Macedonia & Greece: Name Issue

[George S.]

i said it it is not a dispute if it was what is greece losing or comprimising nothing that it gained in 1912.So to end the dispute is stop discussing the dispute all should learn to live and respect each other,its as simple as that.Stop disgussing our name coz its our name.How would you like to ask you to change your name you would tell us to go...
Greece can call its province what it likes.WE can call ourselves what we want and resolution achieved.

[Amphipolis]

I don't see it as a dispute.
It's a dispute based upon the name of a peoples identity, which is unethical to enforce as a dispute in the first place.
This does not help Greece's image, it'll be the laughing stock of the future without a doubt.

A dispute doesn’t have to be materialistic. I don’t think we care about our image more than we care about the name. I’m not sure foreign countries are laughing at the issue or at Greece, but it’s fair to say that they find it a bizarre dispute and they are not interested to study it in detail and in depth. Take an American or a German for instance, who is interested in the topic and realizes that he has to read about Alexander the Great.

i said it it is not a dispute if it was what is greece losing or comprimising nothing that it gained in 1912.So to end the dispute is stop discussing the dispute all should learn to live and respect each other,its as simple as that.Stop disgussing our name coz its our name.How would you like to ask you to change your name you would tell us to go...
Greece can call its province what it likes.WE can call ourselves what we want and resolution achieved.

This isn’t so. Things have changed since 1912 and this is not a realistic example, but for the sake of argument:

Let’s say in 1912 Serbia instead of incorporating your territories, had agreed on the formation of a (vessel) kingdom and wanted it to be called Macedonia. I believe Greece’s reaction and arguments would be the same as today.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Let’s say in 1912 Serbia instead of incorporating your territories, had agreed on the formation of a (vessel) kingdom and wanted it to be called Macedonia. I believe Greece’s reaction and arguments would be the same as today.

If Macedonia was established as a state a hundred years ago this would be a non-issue, and if Greek chauvinists reacted in the same manner they would be largely ignored and look even more moronic than they do now.

[George S.]

THeres quite a number of turkish shiws that are dubbed in macedonian.

[Volokin]

Nimetz’s Name Proposal for Macedonia Revealed

BIRN reveals the name that the UN mediator suggested for Macedonia in April 2013 plus his other proposals for resolving the years-long dispute.

BIRN Team Skopje

The proposal has never been published before in its integral form.
Ahead of Wednesday’s fresh round of talks in New York between Macedonia and Greece over the former’s name, BIRN has obtained the last official name proposal that the UN mediator in the dispute, Matthew Nimetz, offered both sides.

The document is dated April 9, 2013, which corresponds to the date of the mediator’s meeting with negotiators from Macedonia and Greece at UN headquarters, after which it was announced that Nimetz had revealed a fresh name proposal.

The document that BIRN has obtained refers to the name “Upper Republic of Macedonia”.

This matches Greek and Macedonian media reports of the time, as well as statements by the head of Macedonia’s junior ruling party, the Democratic Union for Integration, DUI, Ali Ahmeti.

The proposal has never been published before in its integral form.

This was the first formal written proposal coming from the UN mediator since the 2008 NATO summit in Romania, where Greece blocked Macedonia’s NATO accession.

This excludes the so-called October package of 2008 and its subsequent modified version, from July 2009, which Nimetz himself named a “working paper”.

The proposal formed part of a broader international plan to end the logjam over Macedonia's Euro-Atlantic integration process, which the then EU Enlargement Commissioner, Stefan Fuele, was informally coordinating.

In autumn 2012, Fuele proposed to the EU member states that Macedonia should start EU membership talks; the solution of the “name” dispute would then be left to the early stage of the talks, within one or two years.

The proposal that BIRN obtained is the same one that should therefore have led to a solution of the name dispute in the early phase of the Macedonia’s EU accession talks.

However, Fuele’s proposition was already undermined even before the “events” in the Macedonian parliament in December 2012, when opposition legislators and journalists were expelled from the chamber minutes before the ruling parties adopted the budget for 2013.
The expulsion led to a political crisis in Macedonia, after which most EU member countries lost their enthusiasm for Fuele’s plans for Macedonia.

Moreover, although Macedonian authorities, prodded by international representatives, timidly signaled approval for Nimetz’s proposal as a basis for resolving the dispute, Greece rejected the mediator’s proposition outright.

What the proposal includes:

Analysis of the elements of the proposal may explain the causes for the standpoints adopted by Skopje and Athens at the time.

“Makedonski” and “Makedonikos” instead of “Macedonian”
The use of the adjective in Nimetz's latest proposal, like Macedonian/Makedonski for the language or "Makedonsko/Macedonian" for the nationality, is a consequence of the Greek standpoint that “there should be a way for third parties to differentiate the separate Macedonian identities that exist within Macedonia and Greece, and how Macedonians from Macedonia and Macedonians from Greece will be designated in other languages”.

