Macedonia and NATO

[Bratot]

Анкета на Дневник: Македонците не и веруваат на ЕУ

Мнозинството македонски граѓани немаат доверба во политиката на Европската Унија (ЕУ) кон Македонија, открива новата анкета на "Дневник", тематски посветена на напредокот во интеграциите на земјава во ЕУ и во НАТО што ја спроведе агенцијата "Рејтинг".

Од испитаниците, 60 отсто одговориле негативно, додека 38 проценти рекле дека имаат доверба во политиката на Унијата кон државава. Истражувањето на јавното мислење покажува екстремни разлики во ставовите на двете најголеми етнички заедници: додека 72 отсто од Македонците немаат доверба во политиката на ЕУ, а само 24 отсто имаат, кај Албанците 74 проценти се изјасниле позитивно, а само 24 отсто негативно.

Кај партиските рејтинзи, ВМРО-ДПМНЕ останува во водство со 26,7 проценти поддршка, следува СДСМ со 15,4 отсто, па ДУИ со рејтинг од 7,3 отсто, ДПА има поддршка од 2,9 отсто, додека Нова демократија ја поддржуваат 1,6 процент. Обединети за Македонија се со 1,8 отсто рејтинг, а ЛДП со 1,4 процент. Неопределени меѓу оние што сигурно ќе излезат на следните избори се речиси 40 отсто од анкетираните.

Истражувањето е спроведено телефонски, во периодот од 20 до 23 ноември, на репрезентативен примерок од полнолетно население од 1.080 испитаници, пред случувањата поврзани со "А1", а по појавувањето на наводни досиеја за челниците на ДИУ./Дневник

http://kanal5.com.mk/default.aspx?mId=37&egId=13&eventId=67979

While 72 percent of Macedonians have no confidence in the EU only 24 percent have!

[TrueMacedonian]

I am happy some of you find this as a nice gesture by the Croatian community. I have nothing whatsoever against the Croatians, their country, or their worldwide communities. I just don't like these racist organizations that Macedonia can do without.

[Dimko-piperkata]

YouTube - Federation of Croatian Americans to Obama - Macedonia posthaste into NATO

[DirtyCodingHabitz]

If you click on Letter to Barack Obama from the Croatian community in the U.S. you will see the Macedonian version .

Thanks for posting the video version .

[Prolet]

Here is the Macedonian version

http://sitel.com.mk/video/makedonija/obama-vo-lisabon-da-pritisne-za-makedonija

[DirtyCodingHabitz]

Letter to Barack Obama from the Croatian community in the U.S.

Letter to Barack Obama from the Croatian community in the U.S.

"Would highly appreciate the gesture at the upcoming NATO summit in Lisbon if you give full support for membership of Macedonia in NATO," wrote the National Federation of Croats in the United States President Barack Obama, seven days before the start of the Summit.

The letter from the Croatian community in the United States, President John Kraljikj says Croatian Americans are not satisfied that Macedonia remained just out of NATO and will continue to support the admission of Macedonia in the Alliance, as it did for the admission of Croatia and Albania.

"Macedonia is a strong U.S. ally in the war against terrorism and its membership in the alliance will further strengthen the stability of the Balkans,''said a letter from National Federation of Croats in the U.S. to the U.S. president.

[Makedonetz]

We need to hold on to our rights and our freedom and grow into the future as ROM is doing with all these investments that are happening soon. Onur mentioned turkey is the doorstep to Europe and in a good bilateral position on the map. If we become another great country with strong connections with good neighbors we will become that much greater. Turks are doing fine not being in the EU we would too i belive :rmacedonia

[Pelister]

And we are their hostages

We have made ourselves hostages.

If the Macedonian leadership took the obsessive eyes off the E.U club for a moment, stopped the talks and asked instead that our rights be respected - we would be far better off than we are now.

[Pelister]

It will stop when we end negotiating our name, and our identity.

When that happens, Greece will have no more political leverage. From a third parties point of view, Greece has found it very easy and very simple to convince other countries to hold off accepting our identity while we are 'in negotiations'. End the negotiations, and Greece loses that political power.

Sure, it has blocked us from the E.U and NATO, but our exclusion from this clubs is a small price to pay for the political surival of our State and our identity.

The Macedonians in that respect, have only themselves to blame for this situation.

[George S.]

Don't forget the greeks have allready changed our name to fyrom how much will it take & when will it stop.Why can't the hellasses accept us as we are who we identify as.Is it too much to ask?

