From: irakliot@longs.LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Leo J. Irakliotis)
Subject: Re: Ellemann-Jensen on Macedonia
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:42:31 GMT
Reply-To: irakliot@lance.colostate.edu
Organization: Engineering Network Services, Colorado State University

In article <C85PERWE.93Jan24135814@ide7.IDA.LiU.SE>, c85perwe@IDA.LiU.SE (Per Westling) writes:
|> 
|> Again I point out that if FYRM is a future threat to Greece it will be
|> so regardless of what name they adhere to

You are correct for what you see. But let me show what I believe to be the
complete picture.

If FYRM adheres to a name that complies with EC requirements and revise its
constitution to meet the EC guidelines and terms set forth, then any future
hostile act against Greece will not be based on solid ground. I.e. if they
adhere to the name "republic of macedonia" they can easily claim that "hey,
we are macedonians, that land (northern greece) belongs to us". But if the
call their country "republic of Skopje" or "republic of Bardar" (these names
reflect their geographical history) then how the hell can they support their
claims. And if they remove their "liberation of oppresed macedonians" passages
from their constitution, then they are left with no reason to threaten Greece.

And not only that. If they get recognition in compliance with EC's requirements,
then, Greece, the only EC member in the region and a country with a descent economy
and market, will be open to the enterpreuners of Skopje. Both countries will 
benefit from eachother, but as long as FYRM persists to the Stalinist dream
(not a surprise, given to the hard-core communistic past of their president),
it's the only looser.

|>, and I find it curious that
|> there are Greeks (even in this group) that has said they will
|> recognize FYRM just if it changes it name!

Well, my friend. Being missinformed is not just a priviledge of Americans!
(I don't know if you fellas in Sweden followed up the Zoe Baird affair in
US but boy oh boy wasn't this something else. They refused to approve an
excellent person for the position of the attorney general because she hired
two "illegal immigrants" to take care of their children and drive their car.
Ha! As opposed to the "legal and documented immigrants" you find all around
the States, working in pizza delivery service, restaurants, sanitation etc.
Hey? Did President Clinton ever ordered Pizza Hut? And was the pizza delivered
by an undocumented chinese student? Boy, what a crime and what a shame!)

But on the other hand, you should give some thought to the anger of Greeks
because for over than 40 years they were resisting against the communists'
plots thus protecting their allies. And now their allies have not yet cleared
whether or not they fully support Greece in this issue.

|> There are lots of examples of Nations that doesn't reflect any ethnic
|> groups.  One question - if FYRM is not to be regarded as a nation,
|> which nation should that geographic region be regarded as part of?
|> The Neo-Yugoslavia (which consist of Serbia-proper, Montenegro and
|> porbably soon 50-70% of Bosnia as well Kosovo, and probably some more
|> parts?  

A NATION always reflect an ethnic identity. A country may not. USA for example
is a country despite they call it a nation. It will take a while (500 yrs) to
mature to a nation. USSR was a country, but Russia is a nation. EC is a country
but Greece is a nation. UK is a country but Ireland is a nation. You see the
difference now?

I don't consider FYRM as a nation but I am happy to consider them a country.
As such they deserve a name. If the name is Republic of Macedonia, then it
immplies that it'a a nation. But it is not.

As to what nation FYRM should be regarded as part of, I could say Albania, for
33%. Then there are Greeks, Serbs etc. But as far as I can tell, Greece doesn't
wish nor willing to claim any part for the FYRM. Actually Greece seeks good
relations with that country as long as they get a descent diplomatic status.

|> Sorry if I have missed something but what solution do Greece propose?

Greece supports the solutions proposed by EC. Change the name and revise the
constitution. In the interim, Greece took the initiative to guarantee the
borders of FYRM and got Bulgaria, Albania and Yugoslavia to accept it. Greece
also accepted the French initiative for int'l arbitration. All there solutions
and initiatives were rejected by the communistic goverment of Skopje.

|> I understand that Greece will defend itself, and I will support Greece
|> in that case if it ever will happen.  FYRM is not a member of
|> EC/NATO/WEU so it will be interesting to see if FYRM can defeat the
|> "allies".

I appreciate your statement Per, but damn'd do we have to go all the way
down? Of course FYRM cannot defeat the allies. FYRM cannot even defeat a
single recruiting camp of the Greek Army, but that's not the point. As you
have already seen, Balkans is a quite unstable region still, thanks to the
civilization brought in by Turks for about 200-400 years. Any military
operations in the region will involve other countries as well and believe
me Turks are not that naive to stay away.

As far as it goes for NATO support, I wonder where NATO was when Turkey
invented Cyprus in 1974 --- btw Saddam Hussien used similar if not identical
arguments to justify his country's annexation of Kuweit.

|> I find this "raison d'etre" very far fetched and fell that their are
|> more pressing threats, most involving Great Serbia/Albania.
|> But how can an issue be solved peacefully and diplomatically if the
|> naming business creates such outbursts.

Well, the name problem could have been solved. It's up to the FYRM to
reconsider. But as you see it's not just the name. It's also the particular
passages of their consitution. So far all diplomatic attemtps, by EC and
France were rejected by Skopje. 

|> Looking at the recent history I suppose Italy might be drawn into the
|> conflict eventually.  But if it spread that much...

It's a well supported statement. However, I'd like to believe that Italy will
stand by its EC policy, as Greece.

|> The whole thing might be a very important thing for a small country as
|> FYRM.  I haven't studdied the psychology of the people in that part so
|> I can't give you any explanation, but at least I would react kindly
|> towards a neighbour who was the only one to object (and object
|> strongly even) if I wanted to take a new last-name when I moved from
|> home, chosing a name of one of my ancestors.

Cmon now. FYRM has nothing to do historically with Macedonia. Surely it parts of it
fall within the geo-boundary of Macedonia but ancestors? No.

|> Well, I suppose that those regarding themselves as "Macedonians" in
|> FYRM will regard themselves suppressed if they don't take that name...
|> So what should they do?  Adopt the name "The republic consisting of
|> regions containing Albanians, Macedonians, Greecs, Bulgarians, Serbs
|> and Others" (TRCORCAMGBAO). 

:-) What about a name that reflects their geo-history?

|> solved in other countries, eg Finland has both Swedes and Finns but
|> only the latter gives their ethnicity to the name, and this is
|> accepted by the Swedes as they are a minority. 

Right. Great. But Neither Swedens nor Finns are an "artificial" ethnicity
as those "macedonians" are. Therefore they pose no threat to eachother.
And the "macedonian" ethnicity was made up in order to support Yugo's
claims over Greek territories. Should Greece accept this after fighting
againt it for 40 yrs, backed up by the western allies?

-- 
Leo J Irakliotis                 irakliot@eva.lance.colostate.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Electrical Engineering                      l.irakliotis@ieee.org
Colorado State U
(303) 491-2021                              Optical Computing Lab
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek