Macedonian Think tank!

[Vangelovski]

Bratot,

Repeating the same incoherent and contradictory nonsense in a new thread does not make it any more credible the second time around. Refer back to the thread where you supposedly made your case the first time to understand how ridiculous your assertion that membership under FYROM would "save" our identity is.

[Bratot]

Originally Posted by Vangelovski

Bratot,

Repeating the same incoherent and contradictory nonsense in a new thread does not make it any more credible the second time around. Refer back to the thread where you supposedly made your case the first time to understand how ridiculous your assertion that membership under FYROM would "save" our identity is.

Vangelovski,

you cannot suppress my opinion and I'm not going to exercise your communication inability again on this thread.

I don't think the purpose of this forum was to provide you monopol on every issue related to the Macedonian matters nor you have earned some credibility to be the arbitary on someone else's view.

And if you would like to earn some credibility in our discussions start with decent debating without arrogantly underestimating the different opinion and false insinuations.

That's my frankly suggestion to you, but if you continue with the same low level towards me I will not selfrestrain to answer you in the same manner.

If you try to take this thread in other direction than planned will not discourage me from opening the next thread with same context and reapeating myself as much as I like without your approbation.

[Risto the Great]

Bratot, I was asking a similar question as Vangelovski.
I thought I understood that you thought it was reasonable to join these organisations as FYROM. This is why I was seeking clarification from you.

Your response to the question, in all fairness, basically represents the confusion of all Macedonians in what has become a needlessly complex issue. Your conclusions contradict your original statement in the following fashion:

Originally Posted by Bratot

Actually the whole NATO&EU have violated the IA they imposed on us back in 1995.

Clearly they are not to be trusted.

So I really doubt we could be treated fairly this time and I think we could undertake some actions proposed by Dr. Janev and most probably we could get the solution that Burma/Myanmar has got, meaning we would enter the UN as R. of Macedonia officially but some members of it could use some different name for us billaterally (Greece & France - for example).

The organisations we seek to align ourselves with will not treat us fairly. So we should change our name to enter them so we can be treated more fairly?

As I said before, this situation is needlessly complicated. Why not cut through this Gordian knot by simply asserting ourselves? If the organisations then demand compromise, let them be clear with the terms and Macedonia can deliberate with extreme caution. But seriously, what compromises can these organisations assert? Can they say you do not deserve the rights of other countries for example?

[Vangelovski]

Bratot,

No one is attempting to suppress your opinion. Many, however, have repeatedly demonstrated how flawed and contradictory it is.

[Bratot]

Originally Posted by Risto the Great

Bratot, I was asking a similar question as Vangelovski.
I thought I understood that you thought it was reasonable to join these organisations as FYROM. This is why I was seeking clarification from you.

Risto,

I'm not sure if you really understand it.

It's 2010 now (2 years after the summit in Bucurest) and we are still "the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia" and obviously we will stay under the provisional reference that long until we undertake the measures within the UN membership.

So what exactly has changed on better since we didn't entered NATO under the provisional reference?

The reasonable for me was to try to prevail our position within NATO structure as I gave the example:

In that case, the answer is YES, it would significantly diminish the chances to take off the character of the Macedonian state since we have 12 of all 28 NATO members using our name R. of Macedonia and it's a matter of further efforts to be made as it's a case with Turkey, insisting in every official document to be noted that :"Turkey recognizes Macedonia under its constitutional name"

In my personal opinion we could than get a far more advantage in the further resolving from the position of being member in NATO.

Your response to the question, in all fairness, basically represents the confusion of all Macedonians in what has become a needlessly complex issue. Your conclusions contradict your original statement in the following fashion:

I don't agree it's about contradictory, it's something else I am pointing.

Yes, they violated the IA they imposed, but I would like you and Vangelovski to answer what was the reason of it, in your opinion, Why have they still blocked us and didn't allowed us to join as "the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia" according to the article 11 of the IA?

Clearly they are not to be trusted.

The organisations we seek to align ourselves with will not treat us fairly. So we should change our name to enter them so we can be treated more fairly?

Risto,

where did I said we should change our name to enter them?

You misinterpret me totally.

Now you agree with me these organisations doesn't treat us fairly even the UN where we are members under the reference, right?

Why would you want us to be members of UN at first place, when it was them to inforce on us the provisional reference, denominated our aplication and have put additional obligations on us to fullfil after we become UN member.

And now it's your contradictory when you argued me how easy it would be to set us free from the provisional reference and to continue our UN membership:

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...&postcount=184

I have pointed out on this thread on how many basic issues we were sabotaged by the UN, so why would you think this time will be different?

