Macedonia Blogs » Modern Macedonian History

Feeds

23379 άρθρα από 31 πηγές

• Akritas - ιστορία της Μακεδονίας (564)
• Almopia Press (760)
• Athens Front (46)
• Greek Alert (2866)
• HeLLeNiCReVeNgE (8261)
• History of Macedonia (6)
• History-of-Macedonia.com (1880)
• I Love Thessaloniki (59)
• Ich bin Makedonier Ich bin Grieche. Είμαι Μακεδών. Είμαι Έλλην (16)
• Ας μιλήσουμε επιτέλους! (6840)
• Ελλήνων Χώρος (125)
• Η λογική ως προυπόθεση πολιτιστικής πρότασης (506)
• Ιασιος (9)
• Ιεροφάντης (5)
• Κινήσεις Σχετικά Με το Σκοπιανό Ζήτημα (2)
• Μακεδονικά Χρονικά (208)
• Οδός - Odos (92)
• ΠΕΡΑ ΑΠ' ΤΟ ΦΡΑΚΤΗ (4)
• Πανελλήνιο Μακεδονικό Μέτωπο (126)
• Τσουνάμι (341)
• Το Μακεδονικό ζήτημα σήμερα (219)
• Macedonia - Makedonia (1)
• Macedonia Greece The Land of Legends (5)
• Macedonia was, is, always will be GREECE.Macedonia means GREECE.. (64)
• Macedonia: over 4000 years Greek Homeland (1)
• Makedonien ist Griechenland (58)
• Mediaspotgr (99)
• Modern Macedonian History (118)
• Nachrichten aus Makedonien (74)
• ntebis' blog (11)
• Prayers for Macedonia (13)

Modern Macedonian History (100)

• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 11.07.2010
• 11:36

  The Statistical Battle for the Population of Greek Macedonia

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  by Iakovos D. Michailidis
  from the book "Macedonian History"
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 26.06.2010
• 14:23

  Population Shifts in Contemporary Greek Macedonia by Iakovos D. Michailidis

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Population Shifts in Contemporary Greek Macedonia by Iakovos D. Michailidis
  
  Source:"The History of Macedonia" ,publ. Museum of Macedonian Struggle, 2010
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 19.06.2010
• 17:22

  The role of the Communist International in the hatching of the “Macedonian nation”.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  ">[www.liberapedia.com] [www.liberapedia.com] />By Spyridon SfetasAbstract from the article “The Birth of ‘Macedonianism’ in the Interwar Period” and the book “The History of Macedonia, Museum of the Macedonian Struggle, 2010”.
  In historiography the view that the 'Macedonian nation' was a creation of Tito is widespread. This position can of course not be denied, since the Communist Party of Yugoslavia (KPJ) had particular reasons for promoting 'Macedonianism' in Yugoslav Macedonia as a counterweight ideology to Bulgarian-Serbian competition in the interwar period. The need to detach the Slavs of Macedonia from Greek, Serbian and Bulgarian influence with the creation of a collective Slav-Macedonian identity had already been underscored in the early 20th century by a number of Slav intellectuals, such as Krste Misirkov, Stefan Dedov, Diamandi Misajkov and Dimitrija Cupovski. Foreseeing that the antagonism between Serbs and Bulgarians was continuing at the expense of the local population and that it only perpetuated Turkish rule, they sought to have the Slavs of Macedonia acknowledged as a separate community (millet). Even so, the political conditions of the early 20th century did not favour the advocacy of Slav-Macedonianism as a new collective ethnic identity, and its early proponents had very little impact on the masses. The political and ideological origins of 'Macedonianism' were essentially posed by the Third Communist International (the Comintern) in the interwar period. It is documented that the Communist International saw the Macedonian question as a tactical issue, relating to the political conditions of the time.[1] The publication of important documents for the period 1923-1925 from the Comintern archive has essentially confirmed the view that there were specific reasons as to why the Communist International was promoting a United and Independent Macedonia within a Balkan Soviet Republic. These were to assist IMRO in its attempt to create a unified front between the Bulgarian Communists, the Bulgarian Farmers and Bulgarian-Macedonian organizations for the advance of the revolution in Bulgaria, the establishment of a government of workers and farmers and the destabilization of the Balkan states.[2] According to the Communist International, the Macedonian organisations in Bulgaria should not only disassociate themselves from the influence of Bulgarian 'bourgeois' political elements, but also estrange themselves from Bulgarian nationalism. Criticising the Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP) for the neutral stand it took during the coup against the agrarian government of Aleksandr Stambolijski, Karl Radek expressed himself in the following way at the plenum of the Executive Committee of the Communist International (12-13 June 1923) in Moscow:
  
  'The Macedonian Question has played an important role throughout the whole of Bulgaria's modern history. Macedonia, in which there reside peasants of whom it is difficult to say if they are Serbs or Bulgarian, is an old object of discord between Bulgaria and Serbia. After Bulgaria's defeat in the war, the Agrarian party of Stambolijski gave up [contesting] Macedonia. It gave up not only formally, and in Nis it signed a treaty with Yugoslavia on the basis of which Stambolijski would persecute the old Macedonian organisations. From a social perspective, these are organisations of small and poor peasants. They have a revolutionary past, they have struggled against the rule of the Turkish landowners, against the Serbian bourgeoisie, they have illegal revolutionary organisations. There has been sympathy for the Russian Revolution for a while now. The Macedonian organizations were a social factor with which we could have connected... The Party has done nothing and its neglect of the Macedonian Question is typical. [3]
  
  Instead of the term 'Bulgarian people', as this was used in previous declarations of the Third International, the terms 'Macedonian people' and 'Macedonian population without national distinctions' were introduced in 1923-24. The aim of the Communist International was that all nationalities in Macedonian would develop an indigenous Macedonian consciousness as one 'people' from a political perspective, and aspire to a United and Independent Macedonia so as to undermine the 'bourgeois' Balkan states.
  The new line imposed at the 6th Conference of the Balkan Communist Federation (Moscow, December 1923) and the fifth Congress of the Communist International (17/6 - 8/7/1924) was for a 'United and Independent Macedonia within a Balkan Federation', which would be achievable 'only if the struggle of the Macedonian people is aligned with the struggle of the workers and peasants of the Balkans'. It is obvious that such a policy aimed at the undermining of the Balkan states, including Bulgaria. In a letter to IMRO in July 1924, the Communist International set as a precondition for its assistance the obligation of the organization to begin the revolution in Bulgaria, with the aim of expelling the Bulgarian state organs from the Bulgarian section of Macedonia, and its proclamation as an independent state.[4] The pressure exercised by the Communist International on the Communist Party of Greece (KKE) in 1924 to accept the decision of the fifth Congress of the Communist International on the Macedonian Question can be explained by its policy toward IMRO. The wing of the KKE that accepted the new line justified its position with the argument that, to the degree that support for a 'United and Independent Macedonia' contributed to the successful outcome of the revolution in Bulgaria and the Balkans, then the KKE, as an internationalist party, was obliged to accept it, even coming into conflict with the Greek bourgeoisie.[5]
  The term 'Macedonian nation', identified exclusively and emphatically with the Slav element of Macedonia, had not yet appeared in the texts of the Communist International, but the Macedonian Question was no longer considered simply a Bulgarian issue. The plan of the Communist International failed, but Soviet involvement in the Macedonian Question resulted in the political and ideological polarisation of the Bulgarian-Macedonian initiative. As an ideological and political counterweight to the IMRO of Ivan Mihajlov, an IMRO (United) was founded in Vienna in October 1925, under the mantle of the Communist International. On the Central Committee of IMRO (United) there was a communist wing and a national-revolutionary wing, which, although it disagreed with the communist orientation of the organization, was counting on the assistance of the Soviet Union for a review of the peace treaty. In 1928, with the decisions of the sixth Congress of the Communist International, the national-revolutionary wing of the Central Committee of IMRO (United) was eliminated, and the organization now acquired a narrowly communist character, with Dimitar Vlahov and Vladimir Pop-tomov, members of the Bulgarian Communist Party, in a leading role. The influence of the IMRO (United) in the Balkans was insignificant, given that it was first based in Vienna and later in Berlin and that its newspaper, the Makedonsko Delo (Macedonian Question) published in Bulgarian, was not easily accessible in the Balkans. Until 1928, small groups of the IMRO (United) had been formed only in the Serbian section of Macedonia. They were of little political significance and were expunged completely by the Serbian authorities in 1929. The first nucleuses of the organisation were formed in Bulgaria in 1928. Yet, due to its narrow communist character and the enmity of Mihajlov's IMRO, IMRO (United) could not evolve into a significant political factor in Bulgaria, and was limited to a propaganda role amongst the Bulgarian-Macedonian refugees. The basic political line of the organization was a 'United and Independent Macedonia' within a Balkan Federation, and by Macedonian people they meant all the ethnicities of Macedonia (Bulgarians, Albanians, Turks, Jews, Vlachs, Greeks, Gypsies). In a memorandum (10/9/1927) on the condition of the oppressed peoples of the Balkans to the president of the Council for National Minorities in Geneva, they noted characteristically:
  'In Serbian Macedonia all Belgrade governments, regardless of their differences in domestic and foreign policy, apply the same policy as regards the Macedonians. The Macedonian people, that is all the nationalities that live there and in whose name we speak - Bulgarians, Albanians, Turks, Jews, Greeks, Gypsies - are denied political and civil rights. All Serbian authori¬ties have treated them and continue to treat them as though they are Serbs... If we were to examine how the Macedonian people lives from Greek work, we would see that here the situation is the same. The Greek authorities expelled the Turks from Macedonia, after having first plundered them. They impose many impediments on the Jews, so as to force them to move else¬where. They expel the Bulgarians as well... There is no difference between the Greek and the Serb governments as regards the nationalities in Macedonia. Greece treats these nationalities as though they were slaves. If we examine the Bulgarian section of Macedonia, we would see that the situa¬tion here is similar to that in the Serbian and Greek sections. The Greek and Turk Macedonians who lived here before were expelled. The population that lives in this section of Macedonia, indeed of Bulgarian nationality, enjoys cultural rights. It has schools, churches, etc. And this is the only difference between the condition of the Macedonians in Bulgaria and those in Greece and Serbia... From every other perspective, the condition of the Macedonians in this section of Macedonia does not differ from that of those under Greek and Serbian rule, and in some cases is even worse. The political regime in the Macedonia under Bulgarian rule is one of the most tyrannical in the world. As for the economic situation to which the Bulgarian Macedo¬nians have been abandoned to live in, this is especially tragic.[6]
  Which factors were influential in the abandonment of this position and the adoption of the view that there existed a 'Macedonian nation', exclusively identified with the Slavic group? The access to the Comintern Archive that we enjoy today allows us to follow this process much more completely.
  The old view is generally confirmed, that with Hitler's rise to power the Comintern wished to avoid exploitation of the Macedonian Question by Nazi Germany in favour of Bulgaria in the upcoming war, as had happened during the First World War. In 1933 Mihajlov's IMRO had accepted the IMRO (United) position for a Unified and Independent Macedonia, as a second Bulgarian state, considering the national identity of Bulgarian compatible with the political name of Macedonian. The need for a not only ideological and political campaign, but also a national one against Mihajlov's IMRO, was thus now clear. The efforts of the Comintern to prevent the exploitation of Yugoslavia’s ethnic problems, especially the Croatian, by Nazi Germany had a significant effect. The issue of the foundation of a national Croat and Slovenian Party was thus quickly posed, so that the now nationally-based Communist Parties would henceforth deal with the country's ethnic problems. Given the new conditions, Yugoslavia should act as a bulwark to Nazi Germany's efforts to penetrate the Balkans.
  As soon as Vladimir Poptomov, a member of the Central Committee of the IMRO (United), was informed that the situation of the organisation and the prospect of 'revolu¬tionary action' were to be discussed within the Comintern, he submitted a memorandum on 15/11/1933 to the Secretariat of the Balkan States (Balkanlander Sekretariat, hence¬forth BLS), the Comintern organ responsible for the Balkans. He attributed the causes for the failure of IMRO (United) to develop into a mass organisation to its centralised character, the problems in distributing the newspaper Makedonsko Delo, and the diffi¬culties in reading and understanding the newspaper in Greece and Yugoslavia, since it was published in the scholarly Bulgarian language.[7] Poptomov placed particular importance on the different socio-political conditions that prevailed in the three sections of the wider area of Macedonia, the continuous Serbisation and Hellenisation of the Slavic population, with the result that the younger generations could only easily read and speak the Greek or Serbian languages. As such, according to Poptomov, the newspaper Makedonsko Delo could only be understood by the Bulgarian-Macedonian refugees in Bulgaria. He proposed the decentralisation of the organisation, that a national-revolutionary organisation be founded in every section of Macedonia under the guidance of the Communist Parties and with the slogan 'self-determination of the Macedonian people until the secession of a sovereign and unified Macedonia’.[8] Perhaps the main point of Poptomov's essay was the danger of Serbisation and Hellenisation succeeding.
  At the meeting of the Office of the BLS on 20 December 1933, the proposal of Rilski - pseudonym of Georgi Karadzov, a member of the Bulgarian IMRO (United) -for the IMRO (United) was examined;[9] his position on the right of the 'Macedonian people' to secede, for a Unified and Independent Macedonia, for a Balkan federation of workers, was ratified.[10] The question of the ethnicity of the Macedonians was also posed, and 'a special examination of the question was deemed necessary, if possible with the participation of the comrades who have arrived from Macedonia.'[11] Vlahov was also in attendance at the meeting of 22 December 1933. The issue of the drafting of a decision for IMRO (United) was posed, with the ethnicity of the Macedonians at its core. This task was assigned to Vlahov, Rilski and German, pseudonym of the Bulgarian communist Pavle Gicev, who were given three days in which to present the draft decision.[12]The basic points of the decision were as follows:
  'The national question of Macedonia is particularly closely tied to the question of the war and the question of international social revolution. The rare peculiarity of historical evolution created here, from an ethnic perspective, a situation of which there is no comparison anywhere else in Europe... After the Balkan and the imperialist wars, Macedonia was divided between Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria. There followed an artificial movement of populations from whole regions, settlements, violent denationalization and assimilation... The Macedonian people see the danger in which they will be as long as capitalism and imperialism exist, as long as the large imperialist centers continue to exploit the small Balkan states... The country's population, which has passed through so many wars, has realized that the new imperial war could lead to its complete physical annihilation, if war is not prevented by a prior uprising and the victory of the social revolution in Europe. This situation has rallied all the working population of this section of the Balkan peninsula into one totality, and has created a peculiar situation here, that the population that speaks Slavic and the population that speaks the languages of the minorities feel the same national oppression, economic exploitation and pillaging. They have common interests at the present moment and feel the necessity for a common defence, for when the future historical events arrive.
  The working masses of Macedonia do not characterize themselves and they do not want to be either Bulgarians or Serbs, they consider the governments of the Greeks and the Turks as foreign powers. They characterize themselves as the predominant Macedonian whole... This is where the idea of national Macedonian rule is found, the right of the full national self-determination of the Macedonians, the idea of a unified and independent Macedonian workers democracy, in a common struggle against imperialism and for social revolution.'[13]
  The main section of the draft plan referred to the upcoming war, using the terms 'Macedonian people' and 'working masses of Macedonia', indicating all the nationalities of Macedonia, Slav and non-Slav, as a unified total coming under the term 'people'. This specificity legitimated the right to a unified and independent Macedonian state 'of the working masses'. In essence, this draft plan did not differ from previous IMRO (United) declarations, with the simple difference that, for tactical purposes, mention was no longer made of Soviet democracies or Balkan federations. The draft plan was not deemed satisfactory and, at the meeting of the BLS on 28 December 1933, which Vlahov did not attend, German (pseudonym of Gicev) was given until 31 December 1933 to submit the text of a final decision to the Office of the BLS.=[14]
  Yet, the text submitted to the BLS on 31 December 1933 was similar to the previous draft plan:
  'After the Balkan and imperial wars - the result of which was that the unified from a geographical and economic perspective area of Macedonia was divided into three parts between Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria - the economic and political condition of the Macedonian population has worsened even further... As a result of this policy, the old ethnographic physiognomy of some sections of Macedonia almost changed radically - in the Greek section of Macedonia - and to the degree that the local populations that remained there are prohibited, with the threat of capital punishment, of speaking their mother tongue (in the Macedonia under Serbian or Greek rule)... The overwhelming majority of the working population of Macedonia, which lives in Macedonia or as a refugee elsewhere, despite the differences existing in religion and language and the discord that has been artificially created over the centuries, constitutes a whole, with common economic and political interests at the present moment and feels the need for a common defence, for when the great future historic events arrive. Having as a basis the realization of the need to preserve the common economic and political unity of Macedonia in the interest of its physical existence, [the population] demands the right to national self-determination and even the secession of an independent Macedonian state. The Macedonian masses do not want to belong neither to Bulgaria nor to Serbia nor to Greece, despite the fact that, from the point of view of language and religion, different sections of the Macedonian population are more closely related to the population of one or another Balkan state. Bearing all this in mind, the Balkan proletariat must support the national liberation struggle of the Macedonian people for national liberation and unity in every way, teaching it always consistently and surely that only the total defeat of imperialism will free the Macedonian people from the danger of total physical annihilation, a threat which it always finds it itself under given its geographical position. '[15]
  The Balkan Communists had not grasped the essence of the problem. This was, of course, the matter of the identity of the Slavs of Macedonia, whom revisionist Bulgaria considered as unredeemed Bulgarians, something that would lead to Bulgaria joining the German camp in the upcoming war. The questioning of the Bulgarian identity of the Slavs of Macedonia would deny Bulgaria the right to make claims. Already during the Balkan Conferences (1930 - 1933) Bulgaria had insisted on the signing of bilateral treaties for the protection of minorities. This should characterise the spirit of the decision. During the meeting of the BLS on 3 January 1934, then, German's text was rejected and the intervention of leading Comintern cadres was necessary. The participation of Vasil Kolarov in amending the draft decision is acknowledged.[16] The new text was presented at the meeting of the BLS on 7 January 1934, and was ratified by the Political Office of the Executive Committee of the Communist international at a closed meeting on 11 January 1934. According to the brief proceedings of the meeting, a discussion was held in which Vlahov, Kolarov, German and others participated. Unfortunately, the views that they presented have not been recorded. The Political Office accepted the text of the proposal as a basis, and commissioned the BLS 'to compose a final text on the basis of the views exchanged and in agreement with comrade Kuusinen. The slogan 'Workers Democracy' should remain in the decision'. [17] The intervention of the higher cadres of the Comintern - including otto Kuusinen, Secretary of the Executive Committee of the Communist International and member of the Finnish Communist Party - was, therefore, decisive for the final formulation of the decision on the Macedonian Question and the IMRO (United). The decision differed significantly from the draft decision of 31 December 1933.
  'In conditions of increased international and class conflicts, the direct danger of new wars and the maturing of the revolutionary crisis, the Macedonian national-revolutionary movement, the head of which is the IMRO (United), plays the role of an important element and ally of the working class, the peasantry and all the oppressed nationalities in the struggle to overturn the domination of the bourgeois class and the landowners in the three states that enslaved Macedonia.
  'The division of Macedonia, which was the foundation of the alliance between Bulgaria, Serbia and Greece in the war against Turkey and which immediately emerged as an issue that led to a new war between Serbia, Greece and others against Bulgaria, constitutes in the post-war period a permanent cause for the rise in conflict and the struggle between the three states for rule over the whole of Macedonia and access to the Aegean. On the other hand, the great imperialist states turned Macedonia into a bridgehead for political activities during the imperialist World War, and are now exploiting the Macedonian Question to strengthen their positions in the Balkans. Macedonia is thus one of the centres of the upcoming imperialist war.
  'The states that exist in Macedonia apply a pillaging economic policy that sucks the workers, waging terror and national oppression... The dominant nations of the three imperialist states that divided Macedonia justify national oppression by denying the national specificities of the Macedonian people, by denying the existence of a Macedonian nation. Greek chauvinism declares that the indigenous Slav population in the part of Macedonia that she rules over is constituted of Greeks who had been Slavised in the past centuries, who through violence must "return" to Greek culture, prohibiting them from speaking or learning their mother tongue. The great Serb chauvinists, invoking the existence of Serbian loanwords in the language of the local Macedonian population, declare that this population is one of the "tribes» of the unified Yugoslav nation and they Serbise it through violence. Finally, Bulgarian nationalism, exploiting the relationship of the Macedo¬nian language with the Bulgarian, declares them to be Bulgarians and thus justifies the occupation of the region of Petritsi and its pillaging policy toward the whole of Macedonia. By waging a struggle against the division and enslavement of the Macedonian people, against every kind of national, cultural, social and economic oppression, IMRO (United) must uncover the true meaning of all the sophisms that deny the Macedonians the character of a nation, and not allow them to spread throughout its environment... IMRO (United) must organize and wage a daily struggle against all types of national oppression, against every extraordinary law, for the right to the use of the mother tongue in all state and public institutions, for the freedom to have schools, publications, etc. in the mother tongue... In this struggle, the central slogan of IMRO (United) must be the slogan for the right of the nation to self-determination as far as secession and the achievement of a unified, Macedonian workers democracy.[18]
  The differentiation between the meanings 'Macedonian people' (i.e. all the ethnicities of Macedonia and with the political meaning of the term 'people') and 'Macedonian nation' as a national community with reference only to the Slavs is clear. Since the efforts of the Comintern to exploit the Macedonian Question to promote revolution had so far not brought the desired results, the appeal to the national idea was deemed more effective. Was, however, the decision a reflection of real conditions, or had the division of Macedonia created a feeling of unity amongst the Slavs, with a need to detach themselves from the Bulgarian, Greek and Serbian national ideas? As mentioned, the developments in the three sections were different. The Slav population used the term (Slav-) Macedonians as a geographical term, but also as a anodyne term that could neutralize the perhaps dangerous public self-characterization of 'Bulgarian' in Yugoslavia and Greece, and which could express a localism with the meaning of 'autochthon' in contrast to the migrants, the Serb settlers or the Greek refugees. In terms of consciousness, the sense of difference from the Greek or Serb idea was expressed more in pro-Bulgarian terms,[19] to the extent that we cannot talk about individuals with a fluid identity.
  In the historiography of Skopje it is argued that the decision of the Communist International signified the first recognition of the 'Macedonian nation' as an objective reality in international arenas, something of great importance for subsequent developments. But, as arises from the proceedings of the meetings, the differing contents of the texts of the draft decision and the final decision indicate that the 'Macedonian nation' was not immediately considered a given reality. The Communist International did not mention the prime movers of Slav-Macedonian separatism, nor did it clarify the particu¬lar national characteristics of the 'Macedonians', which distinguished them from the Serbs, Greeks or Bulgarians. It is characteristic that in the draft and the decision for IMRO (United) even the Balkan Communists were unable to conceive the meaning of 'nationality of the Macedonians' as a specific 'Slav-Macedonian nation'. There is no doubt that this was a political decision of the Comintern that was imposed on the Balkan Communist parties. This decision questioned the right of the Bulgarians and of Mihajlov's IMRO to contest the liberation of the 'Macedonians' as unredeemed Bulgarians. At the same time, it eliminated the differences between the Bulgarian and Yugoslav Communists over the ethnic identity of the 'Macedonians'. The Balkan Communist parties were now called upon to transform the geographical term 'Macedonians' into an ethnic term, with exclusive reference to Slavs. Within the new global conditions, after the rise of Nazism, a strong Yugoslavia had to constitute a barrier to Hitler's expansion in the Balkans. Recognition of the national specificity of the 'Macedonians' and the questioning of Bulgarian and Serbian contestations meant that the Macedonian Question could be resolved within the context of a new, federal Yugoslavia. It was not a coincidence then that, at the meeting of the BLS on 5 January 1934, it was decided, alongside the decision on the existence of a 'Macedonian nation', to establish a Croatian and a Slovenian Communist Party within the Communist Party of Yugoslavia.[20]
  Yet, there is still the anthropological aspect ndependent of the political goals of the Communist International, what impact could the call for the existence of a 'Macedonian nation' have on the simple peasants of the wider Macedonian region? Was it ultimately an incumbent, alienated identity? As already mentioned, the term 'Macedonian' was used by the Slavs as a geographical, localized term, and the villagers called the Slavic idiom 'Macedonian'. From this perspective, there was no name issue. The geographical term 'Macedonian' could take on a national dimension in the consciousness of the villages, if there was a political dynamic to promote this transformation, and if the political conditions required it, as indeed was the case during the Second World War. The fact should not be ignored that the Slav population in Serbian Macedonia was the victim of Serb-Bulgarian antagonism and of Greek-Bulgarian antagonism in Greek Macedonia. On the one hand, it was forced by IMRO to shelter the comitadjis, to declare itself Bulgarian and to maintain a Bulgarian position. Yet, on the other, it was persecuted by the Serbian military organizations, when it harboured IMRO, and was undergoing political Serbisation. It was natural that it would be experiencing a crisis of national identity.
  For the Greeks, there was the saga of the Politis-Kalfov Protocol, the subsequent insistence of Bulgaria that the Greek governments recognise a Bulgarian minority, and the general revisionist policy of Sofia made urgent the need for the Hellenisation of other language speakers in Greek Macedonia. Regardless of the long-term potential successes of Serbisation and Hellenisation, the alternative solution of the 'Macedonian nation' operated as a balance to traditional Serb-Bulgarian and Greek-Bulgarian antagonism and provided the population with a sense of security. Political elements could easily concoct a national ideology to service the needs of this 'ethnogenesis', with unclear dividing lines between myth and historical fact, so as to lend the Slavs of Macedonia a 'glorious' past.
  The subsequent policy of the Comintern on the Macedonian issue was determined by the need to constitute a unified anti-fascist front along the spirit of the decisions of the Seventh and final Congress of the Communist International (25/7-20/8/1935). Immediately after the Congress, and in the aftermath of the assassination of the king of Yugoslavia Aleksander Karadjordjevic, in October 1934 orders were given to the Balkan Communist Parties to gain the support of the 'Macedonian masses' for this front. The formation of a unified anti-fascist front along with the 'bourgeois regimes' made the continued existence of IMRO (United) as a separate political organization unnecessary. The slogan of an 'Independent Macedonia' was abandoned in favour of campaigning for basic national, political and economic rights and freedoms.
  The Seventh Congress of the Communist International provided the Balkan Communist Parties with the opportunity to shape their tactics in a manner that was to a great extent autonomous. Their position on the existence of a 'Macedonian nation', however, was a new factor, which they were obliged to take into account in their policies.
  Notes1. For an initial approach, see Sp. Sfetas, Opseis tou Makedonikou Zitimatos ston 20o aiona [Aspects of the Macedonian Question in the 20th century], Thessaloniki 2001,pp. 55-78.2. See the documents collected in L.I. Zila and V.T. Popovski, Makedonskij Vopros v Dokumentov Kominterna, Tom I. Cast 1, 1923-1925 gg. [The Macedonian Question in the documents of the Communist International, Vol. A, Part A, 1923-1925], Skopje 1999.3. See K. Radek, 'Der Umsturz in Bulgarien', Die Kommunistische Internationale, 27 (15. 8. 1923), pp. 115-116.4. See Sp. Sfetas, Makedonien und Interbalkanische Beziehungen 1920-1924, Munich1992, p. 320.5. On these debates, see Sfetas, Makedonien, pp. 434-440.6. See VMRO (Obedineta), Dokumenti i Materiali, Kniga I [IMRO (United). Docu¬ments and Materials, Vol. A], ed. Ivan Katardziev, Skopje 1991, pp. 129-137 (here pp. 131, 133-134).7. Rossijski Centr Hranenija i Izucenija Dokumentov Novejsej Istorii (henceforth RCHIDNI, Russian Centre for the Preservation and Study of the Records of Con¬temporary History),   Fond 509 (henceforth F-Series), Opis 1, (henceforth Op Catalogue), Delo 164 (henceforth D-File), Confidential, Letter from Poptomov to the Secretariat of the Balkan States,  15/11/1933.8. Ibid.9. it has not been possible to locate the proposal in the Archives.10. RCHIDNI, F.495, Op. 69, D.56. Proceedings of the meeting of 20 December 1933.11. ibid.12. RCHIDNI, F.495, Op. 69, D.56. Proceedings of the meeting of 22 December 1933.13. RCHIDNI, F.509, Op.169, (no indication on folder) - Proekt rezolucii o makedon-skoj 'nacii' 1933, [Draft for the decision on the Macedonian 'nation', 1933].14. RCHIDNI, F.459, Op.69, D.56, Proceedings of the meeting of 28 December 1933.15. RCHIDNI, F.509, Op.169, (no indication on folder), O prave makedonskogo naroda na samoopredelenie, 31/12/1933 [On the right of the Macedonian people for self-determination, 31/12/1933].16. See 'Dokumenti. Rezoljucijata po Makedonskijat Vapros', [Documents. The deci¬sion on the Macedonian Question], Vremena, 1 (1992), pp. 100-111.17. RCHIDNI, F. 495, Op. 3, D. 402 'Resolutionentwurf des Balkan - LS uber die makedoniche Frage und die AMRO (Vereinigte). Wird als Grundlage angenommen. Das Balkan - LS wird beauftragt, den Entwurf auf Grund der Meinungsaustausches endgultig zu redigieren und mit dem Gen. Kuusinen zu vereinbarren. Die Losung', Republik der Werktatigen 'soll in der Resolution bleiben'. It does not appear from the Comintern Archives that the role of Vlahov in processing the decision was im¬portant, contrary to what he claims in his Memoirs. See D. Vlahov, Memoari [Recollections], Skopje 1970, p. 357.18. See the collected documents published by the Central Archive Directorate and the State Archives, BKP, Komiternat i Makedonskijat Vapros, (1917-1946), Tom Vtori, [The Bulgarian Communist Party, the Communist International and the Macedonian Question 1917-1946, Vol. B], Sofia 1999, pp. 881-884.19. The interview (1975) with Mihalis Keramitzis, member of the KKE before the war and leading cadre of SNOF and NOF during the Occupation and the Civil War is re¬vealing. 'Then [1939] I had no idea about such things: Macedonians, Macedonia, Macedonian Question, Committee, etc. The same went for all our Macedonian cad¬res. I felt the same thing that a Greek communist felt. To the extent that I felt something different as a Slav, I felt that I was a Bulgarian...' See E. Kofos, 'TO Makedoniko stis scheseis KKE-KKY kata ta teli tou 1944' ['The Macedonian Question in the relations between the KKE and the Yugoslav Communist Party in late 1944'], in the collective volume Makedonia kai Thraki 1941-1944. Katochi-Antistasi-Apeleftherosi [Macedonia and Thrace. Occupation-Resistance-Liberation], IMXA (269), Thessaloniki 1998, p. 131.20. See RCHIDNI, F. 495, Op. 69, D. 63. Proceedings of the meeting of 5 January 1934.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 17.06.2010
• 00:20

