Republic of Macedonia's EU and NATO Strategies

[George S.]

nikola should be tried for treason.(the real one i mean).The fake one merely needs stuff for his newspaper articles.He forgets that the powere of veto regardless of name changes etc is a very powerfull tool.What gurantee has macedonia got even if it complied with the requests.If you ask me its blackmail of the worst kind.Nato or the eu doesn't desrve macedonia.Macedonia is just too good for them.

[Sweet Sixteen]

nikola should be tried for treason.

You could simply get rid of him, by voting against him.

[Bill77]

You could simply get rid of him, by voting against him.

That simple is it?

Who do you suggest we vote for?

[George S.]

nikola is a good greek compratiot the greeks can have him.WE know that his grandfather /father were greeks.He has sold rom down the gurgler.Also unheard of in the anals ohf history is still bargaining with our identity our name i call that treachery and treson.

[George S.]

there is no one that could represent us for now until the people decide to revolt & want change real freedom from the oppressors.

[Sweet Sixteen]

That simple is it?

Who do you suggest we vote for?

There a simple answer to this, but it reveals your hypocrisy. Given that you are either nationalists or ultra-nationalists, you should vote for:

(a) … Gruevski
(b) any small (more) nationalistic party that participates in elections.
(c) Create your own small party

I think option (b) did not exist in recent elections or might have existed in earlier elections or may exist but not be eligible for diaspora.

Regarding (c) (and thinking of Greek elections) you can find parties of … one person only. So, for any small group (e.g. of 10 people) it is realistic to have your own party and participate in elections. (Again, I don’t know if this is an option particularly for diaspora).

So, you’re hypocrites when you call traitor (which is a heavy word) the less treacherous and more nationalist of your political leaders or when you call traitors or worthless all of your people whose burden you are not willing to share.

It’s much better to be in Australia. Stay there!


====

[George S.]

SS you look at things in a different way to us & were not the hypocrits you say we are,I for one volunteered to fight for Macedonia in 2001 but was told that we are not needed as the civil war was going to be short & decisive.Similarly there were enough of us willing to go from the diaspora.I have been in the army and have had some special forces training.But we were refused by the same people the rom govt.The problem in Macedonia is not just political but psychological.THe people are lulled by a false sense of accomplishment.The people don't know any better.As I said I'm not a hypocrite I'm willing to fight for my country it is my duty.THat means a readiness at all times so don't call us hypocrits were not.try the other way round.Remember don't understate us Macedonians our strong point is we may look weak but in actual battle we fight like a hundred warriors.
I know for a fact because of my contacts that your govt is understating the number of people living be they Macedonians etc.WE know the full behaviour of your govt as you can't lie to us.WE know your govt refuse to grant human rights to its minority the Macedonians.THe Macedonian population in the Aegean I think is quite sizable & Greece would not openly admit to the exact no theyed rather lie & cheat &say there are only a few thousands.But you go travel there & look at the Aegean area there are far more than a few thousand.You can't lie to us YOUR the biggest hypocrite who enjoys what yor govt does.Your comments that were hypocrits is not welcomed here.Remember you were warned.

[Volokin]

I've been thinking about this recently, what is all the FYR's fascination in joining the EU and NATO? Since the breakup, all the republics have signaled their intention to join the European Union and NATO - (bar Serbia). Croatia and Slovenia are already in.

1. Is the reason behind this to leave the old quasi-communist times behind them in favor of a more "democratic" state in the future?
2. Is it a way of generally feeling more "European", more in with the times?
3. Or is it a general move towards the West rather than Russia and the East?

I'm leaning towards number 3. There is a definite tilt towards the West, in all matters.

That was sort of more EU based though. In terms of NATO, I don't have such a definite idea. It's sad the vast majority of European countries, more so the Eastern one's, still see America and NATO as this grand and almighty protector who will crush anyone who threatens them. Like the US give a fuck about Lithuania, Montenegro, Estonia and co. NATO is not dumb though, they took full advantage of this. Now they can stretch their military muscle in the face in Russia.

[Soldier of Macedon]

I can't say I agree with "Nikola Gruevski's" opinions, but I'm (nationally) proud to see that the latest Greek members of the forum have some class.

I bet you're proud. He was a moron regurgitating the same trash that others like yourself have in the past. The fact is, his stories were a jest and the minds of worms like him are far removed from reality. People like him thrive on trivialising any aspect of Macedonian history with the sole aim of insulting the Macedonian people, irrespective of how many lies he needs to conjure to get his deluded point across. There is no class in that. He was nothing more than a maggot.