[fyrOM]

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State THOMAS KANTRIMEN

Macedonia and Greece too reliant on U.S.

http://www.vest.com.mk/?ItemID=6EFA25D32D76E74A8AAD2722954697CC

Macedonia and Greece too reliant on the U.S. and not enough on ourselves, "said Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Kantrimen Thomas, commenting on the dispute. He believes that the solution of longstanding disputes can arise only through direct communication between the two sides and that the U.S. can only give broad support in the process.
"I came to bring the message that the solution to this question requires a difficult compromise that must be made on both sides, and must be made through direct dialogue, with mutual respect and trust, not through newspapers and media. We strongly believe that this is the only way to see the result. Both governments need to say how close or far, "said Kantrimen a briefing with reporters in Skopje.
He added that the U.S. is present in the dispute, but the success comes from both governments. According to him, is proof of that commitment of U.S. diplomat Daniel Fried in 2008 which, although given their best, it was not enough for success, because the problem is very difficult.
Kantrimen affirm support for Macedonia, denying speculation that nedoagjanjeto Secretary of State Hillary Clinton mean reduced U.S. interests in Macedonia.
She has visited countries such as BiH, Serbia and Kosovo where there are many serious problems. In Macedonia there are no crisis, no immediate risk of conflict, but still needed a solution to the dispute to provide broader and stronger regional stability, "said Kantrimen.
Kantrimen actually noticed that the name dispute takes too much energy and that are neglected reforms in other areas.
"The most important issue for every country in the region borders, the Constitution, the status and name, but the rule of law," concluded Kantrimen.

[fyrOM]

Bratot look how wonderful the Greek experiment went…multiple ethnic groups dumped in one place and told be Greek and they claim to be 100 percent Greek with no minorities. Very changeable people. Excellent results. Why not try and move the experiment northwards.

Too smart by halves…ever wonder after trying to exterminate out identity since the fall of Alexander we are sill here. Someone should take the usa ambassador to a bridge and tell him the story about the donkey on the bridge when he sets his mind..cant pull him cant push him.

The west telling Macedonians smart stories about their identity isn’t going to impress the Macedonians anymore than telling those stories to the donkey to make him move…unless ofcourse ambassador Reeker knows how to talk donkey.

It is ridiculous every time they say a compromise needs to be made on both sides. There is no compromise on the Greek side so telling Macedonia now needs to make one is nonsensical.

[Bratot]

I will let him put his experiment up his...

It's becoming more obvious that since the creation of SFRJ we are one big experiment, together with the whole region.

[Risto the Great]

“That experiment is the implementation of the concept that the rights of citizenship are defined by where the individual lives and not by his or her ethnicity

I see the Balkans are the new testing ground for theories of a few bureaucrats .
Can anyone explain how the Ohrid agreement can be reconciled to the statement above? Especially given that it is entirely about rights to a minority ethnicity!

[Risto the Great]

NATO Parliamentarians Debate New Balkan Strategies

http://www.defpro.com/news/details/19139/

13:55 GMT, October 27, 2010 Despite the remarkable progress achieved in the Western Balkans, a number of unresolved issues and persistent challenges remain on the path to a full normalisation of the region. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia* continues to contend with the legacy of the 2001 interethnic clashes and the dispute with Greece over the name of the country. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, persistent political blockages have hampered the adoption of key reforms, including constitutional reform, and slowed down the transition away from the mechanism of international supervision established by the Dayton Accords. Meanwhile, Pristina and Belgrade’s competing claims of sovereignty over Kosovo perpetuate an ambiguous situation with particular complications in the North. Faced with these challenges, international strategies in the region have sometimes seemed unable to provide the necessary traction to help resolve remaining issues. Adjusting these strategies and building on a positive trend in the area of regional cooperation can help create new momentum in the region.

These were the main conclusions of the 75th Rose-Roth Seminar which the NATO Parliamentary Assembly held in Skopje, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, on 19-21 October under the theme “South Eastern Europe: Creating New Momentum”. The seminar, co-sponsored by the Assembly of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and the Swiss Ministry of Defence, brought together some 139 participants including 37 members of parliament from NATO and partner countries, government representatives, officials from international organizations, experts and academics.

Ambassador James Pardew, former US negotiator of the Ohrid Framework Agreement for the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and former NATO Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Operations, summarized the key challenge facing the region following the bloody conflicts of the 1990s: “a great political experiment in national identity is taking place which could change South Eastern Europe fundamentally”, he explained. “That experiment is the implementation of the concept that the rights of citizenship are defined by where the individual lives and not by his or her ethnicity [….] the success or failure of this experiment may well determine whether the region can break from its divisive past”. This challenge was a key underlying theme for the three case studies discussed in the two and half days of the seminar.

Speakers and participants recognised the major progress achieved by the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in building multiethnic institutions through the implementation of the 2001 Ohrid Framework Agreement. However, as emphasized by Simone Filippini, Ambassador of the Netherlands in Skopje, while the letter of Ohrid has been implemented, “the spirit of Ohrid” is still missing, a spirit that “involves widespread and sincere acceptance among all ethnicities and their leaders of reconciliation between ethnicities, as well as an understanding that Ohrid was meant not to divide but to reunite”. Speakers stressed how the prospect of EU integration has played a fundamental role in changing perceptions of Ohrid as favouring the Albanian population exclusively, and in combating ethnic nationalist tendencies.