  Pan-Macedonian Association USA letter to Washington Times

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  June 14, 2010
  Re: [www.washingtontimes.com]
  Dear Editor,
  We do agree with Richard Rahn’s statement in his June 3, 2010 article in the Washington Times titled, The Irresponsible Neighbor: Greek Profligacy Hits Bulgaria and Macedonia: “Whether you are a homeowner or a country, it is better to have responsible rather than irresponsible neighbors”. However it is more important to have neighbors that do not steal their neighbors’ property, money, credit cards and social security numbers. With such articles as Mr. Rahn’s in the Washington Times, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (the FYROM) is encouraged to commit such crimes: usurp its neighbor’s history, identity and culture.
  We found the article profoundly insulting to Greece and to Hellenism as a whole. It is historically unfounded, profoundly biased and misleading. Mr. Rahn should know that Macedonia is a Greek province. We consider any mention of “Macedonia and Greece” as two separate.....  and unassociated entities, a direct attack of the sovereignty of Greece. What would the reaction be in the US if someone was talking about New England or California as separate and unassociated entities from the United States? Would the US just stand by and not object if Quebec seceded from Canada and decided to rename itself Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine or New England?
  
  Mr. Rahn should know that as per UN Resolutions #817 of April 7, 1993 and  #845 of June 18, 1993, the official name of the country he refers to is "the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia", or simply the FYROM, until a permanent name is agreed between this country and Greece. The Interim Accord was signed by BOTH Greece and the FYROM, and its purpose was to find a name other than “Republic of Macedonia” for the aforementioned country as this was and continues to be the root cause of their dispute.
  All the claims Mr. Rahn presents in this article cannot be more further from the truth. Could he perhaps point the scholars of the world towards a reference that corraborates the line: “even though Slavic people have been the majority population for the last 1,300 years in the land that is now the country of Macedonia?”
  According to the Turkish census of Hilmi Pasha in 1906, in the area of Macedonia (part of the European Ottoman Empire before the emancipation of this region from the Turks) there was no “Macedonian” ethnicity recorded:
  423,000 or 41.71% Muslims (Turks and Albanians)
  259,000 or 27.30% Greeks
  178,000 or 18.81% Bulgarians
  13,150 or 1.39% Serbs
  73,000 or 7.72% others"
  It must be noted here that the Turkish archives are quite indicative of the situation since, as the rulers of the area, they would certainly emphasize the existence of a “Macedonian” nation if such a nation existed. The Greeks living in Macedonia were simply Greeks and nothing else.
  The author fails to explain why there was no «Macedonian» army to fight for the rights of the supposed “ethnic Macedonians” during the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913. In addition during the negotiating talks of the Bucharest Treaty of 1913, which determined today’s borders with Greece’s neighbors, there were no representatives of any “Macedonian Nation”.  The 1914 Carnegie Report  (Report of the International Commission to Report on the Causes and Conduct of the Balkan Wars) not only did not record the existence of a “Macedonian” army, but neither did it record the existence of any “ethnic Macedonian” civilians. Doesn’t Mr. Rahn wonder why the Krushevo Manifesto that the people of the FYROM hold so dear did not include any "Macedonian" nationality?  It actually calls all inhabitants of Macedonia, as Macedonians,  “regardless of faith, nationality, sex or conviction.”
  Mr. Rahn seems to forget something very important when he states, “the people of Macedonia and Bulgaria will face a shrinkage of their markets…” He is forgetting that Greek businesses that exist in the FYROM  have created over 30.000 jobs there. Moreover the country’s economy would fare much better if the FYROM government did not spend millions of dollars in propaganda against its neighbors and propping up statues of Alexander the Great and his father Philip in their futile attempt to antiquate Skopje.
  The FYROM contributes to its own instability with its artificial nation-building campaigns at the expense of its rather large and restive Albanian minority which is growing ever so impatient as the days go by. To openly suggest that the FYROM’s economic troubles are due to Greece and that it should enter the European Union in order to save itself is false, amateurish and smacks of propaganda. To highlight this point, Mr. Rahn’s executive association with the Bulgarian American Society should provide some sort of conflict of interest, considering that Bulgaria also does not recognize a “Macedonian nation and language”. 
  As to whether Alexander the Great or his father King Philip II were Greek or not, why doesn’t Mr. Rahn take a look at the letter written to President Barack Obama by 364 world-known historians, archeologists and researchers who state: “The answers are clear:  Alexander the Great was Greek, not Slavic, and Slavs and their language were nowhere near Alexander or his homeland until 1000 years later”. Their entire letter and their scholarly documentation can be found at: [macedonia-evidence.org] and should be read and wisely used by anyone writing/commenting on this subject.
  In order to have peace and stability in that region, FYROM needs to refrain from the identity theft of Macedonia. Thus the FYROM must stop the vicious propaganda through media, internet and any other means of publicity including using biased economists writing for the Washington Times. We consider any mention of Greece as a corrupt country hostile to Hellenism.
  Dr. Antonios Papadopoulos                                                       Demitris ChatzisSupreme President                                                                     Supreme secretary                                       of the Pan-Macedonian Association 
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 03.06.2010
• 14:17

  The National Struggle against the Turkish Conqueror until 1830

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The relative religious freedom accorded by the Turks and their toler­ance of Greek economic and social promotion were not enough to blunt the Greeks hatred for their conquerors. The Turks encountered Greek culture in Macedonia conquered it and tried to uproot it. To achieve their aim, they adopted very harsh ruling methods that made the living conditions of Greek subjects unbearable.
  Most of the land in the fertile plains and valleys belonged to large pri­vate estates (ciftliks) of Moslems. Those Christian villagers who worked on these estates were serfs. In return for the right to cultivate a few acres, they surrendered a significant part of their production to the Muslim estate owner. Usually, the estate owner employed armed bands and doubled as the Ottoman state tax collector. He collected the state s share of the production, a right granted him —for a fee— by the sultan s treasury. Often, the same estate owner dictated the decisions of the local Muslim religious courts. In that case the pressure to his tenants became completely uncontrollable.
  The craftsmen, professionals and merchants enjoyed better living con­ditions. However, they were..... also obliged, like all big city dwellers, to endure the arbitrariness of state officials and the burden of rash and excessive taxa­tion. Turkish administration did not function smoothly and oppressed exces­sively the conquered populations.
  
  The salaries of the valis (administrators) of the vilayets (general administrative regions), of the mutesarifs of the sanjaks (prefectures) and of the kaymakams of the kazas (counties) and all the other civil servants, the Army and Gendarmerie personnel were paid out of local taxes. As a rule, these officials also took bribes to perform their duties. Justice was partial and the courts used different criteria for Moslems and subjugated. As a result, the latter avoided getting in disputes with the former, certain as they were that they would not be granted a fair hearing. But even in cases of disputes between them, differences were settled in favor of those with the means to bribe the judges.
  Beyond arbitrary conduct, the tyrannical and unjust Ottoman state proceeded with the abduction of male children, violent islamization and insults against the strict moral standards of the Christian subjects. All these acts heavily oppressed Macedonian Greeks and led them to active resistance. Thus, after thousands of Turkish settlers were moved to the fertile Macedon­ian plains, there was a huge movement of local populations toward the mountainous and rugged areas of the region. They settled these inaccessible regions and founded free communities which the Ottoman authorities could not easily reach. In order not to be harassed, they paid regularly the money for commuting their military obligations and the taxes according to their pro­fessions. They avoided, however, the arbitrary acts of the Ottoman adminis­tration because the dreaded Turkish gendarmes rarely bothered to visit.
  Concurrently with the exodus by the Macedonian Greeks to the moun­tain areas, there was a resurgence of the phenomenon of klephts (literally, brigands; actually, irregular armed bands who frequently resorted to brig­andage), under exactly the same conditions of its occurrence as in the rest of Greece. Later on, armatoles appeared (literally, men-at-arms; organized corps of ex-klephts at the service of the authorities, deployed against the klephts). The Turkish archives of Berrhoea and Thessalonica confirm the existence of klephts and armatoles in Macedonia from the beginning of the seventeenth century.The successive and continuous mountain ranges of western and cen­tral Macedonia served, throughout the Turkish rule, as hideouts for both klephts and armatoles because of their terrain, which is ideal for guerrilla war­fare. In 1682-83, there is a sudden upsurge in klepht activity in the kazas of Ohrid, Monastir, Skopje, Kustendil, Prilep (Perlepe), Fiorina, Kastoria, Biglishte, Chroupista (Argos Orestikon), Anaselitsa (Neapolis), Servia, Berrhoea, Naousa, Yenitsa (Giannitsa), Edessa and Ostrovo (Arnissa). The bands coordinated their action and forced the Ottoman administration to take forceful repression measures. In 1691, the inhabitants of the villages of Melia, Skotina and Karya in the Pierian mountains, revolted. In 1705, the inhabi­tants of Naousa, led by the armatole Zeses Karademos, took up arms against the abduction-recruitment of male children (deushirme) and fought a fierce battle with the recruiters at the defile of the Arapitsa river, where Karademos fell heroically.In order to cope with this serious situation and suppress the revolts the Ottoman administration hired armed bands of Islamized Albanians and used them against the klephts and the armatoles. Thus, from 1700 onwards Albanians started entering Macedonia in large numbers, with many unfortu­nate consequences for the Christian population. Those Turk-Albanians (Tourkalvanoi, as Christians called the Albanians who had been converted to Islam) distinguished themselves in murders, looting, rape, robbery, illegal taxation for their own enrichment, expropriation and other tyrannical acts. This action reached a climax in the era of Ali, pasha of Ioannina (1744-1822). Through mass deportations, the Turk-Albanians succeeded in establishing themselves as joint rulers with the Turks in many Macedonian regions. Many villages became real estates of Turkish Albanian beys.
  Far from limiting their actions, the Greek guerrilla bands actually intensified it. The plunder by the Turk-Albanians exasperated the subjugat­ed populations and more people joined the klephts. During the Russo-Turkish War of 1710-1714, the activity of the klephts increased in the kazas of Edessa and Yenitsa (Giannitsa). In 1717, Greek armatoles attacked the religious court of Naousa and, in 1742, Greek pirates attacked the Kassandra penin­sula. These rebellious acts continued throughout the eighteenth century and peaked during the Orlov Revolt (an insurrection instigated by the Russians during the Russo-Turkish War of 1768—1770). During this episode, an envoy of Catherine II of Russia, Georgios Papazoles from Siatista, incited the arma­toles of Macedonia into rebellion.
  In 1807, during yet another Russo-Turkish war, Macedonian pirates helped the Russian admiral Shenyavin to occupy the island of Tenedos. The armatole leader of the area of Olympus mountain, Nikotsaras, landed in the gulf of Orphano and moved up to Zichna, where he fought a fierce battle with the Turks. It must be noted that the uprising of Naousa, during that period, led to the city s siege by Ali Pasha s Turk-Albanian hordes. Its brave inhabi­tants, under the leadership of armatole Vasileios Romphe s, resisted for four and a half months and finally attempted a heroic exodus, comparable to that of Mesolongi that took place almost twenty years later.
  This struggle against the Turkish occupation suggests that, in the early 19th century, the Macedonians did not differ at all from the other subjugated Greeks. Macedonia was Greece as it possessed the characteristics common to all the regions of the country. The fact that some Macedonians spoke a Slavic idiom was a result of the historical circumstances of their area and it could not be an excuse for them not to be considered Greek.
  Gatsos, the armatole of Edessa, Chatzechrestos, the leader of the Greek cavalry during the great Greek War of Independence of 1821—1829 and many other klephts and armatoles of the Macedonian mountains who formed the famous Macedonian Phalanx during the Greek Revolution, were Slavo-phones. They were also genuine Greeks who, together with their Slavophone compatriots never considered themselves anything but Greek.
  The myth of the Slavic Macedonian nation had not yet been fabricat­ed in the beginning of the 19th century. The Bulgarian state did not exist and Russian Panslavism had not been set in motion.
   Bibliography1-Douglas Dakin, The Greek Struggle in Macedonia, IMXA, 19662-GES/DIS, The Struggle of Macedonia, 19793-Konstantinos Vakalopoulos, History of Macedonia, 20014-Loring Danforth, The Macedonian Conflict5-History of the Greek Nation, 16 volumes, Ekdotiki Athinon, Academy of Athens Awarded6-4000 years of Macedonian history, Ekdotiki Athinon, Academy of Athens Awarded
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 12.05.2010
• 22:37

  Where Loring Danforth failed..

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  ">[press.princeton.edu] [press.princeton.edu] />«The social anthropologist Loring Danforth wrote in the early 1990s that "serious national historiography [of FYROM] rejects the iedea of any direct continuity between the ancient and modern Macedonians". [The Macedonian Conflict, page 187]
  The American scientist failed, to understand  the importance of this link, which both South Slavic invalidate the current unit (and mounting from Belgrade), causing, of course, the discomfort of the old regime members, such as Kiro Gligorov, the other gave in the young Republic oldest and richest property titles of the Macedonia name.
  Danforth also failed to understand that.....the historians of FYROM were already familiar and satisfied with the leading role in building the nation. Soon, from 1996 onwards, archaize dominated the education in the country.»
  
  Source:Basilis Gounaris, The Macedonian Issue from 19th cent until 21st, 2010. Alexandria publications,pages 92-93
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 03.05.2010
• 17:56

  AHI Requests Secretary Clinton to Clarify Inflammatory Article on FYROM in State Department’s Official Publication

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  WASHINGTON, DC—The American Hellenic Institute (AHI) released a letter it sent today to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton expressing the Institute’s discontent with State Magazine’s April 2010 cover story “Skopje, Ancient Macedonia builds modern democracy,” by Stephanie Rowlands. AHI’s letter identified five points of contention with Rowlands’ article.“We respectfully request clarification of certain inflammatory and irredentist content of the article,” wrote AHI President Aleco Haralambides and Executive Director Nick Larigakis. The five points of contention demonstrate “serious flaws” with the article in the areas of 1) Geography, 2) “Macedonian” Identity, 3) FYROM as a “Tolerant” Player in the Region, 4) FYROM’s “Peaceful Development,” and 5) the U.S.-FYROM “Strategic Partnership.”“As published, ‘Skopje, Ancient Macedonia builds modern democracy’ will only contribute to FYROM’s ongoing intransigence to solve an issue of vital importance to U.S. interests,” wrote Haralambides and Larigakis. “Furthermore, it leads one to question if the content of State Magazine is to be taken as official policy of the Obama Administration.”Read the  AHI’s letter to Secretary Clinton.....
  
  
  April 27. 2010
  The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton U.S. Secretary of State U.S. Department of State 2201 C Street. NW Washington. DC 20520
  Dear Secretary Clinton:We write on behalf of the nationwide membership of the American Hellenic Institute (All I), and in accordance with promoting the best interests of the United States, in order to express our serious concerns regarding the cover story published in the U.S. Department of State's April 2010 issue of State Magazine. The feature article in question is titled "Skopje. Ancient Macedonia builds modern democracy." by Stephanie Rowlands. We respectfully request clarification of certain inflammatory and irredentist content of the article.
  While in Senate. Barack Obama was one of three original lead co-sponsors of S.Res.300 in the 110^th Congress. The resolution urged FYROM to work with Greece within a UN framework to reach a mutually acceptable official name. Presidential Candidate Obama reaffirmed his position as a presidential candidate in an October 2008 campaign statement. State Magazine's article directly contradicts the letter and spirit of S.Res.300, which stales, inter cilia, that FYROM should "observe its obligations under the 1995 Interim Accord to prohibit hostile activities and propaganda by state-controlled agencies....^,: Specifically, we identified five points of contention that are serious flaws presented in Rowlands' article.[ Items 1 through A can be found on page 22.]1.    The article's reference to Macedonia as a geographic region falsely asserts that major parts of "Macedonia" lie within neighboring countries.2.    The utilization of the term "ethnic Macedonians" is misleading. The author cites examples during a period of Hellenic history and its cultural traditions (including images of Orthodox churches) and identifies them as "Macedonian." but makes no attribution to their Hellenic heritage.3.      Its claim that the "Republic of Macedonia" has been a tolerant actor in the regional "debate" over its history and culture. The author fails to cite any examples of FYROM's intransigence in the search for a UN-brokered solution or its acts of provocation against Greece.4.      It asserts "Macedonia" is undergoing a process of "peaceful development" in an attempt to become a democratically stable country; however, this process is hindered by its neighbors.5.      It states that FYROM has been an important and faithful strategic partner to the US; an alliance that has extended on multiple levels of cooperation between the two countries.[ Page 24.]
  The five points exemplify the deceptive efforts FYROM has enacted to politically manifest its false identity. Hence, facts must be presented to correct the record of Ms. Rowlands" misleading article.
  GeographyToday, geographic Macedonia is within the borders of at least three countries. Only a small portion of geographic Macedonia lies within FYROM. whose population is one-third Albanian and two-thirds Slavic in origin. The largest part of geographic Macedonia lies within Greece in the Greek province of Macedonia. To claim that "major portions of historical Macedonia lie within the neighboring countries" is simply false. Equally alarming is that this claim is a hostile statement toward Greece's national sovereignty. Does the State Department condone this claim?
  “Macedonian” Ethnicity
  Moreover, the author makes reference to "Macedonians"' being an ethnicity in an effort to formulate a "national consciousness" which is based on false historical and political claims. FYROM's frantic search to create a national identity appropriating classical Macedonia's Hellenic heritage is due to the pressures of Albanian nationalism in the aftermath of Kosovo's independence: its failure to implement the 2001 Ochrid power sharing agreement with the Albanian minority amounting to one-third of its population: and Bulgarian claims that FYROM's Slavic inhabitants are of Bulgarian cultural heritage, much like the 'Macedonian Patriotic Organization' advocated until the late 1980s.
  FYROM as "Tolerant" Plavcr in the RegionThe third point addresses the incorrect description of FYROM as the "tolerant' actor in the regional debate over its identity. S.Res.300 stated: "some textbooks, including the Military Academy textbook published in 2004 by the Military Academy 'General Mihailo Apostolski' in the FYROM capital city, contain maps showing that a 'Greater Macedonia' extends many miles south into Greece to Mount Olympus and miles east to Mount Pirin in Bulgaria[.]" Rowlands fails to provide the full picture which suggests that provocative behavior is merely sourced through such ambiguous claims, i.e. that FYROM is a tolerant player. In this manner, FYROM not only promulgates propaganda by claiming portions of Greek territory, but it also usurps Greek national identity and culture. "Tolerance.'" therefore, is a characterization that would be more suitable for the Greek side. On a number of occasions. Greece has shown the political willingness and has led the efforts to diplomatically negotiate to find a solution. In return. Greece is still subjected to political aggression and nationalist propagandistic claims.
  FYROM's Actions Don't Reflect "Peaceful Development"
  This situation is found in sharp contrast to the preceding claim that FYROM is seeking to build itself upon elements of "peaceful development" and its efforts to become a "democratically stable" country. Once again, the assertions in State Magazine's article contradict S.Res.300. which was co-sponsored by then-Senator Obama and states: "the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia should stop the utilization of materials that violate provisions of the United Nations- brokered Interim Agreement between FYROM and Greece " Such provocative behavior and irredentist attitude can only suggest the opposite—that FYROM is seeking to provoke Greece. Most alarming is the author's claim that this process is hindered by its neighbors, and namely Greece, which by "objecting to the country's name" has resulted in the "postponement of Macedonia's inclusion in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union accession talks." This is a completely unacceptable statement. While the author takes no notice of FYROM's political provocations, she further fails to mention Greece's role in FYROM's development and the political support in resolving "Macedonia's* name dispute. Greece is the largest foreign investor in FYROM leading to the employment of over 20.000 persons—not an insignificant number given that country's population. Greece is also FYROM's third largest trading partner and one of the largest foreign aid contributors.Furthermore. Greece has made a major compromise by proposing "a compound name for the country; a name that will distinguish it from both the Greek and Bulgarian part." Greece's position is unambiguous. It has gone the extra mile. It wants a negotiated, mutually acceptable solution that will be valid internationally, in accordance with the U.N. Security Council resolutions. The previous and current Greek government publicly expressed Greece's readiness to accept a compound name. This is a bold shift of tremendous importance from Greece's initial position, and it demonstrates Greece's significant political will to find a solution because it was not a popular position among certain facets of Greek society and the Diaspora. Unfortunately, this gesture was not reciprocated by FYROM. The time is ripe for FYROM to demonstrate the maturity and the responsibility that a truly "peaceful' and "democratic" and state needs in order to become a member of the Alliance.
  U.S.-FYROM "Strategic Partnership Exaggerated
  Lastly, with respect to the US-FYROM "strategic partnership" the author presents an exaggerated version of reality. Suggesting that FYROM "has been a steadfast security partner, sending soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan" is an overstatement for two reasons. First. FYROM has a small army. Second, the total number of soldiers that serve on behalf of FYROM to all the NATO-run International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is 165 with an expected additional 79 soldiers to join the Force["Troop Numbers & Contributions." ISAF- International Security Assistance Force Official Site. Fri.23 Apr. 2010. [wwvv.isaf.nato.int] Furthermore, the suggestion that the U.S. has been heavily investing in FYROM's "transition to a free-market democracy, build a civil society [...]. modernizing education and strengthen the rule of law" serves as another example of propaganda. FYROM's propaganda violates the U.N.-brokered Interim Accord, as stated in Article 7 paragraph 1 of the Accord, signed in New York. September 13. 1995. between Greece and Cyprus. If FYROM truly embraces its partnership with the United States, it should not be proactively offending a NATO ally, its neighbor. Greece. Rather. FYROM should be acting as a law-abiding democratic state because it claims to be one. The assertion that "Macedonia and the United States are cultivating the leaders of today and tomorrow" is another hyperbole especially as FYROM's educational system is constructed upon historical and cultural fallacies. Hence, this "so-called" coordinated effort has a questionable and biased intention.The State Department's decision on November 4. 2004 to recognize FYROM as the "Republic of Macedonia" was counter-productive and made FYROM more obstinate in its will to negotiate a new name, and it fueled FYROM's desire to continue its provocative propaganda against Greece.
  Secretary Clinton, it is imperative for the U.S. to extend its influence upon FYROM for an immediate settlement of its name issue in a way that is mutually acceptable to both Greece and FYROM. The final name must apply for all internal and international uses (erga omnes). This will allow the United States' strongest ally in the Balkans. Greece, to be the dri\ inu force for FYROM's membership to NATO and ultimately the EU. Also, this will create stability for U.S. interests in the Balkans. Therefore, we ask that you persuade FYROM to negotiate in good faith with Greece and cease immediately their illegitimate propaganda.
  If FYROM refuses to cooperate, the U.S. must consider withdrawing its 2004 recognition of FYROM as the "Republic of Macedonia." Once a mutually acceptable denomination for FYROM has been reached in the UN-sponsored talks, we call on our government to recognize that state by that denomination only.
  Secretary Clinton, the purpose of State Magazine may very well be to provide the latest developments on administrative policies affecting State Department employees or to highlight the experiences of our Foreign Service officials at the myriad of diverse diplomatic postings across the globe at which they serve. The latter may have been the intention with Ms. Rowlands" cover story on FYROM. However. State Magazine must take into consideration the geo-political implications of publishing an article that presents extremely sensitive issues (especially to Greece, a NATO ally) that are one-sided and in the process of negotiation just in an effort to "spotlight" a diplomatic posting. As published. "Skopje. Ancient Macedonia builds modern democracy" will only contribute to FYROM's ongoing intransigence to solve an issue of vital importance to U.S. interests. Furthermore, it leads one to question if the content of State Magazine is to be taken as official policy of the Obama Administration.
  We look forward to your clarification of the five points presented. Thank you.
  Respectfully,
  Aleco Haralambides President
  Nick Larigakis Executive Director
  CC:    Deputy Secretary of State James B. SteinbergUnder Secretary of State for Political Affairs William BurnsChief of Staff to the President Rahm EmanuelAssistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Philip GordonDeputy Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia Tina S. KaidanowDirector of Southern European Affairs Jess L. BailyU.S. Ambassador to Greece Daniel V. SpeckhardU.S. Department of State Senior Greece Desk Officer Adam ScarlatelliU.S. Department of State Greece Desk Officer Ilan A. Goodman
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 29.04.2010
• 23:01

  To the Germans journalists

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Because of this.....
  
