Macedonia & Greece: Name Issue

[Soldier of Macedon]

I completely agree mate.

[Rogi]

Bratot,

Despite being the fundamental argument, I will put principle and our assertion of sovereignty aside for a moment and just look at this from a technical perspective, only to come at this from that angle since most of the substantive fundamental arguments have been covered by others.


The existing situation and the 'option' available to the Republic of Macedonia is not such that it can join the European Union and NATO as "The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" and then end the negotiations over its' name.

This is not an option - not because Macedonia wont accept it (it will, unfortunately, in a heartbeat), but because Greece is not allowing it to be. Let me explain.

The Republic of Macedonia is unable to join the European Union or NATO under the interim name. Greece, as a member of both those organisations, is preventing this and will continue doing so ad infinitum.

There is nothing available to Macedonia to stop Greece from blocking Macedonia's membership to either of these organisations, and this will not change, and it therefore rules out the possibility or option of joining these organisations using the interim name, then rectifying the situation post membership.


Before the 2008 NATO Summit in Bucharest, it perhaps seemed like a potential option or strategy. That play has been ruled out completely now, Greece can and will continue preventing Macedonia's membership to these organisations until, in their words, a 'permanent compromise solution' has been found.

This leaves the Republic of Macedonia with only three options to move forward, only one of which, in my opinion, is the one that must be pursued.

Those three options are;

1. Find a 'permanent compromise solution', or in other words, change the name and give up being Macedonia and Macedonians, in order to join the European Union and NATO. I will not discus this further, for anyone who considers this to be an acceptable option (and none on this forum do) is not worthy of the discussion.

2. Continue to seek EU/NATO membership, whilst pro-longing the negotiations over the name, and lobbying the aforementioned organisations, in the hope that they will, at some point, make a most substantial change in their Constitutions and Treaties, to accommodate Macedonia's accession by removing Greece's ability to block Macedonia. Whilst some may believe this is a viable option, it is not. There is no hint of anything changing with those organisations, the Lisbon Treaty was barely adopted and it will not see any changes for a very long time and with that ends the idea that the European Union may remove Greece's veto ability (or rather the unanimous decision-making requirement which enables the effective Greek veto). This situation is a de-facto permanent solution in that Macedonia will continue to be forced to use the (now long-term and increasingly permanent) interim name, it leads to a generations of Macedonians in the Republic of Macedonia being born and raised in a country internationally referred to as 'The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia' and having born and raised in such a situation, they are naturally accustomed to it, and are less likely to object to it's continued self-imposed use. This situation is, in many regards, worse than even the first option of changing the name; it leaves the Macedonians in a constant state of limbo - if Macedonia asserts itself, there is national pride, if Macedonia changes the name, there is national treachery but having been broken one may some day rebuild, but being in a constant state of limbo is damaging to the national identity, the national psyche and the cultural development of the Republic of Macedonia.

3. The Republic of Macedonia can (and I believe should) end the negotiations and re-assert its' sovereignty. This can, and should, be done on the basis of Macedonia's Right to name itself. It can also (unfortunately, though the more likely scenario) be done on the basis that Greece is in breach of the interim accord by blocking Macedonia's accession to EU and NATO (not relating to the existing legal action being pursued in the International Court of Justice, but rather relating to Article 23 of the Interim Accord). Arguments about the 'consequences' of such action are, at best, purely speculative and based on personal bias and predispositions, however what remains certain is that the Republic of Macedonia has a free market, an open society and is a democratic nation with a democratically elected Government, a close collaborator and contributor to NATO and a Candidate of the European Union - the negative consequences (or rather, whatever Greece will do) will always be limited by, and because of, these factors that align Macedonia to the western world and the reason why Macedonia can never be isolated in the way that an Iran or North Korea are (these are the fear-mongering arguments of those opposing this option) and the reason why even the worst-case, albeit very unlikely scenario (a Greek economic blockade) will too be limited in its effect.

[Vangelovski]

It can also (unfortunately, though the more likely scenario) be done on the basis that Greece is in breach of the interim accord by blocking Macedonia's accession to EU and NATO.

Rogi,

Are you referring to the ICJ action here?

[Bratot]

Bratot,

Firslty, the Interim Accord DOES require Macedonia to use FYROM in international organisations.

As I said, it doesn't require us to change the name in order to enter. Same as so far we are members of all other institutions under the reference but still not accepting a name change.
There is no obligaton for each country to use the reference adressing us and it's on the organization decission whether it will accept us under the constitutional name or the reference.

Becoming members under the reference doesn't mean to change the name, the reference stay in use this way or another.

Secondly, if we do enter the EU/NATO as FYROM what makes you think Greece will allow us to do so without a more "permanent" agreement and EU/NATO guarantees that will prevent us from making any changes back?

There cannot be MORE permament agreement than their obligation not to block our membership under the temp. reference.

Thirdly, you really need to read the Interim Accord before you make further assumptions (like the one you have above) and then come up with hypotheticals based on these false presuppositions.


Finally, I think you are far from being a traitor, however, you need to gain a basic understanding of the fundamental issues and principles surrounding this problem.

I think it's time you stop assuming of being the only sufficient brain in this forum and taking me for less competent.

Being arrogant doesn't make you more competent.

Bratot, what evidence do you rely on that once Macedonia gets in to these organisations as FYROM, that it will be able to subsequently change its name?

I never say 'once it become member' I said it will be much easier to achieve such aim as a member and bettering our political power and ability to convince the other in our use.

That's wishful thinking. If we accept membership by the acronym we have shown that we are willing to concede on our national integrity. If we can't do the right thing before we enter the lion's den, then we won't be able to do anything right once in there.

The acronym doesn't exist and it's usage is our guilt since we should protest on using the acronym "fyrom" as greek invention while the IA say the full name and we should instist on this form.
The Greek effort to avoid using the full reference is obvious.

What's the difference between having the exact same situation but not becoming members?

[Rogi]

Rogi,

Are you referring to the ICJ action here?

No, the existing ICJ action is worded in such a way that it asks for the Interim Accord to be enforced, ans is based on Article 21 of the Interim Accord, and is not an exit manoeuvre.

I was referring to the option to exit from the Interim Accord, it having been in force for longer than 7 years, based on Article 23 of the Interim Accord.

I have now updated my original post to clarify this.

[Vangelovski]

Bratot,

Are you now trying to tell us that one name for international use and a second name for domestic use is not a name change? It sounds like we would be living in our own "reality" while the rest of the world uses FYROM. It also sounds a lot like Gruevski's no change to the "constitutional" name.

I don't understand your next point about how "there cannot be MORE permament agreement than their obligation not to block our membership under the temp. reference."

[Risto the Great]

As I said, it doesn't require us to change the name in order to enter. Same as so far we are members of all other institutions under the reference but still not accepting a name change.

You are correct here. But it absolutely encourages further acceptance of a double name (international vs domestic) strategy. Is there a single international organisation where Macedonia does not use FYROM? What are the chances of that changing?

I never say 'once it become member' I said it will be much easier to achieve such aim as a member and bettering our political power and ability to convince the other in our use.

"As a member" is the same as "once it becomes a member" in my opinion. It implies some new power having overcome an obstacle to entry. What will the new power be? I have asked you this a few times. How do you arrive at the conclusion that Macedonia will be in a better position once it joins these organisations looking like a dog with its tail between its legs?

[Big Bad Sven]

That's wishful thinking. If we accept membership by the acronym we have shown that we are willing to concede on our national integrity. If we can't do the right thing before we enter the lion's den, then we won't be able to do anything right once in there.

Exactly.

Because we foolishly changed our flag and accepted the "temporary" name of FYROM, we are not respected by the "international" community and are seen as push overs. Thats why they are more aggressive on making macedonia "comprimise" more, as they know Grease and the "greeks" will NEVER allow conditions for them to loose or give up something.

Thats why we need to be brave and stand up to this unfair form of political bullying.

[Bratot]

Bratot,

Are you now trying to tell us that one name for international use and a second name for domestic use is not a name change? It sounds like we would be living in our own "reality" while the rest of the world uses FYROM.
It also sounds a lot like Gruevski's no change to the "constitutional" name.

Vangelovski, I thought you have read the IA.

It's not me who is telling you what to do and unfortunatelly you tend pushing this discussion with pretty immature insinuations.

1. We are already member under the temp. reference* in all international institutions and organizations**

2. Becoming member of NATO/EU under the temp. reference doesn't mean accepting "a second name for international use" but allow us to become members without changing the name***

* the reference is not a name
** in some organization(sports) we are accepted under the constitutional name RM
*** Turkey as a member of NATO insist in every NATO document to call us Republic of Macedonia

see ex. on the bottom of the link bellow:

1.Turkey recognizes the Republic of Macedonia with its constitutional name.

http://www.nato.int/issues/nato_fyrom/index.html

I don't understand your next point about how "there cannot be MORE permament agreement than their obligation not to block our membership under the temp. reference."

The agreement is in use, unfortunately or fortunately, but since it's a given condition which you or me cannot surpass ignoring, we can at least use it where it allow us such advantage.

The example with Turkey was enough to point you how we could prevail within NATO structure in using the name of Macedonia and by time we can achieve full victory since the Greek dispute will become irrelevant.

You are correct here. But it absolutely encourages further acceptance of a double name (international vs domestic) strategy. Is there a single international organisation where Macedonia does not use FYROM? What are the chances of that changing?

