Risto Stefov - Articles, Translations & Collaborations

[makedonche]

For those unaware of the dangers of "negotiating" read the following and then tell me if we should continue negotiations:-

Definitions
Negotiation is a process involving dealings among persons, which are intended to result in an agreement, and commitment to a course of action.

Negotiation may be:

between two parties (bilateral); or
among several parties (multilateral).
Negotiation comprises a series of communications between or among the parties. These may occur in one or more:

meetings (same-time/same-place communications);
remote meetings supported by telephone, video-conference or workstations (same-time/different-place communications); and/or
asynchronous communications supported by recorded voice-messages, fax, letter or email (different-time communications).
Each of the parties who participate in negotiation may be a principal, or an agent for a human principal or for a legal entity such as a corporation.

Negotiation may be straightforward and quick, if the wishes of all parties are satisfied by the first proposal put by one of them.

Where the wishes of all parties are not satisfied by the first proposal, discussions are likely to lead to variations to it, or the creation of counter-proposals. This process will generally be quicker if the parties provide information to one another about their wishes.

In some cases, it is possible for a proposal to be generated which satisfies the needs of all parties. This is commonly referred to as a collaborative process leading to a 'win-win' situation.

In other circumstances, one or more parties may have to accept less than they wished for when they entered the negotiation, i.e. to compromise their objectives in the interests of reaching an agreement. Such an environment involves some degree of competition among the parties.

In some circumstances, the fulfilment of the wishes of one party may be directly detrimental to the fulfilment of the wishes of another party, e.g. in bargaining over the price of goods or services. This is referred to as a 'win-lose' situation (in the language of salesmen), or a 'zero-sum game' (in the context of operations research and game theory).

During negotiations, the parties may reach a 'stand-off', whereby no commonly acceptable point along a single dimension (such as price) can be found, or a 'dead-lock', whereby the parties' demands on one another are mutually unacceptable along several different dimensions.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pre-Conditions for a Successful Negotiation
a set of parties who are, or at least may be, capable of satisfying one another's needs
knowledge by the parties of one another's existence
interest by the parties in achieving an outcome
interest by the parties in entering into negotiations
adequate mutual recognition and respect among the parties
a basis for communication among the parties, including:
shared language
the ability to meet together
the availability of infrastructure to support communications over time and space
power of the parties to commit, or arrange the commitment of, the principals
power of the parties to deliver on the commitment

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Major Factors in Negotiation Strategy
Power, i.e. the ability to exercise control

having options, i.e. not wanting any particular outcome too much
other parties not having options
precedent and legitimacy
expertise and judgement in the area
confidence / credibility / comfort / persistence
persuasive capacity
Time

the urgency for each party to achieve a result
Information

the wishes of each party
the urgency for each party to achieve a result
the cue clusters emanating from each party
the pattern of concessions behaviour of each party

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conflict Management Approaches
This is what to do when the party gets rough ...

avoid apparent reactions, i.e. don't take it personally (even if it was meant to hurt), maintain your composure and keep your voice at the same level
avoid statements which directly disagree with the other party's statement
acknowledge that you have heard the message
agree with parts of the message that you accept
seek clarification of the parts of the message that you do not accept

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Key Factors which Influence the Course of a Negotiation
the parties':
cultural backgrounds (e.g. Asians are less concerned about urgency than European cultures; and the Latin temperament demands visible drama)
weltanschaungen (e.g. racial or class superiority)
mindsets (e.g. the capitalist or simple-minded economic rationalist expectation that everyone else maximises their own advantage)
negotiating styles (e.g. the bullying of Kerry Packer or Bronwyn Bishop versus the sweet reason of Desmond Tutu or Mother Teresa)
the inherent bargaining power (or 'leverage') which some parties have at the commencement of the negotiation. In particular, it may be more important, or more urgent, for one party to reach an agreement, than for the others. By refusing to compromise, parties with bargaining power may be able to force other parties to accept relatively disadvantageous terms. Common examples include circumstances in which sellers have monopoly power, or buyers monopsony power, even if the power is quite localised or short-term; and where one party has regulatory authority over one or more of the others
the additional bargaining power which the parties may be able to generate during the course of the negotiations
advocacy, or persuasiveness of argument, by parties to the negotiation, and by influential persons and organisations external to the negotiation process (e.g. a politician, or an industry association)
any prior experiences in negotiating among the parties, which may be positive (e.g. knowing when to trust and when to doubt; and being able to read cue clusters) or negative (e.g. having reason to distrust, or seeking revenge)
subconscious and semi-conscious psychological factors, such as the physical 'presence' or appearance, aggressiveness, confidence, amenability, etc. of the parties to the negotiation
prior and future relationships among the principals (e.g. established business partners may not fully exploit one another's negotiating weaknesses in in the hope of avoiding similarly predatory behaviour in a subsequent negotiation) and relationships among the agents (who have similar interests, e.g. solicitors in a small country town)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Negotiation Strategies
Always commence collaboratively, in order to avoid missing a simple but advantageous solution, and to build up the other parties' investment in the proceedings

In a win-win situation, continue to use consensus and collaboration

In a win-lose situation, where other parties have the upper hand, look for opportunities to avoid or defer the proceedings, or at least to convince the other parties that you can do without a result for the moment

In a win-lose situation, where you have the upper hand, choose between:

competition, i.e. exploiting your strengths and their weaknesses
compromise, i.e. giving up some of your advantage to secure the agreement
accommodation, i.e. giving up more than is necessary
Which is appropriate depends primarily on the urgency to you of achieving a result, and the anticipated longevity of your relationships with the other parties


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some Key Negotiation Tactics
Clearly distinguish between:

firm offers
conditional offers
hypothetical discussions
Avoid making unilateral concessions

Sustain credibility through consistent behaviour and signals

Record key information which arises during the negotiation

Don't use an Ultimatum until and unless the following Pre-Conditions exist:

there is strong commitment by the other parties to achieving a result
it is as pleasantly expressed as possible, i.e. not demeaning but palatable
it is backed up by legitimacy ('my principal has gone as far as he can go')
it is expressed as a choice among alternatives ('the pink one or the blue one')
Document the outcomes by way of a Minute, an Agreement, a Contract, or a Memorandum of Understanding among the parties


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Characteristics of a Successful Negotiator
Personal Knowledge
clarity as to the principal's wishes
a preliminary understanding of the wishes of the other parties
an understanding of the cultural backgrounds, weltanschaungen, mindsets and negotiating styles of the other parties
Personal Skills
communications skills, particularly verbal
an ability to 'read' the other parties' speech and body-signals in meetings, and in remote meetings and asynchronous communications, and to detect and interpret 'cue clusters' (i.e. individual statements and body-signals are convey little information unless they form part of a pattern)
ability to avoid becoming excited and emotive
ability to suppress disadvantageous verbal and non-verbal cues, and where appropriate to send misleading cues in order to support a bluff
ability to cope with conflict and emotion
self-confidence and self-assertivenss, but without unnecessary aggressiveness
coolness, robustness and resilience under pressure
patience and flexibility
ability to quickly assess the impact of variations and counter-proposals on the principal's interests
ability to generate variations and counter-proposals
Commencing Position
bargaining advantages
no apparent bargaining disadvantages

This document is at http://www.rogerclarke.com/SOS/FundasNeg.html

[Volk]

What compromise?? They occupy our land and we are exactly compromising what ?? to gain.... ???

This is a terms of national capitulation or self termination.

WE GAIN NOTHING

[julie]

What compromise?? They occupy our land and we are exactly compromising what ?? to gain.... ???

This is a terms of national capitulation or self termination.

WE GAIN NOTHING

from the outset, all negotiation meetings and talks should have been vetoed by Gruevski. Such a great leader, will go down in history as the premier that handed over Macedonia on a platter. Round of applause. Tool

[makedonche]

What compromise?? They occupy our land and we are exactly compromising what ?? to gain.... ???

This is a terms of national capitulation or self termination.

WE GAIN NOTHING

Volk
Exactly..... here's a couple of my favourite points from the article:-

adequate mutual recognition and respect among the parties

a basis for communication among the parties, including:
shared language
the ability to meet together
the availability of infrastructure to support communications over time and space
power of the parties to commit, or arrange the commitment of, the principals
power of the parties to deliver on the commitment

The first point says it all - adequate mutual recognition - when have they ever shown any recognition, let alone adequate recognition?
With this in mind, one needs to ask the question...."What the hell are we negotiating for?" and "Why", given the lack of recognition!

[Pelister]

Gruevski could have simply stated to the New Greeks, "Your Terms are unacceptable. It is an outrage to even presume we are not Macedonians. It is equally erroneous that the New Greeks have a historical right to the name Macedonia. They do not. The Greek position is in this dispute is an erroneous one. We reject all assumptions and accusations made against us."

[Makedonetz]

What Gruevski needs to do is tell greece these 3 simple things

Sloboda Ili Smrt

Da zivee Makedonija

:rmacedonia:rmacedonia:rmacedonia

[julie]

Gruevski could have simply stated to the New Greeks, "Your Terms are unacceptable. It is an outrage to even presume we are not Macedonians. It is equally erroneous that the New Greeks have a historical right to the name Macedonia. They do not. The Greek position is in this dispute is an erroneous one. We reject all assumptions and accusations made against us."

I question why a logical answer like this has not eventuated .

[Mikail]

This is a great article by Risto Stefov!

I think to a degree, Gruevski has been tough on the issue.

He has.to his detriment, been towing the EU political line, and even though he has tried to appease them by speaking their speak, they still brand him as being a Radical Nationalistic Leader.

We've all said it time and time again. Stop negotiating that which is non-negotiable! Take it to the UN and get a vote of UN members.

We should not accept this unjust treatment any longer!

[Mikail]

Where did we lose our country? – Rumours, Lies and Innuendoes

Part II of this series:


Where did we lose our country? – Rumours, Lies and Innuendoes

By Risto Stefov
[email protected]
January 30, 2011

One factor that has contributed to losing our country to our neighbours, is the constant loss of our bright and intelligent youth to our enemies.

Ever since Greek, Serbian and Bulgarian influence infiltrated Macedonia in the late 1800’s, our brightest minds have been victims of our neighbours. If they could not “bribe” them with a free education and a chance to fill their heads with anti-Macedonian propaganda, they would try spreading rumours, lies and innuendoes about them to vilify them and tarnish their reputation. If that did not work, they would torment them and make their young lives miserable. Some would flee in exile and the unlucky would be detained, jailed, or executed outright on trumped up charges. Our history is full of such examples!

This was happening so frequently and regularly that many Macedonians came to believe that it was a “curse” for a Macedonian to be born intelligent. Unfortunately, this practice has not ended with the revolutionary days, the World Wars, or the Greek Civil War days and to some extent has continued to this day; not only inside Greek, Bulgarian and Albanian occupied Macedonia but also in democratic countries such as Canada, the USA and Australia.

Our enemies may no longer be able to “kill” our bright, young leaders but they certainly have tried to tarnish their reputations, especially among the Macedonian communities where these young people excel.

This is particularly true in countries like Canada, the USA and Australia where these young leaders are free to express themselves and their Macedonian national consciousness in public. In countries such as these our enemies are prohibited from acting out publicly or interfering in our human rights as Macedonians but it is difficult to stop them from interfering in other ways.

Unfortunately there is very little that can be done to stop our enemies from starting and spreading malicious rumours.

Greeks have been telling the world for a century now that “Macedonians do not exist”. What makes you think that they would not attack the integrity of our leaders in any way they can?

I have seen too many young and bright Macedonian potential leaders destroyed in this way here in Canada. It would be naïve of me to believe that these occurrences were “pure coincidence” and that “no one” was behind them.

Most bright, young Macedonians are very enthusiastic about entering the Macedonian community and volunteering in various organizations. They not only donate hard earned cash, but make time away from their families and from their busy schedules to be part of and to help the Macedonian cause.

No sooner do these young people take a leadership role in an organization and begin to assert influence in the Macedonian community than someone comes along and accuses them of “wrong doing”! And without exception the majority of theses accusations are made by Macedonians close to the organization and without the slightest shred of evidence. In other words accusations are made purely on rumours and lies.

I too have been and still am a victim of such malicious rumours. And for that reason I will use my personal experience to explain here how this “attack on the integrity of an innocent person” can not only destroy that person’s ability to lead but the humiliation leaves them no choice but to withdraw from the Macedonian community altogether!

The first time I was attacked was about seven years ago when a person whom I knew very well accused me of “stealing” money from an organization in which I was an officer. This person, during a telephone conversation, said to me, “People should be ashamed of making a living out of lying to people and stealing their money, especially people who would rather steal than work.” When I asked him to identify the thieves, he named me and another individual.

His accusations caught me by surprise so I didn’t know how to react. I asked him if he had any evidence to support these serious allegations. I found his answer surprising. He said, “I don’t need any evidence, everyone I spoke to is saying that. And if everyone is saying it then they can’t all be wrong!”

Too many of our young and bright leaders have been humiliated in this way and in frustration left uttering the words;

“The hell with this, I don’t need this, I am out of here!”

They disappear, sometimes forever, not only from the organization but from the Macedonian community all-together.

It is not so bad and even understandable when a Greek or Bulgarian does this but it is low, demeaning and intolerable when a Macedonian, whom one personally knows and works with, does it.

Of course if “everyone is saying” it then it must be true but what if everyone is repeating a rumour they heard from someone else? Rumours tend to spread like wild fire and just because “everyone is saying it” does not necessarily make it true!

Unfortunately, and I am saying this with a heavy heart, some of us Macedonians have “not matured” in this regard to be able to say “stop everything”, where is the evidence to prove these allegations?

We as a community have not reached the level where, when we hear such accusations, we question ourselves; is there “evidence” to support and substantiate these accusations? We don’t know how to “judge” yet we accept the role of being judges.

Many people have made attempts to humiliate me in hopes that I too will say “the hell with this, I am out of here” and walk away from everything. It is so easy to do! But then I wonder what would benefit the most from me doing that: the Macedonian cause, for which I have worked very hard, or the cause of our enemies?

Here in Canada we live in a society that believes a person is innocent until proven guilty! So you can accuse me of whatever you want but until you show me evidence to back your accusations, your accusations remain just that: unsubstantiated accusations!

I am not so much concerned about our enemies starting rumours and spreading lies as I am concerned for the “gullible” and “unsuspecting” Macedonians who not only believe such rumours but can’t wait to tell their friends!

For them I have this to say;

When you are approached by someone who says something negative about a person whom you know and who is a community leader, human rights advocate, or whatever, with an unquestionable reputation and who voluntarily works hard out of the goodness of their heart for the Macedonian cause, then ask yourself this question, “Who will benefit the most from denigrating this person?”

Will it be our Macedonian cause or the cause of our enemies?

If you answered “the cause of our enemies” then why would you want to spread harmful information about this person, especially without supporting evidence to substantiate it? Think about it!

Now that I am on a roll, I might as well tell you what other things I have been accused of over the years.

I have been accused of;

- Having my wife write my books and articles for me.
- Having “someone” or a number of sponsors pay me to write my books and articles.
- Having a “team” of people working writing articles for me because “how is it humanly possible” for me, “one person” to produce so much work on my own?
- Having stolen money from a number of organizations, some of which I was not even part of.
- Having someone else pay for my vehicle.
- Having stolen money from my parents. Yes, from my own parents!
- Having stolen money from my aunt.

And the latest rumours are that I have stolen money from the Lerin Region Association, from which I have not been a part since 2005 and that the books and articles I have written are “pure plagiarism”!

All these accusations are made not by Greeks or Bulgarians but by Macedonians, some of whom are close to me and I have known for many years.

I say to them all, where is your evidence, your proof that I have done all this? I can’t say that all these accusations have been made by our enemies but I can say that some have.

How can I tell? The person who accused me of “stealing money” from the Lerin Region Association and of my books being “pure plagiarism” does not know me well enough to make that determination, nor has read my books or is a qualified historian to make the determination that they are “pure plagiarism”. So my own conclusion here is that “someone else has put them up to it!”

Even after all this I did not quit working for the Macedonian cause, neither do I have any intention of quitting, so to whoever is doing this, “You are wasting your time with me!”

What has been done to me, I accept as being part of the role I have undertaken; it comes with the territory. But at the same time it upsets me to see how “gullible” a people we can be. How can we as a people be so “trusting” as to allow our enemies to get between us and without us knowing it?

I am not going to answer to these malicious charges made against me until I see the evidence before me because anyone can make accusations but today we live in countries (outside of Greece and Bulgaria) where people are presumed to be innocent until they are “proven” to be guilty and the operative word here is “proven”!

Given my own personal experience in my own community, which I strive to improve, I hope I have given you some insight as to how our enemies operate and can manipulate our “naiveté” and turn us against one another.

I have read about this kind of manipulation being applied during the old Macedonian revolutionary days when our leaders were vilified and murdered sometimes by our own people. I have read and written about this happening during the Greek Civil War where Macedonians were vilified and executed on trumped up changes. And those who managed to escape, the Greeks vilified by fabricating charges against them labeling them “autonomists”, “communists”, “Tito’s agents” and all kinds of “unsavoury” things!

What is interesting about this is that many Macedonians “believed” the lies and fabricated changes more than they trusted their own leaders. Macedonian leaders, people who were ready and willing to voluntarily give up their lives for them, were being condemned again and again purely on rumours and Greek lies.

Macedonians are not the only “gullible” people who believe the lies of those in authority, but unlike other people, the Macedonians have “suffered immensely” at the hands of such authorities and one would think that by now we would have “wizened-up” to their tricks and learned our lessons. But from what is still happening, apparently not!

So here is my prognosis.

Unless we mature and grow out of this “need” to spread unsubstantiated harmful rumours about ourselves, we will continue to lose and we will continue to unwittingly help our enemies keep a stranglehold on us!

The solution to this problem is very simple!

Let us all pull in one direction. Don’t believe anything anyone tells you unless they have proof and they can show it. Don’t spread rumours yourself. Think carefully about what you say and don’t do anything that may be harmful to the Macedonian cause; because anything “harmful” to the Macedonian cause will aid our enemies!

To be continued.

[MacoLionHeartSun]

[This is from the Little Book of BIG Greek Lies, by Risto Stefov. I like to thank Risto Stefov for making this wonderful book and for exposing the greek propaganda to the world and explaining the truth.

Big Greek Lies]

Thanks for Sharing this DCH

Is it possible to create a FB link to educate the young Macedonians & General public about our Right to our Macedonian Heritage and Culture?
I was always led to believe other wise… and judging by the General Public there’s also a falsified understanding. THE BIG GREEK LIE from the Little Book of BIG Greek Lies helps me claim to Greeks that the ancient Macedonians passed down there culture, language and heritage to the Macedonians from the Republic of Macedonia.

[Makedonska_Kafana]

[This is from the Little Book of BIG Greek Lies, by Risto Stefov. I like to thank Risto Stefov for making this wonderful book and for exposing the greek propaganda to the world and explaining the truth.

Big Greek Lies

http://makedonskakafana.com/ebooks.html

[Ottoman]

"Greece is an Ethnically Homogeneous Country"
(Modern-day Greeks Propogate the Myth that They are an "Ethnically Pure" Race)

lol this one is so true, Greeks thinking they are pure.

[George S.]

Not another greek lie!

The Macedonian Digest

“From the readers for the readers”

Edition 62 – February 2011



======oOo======

Editor’s Notes



AMHRC Census Campaign 2011 – Australia Only!

As with Australia's two previous censuses, the Australian Macedonian Human Rights Committee (AMHRC) has prepared instructional leaflets in both English and Macedonian, for the benefit of the Macedonian community. We request that all Macedonian media outlets and Macedonian organizations reproduce and distribute this leaflet at regular intervals, right up to the census date in August.

Click the following links to download the leaflet:

English version (PDF - 256KB)
Macedonian version (PDF - 3.5MB)



About the AMHRC
Established in 1984, the Australian Macedonian Human Rights Committee (AMHRC) is a non governmental organization that informs and advocates to governments, international institutions and broader communities about combating discrimination and promoting basic human rights. Our aspiration is to ensure that Macedonian communities and other excluded groups throughout the world are recognized, respected and afforded equitable treatment. For more information please visit www.macedonianhr.org.au, or contact AMHRC at [email protected] or via +61 3 9329 8960 .



Our Name is Macedonia

https://www.mhrmi.org/our_name_is_macedonia

Feature Stories



Greeks Debate about Macedonia dispute, hope the country Ceases to Exist

http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/17367/46/

Greece and Macedonia are both buying time and avoid any sort of solution. Athens hopes Macedonia would cease to exist, while Skopje is expecting recognition only under its constitutional name - say Greek experts.

- Andreas Papandreou with the Interim Agreement and all steps taken during the Karamanlis and even the present Government, in reality are steps to buy time. Our neighbor to the north, we believe, we hope, naturally, that at some point will cease to exist - says Petros Tatsopoulos, a writer.

"When Macedonia in the 90's agreed to a complicated name, the Greek side was against it, now when Athens is with a changed and softer stance, the other side led by nationalist Gruevski doesn't accept it", this was the consensus of the sides involved in the Athens debate.

Gligorov agreed to "New Macedonia", claimed Greek professor Tanos Veremis, "we agreed, let’s close the problem, but of course one day we received that fatal phone call. Not to ignite the flames, I won't tell you who was on the phone, well, I will tell you today he is a leader of a major party... Samaras!

Greek analysts, writers and professors involved in the debate did not deviate at all from the well known stance by official Athens, however, the audience at the debate did not share the same opinions…

"Today 130 or 140 countries and counting have recognized our neighbor as Macedonia. It's only a matter of time when we say "Well, we are forced to accept Macedonia" said one audience member.

- I only want to say we are wrong...
- No, I won't explain anything to you, you should already know this...
- We'll never recognize them...
- Lower your voice lady, you don't scare me...

These were some of the things overheard among audience members as the debate got heated.

Surprisingly, the microphone ended up in the hands of an ethnic Macedonian from Lerin who was allowed to speak.

- All of my childhood, we were forbidden to say that we're Macedonians. I had a very tough time growing up because I didn't speak Greek, only Macedonian. I knew my language as Macedonian, but was told that was wrong, never got an explanation what was wrong about it? The word Macedonian was strictly forbidden in Greece, and just few years ago, all of Greece adopted the word as its own?!!!

The Macedonian question - the good the bad and the ugly, was part of the debate where the Athens debate had to decide which is which.

- The Balkans has a tendency that one is good, and that's usually us, the others are bad and the rest are boring. In our case, the ugly can be Nimetz, the mediator in this dispute - says Elina Makri, a coordinator of Athens CafeBabel.

The debate was organized by CafeBabel in Athens, with the hope of educating Europe's youth about the dispute with Macedonia. The debate will be translated into numerous languages and sent to all Cafebabel members.




Not another BIG Greek Lie?



THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE IS IMPORTANT FOR ALL MACEDONIANS TO READ, ESPECIALLY FOR THE MACEDONIAN REFUGEE CHILDREN AND THOSE WHO ACCOMPANIED THEM AND WITNESSED THIS “TRAGIC EVENT” FIRST HAND.



IT IS IMPORTANT TO READ IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE GREEK MENTALITY AND GREEK HYPOCRICY AND HOW FAR THESE GREEKS WILL GO TO TORMENT INNOCENT MACEDONIANS WITH THEIR POISONOUS LIES AND DECEIT!



ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT THE SAME 28,000 MACEDONIAN REFUGEE CHILDREN HERE, WHO GREECE EXILED FROM 1948 TO THIS DAY AND WILL NOT ALLOW TO RETURN, NOT EVEN FOR A VISIT? YES THEY ARE!



THIS IS YET ONE MORE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT BELONGS IN “THE LITTLE BOOK OF BIG GREEK LIES” FOR THE WORLD TO SEE!



FOR SHAME!



Risto…



From the article “Innocent’s Day” by Time Magazine on January 9, 1950

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...1653-1,00.html

Peace had come to battered, impoverished Greece; the Communist guerrillas had been driven out, perhaps for good. But last week, on Innocents’ Day (the Church calendar’s anniversary of Herod’s Slaughter of the Innocents in Judea), Greece had a day of mourning—for 28,000 children abducted by the bandits and now living on foreign, Communist soil.


A two-gun salute from Mount Lycabettus woke Athenians at dawn. Church bells tolled and flags drooped at half-mast. Newspapers appeared with black-framed front pages. Places of amusement were closed all day, and for half an hour all traffic stopped, streets emptied, doors were closed and blinds drawn.


Queens Do Not Beg. Earnest young Queen Frederika, mother of three, broadcast a poignant message from the royal palace. She begged for the return of the 28,000 children living in exile “as a mother—because queens are not supposed to beg.” Added Frederika: “The civilized world has remained silent too long.”


The civilized world had made some well-meaning but ineffective protests. UNSCOB (the U.N.’s Special Committee on the Balkans) had verified the mass deportation of Greek children. The U.N. General Assembly had called on Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Rumania for the return of the children. These governments had finally agreed to return any children called for by petition of their parents. Up to last week the Greek Red Cross had forwarded 8,000 petitions, but not one child had been sent back.


Not Even Goodbye. In the palace with Frederika was a group of black-clad peasant women huddled at her side. Kaliroe Gouloumi, from Gorgopotamos, in Epirus, remembered how the Communists took her children: “They were in our village for a year. First they took our animals, then our food, then our children. I had three.” Kaliroe wiped her eyes with her black shawl. “They did not even let me say goodbye. They said they were no longer my children but their children.”


Said Kleoniki Kiprou from Monopilo Kastoria: “First they hanged the priest, then they cut off his mother’s hands, and then they ordered us to follow them. What could we do?” In Albania her eight-year-old girl and five-year-old boy were taken from her and a rifle was thrust into her hands. Tapping the weapon, the rebel capetdnias said: “This is your husband, this is your child.” Kleoniki was forced into the battle of Vitsi. She deserted and got back to her village—without her children. In Fourka Konitsa, the villagers learned in advance of the guerrillas’ abduction plans. They hid the children in ditches. The guerrillas, frustrated, took Sofia Makri and 20 other mothers to the mountains and tortured them. Said Sofia last week: “They hung us from pine trees. They burned our feet with coals. They beat us. When we fainted they revived us with cold water from the spring. Fourteen of us died up there but we did not tell. When the Greek army entered our village they found the dead living, for out of the earth came our children.”


There is no evidence that the Greek children living in Communist countries are physically abused. International Red Cross investigators have seen some of the children and reported that they are well fed. They are being schooled as young Communists and they are expected to feel and show enthusiasm. Said a U.N. delegate in despair: “In ten years there will be NO abducted Greek children; they will have been absorbed.”



EXCERPT FROM: I FONI TIS IRINIS (THE VOICE OF IRENE)


I Martyria tis Irinis Damopoulou apo to Paidomazoma (The Testimony of Irene Damopoulou from the Child-gathering)

By Ioannis Bougas
Erodios Publishing House
Thessaloniki, 2006

Part II (Chapter 19), pages 124 – 127

The KKE (Communist Party of Greece) Constructs Slavomacedonians


It was decided by KKE officials in our community in Florika [Romania] to divide the inmates of the base into Greeks and Slavomacedonians. This division into Greeks and Slavomacedonians started in school. The primary person responsible for the classification of children into one or the other group was the teacher Kostas Triantafyllides from Kalohori, Kastoria [Greece]. Although he had studied to become a teacher in Greece, he had become a fanatical communist, Slavomacedonian, and a persecutor of Greeks. He had personally thrown my brother Ilia and me out of the Greek school [in Florika]. He told us that we were Slavomacedonians and not Greek because we were from St. Demetrios [Greece], which according to him was a village solely of Slavomacedonians.

Since my brother and I refused to declare that we were Slavomacedonians and refused to take courses in Slavomacedonci, we were also thrown out of the Romanian school for three days. Our dismissal from school above all created a problem of survival as we had no more right to food from the school mess hall. When my mother complained to the community leaders because we were not given food, she was told that there was nothing that they could do and that we should think of the consequences of our denial to identify as Slavomacedonians.

Then my mother went to the school to complain. She found one of the teachers, a man named Mr. Nikos from Kilkis [Greece]. Unfortunately, I cannot remember his family name.

“Comrade Niko, why have you thrown my children out of school?” she asked.

“Because you are Slavomacedonians from St. Demetrios!” he answered. “Your children need to change schools and attend the Slavomacedonian school.”

My mother retorted, “Comrade Niko, you are making a big mistake! My children and me are Greeks! We are descendants of Alexander the Great! We have nothing to do with Slavomacedonians. Just because we lived in St. Demetrios, doesn’t mean that we are Slavomacedonians! My father was a Greek priest and fought against the [Bulgarian] komitadjis so that Macedonia could remain Greek. I heard that you, comrade, originate from Pontus [Asia Minor]. With your logic, you should be Turkish then!”

My mother’s fervent complaints had a positive effect, I suppose. My brother and I returned to the Romanian school and continued to take Greek and not Slavomacedonian classes.

The Greek communists on the Florika base also tried to divide the adults into Greeks and Slavomacedonians. They created a committee of communist members that visited the inhabitants of the base one by one so that they can classify them into one or the other group. It was evident however that for many people, the committee members had already decided the result before the visits. Perhaps these visits were a means to inform the inhabitants of their classification, or a means to convince them of it.

Many inhabitants were greatly shocked when they learned that from one day to the next they had become Slavomacedonians. Some actually dared to complain. Others on the other hand accepted the committee’s decision without a word. This should not come as a surprise to anyone today as we lived under such oppressive conditions that all decisions depended on the communist leadership of the community.

When the committee members came to our room to classify my mother, she was naturally informed that she was Slavomacedonian. My mother however, did not accept this. My brother and I cried and pleaded with her to accept so as to avoid seeming oppositional because we were afraid that the community leaders would take her away from us into exile again. My mother however did not hold back her tongue and did not display any fear as she harshly criticized the Greek Communist Party’s plan.

“Comrade Elpida, I had heard of you but I never imagined that you would be so difficult,” said one of the committee members who had visited our room that evening.

After visiting our family, the members went to see an old lady who lived in the next room. Like us, she was from Macedonia [Greece] and had also been brought as a hostage by the KKE to Romania. Unlike us though, she had originally been a refugee from Asia Minor but had immigrated to Greece after the Asian Minor [Ottoman Turkish ethnic cleansing] Catastrophe. My brother and I were listening behind her door:

“How should we classify you granny? Greek or Slavomacedonian?” they asked.

“Greek! How else, my children? I am from Asia Minor, poor old me! What business do I have with Slavomacedonians?” she replied.

[George S.]

people dont realise that greece does not really want macedonia to use the name at all.

[George S.]

Macedonian Struggle for Independence

Macedonian Struggle for Independence



Part 38 – The Ohrid – Debar Uprising



By Risto Stefov

[email protected]

February 2011





Macedonia’s division by the 1913 Treaty of Bucharest, approved on August 10th, 1913 by the Great Powers, left the Macedonian people in shock and disbelief. Macedonia had not only been snatched from their hands but now, after two millenniums since Roman times, it had been again partitioned.



It would have been better if Macedonia was left intact and given to any one of these countries, including the Ottomans, perhaps as an autonomous province, but to have it divided was not acceptable. Many Macedonians were dissatisfied with the turn of events and sought ways to reverse them.



The Macedonian colony in St. Petersburg was the first to react with dissatisfaction and launched an appeal to have the division reversed. But, as before, the appeal was ignored.



As events continued to unfold it became apparent that the Treaty of Bucharest had left more than just the Macedonians dissatisfied. But in the interest of avoiding a war that might spread throughout all of Europe, the Treaty was left as it was. This dissatisfaction unfortunately split the parties into two camps, those who agreed with the Treaty and those who disagreed.



Having lost the most from this experience, Bulgaria was one of the first parties to call for Macedonian autonomy after the Treaty of Bucharest was signed. This gave some Macedonians, including some Macedonian Revolutionary Organization’s (MRO’s) leaders, hope that there was a chance the division could be reversed by diplomatic or even by military means if necessary.



To prepare for such a contingency, in August 1913, MRO leaders met with Mehmed Sefadin Pustina, leader of the Albanian Revolutionary Committee in Elbasan and signed an agreement to jointly take actions against the Serbian regime.



The Bulgarian government also became involved and together with MRO appointed a three member commission consisting of Dr. Balabanov from Shtip, Dr. I. A. Georgov from Veles and Dr. P. Pavlov from Skopje and charged them with the task of going to Vienna to lobby Austrian-Hungarian politicians to help reverse the Treaty of Bucharest and its division of Macedonia. Their job was to inform Austrian-Hungarian politicians about the situation in Macedonia and to let them know that a mistake had been made in allowing the Serbian and Greek regimes, considered to be much stricter than the Ottomans, to occupy and divide Macedonia. They encouraged Austria-Hungary not to give up on the Macedonian people and if necessary to engage all its forces to reverse the division.



On August 23rd, 1913, Macedonian and Bulgarian delegates led by Leopold Mandl, a representative of the Austrian-Hungarian government, held an assembly in Vienna during which Georgov requested that Macedonia be allowed to organize a referendum to determine the Macedonian peoples’ national declaration. He also emphasized that there was great danger that the Macedonian population would be forcibly turned into Serbians and Greeks. Macedonians did not want to be turned into Serbians and Greeks and with help from Austria-Hungary, were prepared to fight against Serbia and Greece. If the Great Powers wanted peace in the Balkans then Macedonia and Albania must be given autonomy.



Mandl was in favour of Macedonian autonomy and said that Macedonia deserved to be helped because the Macedonian people had suffered the most in these wars.



A Resolution was passed calling Macedonia’s division between Serbia and Greece a violation of the Macedonian peoples’ rights, an illegal and uncivilized act. The resolution called on the Great Powers to reconsider the Bucharest Treaty and correct the injustice done to the Macedonian people.



The resolution was sent via telegram to 150,000 Macedonian refugees in Sofia and to the Albanian government in Vlore.



Yane Sandanski too came out in opposition of the Treaty and began his own campaign against it, particularly against Macedonia’s division. Sandanski supported the idea of autonomy for Macedonia and saw hope in it if Austria-Hungary was to give it its support.



In August 1913 Sandanski took a trip to Tirana and Vlore and, with representatives of the Albanian Revolutionary Government, organized preparations for a joint Macedonian -Albanian Uprising. The goals of the Uprising were to cancel the Bucharest Treaty and establish autonomy for Macedonia and Albania. Unfortunately, because of subtle differences between Sandanski’s plan and that of the Austro-Hungarians, Austria-Hungary intervened and cancelled Sandanski’s plans. Discouraged, Sandanski gave up and left Albania.



Seeing that there was no mention in any of the agreements of Bulgaria giving up its share of Macedonian lands, a number of prominent Macedonians in Sofia requested of Bulgaria to be the first to relinquish its part of Macedonia and let Macedonians establish a princedom in that part of Macedonia. Then, supported by Austria-Hungary, the princedom would request of the others to relinquish their parts of Macedonia. Unfortunately the Bulgarian government rejected the proposal, once again showing its true intensions towards Macedonia.



Despite Austro-Hungarian disapproval, MRO and the Albanian provisional government continued with preparations for an uprising and at the same time gaining Bulgarian and Ottoman support. While the Bulgarians were in support of the MRO the Ottomans threw their support behind the Albanians.



The plan was for the Uprising to commence with Macedonian and Albanian Chetas attacking the Serbian and Greek rear while the Bulgarian and Ottoman armies would mount a frontal attack.



Unfortunately opposition parties in Bulgaria were against such an uprising in Macedonia because many believed that cooperation between the Albanians and Macedonians would not last and there would be no benefits for Bulgaria to become involved. However the Bulgarian government continued to prepare for war with Serbia and Greece.



On August 29th, 1913 Bulgaria signed a Treaty with the Ottomans to carry out joint actions against Serbia and Greece, according to which Bulgaria was to give up Odrin, Dedeagatch and Gyumyurdzhina in exchange for Ottoman help to take as much Macedonian territory as possible away from Serbia and Greece. After the treaty was signed, the Bulgarian government ordered one of its divisions to mobilize new troops and commence operations in order to occupy Gevgelija, Strumitsa, Kavala, Drama and Seres. At the same time MRO began to recruit Macedonian volunteers in Sofia and to create new Chetas.



But before any of these plans could be put into action, the French, British and Russian representatives in Sofia found out and vigorously opposed them. So without Bulgarian and Ottoman support it was now up to the Macedonians and Albanians to commence the Uprising. It was agreed by the Albanian Revolutionary Committee, through written authorization, that the Albanian Chetas would come under MRO command and would be led by Vojvodas P. Chaulev, P. Hristov and M. Matov.



On August 25th, 1913 Vojvoda Tane Nikolov met with the MRO Vojvodas in Sofia and informed them of the plan for joint actions against Serbia and Greece in Macedonia and asked them to cooperate with the Albanians. A follow-up meeting was called in Sofia during which the Albanian League in Bulgaria also pledged its support to join the MRO in the uprising.



Before the Uprising was to begin, the plan called for the MRO to send some of its Chetas across the Bulgarian -Serbian border and the rest by Austrian ships from the Black Sea via the Danube River to Trieste and further into Albania. The new Chetas would then join Chaulev and Matov in Macedonia.



In time Vojvodas Matov and Chaulev mobilized about 12,000 insurgents, consisting mostly of Macedonians and some Albanians and Ottomans. Some of the Vojvodas and insurgents expected to arrive from Bulgaria unfortunately never made it to their destinations.



What later became known as the Ohrid -Debar uprising began unexpectedly on September 7th, 1913, not as the planned Uprising but as a spontaneous result of a Serbian provocation in the village Episkupija. The day after Serbian authorities terrorized the population in Episkupija, 300 insurgents from the Debar Detachment launched an attack on the 19th Serbian Regiment stationed in the village Luzuna capturing 18 mountain guns, 7 machine guns and a large cache of ammunition.



The momentum of the sudden attack on the Serbians scattered the Uprising in three different directions. One group of insurgents continued to push the Serbian army towards Gostivar and Mavrovo. A second group coming from Debar advanced on the Serbian strongholds in Lopusnik and Kichevo. A third group appeared in Struga and attacked the Serbians stationed near the village Velesta. As more insurgents joined the fight, a number of towns and cities in western Macedonia were quickly liberated and local authority established.



Among those who established authority in Ohrid were Lev Ognjanov, Dimitar Ivanov, Ivan Grupchev, Lev Kachkov, P. Hristov, Petar Filev, Dam Tsana and Irfan Bey. Among those who established authority in Galichnik were Evrem Avramov, Ilija Efremov, Eftim Giovski and Riste Efremov. (Vanche Stojchev. “Military History of Macedonia”. Military academy. Skopje, 2004. Page 481)



Albanian armed units, trained and instructed by the Austrian-Hungarians and led by Gagliardi were given the task of securing the Serbian -Albanian demarcation line established back in December 1912 at the London Conference. Austria-Hungary’s goal was to move the line eastward so that the Ohrid, Struga and Debar Regions became part of Albania.



The Serbians meanwhile, still hoping to access the Adriatic Sea, established a propaganda group in Albania to disarm the Albanians and convince the Albanian population to join Serbia. This however provoked some Islamic and militant Albanians who formed a fighting group called the “Katchaks” and who fought for the liberation of Albania as an Islamic country. This drew support from many Ottoman officers and soldiers who also joined the group.



The Katchaks fought fiercely, not only against the Serbian army and police, but also against the Macedonian population in an attempt to cleanse the region of Macedonians.



The Serbians reacted quickly and fiercely against the Uprising by engaging all their available forces which were more than a match for the Macedonian insurgents who by now were running out of ammunition. But more disappointing than that was the let down from Bulgaria and Austria-Hungary, both of whom promised help but beyond moral support, delivered nothing.



Chaulev and Matov decided to withdraw from the battles and regroup and organize a defense line about 20 km east of Ohrid, taking a defensive position on the hills at Petrino and Bukovo.



On September 17th, 18th and 19th, 1913 the insurgents fought bravely against the Serbian forces but were overwhelmed by the sudden attack at Golak Mountain by 600 Greek soldiers. At that point Petar Chaulev dismantled his Cheta into small groups and allowed the fighters to retreat to the mountains where they were to spend the winter. Chaulev, Matov, Georgiev, Sibakov, Atanasov and the other Vojvodas and insurgents fled to Albania.



On October 6th, 1913 the Serbian District Chief in Bitola informed Serbian Command that the insurgents were defeated and had retreated to Albania and that the situation in the border region had been pacified.



After the Ohrid -Debar Uprising was suppressed, the Serbian army, police and former illegal bands again began to terrorize the Macedonian population. Schools were closed and all non-Serbian educators were expelled or killed. Special martial courts were opened to prosecute the Macedonians and Albanians who had participated in the uprising. Many people were killed and their houses were burned down.



Material damage and revenge killings for Macedonian participation in the Ohrid -Debar Uprising continued for a while, which prompted the Bulgarian government to suggest that a part of it’s national budget be set aside for organizing another general uprising in Macedonia in the spring of 1914. Austria-Hungary too was encouraged to set aside government money for this purpose.



In the meantime MRO established its own cooperation with Ottoman representatives and agreed to conduct joint operations in Macedonia to protect the Ottoman and Macedonian civilian populations from Serbian retribution.



MRO also met with Albanian representatives in Sofia and agreed to carry out joint activities in the spring of 1914. According to the Albanians who attended this meeting, Austria- Hungary was ready to support the insurgency both financially and militarily.



A new MRO committee was established specifically for the purpose of preparing and coordinating military activities in the future. General Geshov was appointed president of the new committee, Lieutenant Colonel Aleksandar Protogerov was appointed his assistant, and Nikolov, Matov, Drvingov, Todor Aleksandrov, Chaulev, Stojanchev, Dr. Vladov, Zankov and Takvor were appointed members of the committee. It was decided that the Committee would remain inactive until the next spring, but was charged with organizing a struggle that would involve all of Macedonia.



To be continued.