  
  I shall remind you that your cultural monuments Auschwitz and Treblinka still have the Deutsche flag at the top...eternal.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 18.04.2010
• 11:34

  Letter to Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton from Macedonian organisation regarding an unacceptable from the Department of State’s official publication

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Tuesday, April 13, 2010
  
  Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton
  State Department
  United States of America
  
  Dear Madame Secretary,
  
  We, the representatives of the Pan Macedonian Association USA, one of the largest Greek-American organizations are writing you this letter on the heels of an article published in the US Department of State’s April 2010 issue of State Magazine, whose contents we find highly offensive and provocative. The article in question was written by Stephanie Rowlands, the wife of Ryan Rowlands who is the public affairs officer at the US Embassy in Skopje. It is titled “Skopje, Ancient Macedonia builds modern democracy”, is found on page 20-25 [www.state.gov] yet it is curiously flagged as the “Post of the Month” and is showcased on the front page of the magazine. We will focus on a few things which we consider unacceptable to be coming from the Department of State’s official publication.
  
  We can laugh off the mention of “Ancient Macedonia” and the first line of the article that states:....
   “Macedonia, the name evokes images of ancient civilizations, with men in togas and sandals bearing spears and shields”, and refer the US Department of State to established World History. We can also refer the Department to the letter written to President Obama from over 360 renowned classicists deploring the ridiculous antiquization campaign of historical revisionism from Skopje’s ultranationalist government. However, we cannot laugh off nor ignore the following line:
  
  
  “Today major portions of historical Macedonia lie within neighboring countries.”
  
  
  With this unfortunate line, the US Department of State has legitimized Greece’s concerns in the Balkans after the fall of Yugoslavia, and it is championing the irredentist claims of Skopje. Is the Department of State implying that the FYROM is the heir to historical Macedonia? We would like to know if the United States questions the sovereignty of Greece over its own borders. Historical Macedonia is in Greece and is an inextricable part of Greece – period. A Macedonia without Pella, Vergina, Dion, Philippi, and Thessaloniki is not really Macedonia is it? The line from the Department’s magazine is provocative to say the least.
  
  Additionally, apart from the obvious attempt to thrust Skopje’s image to the world (which is fine to do so), the underlying tone and message of the article remains that “Macedonia” (sic) is a stable Balkan country and it is its neighbors that are trying to destabilize it. There is no mention of any contribution to the instability of the Balkans that Skopje has. Moreover, there is an underlying jab at Greece with every line that is written. In no uncertain terms it is Greece, a “most contentious” neighbor which has “hindered its inclusion” into NATO and the European Union and thus it is capricious Greece which is implicitly seen in a negative light. It is almost as if we do not know with what name Skopje came to the bargaining table at the NATO Summit in Bucharest in March of 2008. Furthermore, comparisons of the multicultural FYROM with the United States and how “appealing” it is to Americans are other attempts to showcase Skopje as a darling in the Balkans. On the title page “The Pearl of the Balkans” is written in bold. Even though we understand locals call Lake Ohrid by this title, it is translated as “Biser Balkanski”, which is also the title of a popular irredentist song in the FYROM: “Ey Macedonia, You are the Pearl of the Balkans, Unite Pirin and Egejska (Aegean) with the clear waters of the Vardar, There is only one truth…only one Macedonia, Share it – divide it, But again our beloved will become ours!” At most this was an unfortunate choice of a title.
  
  If the United States wants to nation-build in the FYROM, they can do so but not on the back of Greek history and sensitivities. The collective memory of the United States Department of State shines with Edward Stettinius Jr.’s words in his 1944 Circular Airgram to US diplomatic circles (see attached): “This government considers talk of Macedonian “nation,” Macedonian “Fatherland,” or Macedonian “national consciousness” to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece.”
  
  We are asking for a public explanation for this propaganda piece coming from the US Department of State. We also ask to include the letter [macedonia-evidence.org] of the 362 professors and researchers to President Obama in one of the Magazine of the State Department’s monthly publications as soon as possible. Your husband understood Greece’s positions, as President Obama understands the sensitivities of the Greeks regarding their history. We would like to believe that you do as well.
  
  Sincerely and with regret,
  
  Nina Gatzoulis Maria HatzinakosSupreme President Supreme Secretary
  
  
  Cc President of US Barack ObamaSenator Robert Menendez
  Senator Olympia Snow
  Senator Jeanne ShaheenCongressman Gus Bilirakis
  Congressman John SarbanesCongresswoman Carolyn Maloney
  Congresswoman Nikki TsongasCongressman Zach Space
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 16.04.2010
• 15:12

  Bring Them Back - English Version

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  Reunite Them! BRING THEM BACK!
  Thousands of pieces of Greek antiquities are hosted in the British Museum. Our campaign does not ask for the return of those.
  We ask for the return of the Parthenon Marbles in Greece and the Reunification of the Monument.
  We, the users of the Internet obtain power and we are able to mobilize the international public opinion. Our goal can be achieved this way.
  Do you believe this is fair? If yes, help this goal come true.
  Say your own BRING THEM BACK!
  
  [www.bringthemback.org]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 09.04.2010
• 13:58

  Kidnapped Greek curator is freed by Taliban

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  By Dilawar Khan Wazir
  BBC News, Peshawar
  
  A Greek national kidnapped by the Taliban eight months ago in Pakistan has been released, officials say.
  
  Athanassios Lerounis was abducted while based in the northern district of Chitral, where he worked as the curator of a heritage museum for several years.
  
  He was taken across the border to the Afghan province of Nuristan.
  
  His captors demanded the release of militants held by Pakistan in exchange for his freedom but officials say no militant exchange was made.
  
  "He has been released by the successful efforts of Pakistani security agencies," Rahmatullah Wazir, the top administrative official in Chitral, told the BBC.
  
  The curator was living in the Kalash valley to pursue his interest in an ancient "lost tribe" when he was kidnapped by armed men on 7 September 2009.
  
  The Kalash tribe have European features and still practise a pagan religion resembling that of ancient Greece.
  
  They are said to be descendants of Greek soldiers from the army of Alexander the Great, who passed through this region nearly 2,000 years ago.
  
  Mr Lerounis had been living among the Kalash since 2001. Sponsored by the Greek government, he managed a museum which highlighted the tribe's culture and Greek connections.
  
  Locals point out that before the kidnapping Mr Lerounis had experienced no trouble and was well liked by the locals.
  
  The Chitral district, where he was based, is widely seen as untouched by the Taliban insurgency which has ravaged the rest of the North West Frontier Province.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 20.03.2010
• 18:09

  Paidomazoma: the gathering of the Greek Children

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  In 1948, Cominform, the first official forum of the international communist movement since the dissolution of the Comintern, put into action a plan to take hostage to communist countries children from Greece during the Greek civil war. The aim was to re-educate the children as well as blackmail the populace and the Greek government towards reaching a settlement leading to a partition of Greece and the subsequent creation of an internationalist "Macedonian" Republic. This move has favoured by the Yugoslav dictator Josip Broz Tito and had been a Comitern policy aimed at destroying the national states of the Balkans through the creation of internationalist republics. Today several FYROM sources claim........
   or at least believe the abducted children were FYROMacedonian.
  
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 19.03.2010
• 00:57

  The Greek position on the FYROM naming dispute according to Georgios Koumoutsakos

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The Greek position on the FYROM naming dispute, described by the Greek member of the European Parliament Georgios Koumoutsakos (Group of the European People's Party - Christian Democrats) in an interview for the FYROMacedonian A1 Television, 04.02.2010
  
  PART1
  
  
  
  PART2
  
  
  
  PART3
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 17.03.2010
• 23:57

  Rabid attacks against the Greek President and Deputy MFA laced with hatred and profanities

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The language used in a stream of op-eds, press releases and postings in mainstream websites of the Muslim Minority of Western (Greek) Thrace and the Makedonski (Slavomacedonian) communities in Greek Macedonia and trans-Atlantic diaspora, raises eyebrows, points --once again-- to deeply entrenched psychological pathologies and dampens enthusiasm about the prospect of a nearing solution.
  
  
  Three representative examples are presented below:
  
  
  1. Openly attacking the integrity of the President of the Hellenic Republic, Karolos Papoulias, effectively calling him a "war criminal"...
  http://www.trakyaninsesi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=79:o-&catid=1:son-haberler&Itemid=50
  [About the author of the trakyaninsesi.com piece] [www.youtube.com]
  
  
  2. The site administrator of MakNews.com uses highly offensive language laced with hatred and profanity to describe the mother of Greek Deputy MFA Droutsas [scroll down half way in the URL below]: [www.maknews.com]
  
  
  3. Witness a barrage of slanderous remarks and innuendos against Greek Deputy MFA Droutsas in a Press Release titled "Droutsas, the “new” nationalist,"which was posted in the official website of EFA-Rainbow Party:
  http://www.vinozito.gr/news/2009/december18_g.asp
  
  Christos D. Katsetos, MD, PhD, FRCPath
  
  [www.drexelmed.edu]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 10.03.2010
• 17:48

  The solution of the "Republic of Northern Macedonia" U.S. proposed

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The package also  includes changing the language to "northmacedonian"  The intention of the U.S., where a positive response in Athens, be referred to as the FYROM as "Republic of Northern Macedonia" allegedly informed the Greek Prime Minister as the chairman of U.S. Barack Obama and Foreign Minister Hillary Clinton. Information indicates, however, that the Papandreou reserved respond after weigh all the data.
  
  Under Step, Washington appears willing to reconsider its stance on the FYROM name, recognizing that the enlargement of NATO in Southeast Europe can not proceed if there is no solution.
  
  In this context, the B.Obama and H. Clinton informed the Greek Prime Minister that if they accept the proposal may ......
  notify the Security Council that in future recognize FYROM as "Republic of Northern Macedonia" on the ground that speaks the Northmacedonian language.
  
  According to U.S. sources, Papandreou reserved respond after weigh all the data. The same sources report that Washington is eager to join the Western Balkans into NATO because the "new defense strategy" of carrying the missile defense system in Eastern Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean from Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic, which was originally intended to be installed .
  
  
  Noted that three countries in the region have responded positively to relevant soundings of Washington-Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey, the latter provided that the "system" will be floating inside, which "can not just move east Cyprus and the Aegean.
  
  
  SOURCE:TA NEA
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 03.03.2010
• 10:21

  The Treaty of Saint Germain s-smooth in 1919 and the official name of FYROM*

   »  Modern Macedonian History
   By Marcus A. Templar
  
  In Business Law, the principle nemo dat quod non habet means that no one may give what one does not have; nevertheless, this principle goes a little further. This rule stays valid regarding stolen goods, even if the bona fide purchaser does not know that the seller has no right to claim ownership of the object of the transaction. Thus if goods are stolen, the buyer does not get ownership even if there was no indication that they were stolen. Accordingly, the consequence of the above principle is that a person who does not own property, that is a thief, may not confer the stolen property to another person except with the true owner's permission. The same applies in International Law.
  
  The legal status of each country is that of an artificial person. In the case of the name dispute between Skopje and Greece, the UNSC resolutions have indicated that because Greece complained that the name Macedonia, its derivatives, and its property – historical, social, and even spiritual- belongs to Greece by inheritance, Skopje may not bear the same name without the permission of its owner. Since the owner does not allow any country to bear it, Skopje had to ........
   find another name for the country and its derivatives. Considering countries as artificial persons, we may apply the above to relations among them. The UNSC agreed with Greece’s contention and proceeded to adopt resolutions that constitute legal documents.
  
  
  Resolution 817/93 urges the parties to continue to work together to arrive at a speedy settlement of their difference while both countries carry out negotiations under the auspices of the UN Secretary General, with the objective of finding a mutually acceptable solution to the name issue. Skopje has accepted and it will use the provisional name “The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" or “FYROM.” The Interim Agreement between Greece and the FYROM explains the relation of these countries in a form of do’s and don’ts during the negotiation period.
  
  The Skopjans assert the right to self-determination allowing them to call their country whatever they want. The right of self- determination applies in terms of a country's independence, not in terms of its name, especially when the same name infringes on the human rights of other people. On September 8, 1991, Skopje exercised that right, which was never offered to Cyprus by its British occupiers.
  
  Skopje has sued Greece alleging that Greece is in violation of article 11 of the Interim Agreement because she had persuaded other UN members that Skopje did not meet the spirit of good neighborly relations. Nevertheless, pertinent to the matter, Skopje had not applied to join NATO as FYROM, but as “Macedonia” invoking internal constitutional arrangements. According to International Law, “no country may invoke internal constitutional arrangements to avoid its international obligations.” Besides, no organization, no country, and no court may force Greece to abandon its national rights, national interests, and national security, as Greece understands them.
  
  Officials of NATO and EU countries consider the name dispute that Greece has brought up as preposterous, although they were the same countries who were terrified by the name German thus depriving the Austrians of their own German ancestry. When the UNSC encouraged the two countries to negotiate an acceptable by both countries name for the FYROM, it did not create a precedent, but it employed one from the Peace Treaty of St. Germain-en-Layé of 1919. Upon the end of WWI and the abdication of the Kaiser in November of 1918, the Provisional National Assembly of Austria, representing the new state called Republik Deutschösterreich or “German-Austrian Republic,” formed the Provisional Government of German Austria. The allies, fearing future ramifications of the inclusion of the word German in the title of the new republic, insisted that Austria change its name removing the term "German" from it. Thus according to the provisions of the Peace Treaty of St. Germain-en-Layé, signed on September 10, 1919, Austria appears under the title Republik Österreich or Austrian Republic. The website of the Austrian parliament explains in detail the reasons and the fears of the allied powers regardless of the fact that Austria did not consider those fears valid ( [www.parlament.gv.at] ).
  
  The reality is that those countries, which at present find Greece’s position on the name issue ridiculous, were the same countries that objected to the term "German Austrian" in the title of the new republic being terrified of the consequences. On October 17, 1919, four days after the Constituent National Assembly adopted the treaty, the name of the state was changed to “Republic of Austria.” The consequence of the name change, which the Allies imposed on Austria, was that it affected any name derivatives.
  
  Conversely, the FYROM not only ignored the UNSC resolution 817/93, it actively launched a vigorous diplomatic and lobbying campaign, oftentimes lying that the dispute was over and that Greece had accepted for other countries to call the new state “Macedonia” as it is in the case of Guatemala’s recognition. In some cases, Skopje’s newly found friends did its bidding as it is in the case of Kenya. Skopje even returned documents back to the sender because their country’s name was “Macedonia” as in the case Hungary; and the list can go on and on. The fact that EU and NATO countries ignore the principle nemo dat quod non habet is absolutely inconsequential to them.
  
  The officially sanctioned Macedonism raise Skopje 's nationalism to the highest level with every single day that passes. The "Macedonian" prayer written and produced by Niche Dimovski, vice-president of the World Macedonian Congress, was shown on national TV (i.e. MTV) of the FYROM had God telling the "Macedonians," “[f]rom you, Macedonians, descendants of Macedon I conceived the white race. All that stretches over to the Japanese sea is conceived from you [sic] gene.” Furthermore, in the prayer God said to his flock calling all the white men on the planet Macedonoids [74.125.93.132] ). To this day not one official of the FYROM or the Skopjan diaspora has condemned this racist nine minute video [www.youtube.com] (Last accessed October 16, 2009).
  
  Besides the propaganda issue of “Macedonians in bondage,” the FYROM government published the history book of the “Macedonian Military” that includes the history of ancient Macedonia and an army associated with Skopje’s perception of ancient Macedonia. To be exact, the Military Academy of the FYROM funded the book, which after Greece filed a demarche, the government of the FYROM withdrew, but it is now on sale by the author. Simultaneously, the Slavic pupils and youth have been constantly bombarded with anti-Hellenic propaganda through their schoolbooks, the Press, and its diaspora. In the course of history of any institution of the country, any argument of ancient Macedonians being Greek has been prohibited and it is punishable by law. Yet, not one Skopjan official or scholar has ever provided a single piece of evidence, let alone proof, for their allegedly inherited Macedonism.
  
  The Falkland’s War started because of similar publications appearing in Argentina placing the mentality of the Argentinean people in a state that encouraged the regime to attack a British territory. A whole generation of schoolchildren had been taught that the Malvinas i.e. Falklands were Argentinean territory. The government had even issued postage stamps proclaiming the islands part of the Argentinean Republic. Argentine maps labeled the Islands as "occupied territory."
  
  Nonetheless, the problem is wider than the simple name Macedonia. The Slav inhabitants of the FYROM who have nothing to do with the ancient Macedonians, have changed the names of streets to ancient Macedonian ones (i.e. Greek names), they have been erecting statues of ancient Macedonian heroes (i.e. Greek names) and they are building monuments and naming them after ancient Macedonian kings (i.e. Greek names). Another absurd fact is that although they claim that Alexander the Great was not Greek, they consider him descendent of the mythical hero Heracles concealing the fact that Hercules is the Roman name for Heracles who was definitely an Achaean Greek! The penultimate outlandish thing that remains is to change their own language to “ancient Macedonian” (i.e. the language of the katadesmos of Pella), which was a mixed Northwest Doric dialect with Aeolic elements.
  
  Instead of foreign governments pressuring Skopje to stop the violation of the letter and the spirit of the Interim Agreement, they pressure Greece under the pretext of Skopje’s instability! Have they forgotten that Skopje's disregard for her own signature has become the modus operandi of the country? Skopje has done the same with the Ohrid Agreement and in this manner it keeps contributing to its own instability. ( [www.rieas.gr] ).
  
  Would the same EU/NATO officials that recklessly support the FYROM's ultra-nationalistic path conclude a contract with someone knowing full well that s/he negotiates in bad faith violating pacta sund servanda? Foreign governments violate the principle nemo dat quod non habet because they are indifferent and do not want to see the upcoming problems which they will create when they sign the document of Skopje's ascension to the EU. They politically equate the victim (Greece) to the villain (Skopje) and then proceed to assist the thief to keep the stolen goods, the name Macedonia, along with its derivatives and its heritage, stumping on the principle nemo dat quod non habet and Athens remains silent. WHY? Perhaps Athens is unwilling to think outside the box and consequently connect the dots.
  
  " This text sent from Panmacedonian USA to the members of the Greek Parliament.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 26.02.2010
• 14:54

  Arrest of a Slav Macedonian far-right nationalist for anti-Hellenic reviews as regards Antonios Samaras

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  ">[3.bp.blogspot.com] [3.bp.blogspot.com] /> For more than a year the new president of Greek Centre-Right Party Antonios Samaras would be attacked through YOUTUBE. There were dozens of posts with photos and video statements, which were accompanied by anti-Hellenic mockingly comments.
  
  Mr. Samaras had sued in order to identify the perpetrator. At the prosecuting and removing secret authorization, the Board of Electronic Crime (Greek Police) identified the electronic traces of the offender by sending relevant documents to Interpol. It was found that this is a 22 years old far right-nationalist Slav Macedonian and member of the FYROM Army, which was identified and formed the file against the prosecuting authorities in Skopje at FYROM. A few days ago it was the trial court in Skopje, but the 22 years old s not appeared in the courtroom. The case postponed and is expected in the coming days be called back for trial.
  
  source:taxalia.blogspot.com and newsit.gr
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 24.02.2010
• 09:03

  Betrüger in der Euro-Familie

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  Yet another day marked by paroxysmal manifestations about the Greek financial debacle in the German media. The crisis is real and (to a large measure) the utter disappointment and resentment of Greece's European partners is fully justified. But the German wrath has gone too far.
  First came the gloomy, almost humiliating, interview of Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou in der Spiegel. The arrogant, condescending and prosecutorial style of the journalist conducting the interview is obvious. [www.spiegel.de]
  
  And then came this week's edition of the Munich-based FOCUS weekly magazine bearing the sensationalist title "Betrüger in der Euro-Familie" ("Swindlers/defrauders in the European Family" -- "Απατεώνες/καταχραστές στην Ευρωπαϊκή οικογένεια") on its cover page along side with an appalling image depicting Aphrodite of Milos (Venus di Milo) giving "the finger" whilst being wrapped, from the waist down, in the Greek flag. In fairness, this is beyond poor taste satire. It is an insult to the Greek flag and the dignity of the Greek nation. [www.focus.de]
  
  On a more sober note, I would like to share a quote by my esteemed colleague Dr. Marios Evriviades, Political Scientist at Panteion University of Athens:"The Greeks may be all the Germans say (and worse) but in their history they [Greeks] neither invented gas ovens nor did they put them in use 24 hrs a day for five years in the middle of the 20th century. These same Greeks, incidentally, were the first to inflict on fascists their first organized defeat when Europe lived in fear and despair."
  
  Christos D. Katsetos, MD, PhD, FRCPath
  [www.drexelmed.edu]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 16.02.2010
• 09:44

  «Macedonia is as Greek as the Acropolis» South Australia Premier Rann says

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Adelaide, 10.02.2010
  
  “I will speak of Macedonia being Hellenic and nobody will silence me, because it is something I believe in”. This was the answer of the PM of South Australia Mike Rann, to the reactions of citizens coming from FYROM.
  
  Mr. Rann has been supporting in every possible way the Greek side on Macedonia and Cyprus, outraging the citizens of Australia who come from Turkey and FYROM.
  
  
  “It is important because no one is entitled to steal another nation’s history or culture,” Mr Rann said.
  
  Mr Koloski, president of the self proclaimed “United Macedonian Diaspora”, told The Advertiser that his people had been “slandered” and demanded an unconditional apology. He also met the Minister of Multicultural Affairs, Michael Atkinson in Adelaide and issued a letter of protest to Mr. Rann.
  
  Mr. Rann stated in the past that “Macedonia is as Greek as the Acropolis”The newspaper of Adelaide “The Advertiser” published an article whereby reference is made to Mr. Rann’s speech during the Dimitria Greek festival in the western suburbs in November in which he stated that FYROM’s president Giorgi Ivanov is“stirring up trouble in the most dangerous way” and affirms his commitment to Adelaide’s Greek voters and promises his Government will “remain firm and unswerving in our support for your cause”.
  
  Source: ANA – MPA
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 11.02.2010
• 22:04

  Letter to Human Rights US Department of State from Macedonian organisation.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  February 1, 2010
  
  Mr. Mike Posner President of Human Rights
  C/o Ms Emily Stanfield Executive Assistant to the President
  Human Rights Department
  US Department of State
  2201 C Street NW
  Washington, DC 20520
  
  Dear Mr. Posner,
  
  We would like to bring to your attention the injustices and violations against the historical and cultural identity that we feel are occurring against the 2.500.000 Greeks of the Greek administrative region of Macedonia, who are ethnologically and linguistically Greek, consider themselves ethnically Greek, and are proud of their Macedonian cultural identity for millennia. Our people recently are attacked by a self-proclaimed “Macedonian” ethnic identity of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (the FYROM). Being ethnically Greeks from the Greek administrative region of Macedonia, we would like to express grave concern about attempts to appropriate our cultural and historical Macedonian identity in this region, emanating from a newly independent state that occupies only a small part of the ancient geographical region of Macedonia.
  
  With this letter we state that the Macedonian identity belongs exclusively to Greece on cultural and historical terms and it is extremely inappropriate and threatening to Greece to allow an ethnic self-proclaimed “Macedonian” identity at the northern borders of Greece. Under no circumstances should......
   the international community and the international legal system allow that the principle of self-identification interfere with the cultural and historic identity belonging to another nation for millennia. No one should be allowed to use a term ethnologically that belongs to another nation culturally and historically for centuries. In our case it should be perceived as an obvious attempt to appropriate everything Macedonian.
  
  We will not bring up ancient history (for more information on ancient Macedonia, its integral part in Greek history, and with perspective to FYROM’s historical revisionism as a means to establish an identity in the modern world, please see: macedonia-evidence.org [macedonia-evidence.org] but it is necessary to mention that since the end of the Roman times, and for well almost over 2,000 years, Macedonia was never identified with specific and constant administrative or geographical borders. By the dawn of the 20th century, the name “Macedonia” had a geographical—not an ethnic nor administrative—connotation. The populations however inhabiting Macedonia during that time were not amorphous masses, but distinct ethnicities existed. There were Greeks, Turks, Bulgarians, Albanians, Jews, Serbs and Armenians. The 1906 Ottoman census carried out by Himli Pasha for the region of Macedonia does not mention any “Macedonian” ethnicity: Muslims (Turks and Albanians) 423,000 41.71%), Greeks 259,000 (27.30%), Bulgarians 259,000 (27.30%), Serbs 13,150 (1.39%), Others 73,000 (7.72%)
  
  During the Balkan wars Ottoman territories were distributed among many states in the region. There was no "Macedonian" nation divided as FYROM "human rights" activists constantly attempt to imply both to human rights groups and to the media. Only a small portion of the ancient region of the original kingdom of Macedonia is situated in FYROM.
  