"As a member" is the same as "once it becomes a member" in my opinion. It implies some new power having overcome an obstacle to entry. What will the new power be? I have asked you this a few times. How do you arrive at the conclusion that Macedonia will be in a better position once it joins these organisations looking like a dog with its tail between its legs?

Risto, there is no need to repeat myself again, just read what I replied to Vangelovski.

The acronym doesn't exist formally and it's purely Greek invention in order to cover the name by insinuing "fyrom" as our name.


That's not more encouraging than already is. By not accepting a name change as condition to enter NATO but holding on to IA as direction for our membership allow as position of not changing the name at all because being an actual member provide us with oportunity to directly or indirectly enforce the usage of the constitutional name within it's strucure by the countries that already recognized us as such: Canada, Poland, USA, Turkey, Croatia, Albania, Bulgaria, UK, Czech, Romania, Slovenia etc. which constitute a larger number with trend to enlarge for additional NATO existing members(which haven't recognized us yet).

The possibility for this is high according to me because each country will be tired of the long absurdal reference and wil adjust on the name itself by using Macedonia on daily basis and correspondence also by agrement with the members who already recognized as to enforce the same method of Turkey.

That's why Greece has objected our aplication on the last NATO summit in Bucarest and didn't allowed us to become member even under the reference even though they were obligated not to block, according the signed IA.
That's why we brought them in Court after.

[Daskalot]

Here is article 23 of the interim accord:

Article 23

1. This Interim Accord shall enter into force and become effective on the thirtieth day following the date on which it is signed by the representatives of the Parties as set forth below.
2. This Interim Accord shall remain in force until superseded by a definitive agreement, provided that after seven years either Party may withdraw from this Interim Accord by a written notice, which shall take effect 12 months after its delivery to the other Party.

Why does not Macedonia withdraw from the accord? It has legal right to do so according to the above article.

[makedonin]

Here is article 23 of the interim accord:
Why does not Macedonia withdraw from the accord? It has legal right to do so according to the above article.

Beacause each govenment of Macedonia is spineless. They are all making money using the status quo.

[Daskalot]

The Interim Accord between Macedonia and Greece, ORIGINAL DOCUMENT!

Here is the original document of the Interim Accord as found on the United Nations' webpage.

http://untreaty.un.org/unts/120001_144071/6/3/00004456.pdf

Please notice that the interim name is "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" and not FYROM.

If the name should be shortened it should be written like this, FYR Macedonia. This is my humble opinion.

[Silver]

It's a good thing we haven't entered NATO and the EU which in particular will not exist in it's current form very soon. Once a precedent has been set we are then weaker and have to dig out of a deeper hole than we already are. Macedonia had to walk out of talks with 'Greece' and begin asserting itself.

[fyrOM]

Thanks Bratot for being a voice of reason on this topic. I cannot agree with you more. Vangelovki may not like my long winded writing style but I was attempting to say the circumstances and reason why the government entered the interim agreement and the options available to the government today which needed a bit of space to say.

Your excellent points mirror the actions of the government. Is it an ideal situation. No. in a non ideal world this is the reality we face and how best to move forward from our current predicament.

1. Go through the IJC to force Greece to let Macedonia in the eu and nato as is and work from there for permanent use of the name Macedonia given many members already recognise Macedonia by her name.

2. Delay jumping out of the process of gaining membership to improve our position ie better western style economy and democracy to remove objection ability of Macedonia as a country and get as much foreign investment in. And as Makedonin puts it making money. Does anyone have an objection to making money.

3. Letting see if eu does change her own rules to prevent countries vetoing on bilateral issues as Germany has said once.

4. Failing all this exercise the clause to exit the interim agreement and negotiations with the eu and nato while claiming they tried everything and seeing a total impasse has brought the decision. A kind of holding the moral high ground. This could be a time of Macedonia’s choosing or when a hard word for a decision is put on Macedonia. I don’t think many who advocate jumping out immediately or it should have been at some earlier time have considered patients for benefits and improving situation over bravado and indignation at the injustice of it all. The one thing I will say they are right about is that this course of action carried and continues to carry a high risk of some traitor getting in and following through with changing the name even if it means running for their life and looking over their shoulder for the rest of their life. Risky business I know but as I said in a previous post when have you known in Macedonian history of no risk and easy pass.

[Bratot]

I cannot speak on behalf of the Government nor I agree with their position on many issues.

We can only guess if the intentions of the Government are those we would like to see, but I'm not convinced.
I have had my personal involvment in what occured around Bucurest summit and what folowed and with that experience I don't trust.. basically anyone, especially not some political party.

To be even more clear once again I will declare no intention to be in service of the Government decissions and statements, as I represent only myself.