From: cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek
Subject: Re: DON'T RECOGNIZE SKOPJE-23 REASONS
Date: 11 Nov 92 11:50:52 GMT
Organization: Keele University, England

From article <1992Nov9.233916.14231@eecs.nwu.edu>, by efstse@epsilon.eecs.nwu.edu (Serafim Efstratiadis):
> The following are twenty-three reasons why the US should not recognize the
> Skopje regime under the Greek name of Macedonia.

Any reason for 'regime' or is it just to poison the reader's mind to
start with?
Any way here we go again...

> 1- There is no qualified universally accepted rule of international law that
> authorizes a state to name itself anything it wants.

As far as I know the only bit of international law that's relevant here
says that a country can't take an identical name to one that already
exists. Since the Republic of Macedonia isn't doing this it doesn't
apply. BTW what generally accepted principle is there that a large
country can bully a smaller neighbour into taking a name that doesn't
fit as as the Greeks want to do with Macedonia?
  
> 2- The current Macedonia issue stems from secessionist Skopje's regime maning
> itself in the most provocative was possible as the so-called "Republic of
> Macedonia" and requesting world-wide recognition.

Fancy wanting to be called by your own name - you can't get more
provocative than that can you?  


> 3- It is not proper for a country which is part of a region to degine itself
> in an official manner as representing the whole region. Macedonia, like the
> Americas, Europe, Scandanavia, and the Balkans, is a region. Just as in
> no country in North and South America would call itself the "American
> Republic," and no European country would call itself the "Republic of
> Europe," the Skopje regime in naming itself cannot assume the mantle of all
> Macedonia.

It doesn't, once again no-one is suggesting that part of Greece can't be
called the province of Macedonia. It's the Greek side who are trying to
steal this name for their own exclusive use.  Luxembourg calls itself
just that and Belgium where there is a region called Luxemburg doesn't seem
to mind. Perhaps the Belgians feel more secure than the Greeks.


> 4- Tito changed the name of the Skopjein 1944 fron Vardar Banovina to
> Macedonia.

This could be in recognition of the fact that this area has been
historically called Macedonia of course.
  
> 5- PRESIDENT GLIGOROV OF SKOPJE, TITO'S PROTEGE, CAN END THE PROBLEM
> OVERNIGHT BY REINSTATING THE NAME THE SKOPJE AREA HAD IN 1944--VARDAR
> BANOVINA--BEFORE TITO CHANGED IT.

Attacking Gligorov in this way is simply childish.  Are we going to try
the same guilt by association game with Boris Yeltsin? - Let's live in
the *real* world.  Interesting that Macedonian extremists refer to the
current Macedonian government as the Albanian-communist government - by
using this smear the Greeks seem to getting into bed with some funny
allies.  BTW didn't Greece change the administrative name of Northern
Greece to Macedonia? What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander
you might think. 

  
> 6- Macedonia is a Greek name in origin. Its use in Ancient Greece as the
> Kingdom of Macedonia of Philip II and Alexander the Great, even then denoted
> a region, not a nationality. Macedonians, like Athenians, Spartans, Cypriots and
>  the Cretans were Greeks.

An odd statement as the ancient Greeks, even those on the side of Philip
such as Isocrates didn't think that the Macedonians were Greek. 

> 7- The northern province of Greece, which borders the Skopje regime, is
> Macedonia.

No one disputes this, so why is it an objection? Belgium and Luxembourg
seem to get along.

> 8- The usage of Macedonian as a nationality was Tito's invention in 1944.
> Tito, the communist dictator created a false ethnic consciousness among his
> south Slavic citizens for a number of reasons, including the campaign against
> Greece to gain control of Greece's province of Macedonia and the main prize of
> the major port city of Thessaloniki.

Only one interpretation of why Tito created a federal Yugoslavia and it's
usually accepted that the nationalities he used were pre-existing ones
despite what Greek propaganda would have us believe.
>  

> 9- Skopje's actions and Greece's reactions must also be seen in the context of
> Moscow's and Tito's support of the Greek communists in Greece's civil war in
> 1946-49. Tito supplied arms, equipment and food to the Greek communists and
> gave them bases in the Skopje region of Yugoslavia with the full support
> of Stalin.