  More than half of this region, which corresponds to a large extent to historic Macedonia, belongs to Greece and forms for years now a separate administrative region designated also by the name Macedonia and inhabited by 2.500.000 inhabitants who, since centuries, identify themselves as Macedonians in the cultural and historical sense.
  
  Since 1993 however, when the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia became independent, its leadership insists on the exclusive use of the name “Macedonia” for the newly established state which consists mainly of a Slavic population and various minority groups such as Albanians (30%), Roma, Turks, Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbs and others.
  
  There is no doubt that the exclusive use of the name “Macedonia,” primarily adopted by the FYROM Slavs and their promotion as “ethnic Macedonians” is a stimulus for expansionist claims by FYROM and its Diaspora. Claims to “their rights to self-identification” are unjustified and violates the rights of the Macedonians.
  
  It is interesting to note that a number of politicians and diplomats within the FYROM advocated contradictory theories about the origins of their country’s inhabitants:
  
  --The former President of The FYROM, Kiro Gligorov said: “We are Slavs who came to this area in the sixth century ... we are not descendants of the ancient Macedonians" (Foreign Information Service Daily Report, Eastern Europe, February 26, 1992, p. 35). Also, Mr. Gligorov declared: "We are Macedonians but we are Slav Macedonians. That's who we are! We have no connection to Alexander the Greek and his Macedonia… Our ancestors came here in the 5th and 6th century" (Toronto Star, March 15, 1992). He repeated the same statement in 2009 in an interview with a Greek newspaper.
  
  --On 22 January 1999, Ambassador of the FYROM to USA, Ljubica Achevska gave a speech on the present situation in the Balkans. In answering questions at the end of her speech Mrs. Acevshka said: "We do not claim to be descendants of Alexander the Great … Greece is Macedonia’s second largest trading partner, and its number one investor. Instead of opting for war, we have chosen the mediation of the United Nations, with talks on the ambassadorial level under Mr. Vance and Mr. Nemitz." In reply to another question about the ethnic origin of the people of FYROM, Ambassador Achevska stated that "we are Slavs and we speak a Slavic language.”
  
  --On 24 February 1999, in an interview with the Ottawa Citizen, Gyordan Veselinov, FYROM'S Ambassador to Canada, admitted, "We are not related to the northern Greeks who produced leaders like Philip and Alexander the Great. We are a Slavic people and our language is closely related to Bulgarian." He also commented, “There is some confusion about the identity of the people of my country." In addition, the Foreign Minister of the FYROM, Slobodan Casule, in an interview to Utrinski Vesnik of Skopje on December 29, 2001, said that he mentioned to the Foreign Minister of Bulgaria, Solomon Pasi that they "belong to the same Slav people.”
  
  --On 15 October 2008 the former Interior and Foreign Affairs Minister and candidate to the Presidency of FYROM in the elections of March 2009 Mr. Ljubomir Frckovski in an interview with the Greek Television ET3 said that the Slavs of FYROM are not Macedonians but Slavs who try to avoid their absorption from the Bulgarians.
  
  An interesting example that can serve as an analogy to the Greek cultural Macedonian identity is that of the Bavarians. The Bavarians are culturally Bavarian. Ethnologically and linguistically however they are Germans and no one in the world denies their obvious identity. Could anyone find it acceptable if a state (neighboring to Germany) assumes the name of “Republic of Bavaria,” renames itself the “Bavarian nation,” and claims that non-Germans could constitute a Bavarian minority in Bavaria? Such examples are numerous around the world: the Welch in England, the Britons in France, the New Englanders in US, and so many others.
  
  The Pan-Macedonian Association USA, whose members originate from Macedonia, would like to report the irredentist actions of FYROM and its Diaspora that violate our inherited right to call ourselves Macedonians. Our Macedonian cultural and historical identity has been an integral part of our Greek heritage for millennia. We therefore strongly object that a Slavic nation, north of Greece, can use the name “Macedonian” to indentify its citizens, a term that forms part of Greece’s history and culture for thousands of years. Recognition of a “Macedonian” ethnicity, clearly and without a doubt, would claim anything Macedonian, including history, culture and even land, destabilizing among others the whole region. Therefore we have every moral and legal right to feel threatened by the artificial creation of an ethnic “Macedonian” identity in Greece’s northern border.
  
  As members of the Pan-Macedonian Association USA whose human right to self-identification is violated by the authorities of the FYROM and other entities with the aim to advance their political goals in the region by appropriating our cultural and historic identity, we would like to remind you of the prophetic words of Secretary of State Edward Stettinius’ Circular Airgram to US diplomatic corpus on December 26, 1944: “This government considers talk of Macedonian “nation,” Macedonian “Fatherland,” or Macedonian “national consciousness” to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece.” That statement was true then, therefore it is true now.
  
  Please reply to our appeal for bringing an end to the above violations of our human and particularly cultural and historical rights so that we might further our cause to the appropriate forum.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  Nina Gatzoulis Maria Hatzinakos Dr. Antonis Papadopoulos
  Supreme President Supreme Secretary Supreme Vice-President
  
  Cc Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 29.01.2010
• 17:37

  A response to “The Shame of Modern Greece”

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  On January 20, 2010 Andrew Apostolou published an op ed piece in the Wall Street Journal titled “The Shame of Modern Greece“; the points so obliviously forced or ignored the facts (both as to the burning of the synagogue and the historical context) and maliciously facile that I felt compelled to respond.
  
  My letter to the editor was sent on January 22 but it has so far not been published, probably because it exceeds the ten-second soundbite. I reproduce it below for those who may be interested and for the record (scripta manent, if only on the internet).
  
  A. Caratzas
  

  To the Editor [of the Wall Street Journal]:.....
  
  
  Andrew Apostolou’s “The Shame of Modern Greece” (Opinion Europe, January 20, 2010), about the arson attacks on a historic synagogue in Chania on the island of Crete, represents a case of a premature judgment used to support a simple-minded sermon without respect for the complexity of the historic relationship between the Greeks and the Jews, which stretches back about 2,500 years

  Contrary to Mr. Apostolou, who did not have all the facts, of the five people accused of arson four are foreign, i.e. non-Greek nationals (two are British and two Americans), and one a Greek national; the two British and the Greek individuals have been arrested by the Greek police and will be charged based on video taped evidence of their actions and the confession of at least one of them. The US nationals are fugitives.

  As for the larger issue of anti-Semitism in Greece, there are indeed bigots of all stripes in the country, though these are few and tend to be marginalized; Greece does not have an extreme rightist fascist or racist party that espouses anti-Semitism. Some on the left (including a major left-wing daily) promote “the now banal comparison of Israel with the Nazis,” a view that may be obnoxious but hardly racist. The comparison to anti-Semitism in Turkey falls flat, given that Hitler’s Mein Kampf has sold hundreds of thousands of copies over the last few years in that country, not to mention the fact that its political leadership is not particularly warm towards the state of Israel,

  The relationship between the Greeks and the Jews is too complex to be reduced to slogans such as “[m]any Greeks do not know that their second largest city, Salonika, had a Jewish majority for most of its modern history.” The reality is that the many Greeks know this fact, as they also know that in 1492 the Jews were settled in Thessalonica by the Ottoman Turks after the latter had massacred and enslaved the Christian population of the city and seized its properties. The Jews replaced the tax base of which the Ottomans deprived themselves as a result of their massacres.

  In the more recent past while during World War II over eighty percent of the Jews of Greece were exterminated by the National Socialist occupation forces, assisted by local collaborators (as in all of Europe), a significant number of Christian Greeks (including the family of the undersigned) simply assumed it their duty to protect and to hide their Jewish friends and neighbors. Mr. Apostolou’s accusatory tone about “the often shameful and ambiguous stance that too many (sic) Greeks took during the Second World War” reflects a studied ignorance of human nature universally and serves an anti-Greek political agenda. How many Europeans or Americans really intervened to stop the genocide of the Armenians, the Greeks and other Christians is Asia Minor by the Turks? Indeed many western countries still refuse to recognize that event, which prompted Raphael Lemkin to coin the very term genocide.

  Aristide Caratzas
  New York/Athens

  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 27.01.2010
• 14:04

  FYROM suit issue

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  ">[prev.bermun.de] [prev.bermun.de] />
  by a Reader
  
  
  FYROM press has stated already its disinformation.  They have published that the ICJ decisions are binding.  The truth is that they are not.  The reason behind it is disinformation to the people in the FYROM, but also all over the world as Greece does not abide by the ruling.  The lawsuit in its entirety has as goal a favorable impressions for poor " Macedonia !"
   
  Please take a look what BalkanInSight states and then see what the MIA states.  Both relevant statements are in bold.  Cases before the ICJ are legally binding ONLY when two parties seeking in essence binding arbitration mutually bring a dispute before it.  These cases are on continental shelves, border disputes, etc. Sometimes even that is not enforceable, point in case the border dispute between Eritrea and Ethiopia .   
   
  The case between the FYROM and Greece is a unilateral lawsuit on whether one party violated the terms of a treaty.  Essentially in this case, the " Republic of Macedonia " has filed a complaint before the ICJ because Greece "obstructed" the aforementioned country to join NATO.  The problem with this thinking is that the " Republic of Macedonia " applied to join NATO,  not The FYROM.  Even the complaint to the ICJ was filed under the name " Republic of Macedonia ," not The FYROM.  As we say in the United States , the Interim Agreement is not Burger King to have it "your" way; it is take it or leave it! 
   
  How could it be that Skopje can lobby ....
  .... all over the Planet to keep the name " Macedonia ," demanding furthermore recognition under that name," but when it is convenient to enter international organizations one applies under Macedonia , demanding to join under the FYROM.  The other issue is that Greece never had to bring a "veto" against the " Republic of Macedonia ," which legally does not exist in the eyes of the Alliance .  Allies and Partners in NATO simply did not agree that Skopje met all criteria to participate as equal.  Alliances are social clubs that consent is a prerequisite.  How can anyone expect a Greek soldier to fight alongside a soldier whose country insists on fingering Greece ?  Although there is a difference between friends from allies, the allies make a pact based on common interests.  Because of it, trust is essential.      
  Article 11.1 states, "Upon entry into force of this Interim Accord, The Party of the First Part agrees not to object to the application by or the membership of the Party of the Second Part in international, multilateral and regional organizations and institutions of which the Party of the First Part is a member; however, the Party of the First Part reserves the right to object to any membership referred to above if and to the extent of the Party of the Second Part is to be referred to in such organization or institution differently than in paragraph 2 of the United Nations Security Council resolution 817 (1993).However, resolution UNSC 817.2 states, [The UNSC] "Recommends to the General Assembly that the State whose application is contained in document S/25147 be admitted to membership in the United Nations, this State being provisionally referred to for all purposes within the United Nations as "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" pending settlement of the difference that has arisen over the name of the State." The FYROM violated article 11.1 because the FYROM did not use the "provisionally referred to for all purposes [name] within the United Nations as "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia " pending settlement of the difference that has arisen over the name of the State.
   
  "Article 11. 2. The Parties agree that the ongoing economic development of the Party of the Second Part should be supported through international cooperation, as far as possible by a close relationship of the Party of the Second Part with the European Economic Area and the European Union."  The above says that Greece should be supportive as far as possible.  This support is not exclusive.  It does not say that Greece shall be supportive no matter what!
   
  The FYROM has violated article 11 of the Interim Agreement for insisting on the name " Republic of Macedonia " while the same article states that its name until the dispute is over is The FYROM.  In addition, The FYROM is in blatant violation of articles 6 and 7 of the same agreement. 
   
  Even if the Court finds Greece guilty, nothing is going to change.  NOBODY, including the UNSC has the right to oblige a state to do something that that state considers it is against its own national security in a broader or the narrower sense; NOBODY.  
  
  
  Sarajevo BalkanInsight.com 20 Jan 10
  
  Report by Sinisa-Jakov Marusic: "Macedonian Journalists Accused of Helping Greece"
  
  Skopje -- Greece is using Macedonian journalists' reports to support its case at the Hague-based International Court of Justice, ICJ, where it is being sued for its refusal to unblock Macedonia's NATO accession, Macedonian President Gjorge Ivanov told media.
  
  Ivanov said this on Tuesday (19 January), approximately at the same time when Greece presented its memorandum containing its counter arguments to the Macedonian suit at the ICJ.
  
  "I hear many of the arguments will be from our journalists who gave statements, spread speculations, and gave false information, which the Greek side is using to their advantage," Ivanov stated.
  
  In its memorandum, Greece utterly rejects Macedonian claims that it vetoed Skopje's NATO accession in 2008, arguing that the failure to invite Macedonia to the block at the Bucharest summit of the alliance was due to a lack of consensus, according to the Greek Foreign Ministry.
  
  The ministry said the memorandum included legal, political, and historical arguments that fully refute Skopje's claims.
  
  Macedonian authorities last year filed legal proceedings against Greece for blocking its NATO entry.  They claim this violated the 1995 UN Interim Accord that obliged Greece not to block Macedonia from entering international organizations as long as it uses its UN provisional name, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, FYROM.
  
  Athens, for its part, argues that Macedonia was the one that broke the UN-sponsored agreement first by renaming important infrastructure after heroes from Greek history, such as ancient warrior king Alexander the Great.
  
  Athens and Skopje are locked in an 18-year-long dispute over the use of the name Macedonia.  Greece insists that its neighbour's official name, the Republic of Macedonia, must be changed, as it implies territorial claims over its own northern province also called Macedonia.
  
  In 2008, Athens blocked Skopje from entering NATO by using its rule that new member states must be approved by consensus by all members of the alliance.  Similarly, in December 2009, Greece prevented the EU from extending a start date for Macedonia's EU accession talks.  In both cases, Athens cited the unresolved name spat as reason.
  
  Legal experts warn that the case could drag on for years and that court decisions are not legally binding.
  
  UN-led name talks have so far failed to produce a compromise between Athens and Skopje.
  -==================================
  
  Skopje MIA --20 Jan 10
  ("Greece's Counter-Memorial Submitted to Macedonian State Institutions, Its Contents Remain Confidential -- Dimitrov" -- MIA headline)
  Skopje, January 20 (MIA) -- Macedonian ambassador to the Netherlands and co-representative before the Hague-based International Court of Justice (ICJ) Nikola Dimitrov confirmed Wednesday (20 January) that state institutions had already received Greece's counter-memorial involving the lawsuit filed by Macedonia against Greece for breaching the 1995 interim bilateral agreement by blocking country's NATO membership invitation at the Bucharest Summit.
  - The Republic of Greece submitted its counter-memorial in accordance with the time-limits for initial written pleadings established by ICJ in context with the case concerning the Application of the Interim Agreement of 13 September 1995 filed by the Republic of Macedonia.  Once it was received, the document via the Macedonian Embassy in The Hague was sent to relevant state institutions in the country, Dimitrov told MIA.
  Written pleadings remain confidential until the start of oral proceedings and as a result he says he cannot comment their contents.
  - Given the regulations of UN's principal judicial organ in this stage written pleadings are not available for the public taking into consideration the state interests of the Republic of Macedonia, I am not in a position to comment the contents or to give any details surrounding the contra-memorial, says Ambassador Dimitrov.
  He states that intensive consultations between relevant institutions and experts in the Macedonian team are to be held in the days to come to set up a stance in relation to future steps.
  - The next stage of the case i.e. whether there will be another series of written pleadings or the parties will go directly to oral proceedings will be determined by the International Court of Justice taking into account the views of the parties, Dimitrov says.
  On Tuesday, a day before the time-limit, Greece presented its counter-memorials at International Court of Justice in the Hague regarding the lawsuit filed by Macedonia.  The counter-memorial was filed by Greece's agents at the proceedings, Ambassador Georgios Savvaidis, Foreign Ministry legal counselor Maria Telalian, and a team of ministry diplomats and legal experts assigned to the case.  Greece's written response categorically rejects all of Macedonia's arguments, presenting legal, political, and historical counter-arguments and points of reference.
  Macedonia submitted its evidences backing up the suit on July 20, 2009, after which Greece had 6-month deadline to prepare its defense, which expires tomorrow.
  Foreign Minister Antonio Milososki and Ambassador in Netherlands Nikola Dimitrov are Macedonia's representatives, accompanied by Croatian lawyer Budislav Vukas as ad hoc judge.  Athens University professor Emmanuel Rukunas will be Greece's ad hoc judge.
  Macedonia took Greece before the International Court of Justice in November 17, 2008.  Skopje argues that Athens violated the United Nations-sponsored 1995 Interim Accord signed by both sides by practically blocking its neighbor from joining NATO in April.  According to the accord, Athens obliged not to block Skopje from entering international organizations as long as it is done under Macedonia's UN provisional reference, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, FYROM.
  - We have serious arguments and I believe the completion of this process before the Court in The Hague would impose a responsibility for honoring the Interim Accord.  We plan to finish this process successfully without an alternative, FM Antonio Milososki recently stated.
  Athens has announced that its defense will be based on the fact that there was no veto at the Bucharest summit, but a consensus between NATO members to postpone the accession of Macedonia until name row settlement is reached.  Greece claims it has counter arguments proving that Macedonia was the party that breached the Interim Agreement.
  Given previous cases at the ICJ, proceedings for such cases may last up to several years.  Verdicts reached by the Court are final and legally binding and the UN Security Council is responsible for their implementation and observance.  Established in 1945, ICJ has settled 25 international disputes thus far.
  
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 23.01.2010
• 12:18

  The political ethno-myth of the Slav Macedonians

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  
  The political ethno-myth of the Slav Macedonians[1] can be divided in two opinions. Namely, the issues are two ethno-myths, which are produced and dictated by opposed opinions of certain political power centers in FYROM and her diasporas. The first view or the first ethno-myth is when the Slav Macedonians declare themselves as direct descendents of the Ancient Macedonians and 7.000 B.C Balkan peoples and the second one is when they connect their own genesis with the history of the amalgamation of the Slavs with the 6th cent A.D Balkan people. This kind of divergency, which appears in the Slav Macedonian ethnos, started to be illustrated at a larger extent after the independence of Macedonia that is in the period when the era of totalitarianism finished.
  
  The first view promoted from the Gruevski regime and his ultra-nationalist political partie, nationalists parties, Institute of National History (INI, Institut za natsionalna istorija), World Macedonian Congress and the second from the Socialists political parties, Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts (MANU, Makedonska Akademija na Naukite i Umetnostite)
  
  Both of them characterizing from theirs.....
  extremist  Revisionist views and the denials of the main stream scientist views.
  
  
  
  WHAT IS THE REALITY
  
  
  The history of the construction of a Slav Macedonian national identity does not begin with Alexander the Great in the fourth century B.C. or with Saints Cyril and Methodius in the ninth century a.d., as Slavmacedonian nationalist historians often claim. Nor does it begin with Tito and the establishment of the People's Republic of Macedonia in 1944 as some Greek or Bulgarian historians would have us believe. It begins in the nineteenth century with the first expressions of Slavmacedo­nian ethnic nationalism on the part of a small number of intellectuals in places like Thessaloniki, Belgrade, Sophia, and St. Petersburg. This period marks the beginning of the process of "imaging" a Slavmacedo­nian national community, the beginning of the construction of a Slavmacedo­nian national identity and culture. [2].
  
  At that time the Bulgarian ethno-character of the Slavs of Macedonia went unchallenged. The Graeco-Turkish war of 1897 fomented anti-Turkish strife in Macedonia and subsequently the Bulgarian leadership of the V.M.R.O./ I.M.R.O. staged an abortive revolution at the modern geographical Macedonia in 1903. In the same year Miisinko, who described him­self as a Macedonian, postulated, in an article published in Sofia, the existence of a Macedonian nation.' Possibly, Bulgaria was behind the Macedonian independence movement, which could be used to counter Greek and Serbian pretensions. Unfortunately for, the Bulgarians, the Serbian Cvijic seized upon the idea of  the “Macedonians” and gave to what had originally been a political tag, an  ethnic signifi­cance. [3].
  
  
  THE MYTH OF VICTIMIZATION
  
  Besides the myths of ethnic origin and descent, FYROM historiography also embraces the myth of victimization. On the one hand, this myth serves to define the “others” against whom ethnic consolidation must be achieved. On the other hand, it seeks to instill into the present generation a feeling of indebtedness to its ancestors, as well as to nurture the virtue of being able to stand alone because, it is said, Slav Macedonians in the past were unable to count on the help of anyone or anything other than their own strength and unity. The division of the region of Macedonia after the Balkan Wars is regarded as a traumatic event in the history of the Macedonian people because it destroyed the “ethnic” and “geographical” unity of the country. The Slavic population is portrayed as the victim of harsh assimilation attempts in Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece, vividly described by Slavmacedonian historians. [4]
  
  THE SLAVMACEDONIAN LANGUAGE OF THE FYROM AS PART OF THE POLITICAL ETHNO-MYTH
  
  The Slav Macedonian language is considered by most Slav Macedonians to be one of the most positive contributions to their separate status. The question of what language Slav Macedonians actually spoke prior to 1945 has caused disagreements among even the most disinterested linguists. The Slav Macedonian dialects made a gradual transition from Serbian north of Skopje to Bulgarian in Eastern Macedonia. Even those who claim that a separate Slav Macedonian language existed before 1945 admit that all these dialects have a very close affinity to Bulgarian.  The elements of distinction between the central Slav Macedonian group of dialects (i.e., the language spoken roughly within the region Prilep-Bitolj-Kicevo-Titov Veles) and western Bulgarian were noticeable but not significant. Bulgarian linguistic influence was strengthened by intense secular and religious propaganda in the past and by the fact that Bulgarian was the language used by the old Slav Macedonian nationalists. [5]
  
  THE AIMS OF THE POLITICAL ETHNO-MYTH
  
  Their first aim was to cut off every link between the so-called "Macedonians" and the Bulgarians, as a well as the Serbs, and to convince the people that they belonged to a separate Slavic nation, the "Macedonian" one. Therefore the history of the region, as well as the language, had to be "purged" of all Bulgarian and Serbian elements. All Bulgarian and Serbian historical data connected to that region - historical events, people, activities and intellectual work - were renamed "Macedonian"18, so that they could be incorporated into the new "Macedonian" history which was then being written, or, if they did not fit into the new historical frame work and guidelines, they were denounced as hostile.
  
  The second aim was to eliminate Greek character of Macedonia and Macedonian history; and this would be achieved by minimizing the Greek presence in this region and misinterpreting or falsifying their role, specifically the cultural and intellectual contribution of Hellenism, the orthodox Greek clergy and Greek schools.
  
  The third aim was to search for, fabricate and project the historical development of the so-called "Macedonian people", so as to prove the separate national identity of the "Macedonians", as well as their cohesion and continuity from ancient times until today. It should be noted that this attempt was the reverse of normal methods: that is, they studied modern history first and turned to the study of Antiquity later.
  
  The fourth aim was to create a Great Idea, which would bring awareness to the masses. So the historians of Skopje started declaring that Macedonia, as a whole, was a Slavic country both in its historical tradition and its ethnic composition. For this reason, it had to be united and form a unified state. After World War II, only the Yugoslavian part was re-established nationally within the framework of the Yugoslav Federation. The other two parts, Aegean Macedonia and Pirin Macedonia would have to be restored, i.e., to be united with Yugoslav Macedonia.[6]
  
  CONCLUSION
  
  This political ethno-myth of the Slav Macedonians called from many  obderver as Macedonism/pseudomacedonism/slavmacedonism.[7]Slavmacedonists and theirs supporters supporters have suggested many ways to revise the teaching of European history and science.[8] But if diversity does not apply to truth, then there are limits to academic freedom. That does not mean that we should try to keep people from knowing about erroneous theories or hypothetical possibilities, or from reading works like the Macedonians Slavs and the connection with the ancient Greek culture or the Slavic idiom that speak Greeks and Slavmavedonians is the same with the creation of the Slav Macedonian language that had as aim to de-Bulgarize the Slav Macedonians and create a separate national consciousness.[9]
  
  
  Notes
  
  
  [1]- A Macedonian according to several sources [www.merriam-webster.com] [www.thefreedictionary.com] [Oxford English Dictionary] is a native or inhabitant of the (Ancient or Modern) Macedonian region. Any usage diffrent from this that give from the dictionaries has political and ambiguous motives.
  
  [2]- Loring Danforth, The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World, page 56
  
  [3]- Henry Wilkinson, Maps And Politics: A Review Of The Ethnographic Cartography Of Macedonia ,  page 151
  
  [4]- Ulf Brunnbauer Serving the Nation: Historiography in the Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) After Socialism,  Page 168
  
  [5]- Yugoslav Communism and the Macedonian Question” by Stephen E. Palmer, Jr. robert r. king, 1971, page
  
  [6]- Maria Nystazopoulou - Pelekidou , The "Macedonian Question", [www.hri.org]
  
  [7]- Slav-Macedonism(also call as Macedonism and pseudo-Macedonism) is the political idea prevailing in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) which utilises historical revisionism to establish links between an ethnic group that formed in the 20th century - ethnic 'Macedonians' - and historical events and figures of the 19th century and Middle Ages. For example, Bulgarian Tsar Samuil, despite the overwhelming evidence, is portrayed as a "Macedonian" king. Further attempts are made to deny the Hellenic nature of the ancient kingdom of Macedon and to seek connections between present day ethnic Macedonians and the Ancient Macedonians. Unfortunately for extremist Macedonists , history bears witness to the fact that in the early 1940s the Bulgarian inhabitants of Vardar Macedonia were transformed into "Macedonians" for political reasons by communist dictators (Tito, Stalin, and Dimitrov) and infamous communist organizations (Comintern and the Balkan Communist Federation ).
  
  [8]- The ROSETTA STONE and the Tendov-Boshevski Controversy by Miltiades, Phoebos and Hephastion Bolaris.[ [ancient-medieval-macedonian-history.blogspot.com] ]
  
  [9]- Mary Lefkowich, History Lesson, a race odyssey, Yale University Press, 2008
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 21.01.2010
• 17:12

  Greek Citizenship Code reform

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  The newly elected socialist government of George Papandreou is planning a drastic reform to the Greek Citizenship Code, the law governing the modes of acquisition of Greek citizenship.
  
  The planned proposals would give Greek citizenship to:
  

  • children born in the country, as soon as one of their parents manages to stay legally in the country for five years, by declaration of their parents
    
  • children who attend the first three grades of grammar school, by their own declaration on their majority (18 years)
    
  • children who attend any six grades of school, by declaration of their parents
    
  • children born in Greece of one parent who was also born in Greece, ipso jure

  The reform would also far simplify the requirements for Greek citizenship by adults, abolishing the need to be "of good morals and personality", and to have "knowledge of Greek history and culture", and requiring only that the applicant be in Greece during any 5 of the last 10 years rather than the requirement for 10 years in effect now.
  
  While Greece currently ranks as one of the countries with one of the strictest nationality laws, the planned reforms have no parallel in Europe and will result in its adopting the.......
   loosest requirements in the Union.
  
  
  The repercussions of the reform
  
  There is widespread opposition to the reform, but the Greek constitution allows for a referendum to be carried out only on the initiative of the parliamentary majority, which is held by PASOK, the socialist party. Thus, it is expected that the governent initiative will pass and be enacted into law
  
  Due to its geographical position, Greece receives about 75% of all illegal third-country migrants into Europe. In the past it has legalized hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in a series of blanket amnesty decrees.
  
  Turkey does not honor a bilateral agreement with Greece to accept back illegal immigrants. Moreover, European Union regulations forbid the travel of illegal immigrants and asylum seekers from Greece to the rest of the Union. As a result, a large illegal immigrant population has accumulated in Greece.
  
  The government reform is likely to increase immigration pressure on Greece. Moreover, many newly naturalized Greek citizens are unlikely to remain in the country but will use European freedom of movement rules to settle elsewhere in Europe. The dire economic conditions prevalent in Greece are likely to exacerbate this problem.
  
  In essence, the Greek government is opening up a huge loophole into European Union immigration policy that may result in illegal immigrants using Greece to become legal and then proceed to their final destinations.
  
  The Greek government's policies are also likely to negatively affect Greek public finances as naturalized immigrants, who are mostly employed in low-paid work, will have access to welfare benefits currently reserved to Greek citizens. The repercussions for the stability of the Euro zone are unknown.
  
  
  What must be done
  
  Citizenship law is decided by EU member countries.
  
  However, Greece's newly adopted policies may jeopardize EU immigration policy by creating a "back door" into Europe. It may also jeopardize the stability of the Euro zone by putting a new burden in the already troublesome Greek public finances.
  
  
  It is imperative for EU citizens and other EU governments to ask Greece for an assessment of the effects its citizenship policies will have on the rest of the Union.
  
  
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  
  Αντιπροσωπεία της Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής στην Ελλάδα comm-rep-athens@ec.europa.eu
  
  
  1.Πρεσβεία Αυστρίας athen-ob@bmeia.gv.at
  2.Πρεσβεία Βελγίου Athens@diplobel.fed.be
  3.Πρεσβεία Βουλγαρίας embassbg@otenet.gr
  4.Πρεσβεία Γαλλίας info@ambafrance-gr.org
  5.Πρεσβεία Γερμανίας german-embassy@otenet.gr
  6.Πρεσβεία Δανίας athamb@um.dk
  7.Πρεσβεία Εσθονίας embassy.athens@mfa.ee
  8.Πρεσβεία Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου information.athens@fco.gov.uk
  9.Πρεσβεία Ιρλανδίας athensembassy@dfa.ie
  10.Πρεσβεία Ισπανίας emb-esp@otenet.gr
  11.Πρεσβεία Ιταλίας ambasciata.atene@esteri.it
  12.Πρεσβεία Κύπρου cyemb4@otenet.gr
  13.Πρεσβεία Λετονίας embassy.greece@mfa.gov.lv
  14.Πρεσβεία Λιθουανίας info@ltambasada.gr
  15.Πρεσβεία Λουξεμβούργου athenes.amb@mae.etat.lu
  16.Πρεσβεία Μάλτας maltaembassy.athens@gov.mt
  17.Πρεσβεία Ολλανδίας ath@minbuza.nl
  18.Πρεσβεία Ουγγαρίας huembath@mail.otenet.gr
  19.Πρεσβεία Πολωνίας ateny.amb.wk@msz.gov.pl, ambpol@otenet.gr
  20.Πρεσβεία Πορτογαλίας embportg@otenet.gr
  21.Πρεσβεία Ρουμανίας secretariat@romaniaemb.gr
  22.Πρεσβεία Σλοβακίας embassy@athens.mfa.sk
  23.Πρεσβεία Σλοβενίας vat@gov.si
  24.Πρεσβεία Σουηδίας ambassaden.athen@foreign.ministry.se
  25.Πρεσβεία Τσεχίας athens@embassy.mzv.cz
  26.Πρεσβεία Φινλανδίας sanomat.ate@formin.fi
  Ένωση Ανταποκριτών Ξένου Τύπου (ΕΑΞΤ) fpa@fpa.gr
  
  Mailing list:
  comm-rep-athens@ec.europa.eu, athen-ob@bmeia.gv.at, Athens@diplobel.fed.be, embassbg@otenet.gr, info@ambafrance-gr.org, german-embassy@otenet.gr, athamb@um.dk, embassy.athens@mfa.ee, information.athens@fco.gov.uk, athensembassy@dfa.ie, emb-esp@otenet.gr, ambasciata.atene@esteri.it, cyemb4@otenet.gr, embassy.greece@mfa.gov.lv, info@ltambasada.gr, athenes.amb@mae.etat.lu, maltaembassy.athens@gov.mt, ath@minbuza.nl, huembath@mail.otenet.gr, ateny.amb.wk@msz.gov.pl, ambpol@otenet.gr, embportg@otenet.gr, secretariat@romaniaemb.gr, embassy@athens.mfa.sk, vat@gov.si, ambassaden.athen@foreign.ministry.se, athens@embassy.mzv.cz, sanomat.ate@formin.fi, fpa@fpa.gr
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 20.01.2010
• 10:37

  Athens response to fYRoM suit

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  (ANA-MPA) -- Greece on Tuesday filed its obligatory counter-memorial at the Hague-based International Court of Justice (ICJ) in relation to a suit brought by the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (fYRoM) over the 1995 "interim agreement" between Athens and the one-time Yugoslav province.
  
  The counter-memorial was filed by Greece's agents at the proceedings, Amb. Georgios Savvaidis, foreign ministry legal counsel Maria Telalian and a team of ministry diplomats and legal experts assigned the case.
  
  The counter-memorial lists, in detail and with accompanying documentation, Greece's legal arguments vis-?-vis the case, according to a foreign ministry press release on Tuesday. The ministry added that Greece's written response categorically rejects all of fYRoM's arguments, presenting legal, political and historical counter-arguments and points of reference.
  
  Athens had been given a Jan. 20 deadline to file its counter-memorial, whereas fYRoM had filed its memorial by last July.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 19.01.2010
• 19:03

  Recent Real Historical Tragedy - The Albanian Encyclopedia

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  ">[www.setimes.com] [www.setimes.com] />
  January 14, 2010
  
  Recently, Mr. Nijazi Muhamedi (President of the editorial board of the new 'fictional' Albanian Encyclopedia) stated: "The ancient warrior king Alexander the Great, was neither Greek, nor Macedonian, but Albanian" [www.balkaninsight.com] His book 'Albanian Macedonia', was launched in Tetovo, in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) this week. Mr. Muhamedi said that he was not motivated nor supported by politicians, and that his approach was strictly scientific. How can such an approach be scientific, when historical evidence is well-known and clearly states otherwise?
  
  The 'myth' stated by Mr. Muhamedi has been systemically produced from known Albanian centres that promote historical revisionism and extreme nationalism in the Balkans. Albanians are not universally acknowledged as the descendants of the Illyrians, as their origins are disputed by historians worldwide. This is confirmed from several studies and works such as ´Illyrians´ by John Wilkes; several works from an expert in Albanian history, Miranda Vickers; 'Albanian identities: myth and history' by Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers and Bernd Jürgen Fischer, and collective works from around the world such as the ancient, modern and medieval history from Cambridge and Oxford Universities.
  
  Muhamedi's arguments are quite similar to the arguments raised in the similarly 'fictional' FYROM encyclopedia. Both encyclopedias lack historical merit, and attempt to change the reality that Alexander the Great was of Greek origin. This fact is supported by ......
  most of the world's 'serious' historians, including Prof. Robin Lane Fox (Oxford University) and Prof. Paul Cartledge (Cambridge University), as well as thousands of historical works from many other historians such as Prof. Nicholas G.L. Hammond, Prof. Ian Worthington, Prof. A.B. Bosworth, Dr. Richard Stoneman, Dr. Ulrich Wilcken etc. They have all agreed that Alexander the Great was born in July 356 (Arr. 7.28.1, Plut. Alex. 3.5), was the son of Macedonian Philip´s fourth wife Olympias (daughter of Neoptolemus I, king of the Molossians, a principal Greek tribe in Epirus) (Nicholas G. L. Hammond, 'Philip of Macedon' Duckworth Publishing, February 1998). Olympias, was originally named 'Polyxena', as Plutarch mentions in his work 'Moralia', and changed her name to 'Myrtale' prior to her marriage to Philip II of Macedon, as part of her initiation to an unknown mystery cult ('Olympias, Mother of Alexander the Great' By Elizabeth Carney, New York and London: Routledge, 2006). The name 'Olympias' was the third of four names by which she was known by, taking it probably as a recognition of Philip's victory in the Olympic Games of 356 BC, which coincided with Alexander's birth (Heckel 2006, p. 181).
  
  None of the historians aforementioned describe Alexander as Illyrian, and even more inaccurately - Albanian. A recent petition named Macedonia evidence, has been signed by 357 classical scholars (historians, archaeologists) who support the ´Greekness´ of the ancient Macedonians. Historians from all around the world have made it their duty to preserve the historic truth on Ancient Macedonia ( [www.macedonia-evidence.org] ).
  
  There is an Illyrian myth (now also found in the recent 'Albanian Macedonia' encyclopedia), with which Albanian culture has been flirting with for at least 150 years. There is also a very tentative Illyrian science, based mainly on archaeology, and on some data transmitted by Ancient Greek and Roman Historians. Historians who are ready to accept that Illyrians and Albanians were one people must analyze the Messapic inscriptions, in Puglia. These inscriptions show that the Illyrian question is an extremely complicated one, and that it isn't likely to be resolved anytime soon, unless fundamental epigraphic discoveries are made.
   
  In the real world there are no examples of ancient Illyrian literature surviving (aside from the Messapian writings - and if they can even be considered Illyrian), it is difficult to clarify its place within the Indo-European language family. Albanians first appear in historical records in Byzantine sources in 'History' written in 1079-1080, by Byzantine historian Michael Attaliates. Very little evidence of pre-Christian Albanian culture survives, and Albanian mythology and folklore as it presents itself through the work of Mr. Muhamedi (in this case) is notoriously amalgamated.
   
  One must wonder how certain Albanian scholars can suggest ancient Epirus (a north western Greek state of Doric origin) be conveniently passed as ancient Illyrian at all, let alone Albanian? In the earlier Greek period, Illyrians lived north of River Skubi and by the Classical Greek period, they had migrated southwards near North Epirus; only during the Roman period did they live in the same areas in which the Greek Molossians used to live.
  
  As recorded by Arrian, Alexander himself is clearly distinguishes himself (a Greek) from Illyrian foreigners: "Our enemies are Medes and Persians, men who for centuries have lived soft and luxurious lives; we of Macedon for generations past have been trained in the hard school of danger and war. Above all, we are free men, and they are slaves. There are Greek troops, to be sure, in Persian service — but how different is their cause from ours! They will be fighting for pay — and not much at that; we, on the contrary, shall fight for Greece, and our hearts will be in it. As for our foreign troops — Thracians, Paeonians, Illyrians, Agrianes — they are the best and stoutest soldiers in Europe, and they will find as their opponents the slackest and softest of the tribes of Asia. And what, finally, of the two men in supreme command? You have Alexander, they — Darius!" (Addressing his troops prior to the Battle of Issus, as quoted in Anabasis Alexandri by Arrian Book II, 7)
  
  There isn´t much difference between historical revisionism and historical ignorance; and this concludes to the legitimate scholastic correction of existing knowledge about an historical event, or to the illegitimate distortion of historical records. This is why national encyclopedias such as the FYROM [www.focus-fen.net] and now Albanian [www.balkaninsight.com] encyclopedias do nothing more but ignite ethnic tension [rt.com] in an already volatile region, and have no place in a progressive Balkan region with a European vision.
  
  Australian Macedonian Advisory Council (AMAC)
  info@macedonian.com.au
  [www.macedonian.com.au]
  
  References:
  David Noel Freedman, 'The Anchor Bible Dictionary' Doubleday, 1992, pg 1093
  Charles Edson 'Ancient Macedonian Studies in honor of Charles F. Edson' London, 1981, pgs 27-71
  Robert Morkot, 'The Penguin Historical Atlas of Ancient Greece' Penguin Publishing USA, January 1997
  Nicholas G. L. Hammond, 'The Macedonian State: The Origins, Institutions and History'
  Oxford University Press, Reprint Edition, July 1997; 4. The Language of the Macedonians, pgs 413, pgs12-14
  A.B. Bosworth, 'Conquest and Empire: The Reign of Alexander the Great' Cambridge University Press, Reissue Edition, March 1993
  Arrian, Anabasis Alexandri, Book II, 7
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 12:38

  Macedonians from Xino Nero-FLORINA

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  by Makedonas82
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 02.01.2010
• 00:20

  Slav Macedonian autonomists in the Greek civil war

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  By John Koliopoulos and Thanos Veremis
  
  Another aspect ofthe civil conflict, underestimated m left-wing revisionist studies, was the role of the Greek Slav Macedonian autonomists in  both the outbreak and general direction ofthat war. The KKE and EAM journals referred to them as 'persecuted Slav Macedonian ELAS fighters', while Greek Slav Macedonians called themselves 'Makedontsi'  the name used at the time in the People's Republic of Macedonia to identify those belonging to the new nation. As already seen they had served, in quick succession and even simultaneously, more than one master and cause until the time when Tito gave them a new Identity and a new cause to fight for. These Makedontsi began intruding in the sprmg of 1945 into the Greek frontier highlands in small bands to avenge past or current wrongs. Their numbers increased as more and more Slav Macedonians were prosecuted in Greece, nominally for collaboration with the Axis occupying forces but in essence for having eventually opted for the KKE or the People's Republic of Macedonia. Of some 8,000 Slav Macedonians estimated to have crossed between 1944 and 1945 Into the Republic The Makedontsi raiders perhaps did not exceed 1,000. Later, in 1947 the Yugoslav government maintained that as many as 24.000 Slav Macedomans from Greece had sought refuge in Yugoslavia in the post-Varkiza period. but this number almost certainly included Slav Macedonians who had fled before the December 1944 rebellion.
  
  Of these initial Makedontsi raiders, whom the KKE party journals represented as being 'persecuted ELAS fighters', perhaps not more than one-third had really served with ELAS. They had generally led a precarious existence in refugee camps which the government of the People's Republic of Macedonia had set up for the purpose. Their leaders men like Paschalls Mitropoulos, Mlichael Keramitzis and Naum Peios  were doing odd jobs for the government of the Republic, and most of them were members of the KKE and at the same time of the Republic's ruling Communist Party. These refugee raiders projected Macedonianism among Greece's Slav Macedoians and heralded the imprudent 'liberation' of 'Egqska Makedonza' (Macedonia of the Aegean), I.e. Greek Macedonia. It soon became clear that avenging past or current wrongs was not their ...
  ... primary objective; what these Makedontst really did was promote the People's Republic of Macedonia as the only hope for Greece's Slav Macedonians. The motive behind these raids was to make the Republic attractive to them and, strange as it may seem to facilitate their crossIng over into It. Right-Wing reprisals for such raids achieved exactly that end by driving an increasing number of otherwise peaceful and reluctant peasants across the frontier.
  
  There is  no officIal evidence from the Republic's government to suggest that attracting as many as possible of Greece's Slav Macedonians over to the Republic was indeed official policy. Their presence there as refugees was no doubt a powerful propaganda asset for the Communist regime in the campaign to win support for its national aim to 'liberate' Greek Macedonia. However, one would think that their value as 'persecuted brethren' was not negligible. Moreover, although the departure of Greece's Slav Macedonians was a short-term propaganda asset in the Republic's war of words with Greece, it was self-defeating in the long run because It amounted to an irredentist claim on a Greek Macedonia depleted of its Makedontsi. Those who undoubtedly wished to attract them over to the Republic to serve their own political ends were their leaders, who needed a political clientele of their own.
  
  Whatever were the motives and objectives of those who were behind the Makedontsi raids in northern Greece, the impact of these raids on the situation in the country was calamitous. In addition to being blamed by the government for fomenting band warfare, the KKE was charged with conspiring with a foreign power to cede Greek territory. As mentioned elsewhere, the KKE had distanced itself in 1935, with Commitern encouragement, from the interwar policy for the establishment ofa 'united and independent Macedonia', and had adopted instead a policy which favoured the equal treatment of minorities'. This was still the official policy of the KKE. The projection of Macedonianism from across the frontier, however, put the party in an unenviable position. Reiteration of this policy did not silence criticism, because it satisfied no one. The Makedontsi of Greece had been, or continued to be, members of the KKE and, like the resistance heroes, they held the party hostage. The KKE resented Makedontsi propaganda in Greek Macedonia, but was never able to put an end to it, partly because Makedontst propagandists had the full backing of the Republic's ruling Communist regime, and also because Makedontsi rebel numbers increased as band warfare Intensified in the northern Greek provinces.
  
  In the autumn of 1946 the KKE leadership made an effort to control Makedontsi activities in Greek Macedonia and succeeded in persuading their leaders to place these activities m the Slav-speaking villages of Mt Bernon (Vitsi) under a unified rebel command. The KKE leaders used on tlus occasion the services of one of its ablest commander’s m the region, George Giannoulis, whom they were to execute two years later for losing an important battle on Mt Grammos. The agreement provided for unhindered co-operation and Joint operations of the bands on the two adjacent border mountains, but it remained a dead letter until the rebel army moved Its headquarters into the Makedontsi preserve, in the autumn of1948, and placed their activities under its command. But by then the KKE leaders depended on their hosts for practically all their needs, particularly the need for reserves. In early 1949 the Makedontsi made up more than half of the rebel army, a fact which explains their final exodus following the defeat ofthe rebel army in August the same year.
  
  * Abstract from the book “Greece: The Modern Sequel”. Hurst publications, Pages 87-89.
  
  
  FOR FAIR USE ONLY
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 31.12.2009
• 18:28

  Happy New Year.!!!

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 24.12.2009
• 20:32

  Merry Christmas

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 21.12.2009
• 18:41

  YOUNG TURK REVOLT*

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  by  LS. Stavrianos**
  
  Abdul Hamid became the autocratic ruler of the Ottoman Empire following his dismissal of the first Turkish parliament in 1877. At first he was generally praised for being industrious and sober in contrast to many of his predecessors. This favorable attitude gradually changed with the Armenian massacres of the 1890's and the chronic anarchy and bloodshed in Macedonia. By the turn of the century Abdul Hamid had become "Abdul the Damned" and the "Great Assassin." Whether villain or hero, Abdul Hamid was the master of the Ottoman Empire for three decades.
  
  In his relations with the great powers Abdul Hamid's policy was simply divide and rule, or more accurately, divide and survive. He acquired a reputa tion as a consummate diplomat in pursuing this policy, though it is doubtful that much skill was required to persuade the British to oppose Russian ambitions in the Near East. In domestic affairs Abdul Hamid strove to safeguard his absolutist rule against the disruptive forces of nationalism and constitutionalism. To this end he discouraged travel and study abroad, maintained a great army of informers, and enforced a strict censorship of the press.
  
  Three trouble spots in the empire gave Abdul Hamid the most trouble. One was Armenia, where a nationalist awakening similar to that of the Balkan peoples manifested itself in the second half of the nineteenth century. Another was the island of Crete, where the predominantly Christian Greek population took up arms on every promising occasion in order to attain their cherished enosis, or union with Mother Greece. The third area of trouble was Macedonia, the.......
  ..... tinder box of the Balkans, to which Greeks, Serbians and Bulgarians laid claim. In the end Abdul Hamid was overthrown not by Armenian or Greek or Macedonian revolutionaries, but rather by his own Turkish subjects. And the successful revolutionaries were not the Young Turks in exile who had at¬tracted international attention as the opponents of the sultan, but rather a completely unknown group of conspirators within the empire.
  
  We noted in Chapter 20 that from the time of the reign of Abdul Aziz in the 1860's critics of the Ottoman dynasty fled abroad, where they continued their defiance and where they came to be known collectively as the Young Turks. Their numbers increased markedly during the decades of Abdul Hamid's autocracy. Not only discontented Turks, but also revolutionary leaders of the subject peoples, Moslem as well as Christian, sought refuge in foreign capitals and especially in Paris. All these Ottoman exiles—Turks, Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, Albanians, Kurds, and Jews—held a congress in Paris in February, 1902, with the aim of organizing a common front against Abdul Hamid. But they quickly discovered that they agreed on nothing except that they all disliked the sultan. One group, led by a veteran Young Turk, Ahmet Riza, stood for Turkish predominance and centralized rule, while another group led by one of Abdul Hamid's relatives, Prince Sabaheddin, favored a decentralized empire in which the subject people should have full autonomy.
  
  While the exiled intellectuals were quarreling in Paris, Turkish army officers were taking decisive measures in Saloniki. One of the earliest leaders of these army officers was Mustafa Kemal, who was to win lasting fame after World War I as the founder of the Turkish Republic. In 1905 Kemal organ¬ized in Damascus the secret military society, Vatan, or Fatherland. This was later absorbed by another secret military organization, the Ottoman Society of Liberty, with headquarters in Saloniki. This organization spread throughout the empire very rapidly. Army officers were the backbone of the Society of Liberty, though they were greatly aided by other groups, and particularly by the Jews, who were the most numerous and wealthy element in Saloniki.
  
  The Society of Liberty was organized into cells of five so that no one knew more than four fellow members. A new recruit had to be sponsored by a regular member and was observed closely during a probationary period. For the purpose of communication each cell contained a "guide" who received the orders of the top central committee from the "guide" of another cell, and who was required to pass on the orders without delay. The activities of the Society have been described as follows:This account brings out the glaring contrast between the rootless intel¬lectuals arguing with each other in Paris and the practical revolutionaries quietly building up their underground organization within the empire. The latter group staged its revolt in July, 1908, partly because the sultan's agents were beginning to penetrate its organization and also because the powers were openly considering intervention in Macedonia. The British foreign minister, Sir Edward Grey, proposed in March, 1908, an autonomous regime for Macedonia. A little later it was announced that the British and Russian monarchs would meet at Reval on June 10 to discuss reforms for Macedonia. The Saloniki conspirators, fearing that the end result would be Ottoman partition, decided to act at once.
  

  To meet the expenses each member was compelled to contribute a fixed percentage of his income to the Committee chest, while rich members, in addi¬tion to this tax, made generous donations when funds were required. Arms and ammunition were secretly purchased. A considerable sum was set apart annually to provide for the families of members who lost life or liberty while working for the cause. Their several duties were apportioned to the members. There were the messengers who, disguised in various ways, went to and fro over the Empire carrying verbal reports and instructions. . . . There were the men who had to assassinate those whom the Committee had condemned to death—Government officials who were working against the movement with a dangerous zeal, and Palace spies who were getting on the scent. Other members were sent out to act as spies in the interest of the cause, and the contre espionage became at last so thorough that it baffled the espionage of the Palace. . . . The first and most im¬portant task . . . was, of course, that of bringing round to the cause the Macedo¬nian garrison—the Third Army Corps. ... By degrees a number of the young officers were affiliated and received instructions to win over the rank and file. . . . At last the whole Macedonian army was won over to the cause of the Young Turks. . .
  

  
  
  Events now moved quickly and according to plan. The Saloniki group telegraphed an ultimatum to the sultan threatening to march upon Constanti¬nople unless the 1876 constitution was restored within twenty-four hours. The Third Army Corps solidly backed its revolutionary leaders. In Constantinople the State Council advised Abdul Hamid to comply with the ultimatum. Also, the Sheik-ul-Islam refused to issue a fetva authorizing suppression of the rebels. On July 24 Abdul Hamid proclaimed the restoration of the constitution.
  
  The news of the sultan's capitulation was greeted with wild rejoicing. The long reign of repression was at an end. Christians and Turks embraced one another in the streets. The Young Turk leader, Enver Pasha, exclaimed: "There are no longer Bulgars, Greeks, Rumans, Jews, Mussulmans. We are all brothers beneath the same blue sky. We are all equal, we glory in being Otto¬man." 9 This euphoric atmosphere did not last long. The issues that had divided the exiles in Paris now had to be faced as urgent issues of policy rather than differences in theory. Three political groupings began to emerge at this point.
  
  The dominant one comprised the Saloniki leaders, now popularly known as the Young Turks. In general they adopted the position supported by Riza in Paris. They were ready to grant political representation and religious freedom to all peoples of the empire. But in return they required that these peoples should support the imperial structure and accept Turkish predominance. They frequently stated that they wished all citizens of the empire to become Ottomans in the same manner that all citizens of France were Frenchmen. But this analogy was unrealistic. It failed to take into account the very different historical background and ethnic composition of Western Europe and the Near East. Genuine Ottoman nationality might have existed by the twentieth century if during the preceding centuries the Turks had not administered their empire on the millet principle, and if, instead, they had coerced their subject peoples into becoming Moslems. But they had not taken these measures, and as a result their empire remained from beginning to end an aggregate of self-governing communities. Now it was too late to attempt to fuse them into a homogeneous nation. Nationalist sentiment already had made each one of these communities self-conscious and desirous of an independent existence. The Young Turk pro¬gram was adopted at least a century too late to have had any hope of success.
  
  The second political group that existed at this time was the Liberal Union headed by Prince Sabaheddin. This organization did not agree that centralization and Turkish hegemony were necessary to preserve the empire. Instead, it held that only through local autonomy and full development of communal life could the empire retain the support of its peoples and thus survive. There is no way of knowing whether this proposition was sound because it was never put into practice. It is worth recalling, however, that in the hectic early days of the revolution many Greeks in Smyrna unfurled the blue-and-white flag of the Hellenic Kingdom rather than the star and crescent of their own empire. In any case, the Liberal Unionists never had a chance to assume office. Many Turks suspected them because of the strong backing they received from the Greeks and other nationalities. More important was the military power which the Young Turks commanded and which Sabaheddin and his followers lacked completely. Thus the Liberal Union was condemned to the role of an impotent opposition party.
  
  The third political group was the League of Mohammed. It professed to support the constitution but was most vocal in demanding strict enforcement of the Sheri, or Sacred Law. It opposed the Saloniki Young Turks, claiming that their leaders were Jews, freethinkers, or Westernized Turks who did not observe the precepts of the Koran and who set a bad example with their irreligious ways. This argument was effective with the devout Moslem population, as the brief counterrevolution of 1909 was to demonstrate dramatically.
  
  On April 12, 1909, a counterrevolution in Constantinople broke the hold of the Young Turks from Saloniki and left the capital in the hands of con¬servative Moslem forces. The Saloniki leaders immediately assumed that Abdul Hamid was behind the counterrevolution. Acting on this assumption they de¬posed him later in the year when they regained power. But conclusive proof that the sultan inspired the counterrevolution is lacking. In fact, circumstantial evidence suggests that he was not involved. He remained passive throughout the struggle and made no attempt to guide the unorganized and leaderless rebels. In any case, the Young Turks gathered their forces in Macedonia, marched upon the capital, captured it after only a few hours' fighting, and then compelled Abdul Hamid to abdicate on April 27. The new sultan, Mohammed V, had spent his entire life in strict palace confinement and, according to his own account, had not been allowed to read a newspaper for ten years. The Young Turks therefore expected him to be a compliant figurehead, but to make doubly certain they revised the constitution in August, 1909. The sultan henceforth was to name the grand vizir, who in turn selected the other ministers. Also, the sultan was deprived of the power to dissolve parliament and the cabinet was made responsible to the parliament rather than to the sultan.
  
  The Young Turks now were the unchallenged masters of the empire. With the exception of a few months they remained masters until World War I. All opposition having been crushed, they proceeded with their policy of centralization and Turkish hegemony. But the more they persisted in this policy the more opposition they created. Neither Turkish nationalism nor Ottoman nationalism could exorcise the inexorable awakening of Albanians, Arabs, Greeks, Bulgarians, and other subject peoples. Thus the result was a vicious circle of repression and resistance. Young Turk nationalism, as noted in the previous chapter, was responsible for the Albanian revolt of 1910. And, of more concern at this point, is the fact that the Young Turk revolt affected Balkan diplomatic development in two respects: it encouraged the Austrian and Russian foreign ministers to fish in the troubled Balkan waters, thereby precipitating the grave Bosnian crisis; and it stimulated the Balkan countries to form the Balkan League and, at long last, to drive the Turks almost completely out of Europe.
  
  *Abstract from the book "The Balkans Since 1453", pages 524-528
  **For fair use only.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 15.12.2009
• 13:57

  Macedonian identity is part of the identity of every single Greek citizen and we will not negotiate on that

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  ">[www.newstime.gr] [www.newstime.gr] />
  .......Greek Deputy Foreign Minister Dimitris Droutsas said in an interview at "Proto Thema" newspaper.
  
  Also Mr Droutsas points out that official Athens insists on negotiations only on the name and thinks that it is a mistake to add issues connected only to the language and identity in the negotiations as the Macedonian identity belongs to every single Greek citizen.
  
  Greece will require amendments to the Constitution of formeR Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia(FYROM) so as to realize the formula for a common name for international use. This is the position expressed by Droutsas, who as if covered the Greek red line with concrete.
  
  UN mediator Matthew Nimetz shouldn’t have added the rest of the issues in this proposal in 2005 but the worse thing was that the previous Greek government of PM Kostas Karamanlis agreed to discuss them, Droutsas remarked.
  
  Whole interview in this link.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 09.12.2009
• 18:30

  FYROM President insults EU's vision

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  ">[newsimg.bbc.co.uk] [newsimg.bbc.co.uk] />
  Australian Macedonian Advisory Council
  December 9
  
  The Australian Macedonian Advisory Council (AMAC) is appalled by the latest statements made from FYROM´s President Gjorge Ivanov. According to MINA news, President Ivanov controversially stated "We will not cave under any pressure to change our name or identity just to be a part of the European Union. We've lived this (hi)story many times before, not again. Whatever the outcome of the talks in Brussels, Macedonia (FYROM) will stay right here" threatening to remain outside the EU as the ´Republic of Macedonia´.
  
  Ivanov continues: "Europe unfortunately still has leaders who allow to be carried away by someone's petty interests and hidden agenda.. We see the absence of vision at the EU". These statements have revealed FYROM´s ongoing disregard for reaching a compromise to the name dispute with Greece, that has disallowed it entry into the EU and NATO.
  
  AMAC hopes FYROM will change its current hardline policy, and not continue to insult the European Union and its member states, but instead to tackle the real issue at hand.
  
  Australian Macedonian Advisory Council (AMAC)
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 08.12.2009
• 16:15

  Greece Blocks EU Bid to Set Date for FYROM Entry Talks

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  Greece blocked a proposal to set a date for the formet Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to start talks to join the European Union, saying the country’s name implies a territorial claim on a Greek province of the same name. EU governments “will return to the matter” in the first half of 2010, foreign ministers said in a statement in Brussels today.
  
  naftemporiki.gr
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 04.12.2009
• 19:20

  Handbooks from the archives of the British Foreign Office-1920

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  "Makedontsi" not included in the list of Macedonian ethnicities:
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Look who introduced the moto "Macedonia for the Macedonians" and for what purpose.Also notice why the Bulgarian government was forced to persecute VMRO and arrest its prominent members.The British Foreign Office is certainly a more reliable source than any Scopian dedo.
  
  
  
  
  Compare this article of the London Times from April 14,1901 which confirms what the British Foreign Office wrote:
  When Sarafov and other members of VMRO were arrested in Sofia,the Commitee placarded in the streets the following appeal: "Fellow citizens,the Bulgarian national cause has been attacked"
  
  by Kapetan Doukas
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 00:23

  Intimidating Greek bloggers, covering insults against Greek politicians

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  May 11, 2009. “Forum” magazine publishes online an open letter to the then Prime Minister of Greece, Mr. Costas Karamanlis, authored by Mr. Milan Adzievski. The next day, an english translation is provided by “MINA” news agency.
  

  Hello Black Manlis,
  This is how your last name in the Macedonian language translates.
  Let me ask You, even though I know my questions wont reach your ears: With what right do you insist of being Macedonian, when in your Turko-Greek language you are Karamanlis?
  If you start digging a little bit in your roots, there is a great possibility of meeting a Turk who perhaps out of love, though more likely forced himself on your grandma or great-grandma, as it is usually done by occupational armies.
  Have you ever wondered why you have KARA as your starting prefix?
  Say hello to your Turkish compatriot Karajaferis, and ask him the very same question I asked You.
  How do you ask for monopoly on history? No one is allowed to look back in history, apart from You, and your “Greeks”.
  Will you ever be able to find some strength and dignity and admit that the prehistoric citizens of Athens, Sparta … referred to the Macedonians as barbarians?
  With your quenching thirst today to all of a sudden become Macedonian, aren’t you jumping in your own deathtrap: that you are barbarian.
  How else to describe, or explain the efforts of the Greek Government to destroy the Macedonians, their villages, cities, language, rivers, homes, names, graves… unless it is a barbaric move?
  In the history books, only the barbarians committed such heinous crimes and unpunished (yet) methods of genocide.
  But that was then when civilian criterias weren’t at satisfactory levels, or maybe I am wrong, I am awaiting your answer.
  Are today’s barbarians wearing white shirts and ties instead of skins from killed animals?
  If you know the answer, write to Milan.adzievski@forum.com.mk
  PS: Do you know who was Arhimed? He ran naked through out Athens yelling “Eureka” because he found out that every body submerged in water, pushes out as much water as the volume of the body.
  In your greek case, this law would be: Every fascist move submerged in nationalism, pushes out as much stupidity as the volume of the fascist.
  What is your weight, Black Manlis?
  

  May 13, 2009. “Ta xalia” (pronounced “ta halia”, meaning “the mess”), a greek blog from Thessaloniki, Macedonia, addresses the matter. “Costas Karamanlis, you’re a barbarian Turk, because a Turk soldier raped your grandmother”, says the post title. “Who says these bullshit?”, protests the angered editor.
  
  An hour later, the blog returns with a new post, titled.......
  ....... “Milan Adzievski, you are ******s (a very greek word)!“. “******s” means “******” and the post contains a photo of Mr. Adzievski and his contact details (address, telephone numbers, e-mail).
  
  Fast forward half a year later. Today, the Macedonian bloggers reveal that the “Directorate for Personal Data Protection – Republic of Macedonia” (DPDP), asks for the deletion of posts related to Mr. Adzievski. This caused the outrage of the greek blogosphere and many people rushed to offer advice and express their sympathy.
  But the question remains. Is DPDP right, acting to protect Mr. Adzievski’s interests?
  
  Quoting from DPDP’s website, “Directorate for Personal Data Protection is an independent state authority with status of legal entity and is entitled to perform supervision over the legality of the processing of personal data and their protection, on the territory of Republic of Macedonia“.
  
  “Ta xalia” is hosted on Blogger.com and its terms of service are “governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without giving effect to its conflict of laws provisions or your actual state or country of residence“.
  
  The Macedonian bloggers wrote that Mr. Adzievski’s insults against Mr. Karamanlis, were “bullshit” and that he is a “******”. “Ta xalia” did not act unprovoked and such strong language is common in media governed by US laws, in a country where freedom of speech is of outmost importance.
  
  Regarding Mr. Adzievski’s photo and contact details, “Ta xalia” just republished what is already availabe online. A Google image search returns several photos of Mr. Adzievski. As an example, this is an opinion article by him, calling for disobedience to Albanian calls for equal rights in his country, where his photo is prominent. As for his address and telephone numbers, they are already published in the “House of Immigrants of Macedonia” website.
  
  Concluding, “Ta xalia” republished what is already available online (and quite possibly, submitted by Mr. Adzievski himself) and used strong language to react to his insults against the then Prime Minister of Greece, Mr. Karamanlis. DPDP’s actions have no legal ground; no personal data laws were violated and they cannot act beyond their jurisdiction.
  
  The real test for DPDP will be to stop giving the impression that they’re trying to intimidate the Macedonian bloggers, using their weight as a state authority against them, while hopelessly trying to defend their compatriot.
  
  We can’t help but wonder: does Mr. Gjorgje Ivanov know about this? As Head of the State in DPDP’s jurisdiction, he should – and it would be interesting to know his position for the insults directed against the former Greek Prime Minister.
  