(That doesn't mean we should not try using the arguments we have on disposal)

* To repeat once again the 'provisional reference' is not a name and we are not discussing it's change, there is nothing we should change back, we are the Republic of Macedonia. Don't equate the 'provisional reference' with some changed name, it's simply not correct and it's producing confusion.

As I said before, this situation is needlessly complicated. Why not cut through this Gordian knot by simply asserting ourselves? If the organisations then demand compromise, let them be clear with the terms and Macedonia can deliberate with extreme caution. But seriously, what compromises can these organisations assert? Can they say you do not deserve the rights of other countries for example?

It's about the preception of the people, how to meet their expectations of the common future in respect to being or not being members of these international organizations.

That's why they use NATO&EU as a triumph card in order to convince the people to accept a name change and that's why it would be significantly harder for them to convince us to accept a name change as after becoming members in NATO.

Now it's a question how to satisfy the voters, since politicaly they are the purpose of the manipulation.
We have to find, to introduce another, new solution as alternative for better perspective not related to the membership in NATO&EU.

Neither we can allow Macedonia to be in some international quarantine, as someone would like to see us, that's why logically we need to look for other alternatives too, we have to offer something as another perspective for Macedonia and Macedonians.

My opinion was in respect to the present situation.

Now let me hear you propositions how to solve these issues, what you offer and how would you made it by being aware of the obstacles we are facing?

And I will try to give my critical opinion on it, where we agree or disagree.

If anyone provide me good logic and convince me with his arguments I have no problems accepting, support it and propagating it to other people.

[Bratot]

More on the Strategy for preserving the name by Marjan Popeski on the links below:

-Дали случајот помеѓу Македонија и Грција правно е меѓународен спор?!
-Зошто Европа ја поддржува грчката неправда кон Македонија?
-Има правни лекови за нашата болест
-Привремената спогодба е неправда за Македонија
-Сојузот со САД – причина што Грција не го користи правото на војна
-Пресудата на Меѓународниот суд на правда ќе биде како светилник

[Bratot]

How to End the “Name Game”

By Risto Stefov

[email protected]

August 15, 2010




Almost two decades have passed and there is still no sign of a resolution being reached in the so-called “name negotiations” between Greece and the Republic of Macedonia.



In this article I will attempt to define what Greece is asking for and the compromises that the Republic of Macedonia has already made.



Greece’s opposition to international recognition of the Republic of Macedonia is based on the following;



1. The name “Macedonia” is, was and will always be Greek.



2. The 16 ray sunburst, symbol of the Macedonian royal family, is also Greek on account of “Macedonia” being Greek.



3. Possessing the name “Macedonia” and the 16 ray sunburst constitutes reason that “Skopje” harbours irredentist claims on Greek territory. As evidence of this Greek governments have cited passages from the 1944 ASNOM resolution calling for the “unification of the entire Macedonian nation” which was to be achieved by “the liberation of Greek and Bulgarian occupied Macedonia”.



4. International recognition of the Republic of Macedonia would lead to destabilization of the Balkans.



5. Article 3 of the Macedonian constitution which stated “the borders of the Republic of Macedonia may be changed only in accordance with the constitution” Greece interprets as legitimizing efforts to “break off and annex Greek territories”.



6. Article 49 of the Macedonian constitution which stated that the Republic of Macedonia “cares for the status and rights of Macedonians living in neighbouring countries”, Greece interprets as legitimizing efforts to “liberate enslaved Macedonians living in Greece”.



7. Greek governments deny the existence of Macedonians living in Greece.



8. Using the name “Macedonia” by the Republic of Macedonia may cause confusion internationally because Greece’s “northern province” is also called “Macedonia”, therefore the Republic of Macedonia cannot use the name “Macedonia”.



Now let us have a look at what the Republic of Macedonia has done to alleviate Greek concerns;



a. In response to a European Commission request made on December 16, 1991 by the Council of EC Ministers, the Macedonian parliament, on January 6, 1992, adopted two amendments to the Macedonian constitution. Amendment 1 stated that the Republic of Macedonia had no territorial claims against its neighbouring state and that the boundaries of the Republic of Macedonia could be changed only in accordance with “generally accepted international norms”. Amendment 2 stated that the Republic of Macedonia would not interfere in the internal affairs of other states.



b. The Republic of Macedonia, on many occasions, offered to sign a bilateral agreement with Greece affirming the permanence of the borders between Greece and the Republic of Macedonia.



c. The Republic of Macedonia changed its flag and removed the 16 ray sunburst from circulation.



d. An EC arbitration commission, after its investigation, ruled that the use of the name “Macedonia” did not imply territorial claims towards any of the Republic of Macedonia’s neighbouring states.



At this point the Republic of Macedonia made it clear that bargaining over the name of a state as a condition of its recognition was contrary to the principles of international law, citing that such precedence does not exist.



