United Macedonia Diaspora

[George S.]

vicsand that is precisely the point the umd is off the track on macedonia for reasons only known to itself that it is not giving macedonia it's full undivided attention.We see allready chinks in the armour of an organization that's mean't to represent us but is really letting us down.

[vicsinad]

Soldier:

Other reasons include me not agreeing with the aggressive policies of NATO in Afghanistan, Libya and Serbia. Further, NATO serves not the interest of the people but of financial and corporate thugs who reap the benefits of those wars. It's a bully organization...I would rather see Macedonia not part of it.

I disagree with your characterization and generalizations of Macedonians who are willing to enter an organization/agreement with FYROM. It's like when the government gets your name wrong with your social security and/or birth certificate....every organization, agency, employer, and etc. will be using that wrong name in every single matter. No matter how much you shout and scream to an employer that your pay check should be addressed to "Macedonia" instead of "FYROM", you're legally named FYROM. Your employer may call you Macedonia casually, but officially it will always come back FYROM until you can change your name to Macedonia on that social security/birth certificate. So what to do -- not go to work, not file taxes, not buy goods, don't have bank accounts, don't own property...or continue doing all those "beneficial" things to support you as a person while doing getting your name changed where it matters? Do you lose integrity as a person by officially going under the name you don't want, but that is legally yours, so you can make a living and survive...or at least advance yourself?

Sure, not the best analogy, but it gets the point across I think: UN is pretty much the body that represents admission into the international legal world. Macedonia, although bullied into it, accepted FYROM as its name for the UN...and that trickles down to every other international organization where the members are UN members, where international law under the UN and its branches applies.

There are two different strategies that I think Macedonia could realistically take to achieve the above, and I don't know which one is better: A) drop anything to do with every international organization and agreement that uses the term 'FYROM' and use that to assert our name and identity; or B) concentrate all "name and identity" matters at the UN and continue seeking benefits (economic, environmental, political, etc.) that Macedonia may receive from interacting with those organizations and agreements where FYROM is used.

The Macedonian government the past 15 or so years has been using FYROM for all these international activities without vigorously concentrating "name and identity" matters at the UN...of course, a doomed policy. That's not something I agree with.

[Vangelovski]

Victor,

Accepting admission into NATO as FYROM only puts another nail into the coffin. What would help is entering NATO as Macedonia.

The UN is not some sort of overarching world government in which a state must be a member, nor can "international law" trump national laws and national sovereignty by virtue of the UN's own Charter and the simple fact that the UN is an unelected body. The UN is just another multilateral organisation. Read its Charter. The problem with Macedonia's name lies in Macedonia, with the Macedonian people and their unwillingness (and in some cases just plain ignorance) to EXERCISE their inalienable rights.

In terms of the UN name being used in other organisations, the UN is not affiliated with NATO and there is absolutely no provision within either charter that anything the UN decides on must be accepted by NATO.

I thought you were a law student? Does Meto take legal advice from people like yourself? Have you ever provided Meto with any legal advice? If only Petar hired lawyers like you, we would have solved that problem before it even started!

[Vangelovski]

Kire,

Please tell us more about the "political world" and how it works.

[vicsinad]

Originally Posted by Vangelovski

Victor,

Accepting admission into NATO as FYROM only puts another nail into the coffin. What would help is entering NATO as Macedonia.

The UN is not some sort of overarching world government in which a state must be a member, nor can "international law" trump national laws and national sovereignty by virtue of the UN's own Charter and the simple fact that the UN is an unelected body. The UN is just another multilateral organisation. Read its Charter. The problem with Macedonia's name lies in Macedonia, with the Macedonian people and their unwillingness (and in some cases just plain ignorance) to EXERCISE their inalienable rights.

In terms of the UN name being used in other organisations, the UN is not affiliated with NATO and there is absolutely no provision within either charter that anything the UN decides on must be accepted by NATO.

I thought you were a law student? Does Meto take legal advice from people like yourself? Have you ever provided Meto with any legal advice? If only Petar hired lawyers like you, we would have solved that problem before it even started!

I've probably read the UN Charter more times than you mention Meto's name in any given month. I guess that means I'm as obsessed with the Charter as you are with Meto. Eh, we all have our fantasies...

Aside from that, I never suggested any that of which you may have suggested that I probably suggested. But way to find a convenient opportunity to stroke your ego and boast about some basic knowledge of the UN. You have shown with your words that your "understanding" of what the UN does and its practical effects on states and the way states interact with each other is...well...undergraduate. Do they even have that word "undergraduate" where you come from?

I wonder how quickly a picture of Meto makes you go 6 to midnight...now that would be an interesting topic for a thesis.

Time for some soul searching, don't ya think?

[Vangelovski]

Originally Posted by vicsinad

Sure, not the best analogy, but it gets the point across I think: UN is pretty much the body that represents admission into the international legal world. Macedonia, although bullied into it, accepted FYROM as its name for the UN...and that trickles down to every other international organization where the members are UN members, where international law under the UN and its branches applies.

You stated this in the context of the discussion about NATO. Now you claim you never suggested it?

[vicsinad]

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying I never suggested:

1) That a nation must be a member of the UN;
2) That international laws can trump national laws (but they can and they do... do some research into environmental laws and laws of the sea...and the law of armed conflict);
3) That the UN is an elected body;
4) That the UN is affiliated with NATO;
or
5) That there is a provision in the UN Charter stating that what the UN decides on must be accepted by NATO.

[Vangelovski]

Originally Posted by vicsinad

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying I never suggested:

1) That a nation must be a member of the UN;
2) That international laws can trump national laws (but they can and they do... do some research into environmental laws and laws of the sea...and the law of armed conflict);
3) That the UN is an elected body;
4) That the UN is affiliated with NATO;
or
5) That there is a provision in the UN Charter stating that what the UN decides on must be accepted by NATO.

If that is the case, what did you mean by the following:

Originally Posted by vicsinad

Sure, not the best analogy, but it gets the point across I think: UN is pretty much the body that represents admission into the international legal world. Macedonia, although bullied into it, accepted FYROM as its name for the UN...and that trickles down to every other international organization where the members are UN members, where international law under the UN and its branches applies.

[vicsinad]

It's no secret that the vast majority of the world's states are members of the UN. It's no secret that all states of the EU and NATO are members of the UN. All UN member states have voluntarily bound themselves to the UN Charter (and resolutions and such that arise out of that). Just because NATO is a different organization than the UN, it does not mean that UN members who are members of NATO are not bound by the UN Charter when they are operating under the name 'NATO'. UN is in essence a legal and political body. NATO is basically a defense and military body.

[Vangelovski]

Originally Posted by vicsinad

Sure, not the best analogy, but it gets the point across I think: UN is pretty much the body that represents admission into the international legal world. Macedonia, although bullied into it, accepted FYROM as its name for the UN...and that trickles down to every other international organization where the members are UN members, where international law under the UN and its branches applies.

Originally Posted by vicsinad

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying I never suggested

Originally Posted by vicsinad

4) That the UN is affiliated with NATO;

Originally Posted by vicsinad

It's no secret that the vast majority of the world's states are members of the UN. It's no secret that all states of the EU and NATO are members of the UN. All UN member states have voluntarily bound themselves to the UN Charter (and resolutions and such that arise out of that). Just because NATO is a different organization than the UN, it does not mean that UN members who are members of NATO are not bound by the UN Charter when they are operating under the name 'NATO'. UN is in essence a legal and political body. NATO is basically a defense and military body.

What exactly are you trying to say Victor? Are you saying that the UN's resolution on Macedonia's name applies to NATO or not?