Time to wake up perhaps - the cold war's over, Stalin is dead. TIMES CHANGE

>  
> 10- Tito's and Stalin's actions resulted in the death of over 50,000 Greeks
> and 685,000 were left homeless and 25,000 Greek children were kidnapped. The
> Skopje regime and its communist leadership were in the forefront of Tito's
> efforts against Greece

Evidence vis a vis Macedonia? and can this be connected to the present
day republic of Macedonia which has altered its constitution to
state explicitly that it has no territorial demands on any foreign country?

[Items on American foreign policy deleted with once more the proviso
that we should all remember that times change - something that the Greek
side of the argument seems to conveniently forget. BTW is foreign policy
always decided by what is right rather than what seems expedient at the
time anyway?]
  
> 14- Since 1945, Skopje has mounted a propaganda campaign against Greece
> claiming all of Macedonia for the so-called "Macedonian people."

See the note on the constitution above. Talking of propaganda campaigns
what about the huge 'Macedonia is Greece' one waged by the Greek government?

> However,
> there is no such separate ethnic group. These are people speking a Slav
> dialect living in parts of Macedonia controlled by Yugoslavia and Bulgaria.
> Serbs say these people are Serbs, Bulgarians say they are Bulgarians.

And the Macedonians say they are  Macedonians - might be fair to give
them a chance to speak for themselves.

> The ancient Macedonians were Greeks, as all historical and archaelogical
> evidence demonstrates.

This just isn't true  


> 15- The US must not by swayed by conciliatory statements of President
> Kiro Gligorov, former communist party apparatuchik and Tito protege,
> during his visits to the US, which are carefully state-managed by Hill
> and Knowlton, the public relations and lobbying firm which is also the
> registered foreign agent of Turkey.


Ah I knew the evil Turk would sneak in somewhere, look out for the
Philippines too, I'm sure their recognition of Macedonia is clear
evidence that that country is plotting against Greece. Are you
suggesting that Greece doesn't lobby professionally too (mind when you
look at the arguments used it does make you wonder)

>  
> 16- Paragraph 49 of the Skoje Constitution regime cites the status of "
> Macedonian" people in neighboring countries. Reuters reported (May 4, 1992)
> that Bulgaria, one of two states to recognize the "Republic of Macedonia"
> (the other was Turkey) has announced it will not establish diplomatic
> relations until the European Community conditions are met.

They have been - see the report of the commission that the EEC
commissioned - it is only craven surrender to Greek blackmail that
prevents the recognition of Macedonia - all the preset conditions have
been fulfilled.

>  
> 17- Names have a powerful significance. They are used for territorial claims
> and interference in the internal affairs of one's neighbors.

Therefore America full of names from all of Europe has territorian
claims against all European countries. We could talk about the
Macedonian constitution. Belgium and Luxembourg etc, been we've already
done that....

  
> 18- Greece has no territorial claim to the territory of the Skopje regime and
> welcomes trade ties with good neighboe relations, if the regime change its name.

I think that's call bullying and blackmail isn't it.  


> 19- Recognition of the Skopje regime as "Macedonia" will prove destabilizing
> for the region and harmful to US interests. It is better to prevent a crisis
> than to respond to one.

Since lack of recognition will probably lead to the collapse of the
Macedonian government and probably a Serbian invasion I suggest lack of
recognition would hurt it even more. The US has nothing to loose, much
to gain by helping promote a stable, multi-ethnic Macedonia and only has
to face Greek petulence in return.  


> 20- On June 27, 1992, the EC unanimously accepted the Greek position that the
> Skopje regime should only be granted recognition ONLY if the word "Macedonia"
> was not included.

I don't think the phrase 'Skopje regime' was used. This was a shameful
act and one that the Community was forced into by blackmail - the
commission it sent out to Macedonia recommended recognition - only the
fear of Greece sulking stopped this.

 
> 21- Greece is a major US ally in the Persian Gulf War and in this century.
> (WW I, WW II, Korea).

I think this is called dementia praecox. It's to be hoped that the US
has more courage in standing up to this sort of blackmail than the EEC had.



Time mercifully seems to be running out for the Greek.  It is imperative
that Macedonia is recognised if we are to promote stability in the
Balkans and prevent even more human suffering there.  It is bizarre that
this is stopped by one country fantasising over a mythical version of
its history.  As the editorial of the Independent newspaper here in
England yesterday , put it: 'Greeks should be firmly told that their
childish paranoia is too dangerous to be further indulged'
 
Amen to that.

Andy
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek