I am Macedonian, period.

This is an excerpt from the article by Risto Stefov, published in American Chronicle a few days ago. It describes the view on the "name issue" from our Macedonian perspective, including what we think that the root of the problem is.

How is it possible in the 21st century for someone else to decide who I am, or who I am not? Does the "universal human right to self determination" as declared by the United Nations not apply to me? Am I excluded from this declaration?

How does one become what or who he or she is? Is it the government that decides? The priest, the church, the United Nations...? Who has the power to decide ethnically and nationally who I am, what language I can speak, what songs I can sing, what dances I can dance...? And if anyone has that right who has given it to him or her?

...

In the beginning of the 20th century my ancestors struggled to free themselves and Macedonia from the grip of the Ottoman occupiers as did the other nations in the Balkans. After five centuries of occupation it was time for freedom; time for the Ottomans to leave. The spirit of freedom was felt everywhere and blood was spilled to achieve it. Unfortunately freedom to the Macedonians did not come easily in spite of their effort. Not to Macedonia and not to my ancestors! One tyrant was replaced by three and instead of gaining its freedom Macedonia was again occupied and divided. Worse than before, in addition to losing their homeland, Macedonians now lost their identity and forcibly were made into Serbs, Bulgarians and Greeks.

The struggle for the Macedonian name, identity and language became and 100 years later is still a burden to all Macedonians and a shame for Greece, Bulgaria, the EU and the United Nations who still insist on their non-existence.

An increasing number of countries and people are standing on our side in our fight for the right to be called by our name. People who stand for democracy and human rights agree with us that we should not change our name, that nobody has the right to make us do that against our free will. This mass includes righteous people in Greece, too, who have publicly spoken against their country's fascism and racism towards the Macedonian minority.

The "name issue" between Greece and Macedonia is a case that shakes the very foundations on which the principle of human rights stand upon. It is also a public shame for all involved in this unfair pressure, no matter which organization they represent (UN, EU, NATO...) and how many times they declare to be supporters of human rights. Sometimes doing nothing means doing harm. So far, the problem was not resolved only because Greece has a superior position as a member of NATO and EU, thus blackmailing us with veto to enter there organizations, unless we comply to their lunatic demands. That's all, really, we haven't seen any arguments and facts so far, anything that would justify the irrational fear and hate towards Macedonia and Macedonians, or the will to make them disappear.

No matter how long we wait to enter NATO and EU, we will NOT change our name. We changed our flag and our constitution according to Greece's demands, we endured an economic embargo, we are constantly enduring provocations and insults from our southern neighbor. During this time, we are offering our friendly hand and will to forgive the past. As a final compromise that we are willing to make, we are offering the double formula - that's it, nothing more you'll get from us!



MACEDONIA FOR THE MACEDONIANS!

Is Croatia next on Greece's hitlist?

Greece is annoyed because Croatia has recognised the Macedonian national minority and autocephalous Macedonian Orthodox Church, therefore it is more likely Athens to block the opening of a new chapter of Croatia's membership talks, Split-based newspaper "Slobodna Dalmacija" reports.



The daily citing "unofficial, but confidential information", claims that Greece might block the start of the negotiations in terms of the chapter of judiciary, because the Macedonian minority is mentioned in it.

"Slobodna Dalmacija" says that even though Foreign Ministry spokesman Mario Dragun said he had no information on any announcements about a blockade from Greece, talks are being held about the issue behind closed doors. [via MINA]

Is there an end to the Greek obsession with the existence of Macedonia and us Macedonians? Their hate produces even greater hate, and their lies lead to even more lies. We are too small to compete with Greek diplomatic fist, using facts and logic, and their "more equal" position as member of NATO and EU allows them to hold us hostage to their uncontrollable nationalism and racism. Unless the politicians from other countries stand up to this injustice (but why would they jeopardize their positions in the name of justice?), we will remain prisoners for being what we are, Macedonians.

Link: Novi problemi: i Grčka nam prijeti blokadom pregovora (Slobodna Dalmacija).

Friedman: Macedonians exist before the 20th century

Professor Victor Friedman is one of the world's foremost experts on Balkan languages, and has been studying them for almost four decades, since 1993 as a linguist at the University of Chicago. During his last visit to Macedonia, he had an interview with "Balkanalysis" director Christopher Deliso, where among other topics, they discuss about the Macedonian language and the Macedonian - Greek relations.



On one place in the interview, Friedman mentions the language "Arvanitika" as "the Albanian dialect/language of speakers who migrated to Greece a millennium or so ago":

CD: By the term ‘Arvanitika,’ you mean medieval Albanian?

VF: Most precisely, it refers to the Albanian dialects of Greece that separated from the main body of Tosk Albanian 600-1000 years ago. The dialects were spoken on many Greek islands, the Peloponnese, and in Attica and Central Greece. Greeks don’t like to admit it, but they have had large Albanian-speaking populations for a very long time, not just post-Communist economic migrants. While these dialects are now moribund owing to hegemonistic Greek language policies, they can still be encountered in places like Livadhia.

