From: Chrys Pelegris <chrysp@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: H.N.I.N. - EDITION 2  1/2
X-To: ALL
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 16:37:45 GMT

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

                                H.N.I.N
                  Hellenic News & Information Network

                       " Greek News from Abroad "
                  Edition 2 - Thursday December 10/92

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Article from the "Hellenic-Canadian Chronicles" - Wed December 2/92
Reprinted without permission.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

EC RECOGNITION OF MACEDONIA CONTAINS SEEDS OF WAR
By: Jonathan Eyal, director, Royal United States Inst.

(Editor's Note:  The following article appeared in the Guardian Weekly of
November 22, 1992.  It is reprinted in the Chronicles today with the grateful
premission of the Guardian Weekly).

    Clashes between ethnic Albanians and Macedonian forces (below) indicate
that the Yugoslav war is set to spread south, threatening to embroil other
Balkan states.
    Created at the end of the second world war on territory historically
belonging to Bulgaria, the very existence of a Macedonian nation is
contentious.  A committee of constitutional experts appointed by the EC ruled
in January that Macedonia nevertheless fulfilled the conditions for
sovereignty and should be recognized as an independent state.  Greece, however,
opposes outright recognition.
    Greece, with a province also called Macedonia, has always argued that the
former Yugoslav republic cannot use the same name without rekindling
territorial disputes.  Many European governments dismiss the argument as
irrelevant and dangerous:  an impoverished, land-locked mini-state such as
Macedonia cannot, they argue, threaten Greek stability.
    But the Macedonian violence indicates that matters are more complicated.
The EC is now tempted to ignore Greek objections and grant recognition at
its December summit.  Yet paradoxically, by recognising Macedonia without
conditions, the EC may be playing straight into the hands of Serbia's leader,
Slobodan Milosevic.
    The parallels with the Community's botched policies in Bosnia earlier this
year are striking.  Now, as then, a simple act of recognition is assumed
to be sufficient to avert violence.  And the chances are that the EC, by
ignoring facts on the ground, would actually precipitate a new war.
    Kiro Gligorov, Macedonia's president, has portrayed his republic as an
oasis of calm.  The reality is different.  A large proportion of the population
may be ethnically Albanian.  To make matters worse, this community is largely
concentrated in compact areas bordering Kosovo and Albania proper, raising
the prospect of territorial changes.
    Ethnic Albanians boycotted the referendum on Macedonia's independence,
just as ethnic Serbs opposed Bosnia's referendum.  Furthermore, Macedonia's
Albanians continue to be discriminated against.  Their request to be recognized
as a separate nation has been ignored; their teachers are often dismissed for
using Albanian in schools and their organizations are branded as "subversive".
    Claims that the petty new state is no threat may be fatally optimistic as
the idea that Yugoslavia's breakup could be well managed.
    Under EC pressure, President Gligorov amended the constitution and promised
to respect minority rights.  Yet it is tanks and not constitutions that decide
matters.  Having extracted promises from Mr. Gligorov, no Western diplomat has
bothered to find out whether they were ever respected.
    Furthermore, instead of trying to find a solution to his republic's name
problem, Mr. Gligorov added another dispute by choosing the Star of Vergina,
an ancient Greek symbol, as his republic's emblem.  In an area where history
is politics, he had few other choices:  his people are virtually
indistinguishable from the Bulgarians, and baiting the Greeks may be the only
way the Macedonians can establish their own identity.
    Yet the Greeks are the only neighbours with no territorial designs on the
republic.  Bulgaria has recognized Macedonia, but refuses to recognise the
existence of a Macedonian nation; Albania demands Macedonian's 'cantonisation'
to safeguard its kinsmen's rights.
    Mr. Milosevic, who rose to power in Serbia after crushing ethnic Albanians
in Kosovo, faces re-election in December.  Encouraging violence among ethnic
Albanians in Macedonia and widening the conflict to neighbouring Kosovo is
his traditional method for whipping up Serbia nationalism and retaining power.
    Macedonia's quick recognition may bring down the Greek government or the
prime minister, Constantine Mitsotakis, the only Greek politician still
flexible enough to seek an equitable solution.  And enlarging the war to
Macedonia will draw in Bulgaria and Albania, diverting the West's attention
from Serbia's deeds.
    Aware of the dangers, the Greek government has launched an initiative
this week seeking a guarantee from Macedonia's neighbours that the republic's
frontiers will not be changed.  The initiative may well be the last attempt
to avert a war which could easily engulf the entire Balkan region.  The EC's
best contribution is not to recognise Macedonia, at least for the moment.

( Map below with following statistics:
    Pop: 2 million
    Muslims: 67%
    Albanias: 20%+
    Turks: 5%
    Serbs: 2%
    Others: 6% )

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Article from the "Hellenic-Canadian Chronicles" - Wed December 2/92
Reprinted without permission.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

RECOGNIZING 'MACEDONIA' DEFIES HISTORY

(Editor's Note:  The following article appeared in The Christian Science
Monitor of October 28, 1992.  It is reprinted in the Chronicles today with
the grateful permission of The Christian Science Monitor and the Los Angeles
Times Syndicate International).

