[QUOTE=Daskalot;61361]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.[/QUOTE]

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

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.

[URL="http://untreaty.un.org/unts/120001_144071/6/3/00004456.pdf"]http://untreaty.un.org/unts/120001_144071/6/3/00004456.pdf[/URL]

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.

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.

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.

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.

[QUOTE=Daskalot;61361]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. [/QUOTE]

Not only that, either Party may unilaterally withdraw from the accord [B]at any moment,[/B] but in case when one of the Parties violates the agreement than only on request of the damaged Party the agreement can become void and non-obligatory with such decission by the International Court of Justice.

The Agreement doesn't cease until one of the Parties doesn't withdraw the same or put a request for nullifying from obvious reasons already mentioned.

------
[I]see[/I]:

2. Any difference or dispute that arises between the Parties concerning the interpretation [U]or implementation of this Interim Accord may be submitted by either of them to the [/U][B]International Court of Justice*[/B], except for the differences referred to in Article 5, paragraph 1."



*
Jurisdiction

The International Court of Justice acts as a world court. [U]The Court has a dual jurisdiction :[/U] [B][COLOR="Red"]it decides[/COLOR][/B], in accordance with international law, disputes of a legal nature that are submitted to it by States (jurisdiction in contentious cases); and it [B]gives advisory opinions [/B]on legal questions at the request of the organs of the United Nations or specialized agencies authorized to make such a request (advisory jurisdiction)."

Contentious Jurisdiction

In the exercise of its jurisdiction in contentious cases, [B]the International Court of Justice [COLOR="red"]has to decide[/COLOR][/B], in accordance with international law,[U] disputes of a legal nature that are submitted to it by States. [/U]An international legal dispute can be defined as a disagreement on a question of law or fact, a conflict, a clash of legal views or of interests.



----

Because there [B]has to be such formal initiative [/B]from either Party our Government has acted according to the directions given upper and:


The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia institutes proceedings against Greece for a violation of Article 11 of the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995
[url]http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index....363175f75762b0[/url]


The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia requests the Court to order Greece to “immediately take all necessary steps to comply with its obligations under Article 11, paragraph 1” and “[U]to cease and desist from objecting in any way,[/U] whether directly or indirectly, to the - 2 -
Applicant’s membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and/or of any other ‘international, multilateral and regional organizations and institutions’ of which [Greece] is a member . . .”.

As a basis for the jurisdiction of the Court, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia invokes Article 21, paragraph 2, of the Interim Accord of 13 September 1995 which provides that “[a]ny difference or dispute that arises between the Parties concerning the interpretation of implementation of this Interim Accord may be submitted by either of them to the International Court of Justice, except for the differences referred to in Article 5, paragraph 1”.

[url]http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/142/14881.pdf[/url]



[B]BUT[/B] our Government have [B]NOT[/B] required this Agreement to be declared as void, invalid by the Int. Court!

If I wasn't precise enough, after the period of 7 years the Interim Accord becomes infinite, if one of the Parties doesn't withdraw from it.

As I already stated in the [URL="http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?p=61394#post61394"]other thread,[/URL] the acronym "FYROM" is purely Greek invention and formally doesn't exist.

They are forcing the invented acronym in order to imply different name such as "Fyrom" might be for a total stranger in this issue.

The temporarely reference is:"the former Yugoslav Republic [B]of Macedonia[/B]" and has to be insisted on it's whole or to use the shortened version FYR [B]of Macedonia[/B].

The only dignified exit, in my view, can be enacted at anytime and that is to declare the Interim Accord 'null and void'. The only thing stopping Macedonian politicians from doing this is their vassal interests. The only thing stopping ordinary Macedonians from demanding this is the vague and unsubstantiated apocalyptic senarios fed to them by their vassal politicians.

If Macedonia was to withdraw based on Article 23, it would have to recognise the Accord as valid. If it were to recognise the Accord as valid, it would legitimise the Greek argument that we are in fact stealing their history, name, identity etc.

Bratot,

You can push Gruevski's line, but you are delusional if you think having one name for international use and a second 'monopoly name' for domestic use only is not a name change.

[QUOTE=OziMak;61383]
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.[/QUOTE]How? What mechanism or precedent are you relying on that will ensure this will happen. In fact, it would appear that 130 countries recognising are still not enough to solve this issue. More politically correct rubbish from you.

[QUOTE=OziMak;61383]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.[/QUOTE]I love money. It moves me. But the kind of money that come from EU participation is merely driven by debt. Sure there will be a veneer of increased wealth. But Greeks will now tell you that they are hurting because of it. Bulgarians ... well ... they will probably be eating each other soon like some Russian caught making kebapi out of human beings recently.

[QUOTE=OziMak;61383]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.[/QUOTE]

Failing all of this? Fifteen years of THIS is not enough?
I will agree with you that a traitor could sabotage all of your proposed process very easily. I also contend that Macedonia has had very few leaders with a clean record on matters of Macedonian integrity.

Whilst it is easy to point the bone at some who are displaying heroic tendencies, perhaps you should try to recall any moments of heroism displayed by Macedonia's leaders since the country seceded from Yugoslavia. In other words, maybe it is time for some heroism because all else has failed.