... and he gives an example of a woman who claims she is Greek, but fluently speaks Arvanitika which she learned at home, from her grandmother. The discussion moves to the Greek relations with Macedonia and Macedonians...

CD: (Laughing) on that note, let’s talk about the Macedonia issue now. Greece denies the Macedonian identity, referring to ancient history. What do you think about this?

VF: Unfortunately, with independence, some Macedonians fell into the nationalist trap set by Greece. The Greeks came up with a line claiming the Macedonians could not claim the name Macedonia unless they were descended from the Ancient Macedonians.

Well, no one can reasonably claim to be descended from the Ancient Macedonians, but this became part of the argument, instead of other more pertinent things. And so the issue has remained. But the Greeks have been denying the existence of Macedonia and the Macedonians all along.

CD: From your perspective, how far back does this go as a state policy? To the breakdown of Yugoslavia, or further?

VF: Oh, it’s been that way ever since modern Macedonians began to call themselves Macedonians. The Greeks have been denying the existence of its Macedonian minority since acquiring Greek Macedonia at the Treaty of Bucharest following the Second Balkan War (1913), except for a brief period in the 1920s. In 1957, an otherwise respectable Greek linguist named N. Andriotis published a polemical and, from an academic point of view, deeply flawed booklet entitled ‘The Confederate state of Skopje and Its Language’ – referring, of course, to Macedonia and Macedonian within Socialist Yugoslavia.

CD: This is very interesting to me, because as you know, many Greeks today refer to the whole country of Macedonia by the name of the capital, and the people as ‘Skopjeans.’ So they were using this reference even then?

VF: Of course. But already in the 19th century, Macedonian speakers were calling themselves Macedonians (Makedontsi), their language, ‘Makedonski.’ This is documented.

... and since I don't want to violate the copyright policy of Balkanalysis site, I will only copy one more excerpt from the interview, this time about the difference between the Bulgarian and the Macedonian languages.

CD: Many Bulgarian politicians and academics claim that Macedonian is just a dialect of Bulgarian. What do you say on this topic?

VF: The answer is of course Macedonian is a distinct language. It is similar to Bulgarian, but just as Swedish and Norwegian are similar languages, but separate, so, too, are Macedonian and Bulgarian.

CD: Why?

VF: Both sets of languages have different dialectal bases. And for this reason it is not at all like the case of Moldovan and Romanian. The Moldovan standard language is not based on Moldovan dialects; it is based on the same Wallachian dialects as standard Romanian.

In the case of Macedonian, however, the standard language is based on the dialects spoken in the west-central geographical area defined by Veles, Bitola, Prilep and Kichevo. It is not identical with any specific dialect, and has elements from the eastern ones as well. Standard Bulgarian is not based on a single dialect, but is based on eastern Bulgarian dialects, from Veliko Tarnovo to the Danube and further east.

I warmly invite anyone interested in the subject to read the entire interview. Professor Friedman speaks about dozens of interesting topics, with information that some might find surprising - especially if they lived under decades of nationalistic government propaganda. We all know who am I talking about, right?

All Topics: politics, excerpt, nato, human_rights, eu, argument, document, video, business, fun, photo.

NATO should move towards integration

Michael Evans, who is the defense editor of The London Times, writes in his latest column about the challenges that NATO faces, now that most of the political environment has changed in these past six decades of it's existence. He points the finger towards the President-elect of the USA, Barak Obama, advising him to promptly resolve all issues that compromise the stability of the Balkans, instead of pursuing the open-door policy that has been higher on the agenda so far.

The foreign ministers came up with a fudge that allowed Georgia and Ukraine to believe they were still loved without upsetting Moscow. The issue, however, has not gone away. The alliance is divided between those committed to the open-door policy - Washington being the most prominent - and newer arrivals, including Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic nations, who are worried about the way that Moscow is going, particularly after the mini-war in Georgia in August, and want Nato to focus more on its traditional role of territorial defence. Quite like old Cold War times.

How this division is resolved will depend to a large extent on Barack Obama. Will he follow the Bush line and keep that door open, even for Georgia and Ukraine, or will he reconsider priorities, focusing perhaps on ensuring that stability in the Balkans moves higher up the agenda? This would mean getting Macedonia - there are still rows over its name - swiftly into the alliance and brokering an end to the interminable impasse between Greece and Turkey over Cyprus.

It's ironic that the President-elect has surrounded himself with Clinton Administration officials and appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. They will all be open-door enthusiasts, but it cannot make sense to focus on ensuring the future membership of Georgia and Ukraine, particularly while Mikhail Shakashvili, whose recklessness in trying to seize back the breakaway region of South Ossetia triggered the mini-war, is still President in Tbilisi.

Michael does not explain where does he see the cracks of stability in Macedonia or it's immediate surroundings, but we all agree that our integration into NATO is a benefit for Macedonia, it's neighbors, and the Alliance in general.

All Topics: politics, excerpt, nato, human_rights, eu, argument, document, video, business, fun, photo.