  
  ~~~
  
  
  Adzievski’s letter – original
  
  
  
  Adzievski’s letter – translation
  
  
  
  Adzievski’s photo
  
  
  
  Adzievski’s contact details
  
  
  [history-of-macedonia.com]
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 03.12.2009
• 09:40

  Krste Crvenkovski : we were Bulgarians until 1940

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  Krste Crvenkovski (President of the Central Committee of the Union of Communists in the Socialist Republic of Macedonia) to Todor Zhivkov (First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Bulgaria) – May 19, 1967 said:
  
  “And whether bulgarian consciousness exists in Macedonia, this is a historical legacy. We’re now writing our history. We can’t write that until 1940 we were Bulgarians and after 1940 Macedonians.”
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 02.12.2009
• 03:28

  Pr Loring Danforth: Macedonians(of the FYROM) are not descendants of the ancient Macedonians; they are Slavs.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  An intresting comment took place from Pr. Loring Danforth regarding the ethicity of the Slavmacedonians  at the history-of-macedonia.com
  Here is the abstract:
  

  I have always stated, and I repeat here, that modern Macedonians (people who have a Macedonian and not a Greek national identity) are not descendants of the ancient Macedonians; they are Slavs. This means that they speak a Slavic language. Similarly Greeks are Indo-Europeans, since they speak an Indo-European language. This does not mean that Macedonians should be called Slav Macedonians, any more than Russians should be called Slav Russians or Greeks should be called Indo-European Greeks. In my opinion, Macedonian nationalists who deny they are Slavs and claim they are direct descendants of Alexander the Great and the ancient Macedonians are extremists. They are making inaccurate statements that are bad scholarship and bad politics. Building a statue of Alexander the Great in Skopje and naming the Skopje airport after Alexander the Great are in my opinion irresponsible acts that are not in the best interests of the Republic of Macedonia.
  
  
  I have also consistently stated that people who have a Greek national identity and a Macedonian ethnic or regional identity as Macedonians also have every right to identify themselves as Macedonians. In my opinion no one has the right to monopolize the term “Macedonians” and deny others the right to identify themselves as Macedonians. References to “occupied” portions of Macedonia are also extremely irresponsible and inappropriate. I support the human rights of the Macedonian minority in Greece, as I do the rights of the Greek minority in Turkey, and the Albanian minority in the Republic of Macedonia.
  

  My remark goes to the...regional identity as Pr Danforth quoted. There is not any kind of regional identity. There are two kinds of identity: .......
  ...National and Cultural.
  
  A Macedonian according to several sources [www.merriam-webster.com] is a native or inhabitant of the (Ancient or Modern) Macedonian region. Any usage diffrent from this that give from the dictionaries has political and ambiguous motives.The use of the Macedonian name as a state (or to name a ethnic group) appellation in no way confers the right to appropriate everything and anything derived from or pertained to the entire region of Macedonia. This needs to be legally clarified and remain binding erga omnes. The state name needs specifically to refer to and describe the present region of FYROM. It should apply erga omnes in multilateral and bilateral international relations and transactions and should be observed by all organizations, states, and other non-governmental international organizations, including the government and the agencies of FYROM. As Kofos said [ELIAMEP, April 2009, The Current Macedonian Issue between Athens and Skopje:Is there an Option for a Breakthrough? ] Greek and FYROM parties should accept the name used by the inhabitants of FYROM for their region of geographical Macedonia, i.e. Vardar Macedonia, or preferably Vardar Makedonija.
  
  It is therefore clear that the appropriation of the name Macedonia by the FYROM, on which they have based all their propaganda and even their national existence, does not even correspond to their own false national identity since their artificially created state does not have any national homogeneity. This appropriation of the Macedonian name goes against every principle of justice and conceals other expediencies which directly insult Greek national and Macedonian Cultural Identities as shows the unchanging nature of their continuous propaganda.
  
  I am a Macedonian , however I am in no way identified with or related to the newly formed independent state referred to as “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” ; I am instead insulted by the fact that I cannot be known as a Macedonian without being identified by others as related to FYROM. This is a rape of my identity and a continuing cultural genocide.
  
  Antony D. Smith remarks [National Identity, Oxford,1991] that there are two main kinds of ethnic extinction in the full sense: genocide and ethnocide, which is sometimes - at times misleadingly — called «cultural genocide». In one sense genocide is a rare and probably modern phenomenon. It includes those cases where we know that mass death of a cultural group was premeditated and the basis of that targeting was exclusively the existence and membership of that cultural group.
  
  My cultural identity has been usurped.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 27.11.2009
• 12:59

  Encyclopedia Britannica Blunders (Greece – Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Australian Macedonian Advisory Council
  
  November 27, 2009
  
  Dear Editor,
  
  We (The Australian Macedonian Advisory Council) are writing to you regarding two pages of your online encyclopedia, under the section “Countries of the world”. As an Australian-Greek organization we are extremely disappointed with the sections aforementioned, as in the first article “Countries of the world – Greece” you incorrectly refer to the ethnic composition (under Demography) of 1.8% “Macedonian”. Greece does not recognize any such minority in its borders, as there are already 2.2 million Greek Macedonians who already refer to themselves as Greeks firstly and Macedonians secondly – just like people from Athens refer to themselves as Greeks firstly and Athenians secondly. This is a huge blunder on your behalf, as you have quoted your source as a year 2000 unofficial source. An OFFICIAL source is already available for your use (provided by the Hellenic Republic), and shown in the CIA Factbook – Greece [https:] and throughout many other sources.
  
  The second page in question is the page titled “Countries of the world – Macedonia”, in which you incorrectly use a blurb which states: “DId you know? – In Plutarch’s classic history of Alexander The Great, he claims that the famous Macedonian general was tutored as a youth by none other than Aristotle.” The fact that you present is indeed correct (i.e. Alexander The Great was tutored by Aristotle), but this fact has nothing in common with the country that you are associating it with i.e. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). The region of ancient Macedonia (the land of Alexander the Great) is in Greece, as confirmed by many classical scholars, including the 356 scholars involved with the “Macedonia Evidence Initiative” (www. macedonia-evidence.org). Alexander The Great was born in Pella (coordinates 40°45′36″N 22°31′09″E / 40.76°N 22.51917°E) and his father was born in Aegai (coordiantes 40°28′42″N 22°19′19″E). The Australian Macedonian Advisory Council (AMAC) demands an explaination as to why an unofficial source was quoted in the “Countries of the world – Greece” page, and why a blurb as such has been associated with the FYROM. A correction to both of these pages is quite necessary on your behalf. We patiently await your reply.
  
  Please refer to:
  ( [www.history-of-macedonia.com] ) and
  ( [img402.imageshack.us] ) for clarification.
  
  Thanking you,
  Australian Macedonian Advisory Council
  info@macedonian.com.au
  [www.macedonian.com.au]
  www.macedonian.com.au/forum
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 25.11.2009
• 18:29

  The creation of UNSCOB and its investigation into the question of the "paidomazoma "(Greek Abducted Children)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The Greek question was brought before the Security Council of the United Nations three times during 1946. The first two debates, which were occasioned by complaints from the Soviet Union and the Ukraine respectively, ended inconclusively.[1] The third debate followed an appeal by the Greek Government, made on 3rd December 1946 after detailed consultations with the United States, that the Secretary-General "give early consideration to a situation which was leading to friction between Greece and her neighbours". [2]
  
  On 19th December 1946 the Security Council established a commission of investigation, but the report which was presented by this body on 23rd May 1947 was not unanimous, the western members supporting the views of the Greek Government, while the representatives of the Soviet Union and Poland rejected the findings of the majority. During the following debates in the Security Council, resolutions from both sides were defeated by vetoes, and the matter again ended in stalemate.[3]
  
  The question was then brought by the United States before the General Assembly where there ....
  ...could be no Soviet veto, and on 21st October 1947 the General Assembly (by forty votes to Six, with eleven abstentions) voted to establish The United Nations Special Committee on the Balkans (UNSCOB). UNSCOB was to consist of representatives from Australia, Brazil, China, France, Mexico, the Netherlands, Pakistan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Seats were "being held open" for the Soviet Union and Poland who refused to participate.
  
  UNSCOB's principal task was to investigate the charges, made by the Greek Government, that the guerrillas in Greece were receiving support from Albania, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria. These countries, however, refused to cooperate or even to allow the UNSCOB observers to enter their territories. On 1st December 1947 UNSCOB established its headquarters in Thessalonica. It had already been decided to set up six observation groups each composed of four observers and auxiliary personnel. Six zones were deliminated in northern Greece (sec map reproduced on page 156-157) and by the end of February 1948 groups 1, 2, 3,4 and 6 were in their respective zones.[5] The UNSCOB teams relied heavily on American logistical support, and the Greek Government, in contrast to its northern neighbours, declared its complete readiness to cooperate; in fact a Greek liaison representative "was available continuously from the commencement of the Special Committee's work".[6]
  
  Both from the history of UNSCOB's establishment by the United Nations and from the fact that of those countries directly concerned only Greece was willing to cooperate with the Committee it is evident that UNSCOB could hardly be expected to approach to Greek question in a completely impartial manner. Indeed a recent American study has asserted that "the State Department virtually wrote the UNSCOB report": The American Secretary of State George Marshall on 13th May 1948 sent the US representatives in UNSCOB a detailed list of conclusions for UNSCOB to reach. These (wrote Marshall) were "framed so that desirable recommendations would flow naturally" from them. [7]
  
  As already mentioned, UNSCOB was officially asked by the Greek liaison representative on 27th February 1948 to investigate the claim that Greek children were being abducted to the North, and on 4th March the Committee "formally took up the problem", instructing its observation groups to "give top priority to an examination of the Greek Liaison Service charges".[8] In their report dated 30th June 1948 (with a supplement dated 10th September) UNSCOB was able to present a great deal of information about evacuation of children carried out by the communist guerrillas. This information was based on three main sources: a) information supplied by the Greek Government, b) monitoring of radio stations in the other Balkan countries, and c) reports from the observation groups based primarily on interrogation of a large number of witnesses.
  
  The witnesses, especially, supplied much important information which clearly had considerable influence on the conclusions reached by UNSCOB and set out in these reports. It is therefore important to know how the witnesses were selected and how the actual questioning took place. This was not explained in the reports from 1948, but a later report from 2nd August 1949 described the procedure which was eventually worked out. (It is not clear to what extent this procedure was also used in 1948).
  
  The observers were instructed to "interrogate witnesses selected at their own discretion or brought to their attention by liaison officers of any of the four governments concerned".In practice this meant by the Greek Government, as none of the others cooperated. Witnesses were to be told, prior to interrogation, that they were not before a court of law, but before representatives of the United Nations Special Committee; that they were not obliged to answer any questions or to divulge any information which they did not desire to divulge, and they were to be assured that their names would be kept secret. It was recognized, however, in another section of this report that “witnesses have usually been presented by the Greek Liaison Service and many have been previously interrogated by Greek authorities”.
  
  Section 4 of the report of June 1948 was entitled "Removal and Retention of Greek children”. It stated that the Special Committee "after a careful study of the problem based on all its information" had been able to "establish the following facts":
  

  (1) A census of children has been taken by the guerrillas in certain areas of Greece under guerrilla control. The evidence is that this census is in connexion with the removal of children.
  (2) A large number of children has been removed from certain areas of northern Greece under guerrilla control to Albania. Bulgaria and Yugoslavia and, according to radio reports from Belgrade and Sophia, to certain other countries to the north. However, the Special Committee has not been able to verify, by means available to it, the precise number of children involved.
  (3) While a number of parents have agreed under duress to the removal of their children, and some children have in fact been forcibly removed, other parents have consented- or at least failed to object, to such removal. It has not been possible for the Special Committee to determine the exact number of children removed under these categories.
  (4) The number of cases reported point to the existence of a programme to remove children from areas of Greece under guerrilla control to certain countries to the north.
  (5) Although the responsibility for the initiation of the plan is not known to the Special Commitee, it follows from the appearance of Greek children on a large scale in the countries to the north and the numerous announce ments of the radios controlled by these Governments that the programme is being carried out with the approval and assistance of these Governments" .[10]
  

  The wording seems strikingly moderate. In view of the broadcasts made by the communists themselves, there could hardly be any doubt that an evacuation was taking place. The Special Committee was particularly careful in its discussion of three crucial questions: the number of children involved, the extent to which the evacuation was voluntary, and the question of who was responsible for initiating the plan. However, an annex to the report presented some details which permit at least tentative answers.
  
  Concerning the area, the report stated that the census of children had been taken in the following two main areas of northern Greece controlled by the guerrillas:
  

  (a) The Slav-speaking area of Western Macedonia: The region around Lake Prespa, Florina and Kastoria, which is inhabited mostly by Greek citizens who speak a Slav language.
  (b) The eastern part of Greek Thrace: There have also been a few reports of census-taking in areas of Epirus and in central and eastern Macedonia under guerrilla control.[11]
  

  Concerning the time: "the departures were reported to have begun as early as January, but, for the most part, to have occurred in March". [12]
  
  Finally, on the question whether the children were removed by force, UNSCOB emphasised that the "sources have disagreed", and a large number of individual witness depositions were cited in summary form. Some spoke of children taken by force, or parents "firmly opposed to letting their children go". Three witnesses in the Lake Doiran area said that "they had fled with their children to avoid having them taken by the guerrillas." A witness from the Kastoria area said that "a large number of children from "his village took refuge in Kastoria to avoid being taken by the guerrillas, and that, in his opinion, only 10 % of the parents consented to the removal of their children". But it was also emphasised that the observation groups "found considerable evidence that many of the children, particularly in the Slav-speaking area of Western Macedonia, were taken with the consent of their parents". A witness from the lake Prespa region said that "many parents were happy to see their children go", and in the village of Kato Lefki (near Kastoria) Observation Group 2 “found no proof that any child was taken against the wishes of its parents”. [13]
  
  The witness statements are cited in summary form and by their very nature do not allow any kind of statistical treatment, A resume of the reports from Observation Group 2 (based on Fiorina) stated that "a fairly large number of parents, and especially guerrilla sympathizers, favoured the departure of their children, but there was lively opposition from the majority of parents". It also postulated a marked difference between Slav-speaking and Greek-speaking villages:
  

  "When a village sympathized with the guerrillas, the guerrillas left the parents free to refuse to hand over their children and in Slav-speaking villages the majority of parents willingly accepted the offer In Greek-speaking villages the process resembled conscription; attempts were made to convince the parents and, after a minority of them volunteered, a list of all the children in the village was drawn up notwithstanding the parents1 desires. The summary report of Group 2 did not, however, establish the actual removal of children from its area to foreign countries."[14]
  

  Observation Group 6 (Thrace) "reported that, up to 31 March, the children sent to the countries north of Greece were the children of guerrillas or guerrilla sympathisers*' and found that "the plan to take Greek children into foreign countries has been carried out, to some extent at least, but there is no evidence to indicate whether these children were abducted by Force. [15]
  
  NOTES
  [1] - Sec Van Coufoudakis, The United Stales, the United Nations, and ihc Greek Ouesiion 1946-1952". in: John υ Iatrides (ed.), Greece in the 1940s. Λ Nation in Crisis (Hanover and London. 1981) 275-297, especially 278*281.
  [2]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 1
  [3]- Van Coufoudakis, op.cit. p. 281-285.
  [4]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 1-3
  [5]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 3.
  [6]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 4. section 26.
  [7]- Lawrence S. Winner. American Intervention in Greece, 19431949. (New York, 1982) 256.
  [8]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 18. section 117-118.
  [9]- UNSCOB Report A/935 (1949) p. 23.
  [10]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 19. section 120.
  [11]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 29 (Annex II).
  [12]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 30 (Annex II.
  [13]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 30 (Annex II).
  [14]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p, 31. The distinction between “a fairly large number of parents” and "the majority of parents" is no! a very clear one. nor is it easy to see bow ihc authors of the UNSCOB report arrived at this estimate. In fact this is a point where the language of the report was, perhaps deliberately, vague. Summarizing the evidence gathered from the observation groups (on p. 30) the report slated that "observatitMi groups tound some evidence that children were taken from some villages without the consent of their parents", |...| "but the observation groups also found considerable evidence t that many of the children (...| were taken with the consent of their parents". (Sec also section 3 of the "established fads" cited above). From the information available toil, UNSCOB was unable to decide which group of children was the larger, and this would seem equally impossible today.
  [15]- UNSCOB Report A/574 (1948) p. 31.
  
  by Lars Baerentzen
  Abstract from the article : The "Paidomazoma" and the Queen's Camps, pages 132-138
  Book: Studies in the history of the Greek Civil War, 1945-1949
  FOR FAIR USE ONLY
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 19.11.2009
• 17:20

  Fictitious Academia: Political activism, covered in academic cloak in the University of Utah

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  By Nina Gatzoulis*
  
  The presentations of the majority of the academics participating in the 7th “Macedonian”- North American Conference on “Macedonian” Studies at the University of Utah that took place from November 5-7, 2009, amounted to an anti-Hellenic delirium. The Universities of Utah and Chicago jointly organized the conference, in cooperation with the United “Macedonian” Diaspora (UMD) of Skopje based in Washington D.C.
  
  Most of the presenters, with a few exceptions, aimed to launch an aggressive propaganda attack against Greece, presenting their views without scientific and academic research criteria, without references to sources thereby promoting unilateral research.
  
  Dr. Vasiliki Neofotistos in her presentation “Alexander the Great and the mythic lands”, implied that ...educator Thanasis Lerounis approached the Kalash tribe in Afghanistan through an education program, funded by Greek ministries and thus created the myth of the Kalash as descendants of the soldiers of Alexander the Great. However, she claimed that “Macedonia” approached the tribe of the Hunza in 2008 on private initiative. Dr. Neofotistos used the term “Macedonia” freely, rather than the Republic of “Macedonia,” creating the impression that the entire region of Macedonia (in Greece, Bulgaria, and Albania) belongs to Skopje. Dr. Neofotistos referred to FYROM as “Macedonia”, and she only named the Slavs as “Macedonians”, while the Albanians citizens of “Macedonia” were referred as “the Albanians”, which is academically unacceptable.
  ...the
  
  An unrivaled individual in anti-Hellenism was Dr. Philip Shashko, whose presentation titled “Tasos Kostopoulos on Macedonia and the Slavs in Greece: When a forbidden language speaks truth to power”, was an eruption of hatred against Greece. Dr. Shashko cited, and presented as scientific evidence, the contents of Tasos Kostopoulos’ book (journalist of the Sunday addition Ios in the Greek newspaper Eleftherotypia)!
  
  
  The culmination of the political-activism and racism with a “scientific” cover was Dr. Loring Danforth’s presentations. Dr. Danforth spoke about the research he has completed for the book he has co-authored with the Dutch anthropologist who teaches at the University of Thessaly, Dr. Riki van Boeschoten, entitled “Macedonian refugee children from the Greek Civil War”. Although it was stated that during the Civil War in Greece, Greek and “Macedonian” children were kidnapped and led by the communists into communist countries, their research did not include any Greek children.
  
  
  Mary Rossova from a village of “Aegean Macedonia" in her presentation “From Trnaa to Toronto: The life story of a dete begalec”, recounted how her family with the help of partisans fled to escape the “bad” Greek soldiers in locations across the Iron Curtain countries. She talked about her life in the communist countries and how she finally arrived in Canada, “although,” as she mentioned “a capitalist country” she lives happily with her family there. Trying to give a bad image of Greece she said that upon visiting her homeland in “Aegean Macedonia”, she found her old house in ruins and complained that one…Greek official at the border treated her with arrogance!
  
  
  Traian Dimitriou, also a dete begalec (refugee child) in Dr. Danfroth’s research presentation titled “A Macedonian child in a Greek technical school during the Greek Civil War”, narrated how he ended up in a children’s camp of Queen Frederika in Leros. His vast criticism was that the trip by boat to the island “was awful because the sea was stormy!” He only took weekly baths (!) and was forced to sing the Greek national anthem daily! There was reporting by the ‘victims’ of the camps that many of the children were sold to wealthy families. When the members of the panel were asked by a representative of the Pan-Macedonian Association if there are documented sources for these allegations, they admitted they had none.
  
  
  Both children of the Greek Civil War stressed that they did not want to leave their homeland, but had to remain in the former communist countries against their will. Since the communist governments kept them against their will in what way is it Greece’s fault? They failed to indicate that they had every opportunity to go back and stay in Greece when the Greek government through various U.N. resolutions, called on all Greek citizens who were displaced during the Greek Civil War in communist countries to go back to their homeland (see: UN Resolutions 382 (V Section C), 1950; 618 (VII), 1952; 517 (VI), 1952). There is no doubt regarding Greece’s and the UN’s position on this issue, even though Dr. Danforth implied that the U.N. resolutions were inconclusive. Therefore this claim is not true as is also evident by the strong support of the U.S. Government at the time at all levels. President Harry S. Truman addressing the Congress and with reference to Resolution 514, did not leave any doubt about the strong support of the U.S. to the U.N. resolutions: [www.presidency.ucsb.edu] .
  
  
  It is indeed noteworthy that FYROM accuses Greece that she banished her children, while the Slav/communists kidnapped the Greek children from all over Greece in order to “protect” them. Obviously they chose to forget that the mastermind behind the mass kidnapping of the children was the right hand of Tito, Edvard Kardelj. If the “child saving” was done to protect children, how do they substantiate their claim that the camps of Queen Frederika were not protecting the children?
  
  
  The Danforth /van Boeschoten research was unilateral, and only examined the cases of children who willingly were led by their communist parents, or even sent to Iron Curtain countries with the consent of their parents. Conversely, among the expatriates who attended the conference was Mrs. Irene Damopoulou Karatzios. Mrs. Karatzios was one of the children amongst thousands of other children with or without parents who were abducted by partisans and were led into several Iron Curtain countries against their will. When Dr. Danforth was asked if Mrs. Karatzios could speak about her plight, he prohibited her to speak in a peremptory manner. In a private discussion with Mrs. Karatzios, Dr. Danforth said he read the book “The Cry of Irene” which was written about her and implied that her claims are untrue!
  
  
  An excerpt of Mrs. Karatzios’ plight in the book “The Cry of Irene”, authored by Dr. Ioannis Bougas, is provided: (ISBN: 969-454-022-X email: erodhios@erodhios.gr):
  
  

  My mother’s denial to give my little brother and myself away to the communist guerillas, so that we might be delivered into the iron curtain countries, a deed organized by the KKE, placed her in the ranking of a shady “ reactionary” and put the entire family as KKE’s target for revenge. First they took my mother to help the rebels in the mountains carrying materials, where she was often physically tortured. My brother, along with other residents of our village and I, were ordered to abandon our homes and forced to live in makeshift huts in the nearby forest.
  

  Later, they led us cross the borders secretly and we entered Albania. After walking on foot for several days, almost without food or water, we arrived in a dirty prison labor camp. Once reunited with our mother, we spent some time in various prisons in Albania, and finally we were dragged in the galley of Loulé in Romania, where my brother and I attended the Russian-Romanian schools of their “father” and “god” Stalin. In addition we suffered incredible pressure from the leaders of KKE to give up our motherland Greece and become Slavomacedonians
  

  One of the most balanced and informative presentations was that of Dr. Bill Darden titled “Greek articles vs. Slavic relatives in the Strumchki (Makedonski) Apostol and other early Slavic text” which focused on the difficulty of translating the Bible from Greek to Slavic.
  
  
  
  Dr. Emilija Crenkovska presented on “The language of the Old Church Slavonic writing of Macedonia in the period of the Byzantine and Ottoman Empire”, in the “Macedonian” language, without translation or even a written summary of the content of her speech. Members of the Pan-Macedonian Association, knowledgeable of the language of FYROM and the local Greek slavophone idioms explained that Dr. Crenkovska spoke in the Serbo-Bulgarian language of FYROM that she named “Macedonian”. When a member of the Pan-Macedonian Association conveyed this information to the panelists he did not receive an answer, and some individuals in the audience urged the presenters not to pay attention to such interventions!
  
  
  Quite notable was the reaction of the Dr.Victor Friedman, Professor of Linguistics and Balkan Studies from the University of Chicago. When a member of the Pan-Macedonian Association tried to approach him in a friendly manner, the academic exploded and started shouting, “the ‘Macedonians’ have a right to exist!” Also one could characterize as inappropriate the efforts of Dr. Friedman and Andrew Graan (doctoral candidate under the auspices of Dr. Friedman) to distract the university journalist who was interviewing Mrs. Karatzios and the writer of this article. Addressing the journalist, Dr. Friedman said: “take everything they say with a grain of salt…”
  
  
  Members of the Pan-Macedonian Association U.S.A have attended several propaganda events organized by FYROM and its Diaspora in American universities. Unfortunately, while the Greek embassy is being informed of such events, the Greek state is absent in FYROM’s efforts to defame Greece. It is particularly important that representatives of the Greek State participate in such conferences to refute the ignorant argumentation of the academic community of FYROM. Moreover, relevant scientific conferences with the participation of foreign academics have to be seriously considered by Greece in the future. In addition the libraries of American universities should be enriched by contemporary English-language material on the issue of Macedonia. These failures generate “data” which Hellenism will be forced to face in the future.
  
  
  *Mrs. Gatzoulis is the Supreme President of the Pan-Macedonian Association USA
  
  
  Nina Gatzoulis
  Supreme President of the Pan-Macedonian Association (USA)
  E-mail: ninagatz@comcast.net
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 17.11.2009
• 17:49

  Tragedies of the abducted Greek children of 1948: the reality of the FYROM claims

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  In 1948, Cominform, the first official forum of the international communist movement since the dissolution of the Comintern, put into action a plan to take hostage to communist countries children from Greece during the Greek civil war. The aim was to re-educate the children as well as blackmail the populace and the Greek government towards reaching a settlement leading to a partition of Greece and the subsequent creation of an internationalist "Macedonian" Republic. This move has favoured by the Yugoslav dictator Josip Broz Tito and had been a Comitern policy aimed at destroying the national states of the Balkans through the creation of internationalist republics. Today several FYROM sources claim or at least believe the abducted children were FYROMacedonian. Indeed that they were not abducted, rather they were refugees fleeing the Greek army.
  
  It was in the month of November 61 years ago when the United Nations issued a resolution condemning the abduction of the Greek children. The text of the resolution and its context have been presented in my last article. The tragic stories of the abducted children that follow defy belief.
  
  Last week a conference took place at the University of Utah, sponsored by the United Pseudo-Macedonia Diaspora (UMD), a lobby group campaigning against "Greek atrocities" in Cyprus and other out of touch with reality issues. There was....
  
  
  ..... a display of venom the revisionism of history condoned by segments of the FYROM government and media. An eye-witness in the audience attempted to speak about her experience during the child abductions, probably the only person in the entire conference with any real experience from their own lives. The response from one of the Yugoslav speakers was:
  

  "This poor woman had probably been drawn into a Greek family or circle years before, and in order to keep peace in the family had decided to play dumb when it came to her linguistic and ethnic identity. To an outsider it appeared to be quite the sad spectacle, for her Greek handlers to parade her out at an academic conference as some sort of living proof of the non-existence of her mother tongue and ethnicity."
  http://www.maknews.com/forum/general-discussions/report-macedonian-conferenceuniversity-of-utah-t17459.html
  

  It defies belief that a people recently freed from Communism continue to otherwise believe that it is the rest of the world that has been brainwashed and go to such extreme extents of inverting reality to reassure themselves an their audience of this belief. Prof Christos D. Katsetos, MD, Dr philos, FRC Path, subsequently sent a letter of protest to the University of Utah commenting:
  

  "I submit that Mrs. Damopoulou was denied at the University of Utah conference the common courtesy of being heard and respected as a member of the Greek Macedonian community and also as a credible eyewitness – by virtue of being a young victim of involuntary evacuation and forced migration during the Greek Civil War (1946-49).
  Indeed, what Irene Damopoulou-Karatzios has recently experienced, both during and after the conference, is precisely the kind of dehumanization and disentitlement that is considered as one of the basic psychological substrates underlying the perpetuation of ethnic conflicts."
  

  The children´s tragedies
  
  Georgios Manoukas was the General Inspector of the 1946 Child Gathering (Paidomazoma) and also a former member of KKE (Greek communist Party). He returned disillusioned to Greece during the amnesty period in 1961 and published a book on the child abductions called Paidomazoma (Child Gathering, The Great Crime against our People, Georgios Manoukas, 1961). In it he examines Cominform policy towards the children and concludes that the Yugoslav government (Tito) falsified the numbers of these children, integrated them into the population of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and acculturated them into the new "Macedonian" culture. Some children were trained and sent back to Greece to fight, indeed as janissaries.
  
  One of the five-member council during the child abduction era was a Slav Macedonian from Greece named Sikavitsas. This person according to Manoukas was responsible for the Slavophone Greek children. In the so-called Mountain Government of KKE were also two Greek Slavophone "ministers". Their names were Metrovsky and Stavro Kocev. They visited those children that were Slavophone and aimed at the elimination of their use of the Greek language. Their lectures used terms such as "Macedonian autonomy", saying "Greece was a creation of the Big Powers" (like Risto Stefov does today), claiming that "Slavic Macedonians were the only descendants of the ancient Macedonians", using language such as "freedom to the occupied Aegean Macedonia from the monarchofasists", the same language we hear from the children of some of the FYROMacedonian expatriates today.
  
  
  Below are some passages from his book:
  
  On page 57, Manoukas refers to a FYROMacedonian volunteer who was fighting in Greece. He heard from him, apparently for the first time, that "the Aegean Macedonia begins in a place in Yugoslavia and includes places in modern Albania, Bulgaria and Greek Macedonia while in depth it reaches to about Mt Olympus! This Slav was not illiterate. He was rather well tutored."
  
  On page 107, George Manoukas explains the response of the Communist Block parties to the request from the United Nations for the repatriation of the Greek children. Representatives from the communist parties of several countries gave speeches and promises to the Greek Communist Party about the return of the children in a meeting held in Prespa (where the KKE government in exile was located, in modern FYROM) on the 29.2.1949, after calls from the United Nations for the return of the abducted children. The speeches show what kind of response there was among communist countries regarding the unanimous call from the UN for the return of the abducted children to Greece.
  
  
  Lili Olt, Communist Party of Hungary: "The GREEK children we are hosting in our country are the best example of support for your struggle".
  
  
  Zenova, Communist Party of Czechoslovakia: "We will return the GREEK children we are hosting in our country once they are grown up and educated".
  
  
  Anna Roubou, Romania : "The children we are hosting will be returned to you after Victory!" – so were they hostages?
  
  
  Zaboteska Stanislava, Communist Party of Poland: "We educate your children according to the example of your heroes, like Mitsos Paparrigas. We believe that your children, our children, are children of the great family of peoples. We will return them to you after final freedom and people´s democracy".
  
  
  Bito-Karo of the Communist party of Albania: "We found your children pale when they came to our country. We opened our arms and embraced them."
  
  
  The General Secretary [unfortunately not named] of the so-called NOF/SNOF, the so called National Liberation front for Macedonia said: "today we can proclaim an independent Peoples Republic of Macedonia that will be part of the Balkan Peoples´ Republics. The central council of NOF assures the Greek people that it will maintain unity between the Greek and Slavomacedonian people, because of our common aim: freedom – independence".
  
  
  Independence of the Greeks from the Greeks? In any case note, this fanatical man used the term Slavomacedonian not Macedonian. Modern FYROM has pushed this kind of extremism further. The Slavomacedonians of 1949 communist propaganda have become the "Macedonians" of modern FYROM> this was clear from Nikola Gruevski´s speech in Australia mentioned in my previous article ( [www.americanchronicle.com] ).
  
  
  But how ridiculous. This is the response of the communist parties of Europe to the request for the return of the Greek children! Indeed Manoukas says the representatives of the Greek communists Mpartzotas and Kokkalis (KKE), and Papadimitris (AKE) vowed to intensify the abductions! And now the Skopians speak of a Greek atrocity: the expulsion of 28000 children from Greece.
  
  
  Manoukas next explains the ways in which the Communist Block tried to avoid returning the children to their parents.
  

  "The task of the Greek Red Cross was exceedingly difficult.
  
  
  On the one hand the communists unleashed in this regard and on orders of the KKE an unforeseen campaign of terrorism, so that the gathering of applications (by parents for the return of the children) could be discouraged, as well as any expression of a desire for the repatriation of the children.
  
  
  On the other hand, the KKE, with the aim to have favourable concessions from the parents for the commission of the children to the Communist Block, gave orders to communist commissars to tour the regions held by the communists to obtain in every possible way favourable declarations from parents about their "willing" surrender of their children.
  
  
  It is obvious that this policy of extortion was designed not only so as to reveal a great number of parents who "willingly agreed" to the surrender of their children, but to shake through fear the will of many parents so that, were they to be called in the future to express their wish for the childrens´ return to refuse to do so, for fear of reprisals."
  

  Manoukas mentions that many parents had fled as far as Crete or the Peloponnese seeking safety. Then he adds:
  

  "Many of the parents had been forcibly recruited by the "symmorites" and therefore it was not possible to have expressions of a desire for the return of their children.
  
  
  But the most terrible of all was the fact that, because of executions by the symmorites of a great number of individuals, the natural guardians of the children were no longer in live and it was exceedingly difficult to find and determine which among the relatives were the nearest to the children so that they may have the right to apply for the return of the children according to the UN directive."
  

  Further down Manoukas says how the KKE tried to avoid returning the children. One excuse they devised was that if they received an application from only one parent, they would reply that the child or children could not be returned because there was no agreement of the parents for their return.
  
  
  On page 34, Manoukas describes a heart-rending story of the abduction of five children, brothers and sisters:
  

  On Feb 14th, 1950, an announcement had been made in Greek from Bucharest in response to requests from the Voice of America for the return of the abducted children to Greece:
  
  
  "The Voice of America cannot stomach the fact that 28,000 Greek children and Slav Macedonians were transported to the Peoples´ Republics with the full accord of their parents. These children will continue to live there according to the wish of their parents, will be educated in their own language and national spirit and will learn a trade…"
  
  
  "Here is an example of the agreement of a family to send their children to the Iron Curtain to be "educated in their own language and national spirit and to learn a trade". The village schoolteacher in Zerma in 1947 was one named Mitsis. I do not know if he is still living. He had a wife and five children.
  
  
  Budapest, August 1949. We had our base in Budapest. In August 1949 I was supervisor of the Central Office and "Inspector" again of the Paidomazoma. One day Yiannis, the colleague in charge of censorship says to me: "Comrade, a letter has arrived and it appears to be suspicious from beginning to end. Read it so that we may see what this fascist says".
  
  
  I took the "suspicious letter", put it in my pocket and continued my work. In the afternoon after I had finished, I went by the Danube and I sat somewhere, watching the murky water of the Danube that flowed quietly. There I remembered the letter of the "fascist" I had in my pocket. I took it out, I saw it was well written and scanned to the bottom of it to see who was writing. I saw then it was from Mitsis, the schoolteacher of Zerma. What does he want - I thought to myself. What business does he have with us? And, my God, the wretched man wanted to know where his children were, where is his little one, whether he cries for his father and mother and whether they are all together, "Whether Spyridoula takes care of you" … and "try to find where your mother is because I do not know". I read it over and over again. I remembered it was his Encyclopedia that we had confiscated and he was one our men were hunting and wanted to kill.
  
  
