Nikola Gruevski

[Vangelovski]

"According to sources from the participants at the last meeting, the President (Branko Crvenkovski), and SDSM, DUI and DPA are against a referendum"

What does that particular sentence have anything to do with what GRUEVSKI was thinking/planning? Do we need to go over the whole referendum business again? The fact that we have ground hog days over and over again only shows the lack of understanding of fundamental principles by certain members.

[Bill77]

Bill77,

You have misunderstood your own quote. What Ivanov said is perfectly in line with what was reported in Utrinski. He was not against the name proposed, but rather upset that it did not include the language and name of the people. As per what was reported in Utrinski, Ivanov would accept "Northern Macedonia", if the proposal "guaranteed" the language and identity.

I might have misunderstood it. Thanks for the clarification.

But i might be misunderstanding something again (due to not wanting to believe that our best hope so far will sell us out) But i take your explanation of him being "upset that it did not include the language and name of the people", as Ivanov looking for, "rachki" so this proposal does not go ahead.

Mabe i need to get my head out of the sand. But any hope i can hold on to i will try, and then hope even more that it does not bite me on the ass.

[Vangelovski]

But any hope i can hold on to i will try and hope again it does not bite me on the ass.

I wouldn't waste my hope by placing it in the hands of politicians - it will almost definitely come back to bite you in the backside

To be honest, I don't see anything special in any of our politicians of recent times. The only difference between Ivanov/Gruevski and Gligorov/Crvenkovski, for example, is that the former are much more subtle in their anti-Macedonian (or anti-freedom) views. This, however, does not mean they are a 'better' option. In fact, I would consider them a more dangerous pair because they hold (in the eyes of the uninformed) "patriotic credentials".

[blackcactus]

What does that particular sentence have anything to do with what GRUEVSKI was thinking/planning?

Read my last post, beyond that your on your own

[Vangelovski]

Read my last post, beyond that your on your own

In other words nothing.

[julie]

An acceptance of Northern Macedonia is not a patriot

[blackcactus]

More info to think over:

Quote from Wikileaks thanks to Onur

"5. (C) Levitte expressed optimism that a new Greek government would be "more solid" and allow greater flexibility for progress in the Greek-Macedonian name dispute. A/S Gordon agreed that either a more solid Conservative government or a Socialist government would be a stronger, more flexible partner in the negotiations. He expressed hope that if the international community could convince Macedonia to abandon the idea of a referendum and get Greece to abandon the necessity of changing passports, then progress could be made."


More contextual evidence that the International Community wanted to block RoM from using a referendum, the RoM government may have been attempting a block against bigger powers forcing RoM's hand on the name issue, I can't be certain, but it does look that way to me

As mentioned before, interestingly President (Branko Crvenkovski), SDSM, DUI and DPA were also against the referendum

Context is important in understanding Gruevski's decision to place a referendum in the way of so may who opposed it

Not that I know what the true belief of Gruevski is, but it's good to see the context in which decisions are made allowing for a more 'honest' appraisal of the 'facts'

[Vangelovski]

BC,

This does not add anything to the topic. It merely expresses the view that the Americans did not support a referendum. Just because the Americans opposed a referendum, that does not automatically mean that a referendum is a good idea and Gruevski is an uncompromising patriot. But we have already been through all of this before - you need to think out the implications of what you are suggesting.

[Bratot]

To be noted:

На референдум пред македонските граѓани ќе се најде наредниот предлог за името што ќе го даде посредникот Метју Нимиц, дури и во случај Владата да не застане зад таквиот предлог. Владини извори брифираат дека референдум сигурно ќе има ако Грција го прифати предлогот и доколку за пакетот на Нимиц се јави позитивно мислење во одредени кругови во земјава. Поради силниот притисок од Брисел и од Вашингтон, Владата одлучила да распише референдум дури и Нимиц да излезе со предлог што не е прифатлив за македонската преговарачка страна. "


" On the referendum for the name the next suggestion given by the mediator Matthew Nimetz will find place in front of the Macedonian citizens, even if the government will not stand behind such a proposal. From the Government sources briefing that a referendum would certainly happen if Greece accepts the proposal and if the package of Nimitz get positive opinion in certain circles in the country. Due to the strong pressure from Brussels and Washington, the government decided to hold a referendum even if Nimetz come up with a proposal that is not acceptable for the Macedonian negotiating side."

http://novamakedonija.com.mk/NewsDet...tIzdanie=22087

[Bill77]

Due to the strong pressure from Brussels and Washington, the government decided to hold a referendum even if Nimetz come up with a proposal that is not acceptable for the Macedonian negotiating side."