Now let us review what has been done and what, if any, remains to be done to address Greek concerns.



Item 1 of the so-called “Greek concerns” can be removed from the list because (1) Modern Greece has nothing to do with Ancient Macedonia, its territory, or symbols and (2) the Republic of Macedonia, being located inside geographic and historic Macedonian territory, has the right to that name and the territory it currently occupies.



Item 2 is no longer a concern for Greece since the Republic of Macedonia abandoned that symbol when it changed its flag as per item “c” above.



Item 3 is no longer a concern because the Republic of Macedonia amended its constitution as shown in parts “a” and “b” above. Also as stated in “d” above, the EC arbitration commission, after its investigation, ruled that the use of the name “Macedonia” did not imply territorial claims towards Greece.



Item 4 above should not be a concern for Greece because the Republic of Macedonia has over the years (1) proven to be a peaceful state and (2) does not have the economic or military resources to be a threat to any of its more powerful neighbours.



Items 5 and 6 above have been taken care of with the Republic of Macedonia’s constitutional amendments mentioned in item “a” above and should not be of concern to Greece.



Item 7 above is an internal Greek problem which Greece has to deal with on its own. It has nothing to do with the Republic of Macedonia. This item is also covered by the second constitutional amendment in part (a) above; Amendment 2 stated that the Republic of Macedonia would not interfere in the internal affairs of other states. This includes Greece.



Item 8 above can be addressed by Greece using the name “Province of Macedonia” for its northern province while the Republic of Macedonia uses “Republic of Macedonia” to denote the Macedonian state. A state always takes precedence over a province or territory. Clearly, anyone can tell the difference between “Province of Macedonia” and “Republic of Macedonia”. Even if they can’t, what harm will it do?



In reality all of Greece’s concerns, as stated up to this point, have been addressed by the Republic of Macedonia.



Since the Republic of Macedonia has made no demands of its own from Greece, the so-called “name negotiations” are now and have been for the last decade a non-issue.



If Greece, however, continues to make further demands of the Republic of Macedonia to “change” its name without producing “legitimate” reasons as to why, then either Greece has not made it “perfectly clear” as to what it wants from the Republic of Macedonia, or Greece has secretly widened its original scope.



If that is the case then this opens the door for the Republic of Macedonia to (1) withdraw the compromises it has already made, (2) walk away from the talks, and (3) make demands of its own. For example, the Republic of Macedonia can make a case for examining history and determining the legitimacy of Greece’s historic claims to Macedonian territories. The Republic of Macedonia can also sue Greece for compensation for the damages that the unfair February 1994 Greek imposed embargo caused to the Republic of Macedonia’s economy.



It is now time for Greece to come to its senses and recognize the Republic of Macedonia by its constitutional name. I believe this is Greece’s last chance where conditions are most favourable for Greece to end the “name negotiations” and Recognize the Republic of Macedonia. This is the time where Greece has most to gain by exiting the negotiations. Putting more demands, using blackmail and delay tactics clearly show that Greece is not interested in a “fair resolution” and therefore is working under a hidden agenda, which in time will become obvious to everyone who will then side with the Republic of Macedonia.



Other articles by Risto Stefov:



http://www.maknews.com/html/articles.html#stefov

http://www.americanchronicle.com/authors/view/3446



Free electronic books by Risto Stefov available at:



http://makedonskakafana.com/risto_stefov_ebooks.html

[George S.]

I don't think there should be any bargaining on a country's identity as you are who you are & not wghat someone else decides you are.They did it with the flag here's hoping they don't do it with the name.If greece is bothered by the name macedonia then why doesn't it tell america to stop using it as there is a place called macedonia in america.Since when did greece decide it can change a country's name to suit herself??What is greece afraid of that the world will find out that the macedonia it holds is illegal & may have to give it back to the macedonians.

[Bratot]

The propaganda campaign is striking again via the same media, lets see the "new" or moderated propaganda explanation:

Дипломатски извори во Скопје, брифираат дека се работи на сет мерки, а дека решението за спорот е веќе во познатата формула уставното име да добие „додавка“.

Овие информации се совпаѓаат со пишувањата на грчки „Катимерини“ дека двете земји се под притисок од меѓународната заедница пред самитот на НАТО во Лисабон.

„Република Македонија Вардар што ќе ефектуира со тоа луѓето да ве нарекуваат како што сега ве нарекуваат, зошто луѓето се мрзливци и не сакаат компликации“, изјави Гералд Кнаус.

http://a1.com.mk/vesti/default.aspx?VestID=126617

Translation:

Diplomatic sources in Skopje, the briefing that it is a set of measures and dispute settlement that is already well-known formula to get the constitutional name "remark.