[Redsun]

NATO Summit 2014: U.S. Should Support Macedonia
By Luke Coffey http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...port-macedonia

On June 25, outgoing NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen announced that there would be no enlargement at the next NATO summit in Wales in September 2014. This announcement was a huge disappointment for the Republic of Macedonia, which has met all criteria to join the alliance but continuously has its application vetoed by Greece over a name dispute.

Macedonia would be a welcome addition to the NATO alliance, and its membership would contribute to regional stability in southeastern Europe. The U.S. should continue to back Macedonia’s goal of joining the alliance.
Macedonia’s Long Road to Independence

The Republic of Macedonia is a small but geopolitically important Balkan nation. The region of modern-day Macedonia has been under the control of several regional empires throughout history. In antiquity, the kingdoms of Paeonia and then Macedon ruled the area. Later, numerous different empires and kingdoms ruled over this region, including the Roman, Byzantine, and Ottoman empires.

As the Ottoman Empire was slowly collapsing in the late 19th century, there was a rise in Macedonian nationalism seeking autonomy for an independent Macedonian state. Although this movement was successful for only a brief 12 days before the Ottomans took control again, it planted the seed for eventual independence. In the Balkan Wars of 1912–1913, this region was divided through the Treaty of Bucharest among Bulgaria, Greece, and Serbia.

In 1944, Macedonia became one of the six socialist republics of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. In 1990, after Yugoslavia changed from a socialist state to a parliamentary democracy, the word socialist was dropped from Macedonia’s name. With the dissolution of Yugoslavia in 1991, Macedonia became an independent state and kept the name—Republic of Macedonia—as its new constitutional name. Greece quickly protested on the grounds that the name Macedonia, which is the same as that of Greece’s northern province, implied regional territorial claims by the new nation. This claim is unfair for three reasons:

Macedonia is the size of Vermont and has a population of only 2 million. Greece has a population of 11 million and is five times larger. Macedonia does not pose a military threat, either practically or rhetorically, to any of its neighbors—especially Greece.
Although there is nothing indicating that in the 21st century any of Macedonia’s neighbors have territorial designs on Macedonia, historically regional powers sought to control Macedonia, not the other way around. This was the primary driver of the 1912–1913 Balkan Wars, for example.
To alleviate Greece’s concerns, a specific provision has been placed in Macedonia’s constitution stating: “The Republic of Macedonia has no territorial pretensions towards any neighboring state.”

Believe It or Not, It’s All About a Name

In 1993, Macedonia joined the United Nations under the provisional name “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.” In 1995, Macedonia and Greece agreed to a U.N.-brokered interim accord in which Athens agreed not to block Macedonia’s integration into international organizations such as NATO so long as it called itself “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” until both sides agreed on a mutually acceptable name.

Macedonia joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace in 1995 and received a Membership Action Plan in 1999. Upon completing its Membership Action Plan in 2008, Macedonia anticipated an invitation to join the alliance at the NATO summit in Bucharest. Yet Greece unilaterally vetoed Macedonia’s accession over the name issue. In December 2011, the International Court of Justice ruled that Greece’s veto was in blatant violation of the 1995 interim accord.

Macedonia has little leverage in urging Greece to come to the bargaining table. Greece is already a NATO member, and Athens’s internal political dynamics are likely to delay the negotiation process.
Macedonia: A Solid U.S. Ally

Despite the small size of Macedonia’s military (approximately 7,300 service members as part of a Joint Operational Command), the nation has already contributed respectably to the NATO alliance. Macedonia has participated in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) mission in Afghanistan since 2002, rotating a total of 3,200 troops to Afghanistan during this period. Furthermore, Macedonia has indicated its willingness to participate in the post-2014 follow-on mission to train and assist Afghan forces after ISAF’s combat mission ends.

Macedonia sends forces to Bosnia and Herzegovina as part of the EU’s Operation Althea. Since 1999, it has allowed NATO forces deploying to Kosovo to transit its territory. Further afield, Macedonia participates in the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, and between 2003 and 2008 it deployed forces in support of U.S.-led operations in Iraq, including a special operations unit. These contributions demonstrate a willingness by Macedonia to contribute to global security.

It is important for the U.S. and NATO to ensure that NATO enlargement takes place for those countries that meet the high standards. NATO’s “open-door policy” is critical to mobilizing Europe and its allies around collective transatlantic defense. The open-door policy also promotes democracy, stability, and security in the North Atlantic region by enticing countries to become a part of the alliance through positive democratic and military reforms. If aspiring NATO members see the door closed for Macedonia, it could discourage them from undertaking the desired democratic reforms to someday join the alliance themselves.
Backing Macedonia Is the Right Thing

The U.S. should make sure that the open-door policy is not closed. Macedonia met all criteria to join NATO in 2008. The only thing preventing Macedonia from joining the alliance—and therefore preventing the Wales summit from being an enlargement summit—is Greece’s veto. Keeping the door closed to Macedonia does not benefit Europe’s security and it weakens NATO’s open-door policy as a tool for reform, modernization, and democratization.