This is the reason (according to Ivanov) why a referendum would be held.

Ivanov: Macedonians will have a final say in a referendum

Any solution that may emerge from the name row negotiations will be a subject of a referendum, President-elect Gjorge Ivanov said Wednesday, commenting the proposal 'The Republic of Northern Macedonia', pointed as acceptable by Greek Ambassador to US Alexandros Mallias at a conference in Washington.

The proposal has been present for 15 years, being favored by Greece and part of the ideas of UN mediator Matthew Niemetz, Ivanov said.

- (This proposal) bears geographic determinant, favored by Athens. We are always ready for compromise, but it must not jeopardize the interests of our state. This compromise, whatever it is going to be, will have to be approved by our citizens. Our Constitution says that the sovereignty derives form the citizens and they are to make decisions on any matter of state interest, such as the name issue, Ivanov told reporters.

If this is so regarding the constitution, then his stance on calling on a referendum would have to be correct as it is law.

Unless people disagree with "sovereignty derives form the citizens and they are to make decisions on any matter of state interest", Then its another argument.

I know many here would wan't to wipe there backside with the constitution, but do you agree that, citizens should make decisions on any matter of state interest?
Or leave it up to these untrustworthy politicians to make decisions on any matter of state interest?

[Vangelovski]

Bill77,

Sovereignty does derive from the citizens and its ironic that this is the only instance in which the Macedonian Government accepts that. A referendum is going in the wrong direction. Were we not calling for an end to the negotiations only a few days ago? Now we want to legitimise the negotiations and the actual deconstruction of our sovereignty by voting on a name change proposal? We need to end the negotiations, not legitimise them. How many steps backward do you think you have taken simply by considering a referendum on this issue? In addition, how many fixed referendums do you think it would take to accept a name change?

[Risto the Great]

Now we want to legitimise the negotiations and the actual deconstruction of our sovereignty by voting on a name change proposal?

Agreed.
Honestly, if some Macedonians choose to remain ambivalent on issues pertaining to sovereignty, they should shut up and let the adults deal with the issue. It is embarrassing to put such issues on a negotiating table.

[Bill77]

Bill77,

Sovereignty does derive from the citizens and its ironic that this is the only instance in which the Macedonian Government accepts that.

I see what you mean here. Where was the constitution and referendum, the let the citizens decide when the Ohrid treaty was decided.

Were we not calling for an end to the negotiations only a few days ago?

Oh i still am. But i can't see that happening untill we see some massive protests out on the streets by the citizens. I would bet that the government would like to see it aswell, since it seems like the current Gov are pro "let the people decide" (or reality is they are chicken shit to make the decision on there own). I think Gruevski and co, are afraid of backlash from many sides who make way much noise than those calling to end negotiations.

Now we want to legitimise the negotiations and the actual deconstruction of our sovereignty by voting on a name change proposal? We need to end the negotiations, not legitimise them. How many steps backward do you think you have taken simply by considering a referendum on this issue? In addition, how many fixed referendums do you think it would take to accept a name change?

Untill the citizens of Macedonia take the streets and are louder than A1, SDSM, Ethnic Albanians, West, etc.... I think this constitutional law, acts like an insurance for us. And the these wolves such as SDSM, DUI, US etc, know it which is why they are also anti referendum.

All i am trying to do is express my feeling that it should be up to the people and not Politicians (and i an sure you would agree) when it comes to issues such as our identity, therefor i am giving some credibility to this clause or rule in the constitution.

[Vangelovski]

Bill77,

I agree that the citizens (of any state) are the ultimate political authority. However, this is not a question that needs to be put to a referendum - this is one that needs to be dismissed entirely and the Interim Accord reversed. By arguing for a referendum the Macedonian Government is in actual fact legitimising the Interim Accord, the negotiations and any potential name proposal. Although it sounds democratically defensible, it is actually the opposite - it is attempting to provide a facade of democratic legitimacy to an Accord which actually violates our self-determination - quite Orwellian.

[kykypajko]

Solja Boy maybe one day when I have 7,779 posts like you I'll be a "masala"

Internet warrior by day......fighting Macedonians who don't agree with your nationalistic interpretation of history. Alexander the half Macedonian and half Illyrian would be proud of you, as well as the Vlach Pitu Guli