This information correspond with the writings of the Greek Kathimerini that both countries are under strong pressure from the international community before the NATO summit in Lisbon.

" Republic of Macedonia Vardar (Vardarska Macedonia!?) will result by the people to call you in the way they call you now, because the people are lazy and do not want complications " says Gerald Knaus.

---

As we can see the propaganda machinery doesn't rest even though their creative potential has been spent already and they are using more and more lamely arguments to 'convince' us in their prophecy.

To remind you of my previous quote:

The purpose of the media is not to make you to think that the name must be changed, but to get you into debate - what name would suit us.


The standard tactic of imagined "diplomatic" sources in order to confirm their supposed credibility, than catching up with their propaganda mother Kathimerini to show relevance and followed by another "opinion maker" employed for this case - Gerald Knaus.

Who is Gerald actually?

http://www.esiweb.org/rumeliobserver...ew-in-dnevnik/

is founding chairman of the European Stability Initiative (ESI). He studied in Oxford, Brussels and Bologna. He taught economics at the State University of Chernivtsi in Ukraine and worked for five years in Bulgaria and Bosnia for NGOs and international organizations. He was director of the Lessons Learned Unit of the EU Pillar of the UN Mission in Kosovo (from 2001 to 2004). Gerald published many articles that have triggered wide public debates, including "Travails of the European Raj" on Bosnia (2003) and "Member State Building and the Helsinki Moment" on the EU role in the Balkans (2004). He also co-authored more than 60 ESI reports as well as many scripts for TV documentaries on South East Europe. He is a founding member of the European Council on Foreign Relations and associate fellow at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the Harvard University Kennedy School where he also spent one year as a visiting fellow lecturing on state building and intervention.

Well... he is an "analyst" the rebranded version of a "propagator".

Here, visit his website named "Rumeli Observer"...yup, take a look:

http://www.geraldknaus.eu/

oohh my, it's a clone of the previous, I guess his intention is to have his "analyses" jumping from every corner, placed by a fancy name as "European Stability Initiative".

I'm tired of these propaganda mercenaries, being employed for the purpose of convincing us to have our name changed and how the people will still call us 'Macedonia' iirespective of the name we chosed, just because they are.. believe it or not... LAZY!

Well.. I must say, I'm aaallmoostt convinced, come on Gerald you can do it better, but in the meantime why don't you change your name to Gerald The Asshole Knaus just to see if your theory about the laziness will help you preserve your original name, you moron!

[Bratot]

At a tribune entitled “European Perspectives through the prism of a Macedonian – Greek conflict” influential Macedonian intellectuals from different NGO’s talked about the past, the future and the EU.

The main points conveyed during the debate is for Macedonian politicians to avoid falling into a trap set up by the European Union and Greece in which the Macedonians themselves will lead the way in changing their own name and identity.

All involved in the debate concluded that the current ‘talks’ with our southern neighbor have long been derailed and are outside the legal UN Framework.

- Visa vi the name “North Macedonia” does this mean the Faculty for Linguistic at Ss Cyril and Methodius University will become the “Faculty for North Macedonian language? What is happening now is a form of neocolonialism where we are being forced to cooperate in the destruction of our past and future” says Elizabeta Shakleva from the Faculty of Lingustics.

Professor Blagoja Samakovski says the European Union has put Macedonia as a ‘negotiating side’ in this manufactured dispute so it can hide from the responsibilities of their own making and choosing.

- Through out history, the big powers have changed borders, names of countries without any consulting or agreement. They need us for what exactly? The EU can change our name without consulting us. EU’s political nomenclature is not interested in politics or names, only in their 30.000+ euros monthly salary. Javier Solana can not be an individual responsible for moral values.
Our tiredness from this ‘dispute’ does not mean we need to give up and lose our thousands of years of history. This is about our children – says professor Samakovski.

- We need to ask ourselves, when did Greece entered into ‘negotiations’. We also need to remind ourselves that our UN reference, according to the UN framework is valid only for internal UN use, not outside it – added Professor Ljubomir Cuculovski.

Jovan Donev of the Euro Balkan Institute and professor Gordana Siljanovska added Macedonian politicians need to be very careful as Athens fascist policies have not changed ever since occupying Aegean Macedonia in 1913.

The main questions Macedonian politicians need to ask is whether Macedonia is aligning itself strategically with the right ‘Union’.
Is entering a Union that doesn’t recognize us as people viable, or perhaps looking at a ‘Union’ with the more traditional allies … Turkey, US, China…


http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/10507/2/


Proffesor Elizabeta Shakleva
Proffesor Blagoja Samakovski
Professor Ljubomir Cuculovski
Professor Gordana Siljanovska
Jovan Donev of the Euro Balkan Institute