To send the right messages, the U.S. should:

Show support for Macedonia. The U.S. should use the NATO summit to show its appreciation for Macedonia’s contributions to ISAF and thank the Macedonian people for their patience while they wait to join the alliance six years after meeting all the criteria.
Privately pressure Greece. The U.S. should pressure Greece behind the scenes to allow Macedonia to join NATO under the terms of the 1995 interim accord.
Ensure that NATO is clear on Macedonia’s future membership. The summit declaration should make it clear that it is the official position of NATO that Macedonia’s future is in the alliance.
Continue working with the Macedonian armed forces. As the NATO-led combat mission in Afghanistan comes to an end, the U.S. should ensure that it continues to train with and prepare the Macedonian military for future challenges.

NATO’s Open-Door Policy Jeopardized

Enlargement of the alliance has greatly contributed to the security of all the member states and regional stability. The U.S. should work to ensure that NATO’s open-door policy remains in force and that qualified nations are allowed a timely accession to the alliance.

Greece’s pertinacious opposition over the name issue, coupled with the illegality of its position under international law, has jeopardized NATO’s open-door policy. Greece should work with Macedonia to seek reconciliation, and the U.S. should play a leading role.
—Luke Coffey

[Constellation]

NATO Summit 2014: U.S. Should Support Macedonia
By Luke Coffey http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...port-macedonia

On June 25, outgoing NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen announced that there would be no enlargement at the next NATO summit in Wales in September 2014. This announcement was a huge disappointment for the Republic of Macedonia, which has met all criteria to join the alliance but continuously has its application vetoed by Greece over a name dispute.

Macedonia would be a welcome addition to the NATO alliance, and its membership would contribute to regional stability in southeastern Europe. The U.S. should continue to back Macedonia’s goal of joining the alliance.
Macedonia’s Long Road to Independence

The Republic of Macedonia is a small but geopolitically important Balkan nation. The region of modern-day Macedonia has been under the control of several regional empires throughout history. In antiquity, the kingdoms of Paeonia and then Macedon ruled the area. Later, numerous different empires and kingdoms ruled over this region, including the Roman, Byzantine, and Ottoman empires.

As the Ottoman Empire was slowly collapsing in the late 19th century, there was a rise in Macedonian nationalism seeking autonomy for an independent Macedonian state. Although this movement was successful for only a brief 12 days before the Ottomans took control again, it planted the seed for eventual independence. In the Balkan Wars of 1912–1913, this region was divided through the Treaty of Bucharest among Bulgaria, Greece, and Serbia.

In 1944, Macedonia became one of the six socialist republics of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. In 1990, after Yugoslavia changed from a socialist state to a parliamentary democracy, the word socialist was dropped from Macedonia’s name. With the dissolution of Yugoslavia in 1991, Macedonia became an independent state and kept the name—Republic of Macedonia—as its new constitutional name. Greece quickly protested on the grounds that the name Macedonia, which is the same as that of Greece’s northern province, implied regional territorial claims by the new nation. This claim is unfair for three reasons:

Macedonia is the size of Vermont and has a population of only 2 million. Greece has a population of 11 million and is five times larger. Macedonia does not pose a military threat, either practically or rhetorically, to any of its neighbors—especially Greece.
Although there is nothing indicating that in the 21st century any of Macedonia’s neighbors have territorial designs on Macedonia, historically regional powers sought to control Macedonia, not the other way around. This was the primary driver of the 1912–1913 Balkan Wars, for example.
To alleviate Greece’s concerns, a specific provision has been placed in Macedonia’s constitution stating: “The Republic of Macedonia has no territorial pretensions towards any neighboring state.”

Believe It or Not, It’s All About a Name

In 1993, Macedonia joined the United Nations under the provisional name “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.” In 1995, Macedonia and Greece agreed to a U.N.-brokered interim accord in which Athens agreed not to block Macedonia’s integration into international organizations such as NATO so long as it called itself “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” until both sides agreed on a mutually acceptable name.

Macedonia joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace in 1995 and received a Membership Action Plan in 1999. Upon completing its Membership Action Plan in 2008, Macedonia anticipated an invitation to join the alliance at the NATO summit in Bucharest. Yet Greece unilaterally vetoed Macedonia’s accession over the name issue. In December 2011, the International Court of Justice ruled that Greece’s veto was in blatant violation of the 1995 interim accord.

