbending attitude had, of course, a first obvious negative effect: FYROM didn’t receive an invitation to join NATO, as long as there wasn’t a mutually accepted solution to the naming-dispute. But the most discouraging thing is that Skopje seems not to appreciate the actions of good will from the Greek side: It should be noted that Greece is the number one foreign investor in FYROM, with $1 billion invested capital generating around 30,000 new jobs (3). And its not only that. Athens has, constantly and officially, supported FYROM’s EU perspective (4), but with the infrangible prerequisite that there will be a commonly accepted solution to the naming-dispute. Nevertheless, the government of Skopje, maybe motivated by petty politics, remains in its hard nationalistic line, denying to contribute effectively to a fair compromise.

A negative assumption, which can also be explained by the fact that FYROM didn’t manage, until now, to renounce its hidden chauvinistic idle wishes. Because, actually, the Greek concern isn’t the name itself, but what lies benieth the use of the name: Articles 3, 68 and 74 of the Constitution of the self-called “Republic of Macedonia” include reference to a “possible change of the existing borders”, meaning the borders between FYROM and northern Greece. Taking into account that, for many decades, nationalism and ethnic tensions have been proved as a fundamental reason for Balkans’ dismemberment (e.g. Kosovo, Montenegro), nobody can guarantee that the northern Greek borders are fully secured from Skopje’s smouldering chauvinism.

On that point, its very positive the fact that prominent members of both the U.S. Congress and Senate share the above concerns. On August 3, 2007, senators Barack Obama, Olympia Snowe and Bob Menendez introduced to the Senate a resolution (S.R.300) calling Skopje to “stop the utilization of materials that violate provisions of the United Nations-brokered Interim Agreement between FYROM and Greece regarding hostile activities or propaganda” (5). Furthermore, the Democratic Presidential nominee, Barack Obama, proved that he - contrary to George W.Bush - understands the political condition in South Eastern Europe and has the will to contribute positively to the persistence of Peace, Security and co-operation in the region.

Therefore, a clear and honest message must be send to the government of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. That they must act with responsibility and prudence, far from nationalistic practices. Good or bad, I guess that’s the only way to catch the train for NATO and the European Union.

Notes:

1. Interview in Eleftherotypia Newspaper, Athens, May 5, 2007.

2. “Macedonian quandary” by Bob Menendez & Olympia Snow, The Washington Times; September 24, 2008.

3. NATO Enlargement — The View from Athens by Ambassador Alexandros P. Mallias, The Huffington Post, March 27, 2008.

4. EU-Western Balkans Summit in Salonika, Greece, June 2003.

Authors Bio: Born in Salonika, Greece in 1984, Nikolaos L. Mottas is a research university student (PhD) and an article-writer. He is a graduate of Political Science and holds a Master of Arts on Diplomacy from the Diplomatic Academy of London. He cooperates with the Greek newspaper ‘Makedonia’ as a freelance international news Editor.