Countries that recognize Macedonia

[thessalo-niki]

If it's not, you can (and should) correct it.
_________________________________
Odysseas Elytis - Our name is our soul

[Bratot]

Have you guys checked this out?

I'm not sure if its 100% accurate, but you know wiki's stupidity on accuracy.

What exactly is your point?

[DedoAleko]

Germany and Macedonia sign a bilateral agreement under our name, could this be the first step towards name recognition?

http://www.kanal5.com.mk/default.asp...&eventId=65457

We can speculate why this "news" popped out,but it would be EXTREMELY NAIVE to think of this as a step towards name recognition by Germany.

[DirtyCodingHabitz]

What exactly is your point?

Well the topic says Countries that recognize Macedonia, so I posted a link that might have some information....

[indigen]

Only within the UN!

Who are you trying to mislead and misinform with your disinformation? Are you that thick not to know that what you are propagating IS ABSOLUTELY FALSE or have you got an AGENDA for sowing confusion among the uninformed?

Has not Macedonia accepted recognition by USA in 1994 under the "TR" ("Temporary Reference" - "samo za dva meseci") and has not Macedonia in fact COMMITTED to ONLY applying for membership to international organisations under the terms of the "IA" ("Interim Agreement", signed in 1995 but in the pipeline much, much earlier.), which in ALL cases where HR is a member means using the "TR"?

Secondly, has Macedonia not ITSELF accepted recognition by many countries, e.g. Australia, under the "PR"?

Lastly, Macedonia IS ACTUALLY SUING GREECE IN ORDER TO UPHOLD THE PROVISIONS OF THE "IA", WHICH MEANS USING THE (highly offensive and damaging to the Macedonian Nation) "TR" FOR ALL INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS (WHERE GREECE IS A MEMBER)! And that certainly means the use of the "TR" is NOT for "internal UN use only"!

The ICJ Case: The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia institutes proceedings against Greece for a violation of Article 11 of the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995

[Prolet]

We can speculate why this "news" popped out,but it would be EXTREMELY NAIVE to think of this as a step towards name recognition by Germany.

Dedo Aleko, We have a similar cultural agreement with France under our name, it is a valid document and we should use it to make further progress with the German Government.

How does it work? We have to sign an official document under our name which the other country states that they recognize our name or can it be done under an official bilateral document between two countries? Thats how Ireland recognized us.

[George S.]

I think the sooner the macedonian govt establishes relations with the rest of the world thebetter.The more we are recognized under our constitutional name it would be better for us. I'm sure greece will abandon it's campaign to change the name of rom once we get world recognition.

[julie]

The Interim accord is not a conventional perpetual treaty, as it can be superseded or revoked, but its provisions are legally binding in terms of international law.

if this is the case, PLEASE can someone explain to me why Macedonia does not declare the Interim Accord null and void????
if Macedonia rejects the interim accord and declares it null and void HOW can its provisions then be legally binding by international law?

Name negotiations then cease immediately.

I cant get my head around this, if its null and void, there are no provisions that are legally binding within international law.
Bratot, Indigen, would really appreciate both your viewpoints, I cant get my head around it.
Its really that simple. Then Why is Macedonia continuing with the bullshit name talks?

[Bratot]

The Interim accord is not a conventional perpetual treaty, as it can be superseded or revoked, but its provisions are legally binding in terms of international law.

if this is the case, PLEASE can someone explain to me why Macedonia does not declare the Interim Accord null and void????
if Macedonia rejects the interim accord and declares it null and void HOW can its provisions then be legally binding by international law?

Name negotiations then cease immediately.

I'm not expert on International law but I will try to give you my opinion.

Julie, the obligations for "settlement of their difference" refering to the name of Macedonia are not a product of the Interim Accord, but the Resolution 817 (and 845) of UN from year 1993 with our membership in UN.

If we withdrew the IA we will not cease the negotiations on the name but we will be able to bring back the old flag for example.

After we withdrew the negotiations under IA, than on the basis of Article 33 of the Charter and other, we'll still have to decide on one of the instruments of Article 33 of the Charter of UN for peaceful settlement of the dispute with Greece:

Chapter Vl: Pacific Settlement of Disputes
Article 33
The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their disputes by such means.

http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-un.htm

If this happen, we'll still need a decission of the International Court of Justice, but we wont have our strong argument that the Interim Accord is "Null and void" because we unilaterally withdrew from it. And I'm afraid we will be forced to continue the negotiations.

There are two legal options to cease the IA:
1. Unilateral decission based on the article 23 paragraph 2 of this Agreement, as a option which is guaranteed by the UN envoy signatory on the same IA.
2. To get a decission from the ICJ that this agreement is 'null and void'.(which I prefer)

I think we both can agree that the Court decission on a paper has always the best possible assertive impact.
Such decission would release us from the negotiations.

To prove the IA null and void we have to point out that Article 5 paragraph 1 of this IA is direct violation on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Right which protect the right for a name- identity.

Also the both resolutions 817 and 845 from 1993 are in a contrary of Article 103 of the UN Charter:

Article 103 states that members' obligations under the UN Charter override their obligations under any other treaty.

This article specifies that if a contractual norm is contrary to the norm of the United Nations Charter, apply the standards of the Charter of the United Nations.
In this particular case the resolutions are inconsistent with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations in paragraph 1 which determine the conditions of membership in UN.

It is ackowledged that we fullfiled all criteria according to the article 4 to become members of the UN.

Its really that simple. Then Why is Macedonia continuing with the bullshit name talks?

It looks simple, but we can't know every detail behind the curtain.

I can only hope and guess that our Goverment is trying be ''foxy'' and her appeal in the ICJ for "violation" and not nullification is a strategy to become members of NATO under the currently active IA in order avoid another 'veto' blockade of her application and later after becoming members to use our right as described upper, using either the option 1 or option 2 to cease the IA and both resolutions.

But I'm not in position to guarantee on their behalf.

[UMDiaspora.org]

Bratot - the Interim Accord states under Article 23:

"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"

Macedonia can withdraw at any time.

[UMDiaspora.org]

Australia should be the next country to recognize us!

[Bratot]

I'm not expert on International law but I will try to give you my opinion.

Julie, the obligations for "settlement of their difference" refering to the name of Macedonia are not a product of the Interim Accord, but the Resolution 817 (and 845) of UN from year 1993 with our membership in UN.

If we withdrew the IA we will not cease the negotiations on the name but we will be able to bring back the old flag for example.

After we withdrew the negotiations under IA, than on the basis of Article 33 of the Charter and other, we'll still have to decide on one of the instruments of Article 33 of the Charter of UN for peaceful settlement of the dispute with Greece:

http://deoxy.org/wc/wc-un.htm

If this happen, we'll still need a decission of the International Court of Justice, but we wont have our strong argument that the Interim Accord is "Null and void" because we unilaterally withdrew from it. And I'm afraid we will be forced to continue the negotiations.

There are two legal options to cease the IA:
1. Unilateral decission based on the article 23 paragraph 2 of this Agreement, as a option which is guaranteed by the UN envoy signatory on the same IA.
2. To get a decission from the ICJ that this agreement is 'null and void'.(which I prefer)

I think we both can agree that the Court decission on a paper has always the best possible assertive impact.
Such decission would release us from the negotiations.

To prove the IA null and void we have to point out that Article 5 paragraph 1 of this IA is direct violation on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Right which protect the right for a name- identity.

Also the both resolutions 817 and 845 from 1993 are in a contrary of Article 103 of the UN Charter:



This article specifies that if a contractual norm is contrary to the norm of the United Nations Charter, apply the standards of the Charter of the United Nations.
In this particular case the resolutions are inconsistent with Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations in paragraph 1 which determine the conditions of membership in UN.

It is ackowledged that we fullfiled all criteria according to the article 4 to become members of the UN.



It looks simple, but we can't know every detail behind the curtain.

I can only hope and guess that our Goverment is trying be ''foxy'' and her appeal in the ICJ for "violation" and not nullification is a strategy to become members of NATO under the currently active IA in order avoid another 'veto' blockade of her application and later after becoming members to use our right as described upper, using either the option 1 or option 2 to cease the IA and both resolutions.

But I'm not in position to guarantee on their behalf.

Bratot - the Interim Accord states under Article 23:

"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"

Macedonia can withdraw at any time.

Where did I stated the opposite?

[Vangelovski]

I'm not expert on International law but I will try to give you my opinion.

Bratot,

You are right, you are no expert and your opinion is fraught with error and false assumptions. You've had this explained to you time and again, so you either don't understand or you're just been malicious.

[Bratot]

Bratot,

You are right, you are no expert and your opinion is fraught with error and false assumptions. You've had this explained to you time and again, so you either don't understand or you're just been malicious.

Where are the errors?

Why don't you point your objections more precisely and try to give the correct deffinition according to you?

( You must be the expert)

[julie]

Thank you Bratot for the explanation, it has given me a greater understanding
Vangelovski, could you please give me your understanding of what Macedonia needs to do to declare it null and void?
Cheers guys