Macedonia has little leverage in urging Greece to come to the bargaining table. Greece is already a NATO member, and Athens’s internal political dynamics are likely to delay the negotiation process.
Macedonia: A Solid U.S. Ally

Despite the small size of Macedonia’s military (approximately 7,300 service members as part of a Joint Operational Command), the nation has already contributed respectably to the NATO alliance. Macedonia has participated in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) mission in Afghanistan since 2002, rotating a total of 3,200 troops to Afghanistan during this period. Furthermore, Macedonia has indicated its willingness to participate in the post-2014 follow-on mission to train and assist Afghan forces after ISAF’s combat mission ends.

Macedonia sends forces to Bosnia and Herzegovina as part of the EU’s Operation Althea. Since 1999, it has allowed NATO forces deploying to Kosovo to transit its territory. Further afield, Macedonia participates in the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon, and between 2003 and 2008 it deployed forces in support of U.S.-led operations in Iraq, including a special operations unit. These contributions demonstrate a willingness by Macedonia to contribute to global security.

It is important for the U.S. and NATO to ensure that NATO enlargement takes place for those countries that meet the high standards. NATO’s “open-door policy” is critical to mobilizing Europe and its allies around collective transatlantic defense. The open-door policy also promotes democracy, stability, and security in the North Atlantic region by enticing countries to become a part of the alliance through positive democratic and military reforms. If aspiring NATO members see the door closed for Macedonia, it could discourage them from undertaking the desired democratic reforms to someday join the alliance themselves.
Backing Macedonia Is the Right Thing

The U.S. should make sure that the open-door policy is not closed. Macedonia met all criteria to join NATO in 2008. The only thing preventing Macedonia from joining the alliance—and therefore preventing the Wales summit from being an enlargement summit—is Greece’s veto. Keeping the door closed to Macedonia does not benefit Europe’s security and it weakens NATO’s open-door policy as a tool for reform, modernization, and democratization.

To send the right messages, the U.S. should:

Show support for Macedonia. The U.S. should use the NATO summit to show its appreciation for Macedonia’s contributions to ISAF and thank the Macedonian people for their patience while they wait to join the alliance six years after meeting all the criteria.
Privately pressure Greece. The U.S. should pressure Greece behind the scenes to allow Macedonia to join NATO under the terms of the 1995 interim accord.
Ensure that NATO is clear on Macedonia’s future membership. The summit declaration should make it clear that it is the official position of NATO that Macedonia’s future is in the alliance.
Continue working with the Macedonian armed forces. As the NATO-led combat mission in Afghanistan comes to an end, the U.S. should ensure that it continues to train with and prepare the Macedonian military for future challenges.

NATO’s Open-Door Policy Jeopardized

Enlargement of the alliance has greatly contributed to the security of all the member states and regional stability. The U.S. should work to ensure that NATO’s open-door policy remains in force and that qualified nations are allowed a timely accession to the alliance.

Greece’s pertinacious opposition over the name issue, coupled with the illegality of its position under international law, has jeopardized NATO’s open-door policy. Greece should work with Macedonia to seek reconciliation, and the U.S. should play a leading role.
—Luke Coffey

Macedonia should stay out of NATO at all costs. And the U.S. should not play any role whatsoever.

[George S.]

No macedonioa should enter nato under its constitutional name.They should not impose additional requirements.

[Amphipolis]

MEP Kaili: I will not specify which Macedonia I am from

In a dynamic appearance at an event in The Hague, on the occasion of the 60th Annual NATO Congress of NATO, Greek MEP Eva Kaili, left the American president of the US Delegation for Macedonia speechless. Kaili referred to energy issues, the issue of rising costs of the Alliance and responded to the US senator who argued that “the issue of the name of Macedonia should not be an obstacle for the country’s accession to NATO”.

The “Olive” MEP in response to a placement of the US Senator noted that “this is a debate that has fortunately stopped in the EU, since this name has not been recognized”, and added: “however, as a member of NATO’s Committee for many years, as a Member of Parliament, I emphasize that I am from Macedonia and I think that this has become clear, at least in our nearby countries.

The problems that exist in countries outside the alliance, should be resolved outside the alliance, since they are critical. They are not only political and historical, they are also economic. They are obligated to stand alongside their conventional allies and realise that if it was the other way around, they would like to see us next to them.

One cannot deny our right to veto, pending resolution of this issue, so when I say that I am from Macedonia, I won’t have to specify from which Macedonia I am from”.



- See more at: http://www.balkaneu.com/mep-kaili-ma....lgVAlnuW.dpuf

Εdit: I posted this story as an excuse to post her picture.

[Nikolaj]

If only her intelligence was proportional to her appearance.

[Philosopher]

She is very lovely. She looks like a pure Slav, however.