However, “the attractiveness of the EU model is lost today”, Stevo Pendarovski, Assistant Professor at University American College Skopje, argued. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’s path to the EU and to NATO continues to be hampered by its dispute with Greece over the name issue, a dispute that also resonates internally and has created new divides both within the ethnic Macedonian political class, and between Macedonian and Albanian leaders in the country. As one speaker put it, “negotiations about the name are not really about the name”; other key issues include the scope of the use of the name and, most importantly, underlying identity issues. Given the sensitivity of the latter, speakers and participants were generally sceptical that a resolution of this dispute was forthcoming.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the general elections held on 3 October, although they brought new actors to power, did not fundamentally change underlying dynamics. Political blockages along ethnic lines have delayed the country’s Euro-Atlantic integration and created obstacles even in those areas of clear success, such as defence reform. Thus, the failure to resolve the issue of immovable defence property has prevented the activation of Bosnia and Herzegovina ’s Membership Action Plan with NATO. Speakers deplored the lack of an EU policy on Bosnia and Herzegovina, and challenged the widespread belief that constitutional reform will solve political blockages and that a package deal would be the best solution. Instead, they called for a gradual progressive approach, focusing on those areas where consensus and progress is achievable.

In Kosovo, the security situation was assessed as calm in most areas, granting a progressive reduction of the KFOR presence, with a further decrease expected shortly from 10,000 to 5,500 troops. However, all speakers stressed that the situation in the North, where Pristina’s authority is extremely limited, remained the key problem. The prospect of new talks between Belgrade and Pristina was seen as the only way out of the current conundrum, but what these talks could be expected to achieve was unclear. The political crisis in Kosovo and the prospect of elections added another layer of complication. Speakers all noted that failure of the dialogue risked fostering nationalistic projects of redrawing borders, be it through a partition of the North of Kosovo, a land swap between Northern Kosovo and the Albanian-majority parts of South Serbia, or even the creation of a Greater Albania. However, speakers and participants generally dismissed such calls to reopen the question of current borders as extremely dangerous strategies.

Turning to the question of international strategies in the region, speakers generally agreed that there was no need for radically new approaches. Putting into question current strategies would send a wrong signal to countries of the region, which need to see integration as a credible prospect. There was broad consensus that in NATO’s specific area of responsibility – defence reform –, impressive progress had been achieved. The accession of Albania and Croatia and the contribution of armed forces of the region to NATO operations demonstrated that the Western Balkans countries had become contributors of security. NATO therefore did not need a new strategy for the region. The adoption of NATO’s new Strategic Concept in Lisbon was expected to create a new momentum for the Alliance, which would also reinvigorate nations’ efforts to qualify for membership.

Participants agreed that the EU provided deeper and broader incentives for reform than NATO in the Western Balkans. However, the EU’s adoption of enlargement as a stand-alone foreign policy in the Western Balkans was seen as having reached its limits. The combined impact of enlargement fatigue, the global financial and economic crisis and the debate over the Union ’s absorption capacity had led to a “carrot crisis in the EU”, as put by Dusan Reljic, Senior Researcher at the German Institute for International Affairs. The EU’s approach was also hampered by a disconnect between goals and instruments.

Speakers and participants thus stressed the importance for EU and NATO member states to speak with one voice in their relations with countries of the region. Greater synergies should also be sought between the EU and NATO at the strategic level as well as in specific practical areas.

Seminar participants also called on the EU to augment its overarching enlargement strategy with policies that would be tailor-made to the specific challenges faced by each country. The promise of membership without a clear roadmap and specific benchmarks was not enough. Promoting local ownership of reforms, particularly in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo, was also considered essential.

A greater focus on economic development rather than mere assistance aimed at preserving stability was mentioned as another important priority. This could also include opening the EU’s doors more widely to labour migrants from the region, one speaker suggested.

Finally, speakers agreed that regional cooperation provided a key source of new momentum in the Western Balkans. A new wave of normalisation and reconciliation, the mushrooming of practical initiatives and a growing regional ownership of cooperation mechanisms, had brought about positive dynamics which could help complete the transformation of the region.

Looking back at the past 20 years, Jovan Teokarevic, Professor at Belgrade University, concluded that after a decade of conflict and another decade of normalisation, it was now time to move to “a decade of consolidation of positive changes, which should end with the accession of the entire region to Euro-Atlantic institutions”. This would complete the region’s path “from war to stabilisation to the European mainstream”.

Company or Organisation Portrait:
The NATO Parliamentary Assembly is the inter-parliamentary organisation of legislators from the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance as well as 14 associate members. The Assembly provides a critical forum for international parliamentary dialogue on an array of security, political and economic matters. Its principal objective is to foster mutual understanding among Alliance parliamentarians of the key security challenges facing the transatlantic partnership. Assembly discussions and debates make an important contribution to the development of the consensus that must underpin Alliance policies.