The ideologist of this strategy is the Greek historian and former advisor in the Greek Foreign Ministry, Evangelos Kofos. On the political level, this approach was promoted by Dora Bakoyannis, Greek Foreign Minister from 2006 to 2009.

Kofos devised his thesis in 2005, which he later explained in more detail in 2009. According to him, the Macedonian language should be designated in English as the “Makedonski language” while ethnic Macedonians should be described as “Makedontsi”. Applying the same rule to Greek Macedonians, Kofos says that in English they should be translated as “Makedones” with an adjective “Makedonikos” [derived from the Greek Μακεδόνες]
The place of the adjective “Upper” in the composite name was one factor.

Greece wanted the adjective placed immediately before the word Macedonia, as in “Republic of Upper Macedonia”, while Nimetz’s proposition put the adjective before the word Republic, as in “Upper Republic of Macedonia”, which made it more acceptable to the Macedonian side.

In the part of the proposal linked to the issue of national identity, Nimetz proposed that the Macedonian language be named “Macedonian/Makedonski”. He gave an example of how this would work in practice: “The document will be translated into English, French, Macedonian/Makedonski and Russian.”

Nimetz’s coined phrase for the language was a compromise between Macedonia’s insistence on use of the term “Macedonian” and the Greek stance, which was that “Macedonian” is unacceptable, and that the most they could accept was “Makedonski” - which is the pronunciation of the word for the Macedonian language, in Latin transliteration.

Nimetz proposed an even more complicated solution when it came to determining “nationality”. In Macedonia, this term is translated as “nacionalnost”, and is more associated with ethnicity than with the more common international association with the idea of citizenship.


UN mediator Matthew Nimetz [middle] with the Greek and Macedonian name negotiators | Photo by: UN/Eskinder Debebe
The European Convention on Nationality, which the Macedonia has ratified, thus defines “nationality” as “the legal bond between a person and a State and does not indicate the person's ethnic origin.”

To meet this difference in perception, Nimetz offered a parallel use of two phrases: “Upper Republic of Macedonia” and “Makedonsko/Macedonian”.

The practical example for this, contained in Nimetz’s proposal was the following sentence: “She is a citizen of Upper Republic of Macedonia; alternate: She is Makedonsko/Macedonian citizen.”

Not ‘Erga Omnes’ enough for Greece:

The proposal also defined the scope of use of the new compound name and of the references to language and nationality.

It said that they would be used “erga omnes [towards all] in all multilateral official contexts, including treaties, agreements and official documentation”.

Greece insists on domestic use of new name:
The announcement of the Greek Foreign Ministry from September 29, 2014 is an official document of the Greek authorities that most directly reflects Athens’ standpoint.

“Greece’s position in favor of a compound name, with a geographical qualifier before the word ‘Macedonia’, and not before the word ‘Republic’, to be used in relation to everyone (erga omnes), for all uses, domestic and international, has been thus formulated for many years now and has been stated repeatedly in the Hellenic Parliament as well as internationally, in multilateral and bilateral meetings,” the announcement reads.

“We assume that it is obvious to everyone that the provisional name (Τhe former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia), under which our neighbouring country joined the UN in 1993, and with which it participates in a large number of international organizations, actions and meetings, is a compound name with qualifying modifiers before the word “Republic” and not before the word ‘Macedonia’.

“This compound provisional name is not used in relation to everyone (erga omnes), but in the international organizations and in the meetings and actions that they organize bilaterally with a large number of countries, but unfortunately not domestically, not in passports, and not bilaterally with those countries that have recognized FYROM under its so-called constitutional name.

“This is a state of affairs that violates international law and must change. The responsible and clear Greek stance is the only one that leads to the changing of this state of affairs.”
However, while the term “erga omnes” soothed some Greek concerns, the definition substantially differed from the one that the Greek side insisted on. Greece wants the new compound used at home in Macedonia as well as in its relations with other countries.

The proposal further envisaged the UN Secretary General informing all UN members about the compromise name and recommending them to use it in all official contexts.

Adoption of obligatory documents regarding usage of the compound name in bilateral relations was not envisaged. This allowed for the possibility of some countries continuing to use Macedonia's constitutional name in direct communications.

The name "Република Македонија" [Republic of Macedonia], according to the proposition, could also continue to be used within Macedonia.

Usage of the new name in Macedonia’s passports was not explicitly noted in the proposal so it remained unclear whether this was implied in the phrase “official documentation”.

The new name would be obligatory in the UN, the EU and NATO, while Greece would not object to the integration of the country under the name “Upper Republic of Macedonia”.

Concerning commercial use of the term “Macedonia” and “Macedonian”, the proposal urged both sides to reach agreements based on non-exclusivity.

For example, there could be a “Macedonian wine, produce of Greece” and a “Macedonian wine, product of Upper Republic of Macedonia.”

The mediator did not suggest, directly or indirectly, that Macedonia make any constitutional changes during the phase of implementation of the solution.

He implicitly rejected the idea of a Macedonia staging a referendum on this issue. Macedonia would need only to take “binding, definitive and irrevocable national processes, including parliamentary and executive action,” the proposal noted.