By: CM Woodhouse
    Commentators on international politics do not like being taken by surprise,
so they tend to foresee the worst.  Few thought Yugoslavia would stay together,
in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet empire.  But few if any foresaw the
horrifying brutality and scale of the consequences in Croatia and Bosnia.  The
experts do not want to be caught napping again, so they are already identifying
the scene of the next catastrophe.  We are now being warned that the most
likely candidate is the ex-Yugoslav republic that Tito called Macedonija.  The
people being blamed for a prospective catastrophe are the Greeks.
    The Greek government is regularly accused in the Western press of being
tiresome and obstructive over the recognition of this small land-locked
territory on its northern borders, which has declared itself independent of
Yugoslavia.
    The de facto government of the ex-Yugoslav republic, with its capital at
Skopje, sought international recognition as the Republic of Macedonia.  After
a cursory discussion in the Council of Ministers of the European Community
(EC), 11 members were initially persuaded to agree, but Greece dissented.
From the first, the Greeks made it clear that their objection was not to
recognition but only to the name of Macedonia.
    Some weeks later, at a meeting of heads of government, the Greek prime
minister explained the grounds of the objection.  The other members accepted
his arguments and agreed that the new state could be recognized, but only
under a different name.  Given that the decision was finally unanimous and
was reached by a process of reasoned argument, what was tiresome, difficult,
or obstructive about Greece's conduct?
    What was the Greeks' case?  Simply, it was that he former Yugoslav republic
of Macedonija was nothing but an invention of Tito's as a bridgehead for the
penetration and anexation of Greece's northern province, whic is the real
Macedonia with its capital at Salonika.  Tito's Makedonija did not ever exist
as a name on any map 50 years ago.  But after 1945 Tito began openly talking
of a Greater Macedonia that would include not only his small, artificial
province but also the Greek province that he called Aegean MAcedonia.
    He pursued this policy not only by state-controlled propaganda but also
by semi-clandestine warfare.
    During the Greek civil war of 1946-49, the communist-led Democratic Army
was supported from Tito's territory by military supplies, training, and
recruits, and by safe harbors north of the Greek frontier, which the Greek
National Army was debarred from crossing.  By the end of the civil war, half
>>> Continued to next message
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * **FLASH** Energizer bunny arrested, charged with battery.
the manpower of the Democratic Army were Slavs recruited either from Tito's
Makedonija or from the Slav-Macedonian minority in Greece.  The rebel
government set up by the Greek communists contained two Slav-Macedonians.
    There is no doubt that if Tito had had his way, Greater Macedonia would
have been established with its capital as Salonika, the port on the
Mediterranean that Stalin also desired.  The Republic of Makedonija would have
sunk back to its minor status, and its nominal capital of Skopje would have
remained as insignificant country town.  Skopje as a capital would have
been absurd, for when Macedonia was last geographically united, under the
Ottoman Empire, Skopje was not even in Macedonia; it was the capital of the
neighbouring Turkish vilayet of Kossove.
    If one consults a map of south-east Europe before the Balkan wars (the
Harmsworth Atlas of 1920), the boundaries of Macedonia in the Ottoman Empire
are clear.  Those boundaries were breached by two Balkan wars and reconstituted
on the lines tha the original anti-Turkish alliance (Greece, Montenegro,
Serbia, and Bulgaria) had reached by force of arms.  No final settlement
of the frontiers could go unchallenged on ethnic grounds, not for nothing did
the French adopt the word macedonie for fruit salad.
    But the frontiers have not been substantially changed since 1913,
despite several efforts.  The outcome is unmistakable on the map of southeast
Europe:  Only a very small segment of historic Macedonia now lies within the
borders of Tito's Makedonija, and an even smaller one in Bulgaria.
    The Greeks' objeciton to the misuse of the name of Macedonia is therefore
well founded.  It is all very well for the experts to claim that the petty
new state presents no threat to anybody.  That could be as fatally optimistic
as the expectation that the disintegration of Yugoslavia could be peacefully
managed.
    The optimists should not forget that both Serbia and Bulgaria have had
historic claims on Greek Macedonia, howerver ill-based.  It was from Belgrade
and Sofia that the last assault on Greek sovereignty was launched.  Are the
present incumbents of power in Belgrade and Sofia today more trustworthy?
They too have potential claims against the ex-Yugoslav republic, whereas
the Greeks have none apart from the usurpation of the name.
    It would be naive to suppose that in accepting the Greeks' argument
the EC was yielding to a tiresome and obstructive partner.  It was simply
exercising prudence and common sense.  If a catastrophe is coming in the
ex-Yugoslav republic, it will come anyway, not because its wish to choose
a provocative name is frustrated.

* CM Woodhouse, a British historian and former member of Parliament, served
Britain in Greece during and after WWII.  He writes on Greek history and
policits.   c.c. Hellenic Chronicles.

END.

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Chrys Pelegris  |  ===__-+-                          WWIVNet:35@4650
    Toronto Canada  | Internet: chrysp@zooid.guild.org   FidoNet:1:250/338
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * **FLASH** Energizer bunny arrested, charged with battery.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.greek