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/nimetz-s-name-proposal-for-macedonia-revealed

Macedonia is not just "negotiating" the name, but the language and the fucking ethnicity. Why are we even negotiating for? The only issue we should negotiating with Greece is the recognizing of the Macedonian community within Greece's current borders.

How can Mr. Naumovski sit down and "negotiate" our very existence with those who took most of it away from us? Macedonia should leave the negotiations immediately before giving in and humiliating themselves. I fear the longer these talks drag on for the more likely Macedonia will accept one of these proposals. Looking at the past, it doesn't seem so unlikely, officially, we've lost our land, flag and now probably our name. It will only add to the list of tragic moments in Macedonia's history.

[Risto the Great]

I had it on good authority his name suggestion was going to be "Stick it up Macedonia" instead of upper Macedonia.

Same old tired shit here.

[Volokin]

Sure it's the same old shit, but it's only a matter of time before this "joke" is actually accepted, and made official.

[Soldier of Macedon]

Same old tired shit here.

After two decades of the same shit this is what this knucklehead comes up with. How utterly offensive to all Macedonians across the whole world. There will never be a solution with these animals. Macedonia must withdraw from these shameful discussions and retain its dignity.

[Vangelovski]

http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/arti...donia-revealed


Macedonia is not just "negotiating" the name, but the language and the fucking ethnicity. Why are we even negotiating for? The only issue we should negotiating with Greece is the recognizing of the Macedonian community within Greece's current borders.

How can Mr. Naumovski sit down and "negotiate" our very existence with those who took most of it away from us? Macedonia should leave the negotiations immediately before giving in and humiliating themselves. I fear the longer these talks drag on for the more likely Macedonia will accept one of these proposals. Looking at the past, it doesn't seem so unlikely, officially, we've lost our land, flag and now probably our name. It will only add to the list of tragic moments in Macedonia's history.

The negotiations were always about the whole identity package - the name, language, ethnicity etc.

Macedonians have a problem with their national motto - navednata glava sabja ne sece. They fear standing up for themselves.

Given this, some have suggested non-violent resistance against the government to either force the people's will or bring it down all together. Given the mentality, I doubt anyone would even be willing to organise, let alone undertake, what could be a months (perhaps years) long commitment to rolling protests, strikes, blockades etc.

[Vangelovski]

Following on from my previous post, I started looking at the "coloured revolutions" over the past decade or so. I found quite a few that I was never aware of and ones that happened in the 70's. Some successful, some not, across a diverse range of countries, but all usually non-violent and with the goal of protesting against governments seen as corrupt and/or authoritarian, to advocate for democracy or to create strong pressure for change.

Carnation Revolution (Portugal)
Yellow Revolution (Philippines)
Velvet Revolution (Czechoslovakia)
Bulldozer Revolution (Serbia)
Rose Revolution (Georgia)
Orange Revolution (Ukraine)
Tulip Revolution (Kyrgyzstan)
Cedar Revolution (Lebanon)
Blue Revolution (Kuwait)
Jeans Revolution (Belarus)
Saffron Revolution (Burma)
Grape Revolution (Moldova)
Green Revolution (Iran)
Jasmine Revolution (Tunisia)
Lotus Revolution (Egypt)
Jasmine Revolution (China)

I don't see why such a thing is not possible in Macedonia...besides the obvious hurdle of the Macedonian people themselves.

In many of these cases only a tiny proportion of the total population was enough to enact change. Imagine if the 30-35 per cent unemployed in Macedonia (what else do they have to do?) actually participated in such an exercise.

[Nikolaj]

It's as if they've forgotten what a 'Republic' is...

I on their proposal.

[George S.]

Think about the sort of govts have been in existence.If you are talking about greece they never going to conced anything.The very thing is linked to thei nationalism.They have it as a requirement ,a must that alexander was greek and spoke greek.Think about the propaganda that has sprouted up since 2012.Forced assimilation,forbade speaking of macedonian idiom.change toponyms names etc.Do you think they will change their tack.Does a leapard change her spots???

[Vangelovski]

http://fokus.mk/video-studentite-od-ukim-ne-za-eksterno/

2,000 students protest against independent assessment of their work. This is probably one of the largest protests against the Government. I can only think of one or two examples of when more than a few thousand Macedonians protested anything or protested anything for more than one day.

Given student activism across most countries and the evidence of its existence in Macedonia, you would think that they would at least get more involved in pressuring the Government on the name negotiations. But I think self-interest, rather than national interest (which can be a form of self-interest, though not as direct) is the mobilising factor for most Macedonians.

[Risto the Great]

Macedonians in Macedonia are mostly oblivious to the name issue. I'm convinced the name issue does not affect them anywhere near as much as it does Macedonians in the diaspora.

[Vangelovski]

An example of student activism in Macedonia (though of the wrong kind). This protest is calling on Macedonians to 'wake up to themselves' with the aim of strengthening Macedonian national awareness...all the while promoting the ventilator. What a waste.