  I went back to my office. I started browsing through the "registers" to see in which country were his children, because the letter said he had many. Five children!
  
  
  I was glad to find they were in Hungary, and some indeed in Budapest. I thought to go immediately to find one of them , to give him the letter with his father´s kisses… but then I remembered about their mother. I had to find in which country she was, to put them in contact with each other so as to make them happy, the poor little souls.
  
  
  I went through all the "registers´. I found nowhere the wife of the wretched schoolteacher. I began to curse the commissaries of the various countries for their insufficient records!!
  
  
  I left my office and went to the Children´s Town. It was late and they were asleep. I returned to my room, but I could not rest!
  
  
  Next day I returned to the Children´s Town. I found one of them, a little girl and without letting her suspect that I had a letter, I began to ask: Where is your father? Your mother? Your siblings? And the little girl said to me: "My father stayed in Greece, I do not know where and if he is alive. Myself, my sister and a brother are here, I do not know about the other two. We do not know where our mother is. She may be in one of the countries. Because when the men took us and we asked for our mother, because we did not want to leave without her, they told us that we will find her here. "She has already left, she is ahead of you" they told us. I turned to leave when I heard again the little girl say: "Comrade, go see where our mother is and tell us! We have a year and a half to see her and we long for her, we are as orphans. Why, comrade, the men tricked us? Where is our mother? "
  
  
  I was not satisfied by the little girl. She did not know much and so I went to find men and women from the region of Konitsa to find the end of this case.
  
  
  And I found it! But what did I find! When I found out my legs and my arms trembled from the emotion. They informed me that the men shot the children's mother near her village. That when the children were taken she was already dead. The children did not know. Neither their father! And the little one was waiting for me to come by the Children´s Town again, to tell her in which country(!) is her mother! Our men had taken care of her in the ravines of their village! And the children? The Party "took care" of them. And here "not even one child has been taken by force!..." What would the Communist Party of Greece claim? And what the criminal voice from Bucharest?"
  

  An article in Eleftherotypia of 17/07/2003 tells the story of 13 villagers who were abducted as children by the communist guerillas:
  

  "In the bleak city hall of Kozane, a northern Greek mountain town, 13 peasants stood before a U. N. field team. The peasants had been hostages of General Markos Vafiades' communist andartes. In the mixed Greek-Slav-Albanian dialect of the Macedonian border people, they haltingly told their story.
  
  
  Black-shawled Athena Papalexiou, 50, spoke first. "All children between 3 and 14 were being registered by the andartes," she said. The rebels had told the parents that the children would be sent to good homes in the Slav "democracies." "Would the children come back again?" asked an investigator. "It was forbidden to discuss the matter," replied Athena.
  
  
  John Natsis and Zagarus Voiliotis had been billeted with a widower in Kranies, in the rebel-controlled northwest corner of Greece. They had watched the widower give the names and ages of his three children to a rebel officer and a clerk. "They told him he must be glad that his children would be taken away to the safety of other countries," said the two peasants. "They said soon the Monarcho-Fascists would bomb Kranies, and in Romania his children would receive a good education.""
  

  Manoukas reveals the anger expressed by this crime worldwide in chapter VII of the book. A British professor Animbus wrote a letter to the United nations saying:
  

  "Hell itself could not labour a plan more satanic. This heinous crime that defies description, was accompanied by cynical comments transmitted by the Albanian Radio Station, as well as the radio stations of Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, for the "warm" and "loving" welcome, which was extended to the innocent little victims in the capitals of these countries.. They were abducted to be tutored to hate their parents, their religion and their homeland as their common cultural inheritance. There is danger that these unfortunate young souls will be lost forever and if they ever return they may act as offspring of "snakes" against the breast of their motherland. Thousands of Greek children, abducted by the red criminals who added the tragedy of their heinous child abduction to the terrible crime against their homeland, are facing the terror and abomination of Soviet totalitarianism and are under inhuman pressure to change their national consciousness and to become enemies of their homeland."
  

  In the National conference for the Protection of Children in Stockholm, August 1948, a unanimous declaration was made (I translate from Manoukas):
  

  "The General Council of the International Union for the Protection of Children which met in Stockholm on 14-8-1948, informed that a considerable number of Greek children were abducted from their homeland without the consent of their parents and considering that such an act is an outright violation of the principles of the Declaration for the Rights of the Child, the so-called "Geneva Declaration". Resolves:
  

  1. That the United Nations work to find the proper means such that the return to their homes of all the children that are held from their parents against their wish is achieved at the soonest time possible.
  
  
  2. That the International Union for Child Protection offer their services, in coordination with other organizations, so that care may be provided to these children, wherever they may be.
  
  
  3. That the United Nations may be requested to take measures such that the children of all nationalities may be protected against the violent transfer and detention far from their homeland without the consent of their parents"
  

  A diplomat who visited a Children´s Station in Hungary and afterwards wrote in the newspaper Greek Star (16 May 1950):
  

  "I was accompanied by an official who spoke Greek to the camp at BALATON FURE. The official talked to a young boy who, when he heard his mother tongue brightened up and started to talk in Greek. But a bigger child then came and pulled the little one by the hand and said that he must not disobey the orders, to speak Greek and in actual fact to foreigners…"
  

  "They understand very well that, if they teach to the Greek children their false philosophy, their task in the world will be much easier".
  

  K. George Christojaher in a radio interview in San Francisco.
  
  "The Greek children were transported beyond the borders to be raised as communists and to be educated in communist schools, in an atmosphere of hate, so that when they grow up they return well armed against their fatherland".
  
  From a speech of Donald Fleming to the Canadian Parliament, 22 April 1050.
  
  Greek-Yugoslav border: the president of the Greek Red Cross Mr Georgakopoulos receives Greek children repatriated from Yugoslavia. From Paidomazoma, The Great Crime against our People, Georgios Manoukas, 1961.
  
  
  In his book "The Cry of Irene", the same Irene who was shouted down in Utah in the recent Pseudomacedonian conference, Ioannis Bougas tells the true story of a young girl, Irene Damopoulou from Kastoria, in western Macedonia, during the years of the Greek Civil War (1946-49).
  
  
  Irene recounts:
  

  "Since my brother and I refused to declare that we were Slavomacedonians and refused to take courses in Slavomacedonci, we were also thrown out of the Romanian school for three days. Our dismissal from school above all created a problem of survival as we had no more right to food from the school mess hall. When my mother complained to the community leaders because we were not given food, she was told that there was nothing that they could do and that we should think of the consequences of our denial to identify as Slavomacedonians. Then my mother went to the school to complain. She found one of the teachers, a man named Mr. Nikos from Kilkis [Greece]. Unfortunately, I cannot remember his family name. "Comrade Niko, why have you thrown my children out of school?" she asked. "Because you are Slavomacedonians from St. Demetrios!" he answered. "Your children need to change schools and attend the Slavomacedonian school.""
  

  Irene tells another haunting story that perhaps should put some sense into the remaining Greek exiles in former communist countries:
  

  "Some mothers lost their lives trying to keep their children. For example that was the fate of Sultana Petridis. I happened to see it with my own eyes and hear with my own ears the terrible torture she suffered in the hands of the communist partisans because she refused to give her children away to the paidomazoma. Sultana Petridis was from the village of Polyanemos of Kastoria. She was divorced from her husband and had two small children, a boy and a girl, whom she refused to give to be taken into Iron Curtain countries. One day, as I was going from our house to my grandmother´s house, I met her in a narrow street of our village. She was walking between two partisans with guns, holding her head down and her hands behind her back. Two more partisans were following a few meters behind them. As the street was very narrow, I stopped and remained standing on the side for them to pass. When they reached the place where I was standing, auntie Sultana slowed her walk and asked me about my family´s name. When I told her, she asked me where my parents were. She asked first for my father, and then for my mother. About my father I said that I did not know, and for my mother I told her that she was at home. As the guerrillas pushed her to continue, she turned her head a little and told me to give "greetings to my mother from aunt Soulta".
  

  Later that evening we started hearing Sultana´s cries and screams of pain from the torture she was obviously suffering in the hands of the communist guerrillas. The guerrillas had led her to my uncle Papagermanos´ house, which after his escape to Kastoria, was being used by them as their local headquarters. The torture of unfortunate Sultana Petridis continued late into the night. Next morning, the guerrillas put her on a mule and led her outside the village. Because of the torture she had suffered she could not stand on the mule. Thus, the guerrillas first placed a wooden structure on it and tied Sultana. As they were leading her on the mule by our house, she looked as having no life in her. Perhaps she was unconscious. My mother and I,saw this scene from a small window of our house. The guerrillas led her little further north from our village, inside the narrow valley and killed her.
  

  The communists took Sultana´s children into the Iron Curtain countries. Later, they returned to Greece. Her son visited the area of Kastoria, and he was asking to find out "why the fascists killed his mother"? One of those he asked was my uncle, Leonidas Lazaridis, who related this to me. My uncle knew the real killers of Sultana Petridis, and informed him. He told him that the killers of his mother were exactly those people who had indoctrinated him and his sister with stories about "fascists killers," while he was away in some communist country. I do not know if he was convinced, or if he pursued the matter to learn all the truth about the torture his mother had suffered in the hands of the guerrillas of the Greek Communist Party before her killing."
  

  This man and countless others, some living now in FYROM and others or their children living around the world, have been apparently indoctrinated since 1948 to believe that the children were not abducted but were Slavomacedonian refugees fleeing the Greek terror. The ones in former Yugoslavia have been apparently fully brainwashed. The surprising perhaps thing is that even some of those in Canada and Australia promote this idea. These people, who left Yugoslavia after Tito fell out with Stalin, had the opportunity to hear the outside view. Their hardline claims make one to suspect that they fled Yugoslavia for fear of reprisals when Tito was facing a change in his policy. From the tone of their preaching they sound like die-hard former NOF/SNOF members the chief promoters of the claim of fleeing fake "atrocities". The perfect audience for Gruevski´s inflammatory rantings. What a sad, miserable situation. A disowned people, some of them perhaps abducted Greek children, others their abductors, living a lie and wishing to join Greece in the European Union and NATO while accusing Greece for a phantom atrocity, attacking and defaming everything sacred and stealing the name and history of Macedonia. That is a perfect recipe for a failed start and a bad ending.
  
  
  The United Nations should have finished the business of Tito´s and Cominform´s fake "Macedonia" in 1991.
  
  
  A moving moment at the Greek-Yugoslav border: families reunite with their children returning from Yugoslavia. From Paidomazoma, The Great Crime against our People, Georgios Manoukas, 1961.
  
  
  by Tymphaios
  November 16, 2009
  americanchronicle.com
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 14.11.2009
• 16:27

  A war crime against Greek children portrayed as a Greek crime against "Macedonians" (FYROM, Greece)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  by Tymphaios
  November 12, 2009
  americanchronicle.com
  
  
  In a recent visit to Australia, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) prime minister Nikola Gruevski spoke to FYROM expatriates about the inability for them to live freely in their FYROMacedonian motherland in Greece and Bulgaria: "Macedonians (sic) in Australia are enjoying a unique opportunity to live together with their compatriots of Aegean and Pirin Macedonia, which does not happen in our motherland". At the same time extremists such as Risto Stefov are accusing Greece of a war atrocity: expelling up to 50,000 "Macedonians" from Greece during the Greek civil war in 1946-49. These are presumably the FYROMacedonians now living in Australia free, while it is not possible to do so in the FYROMacedonian motherland - in Greece and Bulgaria.
  
  These are extraordinary statements. Indeed there were even various documentaries (eg. [www.youtube.com] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOFcR2yTKN8) full of hate and a tearful song sung by a seductive lady produced in FYROM since Gruevski was elected Prime-Minister, portraying refuges from Macedonia arriving in Yugoslavia in 1949. These documentaries show orphaned children in the custody of foster "mothers" offloaded from trains. The videos were uploaded on YouTube with English translations, accompanied by inflammatory statements such as :
  
  "Don't be afraid of the truth, Greece is Nazi!". Risto Stefov cries out: "It´s time to expose the acts and atrocities they perpetrated against us in the name of Hellenism!" For such an atrocity, one ought to think there must be a record of it. The record is unfortunately not very favourable to this extremist view. Remember this extraordinary accusation is coming from a country that is requesting Greece´s help to enter the European Union and NATO, of which organisations Greece has been a long-standing member. This is also coming from a country that received Greece´s acceptance to enter the United Nations, pending a UN brokered Agreement never fulfilled. Lastly, this is how FYROM approaches Greece when and while in fact it needs Greece.
  
  
  This article is not so much about bad diplomacy as about the actual reality of these claims. What are the atrocities we are concerned with? The FYROM propaganda claims that Macedonian children arrived as refugees in Yugoslavia during the Greek Civil War of 1946-49, fleeing the so far undocumented bombings by the Greek army. Have the United Nations recorded anything about these children "fleeing" Macedonia?
  
  
  In the United Nations General Assembly of 1948, the Greek government made the following statement:
  

  Plea of the Greek Parliament to the United Nations, 1948 :
  
  
  "The Hellenic Parliament seeing that the communist bandits enforce systematically a program of genocide via the abductions of children and the taking of hostages, that the noted abduction of hostages is the outcome of armed and raw violence perpetrated against widows and orphans, whose protectors were slain by the bandits
  
  
  Resolves
  
  
  Protests to the entire civilized world and especially to the Parliaments of free nations and makes a plea to the U.N. that as a mediator in this unprecedented drama of the Greeks will proceed without delay into taking practical and effective measures for the repatriation of the abducted as well as the termination of this unheard-of tragedy."
  

  Something seems not quite right. FYROM propaganda today claims the Greeks were chasing off the children in 1948, whereas Greece had submitted a plea to the United Nations protesting the abduction of the children. Why did Greece protest the abduction? Why was Greece requesting the children back when current FYROM propagandists say Greece was chasing them away?
  
  
  In this context it is surprising the Eastern Block countries did not submit a complaint that Greece was causing a refugee problem sending thousands of children off to communist countries. Why were the Communist Block countries silent about this alleged Greek "atrocity"?
  
  
  After sending a team to the area of conflict and examining the evidence, the United Nations General Assembly UNANIMOUSLY agreed in 1948 to a resolution (Resolution 193(III)) titled: Threats to the political independence and territorial integrity of Greece:
  

  "The General Assembly having considered etc etc … (full text appended at the end of the article)
  
  
  Recommends the return to Greece of Greek children at present away from their homes when the children, their father or mother or, in his or her absence, their closest relative, express a wish to that effect;
  
  
  Invites all the Members of the United Nations and other States on whose territory these children are to be found to take the necessary measures for implementation of the present recommendation;
  
  
  Instructs the Secretary-General to request the International Committee of the Red Cross and the League of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to organize and ensure liaison with the national Red Cross organizations of the States concerned with a view to empowering the national Red Cross organizations to adopt measures in the respective countries for implementing the present recommendation.
  
  
  Hundred and sixty-seventh plenary meeting,
  
  
  27 November 1948"
  

  The request was renewed by another unanimous UN resolution in 1949 titled again:
  

  "THREATS TO THE POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF GREECE - 288 (IV) (18 November 1949)
  
  
  Noting the report submitted by the International Committee of the Red Cross and the League of the Red Cross Societies on the question of the repatriation of Greek children,and expressing warm appreciation of the efforts made by the two International Red Cross organizations to facilitate the implementation of General Assembly resolution 193 (III) C, Noting that the Greek children have not as yet been returned to their homes….
  
  
  2.Urges all the Members of the United Nations and other States harbouring the Greek children to make all necessary arrangements, in consultation and co-operation with the international Red Cross organizations, for the early return to their homes of the children with the aforementioned resolution;"
  

  These and subsequent UN resolutions were not answered. From 1950 to 1952 only 684 children were permitted to return to Greece. By 1963, around 4000 children had been repatriated. Of those who did not return many died of illness, some escaped to Germany and others have since returned or have yet to return. The reason no one from the communist countries complained about the children abductions at the Cominform meetings was precisely because the genocidal abduction of the Greek children was planned in a Cominform meeting early in 1948. By the summer of that year some 28,000 children had been abducted from Greece. However, the inhabitants of FYROM and their expatriates have been made to believe - and they try to convince the world - that the crime was conducted by Greece. An atrocity - nothing less!
  
  
  What a disgrace for spokepersons and TV stations on behalf a people who desire to become a part of the European Union and Nato. This behavior is so inflammatory, no excuses can be made for it.
  
  
  Not only the United Nations but the voice of church leaders was damming for the abductions of the Greek children to the Communist Block:
  
  
  The Greek Orthodox Church protested against the child abductions and the Greek Archbishop and all Orthodox Patriarchs wished that the children would return to their mothers and their family and that the crime stops.
  
  
  Pope Pius said 'We are mourning because in Christian Europe, hundreds of children were violently taken from their mothers, from their parents and from their schools, to be educated, or to say better brainwashed from foreign teachers, acting on orders of the blasphemous abductors''
  
  
  Greek Cypriot Archbishop Makarios II also made a speech, hoping that the civilized world would help the Greek children return to their homes and family.
  
  
  On April 19th, 1950, US President Harry S. Truman made the following statement at the House of Representatives:
  

  "My dear Mr. Speaker,
  
  
  I fully share the concern of the House of Representatives for the thousands of children removed from Greece to eastern Europe by the communist guerrilla forces, and I welcome the adoption of House Resolution 514 of March 22, 1950, calling for the speedy return of these children to their homes and homeland.
  
  
  The rights of children and parents to share the protection, comradeship and beneficent influence of a family home are fundamental and have been implicitly recognized, in the case of the Greek children, in two unanimous resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly. It is morally inadmissible that political considerations or technical difficulties should be allowed to stand in the way of the reunion of these children with their parents.
  
  
  The Executive Branch of the Government has been persistent in its endeavors to secure effective compliance with the United Nations resolutions in this case. These efforts will not be relaxed until the Greek children are back in their homes."
  

  The text of House Resolution 514 is as follows:
  

  "Resolved, That the House of Representatives expresses its profound concern for the thousands of Greek children removed or carried off into countries of eastern Europe by the Communist guerrilla forces during the course of the recent guerrilla warfare in Greece, and requests the President to exert all of his powers, acting through the United Nations and other international organizations and directly with the governments of the countries where these children are located, to the end that these thousands of children shall be speedily returned to their homes and homeland ."
  

  
  
  History cannot be created. Reality cannot be reinvented. The world is not a former communist propaganda enclave. On the issue of the atrocity of the child abductions, the voice of most of humanity has been loud and clear. They were Greek children used as a pawn in the communist Macedonia gamble.
  
  
  APPENDIX
  
  
  United Nations Resolution 193 (III). Threats to the political independence and territorial integrity of Greece
  
  
  A
  
  
  The General Assembly,
  
  
  1. Having considered the reports l of the Special Committee established by General Assembly resolution 109 (II))
  
  
  2. Having noted the conclusions of the Special Committee and, in particular, its UNANIMOUS conclusion that, despite the aforesaid resolution of the General Assembly, "the Greek guerillas have continued to receive aid and assistance on a large scale from Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, with the knowledge of the governments of those countries, and that the Greek guerillas in the frontier zones have, as found by the Special Committee:
  
  
  (i) "Been largely dependent on external supply. Great quantities of arms, ammunition and other military stores have come across the border, notably during times of heavy fighting. Strongly held positions of the guerillas have protected their vital supply lines from Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and, in particular, from Albania. In recent months, there has been less evidence of receipt of supplies from Yugoslavia by the guerrillas;
  
  
  (ii) «Frequently moved at will in territory across the frontier for tactical reasons, and have thus been able to concentrate their forces without interference by the Greek army, and to return to Greece when they wished;
  
  
  (iii) "Frequently retired safely into the territory of Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia when the Greek army exerted great pressure";
  
  
  3. Having noted further the conclusions of the Special Committee that a continuation of this situation «constitutes a threat to the political independence and territorial integrity of Greece
  
  
  and to peace in the Balkans" and "that the conduct of Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia had heen inconsistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations",
  
  
  4. Having noted the recommendations submitted by the Special Committee,
  
  
  5. Considers that the continued aid given by Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia to the Greek guerrillas endangers peace in the Balkans, and is inconsistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations;
  
  
  6. Calls upon Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia to cease forthwith rendering any assistance or support in any form to the guerrillas in fighting against the Greek Government, including the use of their territories as a base for the preparation or launching of armed action;
  
  
  7. Again calls upon Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia to co-operate with Greece in the settlement of their dispute by peaceful means in accordance with the recommendations contained in resolution 109 (II);
  
  
  8. Calls upon Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia to co-operate with the Special Committee in enabling it to carry out its functions, in particular the function of being able to assist teh Governments concerned in accordance with paragraph 10 (c) of the present resolution, and upon Greece to continue co-operate toward the same end;
  
  
  9. Recommends to all Members of the United Nations and to all other States that their Governments
  
  
  refrain from any action designed to assist directly or through any other Government any armed group fighting against the Greek Government;
  
  
  10. Approves the reports of the Special Committee, continues it in being with the functions conferred upon it by resolution 109 (II) and instructs it :
  
  
  (a) To continue to observe and report on the response of Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia to the General Assembly injunction not to furnish aid to the Greek guerrillas, in accordance with General Assembly resolution 109 (II) and the present resolution;
  
  
  (h) To continue to utilize observation groups with personnel and equipment adequate for the fulfillment of its task;
  
  
  (c) To continue to be available to assist the Governments of Albania, Bulgaria, Greece and Yugoslavia in the implementation of resolution 109 (II) and of the present resolution; and for this purpose, in its discretion to appoint, and utilize the services and good offices of one or more persons whether or not members of the
  
  
  Special Committee;
  
  
  11. Decides that the Special Committee shall have its principal headquarters in Greece and, with the co-operation of the Government or Governments concerned, shall perform its functions in such places as it may deem appropriate for the fulfilment of its mission;
  
  
  12. Authorizes the Special Committee to consult, in its discretion, with the Interim Committee with respect to the performance of its functions in the light oJ developments;
  
  
  13. Requests the Secretary-General to provide the Special Committee with adequate staff and facilities to enable it to perform its functions.
  
  
  Hundred and sixty-seventh plenary meeting
  
  
  27 November 1948.
  
  
  B
  
  
  The General Assembly recommends that Greece, on the one hand, and Bulgaria and Albania, on the other, establish diplomatic relations with each other, the absence of which is harmful to the relations between these countries;
  
  
  Recommends the Governments of Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia to renew the previously conventions for the settlement of frontier questions or to conclude new ones, and also to settle the question of refugees in the spirit of mutual understanding and the establishment of good-neighbour relations;
  
  
  Furthermore recommends the Governments of Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia to inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations at the end of six months, for communication to Member States of the United Nations, of the fulfillment of the above-mentioned recommendations.
  
  
  Hundred and sixty-seventh plenary meeting,
  
  
  27 November 1948.
  
  
  C
  
  
  The General Assembly
  
  
  Recommends the return to Greece of Greek children at present away from their homes when the children, their father or mother or, in his or her absence, their closest relative, express a wish to that effect;
  
  
  Invites ail the Members of the United Nations and other States on whose territory these children are to be found to take the necessary measures for implementation of the present recommendation;
  
  
  Instructs the Secretary-General to request the International Committee of the Red Cross and the League of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies to organize and ensure liaison with the national Red Cross organizations of the States concerned with a view to empowering the national Red Cross organizations to adopt measures in the respective countries for implementing the present recommendation.
  
  
  Hundred and sixty-seventh plenary meeting,
  
  
  27 November 1948.
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 09:22

  Stifling the Cry of Irene at the "7th Macedonian-North American Conference" -A case of nuanced censorship through dehumanization and disentitlement*

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  As someone who has vehemently opposed from the outset any form of political interference with the "7th Macedonian-North American Conference" at the University of Utah (November 5-8, 2009), I am obliged to report an incident, which, in my view, infringes on the right to freedom of speech.
  
  Irene Damopoulou-Karatzios, an expatriate bilingual Greek Macedonian, who was present at the conference, was allegedly disallowed, by Professor Loring Danforth, the speaker of one of the presentations, to express a dissenting perspective (during the allotted Q&A period) concerning a local Slavonic dialect spoken in the Kastoria region of Greek Macedonia but most importantly, to offer a personal account of her very own childhood experiences dating back to the fateful days of "Παιδομάζωμα", i.e., the "Evacuation" or "Abduction" of Children (depending on different perspectives) during the Greek Civil War (1946-49)[1].
  
  Even though I was not physically present at the conference, I have had the opportunity to speak on this matter with Mrs. Damopoulou-Karatzios, whom I know personally and deeply respect. I believe that....
  ..... her grievance has merit and have no reason whatsoever to doubt the veracity of her statements.
  
  It is noteworthy that Irene Damopoulou-Karatzios was also portrayed -by another speaker at the same conference- in demeaning terms. In his blurb in MakNews, Dr. Michael Seraphinoff, Chair of the 10th Session of the "7th Macedonian-North American Conference", has openly belittled, humiliated and dehumanized Mrs. Damopoulou, in a most condescending way. Whilst infringing on the principles of objectivity, fairness and scholarly open-mindedness, Dr. Seraphinoff makes a farreaching and tenuous assumption of Irene Damopoulou-Karatzios' "ethnicity" when he rejects a priori her Greek Macedonian identity thus effectively rejecting the existence of divergent Macedonian identities [2]. Indeed, Dr. Seraphinoff's statement is quite telling in this regard:
  
  "This poor woman had probably been drawn into a Greek family or circle years before, and in order to keep peace in the family had decided to play dumb when it came to her linguistic and ethnic identity. To an outsider it appeared to be quite the sad spectacle, for her Greek handlers to parade her out at an academic conference as some sort of living proof of the non-existence of her mother tongue and ethnicity.
  [www.maknews.com]
  
  The pursuit of knowledge calls for the free exchange of ideas and perspectives as well as the open expression of divergent opinions. The ability to participate in a fair and open debate is fundamentally hindered if the speaker of a presentation or the Chair/Moderator of a session decide to suppress dissenting opinions by exercising their "prerogative" to stifle discourse and cut off dialogue. Silencing a legitimate eyewitness at an academic conference, on the grounds of dissent, violates the academic code governing freedom of expression and standards of conduct.
  
  Everyone is entitled to dignity and fair treatment. Such treatment ought to be extended  both to scholars and non-scholars (lay members of an audience). I submit that Mrs. Damopoulou was denied at the University of Utah conference the common courtesy of being heard and respected as a member of the Greek Macedonian community and also as a credible eyewitness – by virtue of being a young victim of involuntary evacuation and forced migration during the Greek Civil War (1946-49).
  
  Indeed, what Irene Damopoulou-Karatzios has recently experienced, both during and after the conference, is precisely the kind of dehumanization and disentitlement that is considered as one of the basic psychological substrates underlying the perpetuation of ethnic conflicts.
  
  Professor Christos D. Katsetos
  MD, Dr philos, FRC Path
  
  * Parts of this text were originally posted in the Modern Greek Studies Association List (MGSA-L) on November 10, 2009 under the thread "Conference Reignites Feud".
  [maillists.uci.edu]
  
  FOOTNOTES
  [1] Ioannis Bougas, "Η Φωνή της Ειρήνης" (The Cry of Irene)- the true story of a young girl, Irene Damopoulou from the Greek Macedonian region of Kastoria unfolding during the trying years of the Greek Civil war (1946-1949)
    [www.biblionet.gr]
  
  [2] For a balanced account of scholarly perspectives and critical reappraisals of the subject, see “Μακεδονικές ταυτότητες στο χρόνο” (Macedonian identities in time) Εκδόσεις Πατάκη - 2008
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 01:39

  Anti-Hellenic movie “A Name is a Name” playing in FYROM diaspora festival

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  At the so-called “Macedonian Film Festival” in Toronto. Made by a small European film company with the heavy support of the Skopje government and its allies and lobbies, and by its political party “Rainbow” (Grk: Ouranio Toxo) in Greece, it will be distributed throughout North America in coming weeks. It attempts to depict Greece as a human-rights-abuser
  
  It projects a fictitious story of a Skopjian-American marine “Nick Stoyan” being tortured by skinhead look-alike Greek officials. In an attempt to dupe American viewers its has images of the American flag interweaved with the Star of Vergina.
  
  One YouTube trailer we located says “Ellada the other Greece”
  
  “A Name is a Name: A film about a Nation held hostage because of its name.”
  
  [www.anameisaname.com]
  
  Here is the offensive Anti-Hellenic You Tube trailer in English:
  
  You Tube: Nick Stoyan, eng
  
  
  
  by Hellenic League of America (HLA)
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 11.11.2009
• 11:40

  The FYROM name issue

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  The FYROM name issue is not simply a dispute over historical facts and symbols. It is a problem with regional and international dimensions, given that FYROM is exercising a policy of irredentism and territorial claims fuelled by the falsification of history and the usurpation of Greeces historical and national heritage.
  
  In its current form, the FYROM name issue arose in 1991, when FYROM declared its independence under the name Republic of Macedonia.
  
  Historically, the Greek name Macedonia refers to....
  
  
   the state and civilisation of the ancient Macedonians, which beyond doubt is part of Greeces national and historical heritage and bears no relation whatsoever with the residents of FYROM, who are Slavs by descent and arrived in region of the ancient Kingdom of Macedonia at a much later stage.
  
  Geographically, the term Macedonia refers to a broader region that includes portions of the territories of various Balkan countries (mainly Greece, FYROM and Bulgaria). However, the greater part of geographical Macedonia coincides with the area covered by the ancient Greek Macedonia, which lies within the boundaries of modern Greece. Some 2.5 million Greek citizens currently live in the Greek part of Macedonia, whose inhabitants have called and considered themselves Macedonians since time immemorial.
  
  The name issue originated in the aftermath of the Second World War, when Josip Broz Tito separated the area then known as Vardar Banovina (now FYROM) from Serbia, granting it the status of a Republic within the new federal Yugoslavia, under the name Socialist Republic of Macedonia, concurrently promoting the doctrine of a separate Macedonian Nation. Obviously, the most important reason for opting to promote the doctrine of Macedonianism at clear variance with the geographical reality of the broader region of Macedonia was his desire to gain access to the Aegean Sea by cultivating the notion of reunification of all Macedonian territories.
  
  This is the context of the irredentist efforts that have been mounted by FYROMs political leadership to nurture in the countrys citizens via school books and propaganda the notion that they are the descendents of the ancient Macedonians, thus cultivating the concept of a United Macedonia, a portion of which is FYROM, with other parts under Greek, Bulgarian and Albanian occupation. It is clear that the irredentist doctrine of a United Macedonia opens the way to claims on occupied territories.
  
  Against this historical background, FYROM was admitted to the UN in 1993 under a provisional name, as the Security Council (Resolution 817) noted that a difference has arisen over the name of that state which needs to be resolved in the interest of the maintenance of peaceful and good-neighbourly relations in the region( Security Council Resolution 817 of 1993).The Security Council further called on Greece and FYROM (Security Council Resolution 845 of 1993) to enter into negotiations on a definitive solution to the problem. The obligation undertaken by both parties to negotiate an agreement on the name issue was set down in the Interim Accord signed by Greece and FYROM in 1995, establishing, at the same time, a code of conduct between the parties.
  
  Since then, Greece has made every effort to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution on the name issue. Unfortunately, 13 years later, no significant progress has been achieved, due to FYROMs intransigence, bad faith, and provocative attitude, as it holds to the maximalist position of rejecting any name other than the constitutional Republic of Macedonia, thus rendering the negotiations under the UN aegis an interminable exchange of views.
  
  At the same time, FYROM is systematically violating the bulk of the provisions of the Interim Accord,
  
  

  -pursuing the imposition of its constitutional name, bypassing the obligation to work for a negotiated settlement, and
  

  -proceeding to a number of irredentist and provocative actions and statements directed against Greece
  

  The most recent examples of this conduct include  putting up posters in FYROMs capital showing a Greek flag with a Nazi swastika in place of the Christian cross. A few months later, the Greek diplomatic mission in Skopje suffered serious damage perpetrated by a fanatical crowd, which enjoyed the tolerance of the countrys law enforcement authorities.
  
  FYROMs political conduct constitutes a severe injury to good neighbourly relations and a destabilizing factor in the wider Balkan region, as the countrys leadership has chosen the treacherous path of extreme nationalism, in violation of the principles of international law.
  
  At the April 2008 NATO Summit in Bucharest, the member states of the Alliance agreed with Greeces position on the need for FYROM to comply with the principle of good neighbourly relations and collectively decided (paragraph 20, Bucharest Summit Declaration) that an agreement on the name issue is a necessary prerequisite for FYROMs accession to NATO. The Summit Declaration states that an invitation to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia will be extended as soon as a mutually acceptable solution to the name issue has been reached.
  
  In a follow-up to NATOs Bucharest decision, the European Council stated in its Conclusions of 20 June 2008 and for the first time explicitly that the resolution of the name issue is essential for the opening of accession negotiations with FYROM.
  
  Unfortunately, the calls of the international community have gone unheeded by FYROMs political leadership, which though strengthened by the outright majority achieved in the June 2008 elections has chosen not to show the political will to resolve the longstanding name issue, but rather to attempt to derail the negotiations under the UN, raising issues in no way related to the provisions of Security Council Resolutions 817 and 845.
  
  For Greece, the definitive settlement of the matter and the finding of a mutually acceptable solution remain the sole objective. Greeces shift from its initial negotiating position accepting the idea of a compound name that includes the term Macedonia on the condition that there is also a geographical qualifier is proof of the constructive spirit and good faith in which Greece has approached the negotiations under the UN to date.
  
  The Greek side calls for:
  

  1. the adoption of a definitive composite name with geographical qualification of the term Macedonia, for all purposes (erga omnes) and for all uses, so as to avoid confusion with Greek Macedonia and to put an end to the irredentist policy and territorial aspirations of FYROM,
  

  2. that FYROM genuinely renounces the usurpation of historical and national heritage of the Greek people,
  

  3. Endorsement of the definitive solution by the UN Security Council, so as to ensure respect for its implementation.
  

  Source: Hellenic Ministry of Foreign Affairs
  
  
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 05.11.2009
• 23:44

  The truth about "United Macedonian Diaspora"

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  This is a Q & A for those having difficulties comprehending what was posted in my previous messages.
  
  Online version: [paste2.org]
  
  In both cases, beware of folding links - or just get the pdf (end of the Q & A).
  
  
  =========START=========
  
  The truth about "United Macedonian Diaspora" - Q & A
  
  
  Q: What happened?
  
  
  
  A: Maknews.com is a web forum frequented by "United Macedonian Diaspora" (UMD) members. A discussion explaining UMD's philosophy and goals, suddenly vanished.
  
  Q: Why?
  A: If you read the text, you'll understand why. This discussion could not continue publicly and was probably moved to a private forum.
  
  Q: Where can I read the text?
  A: The URL for the discussion is www.maknews.com/forum/post212232.html but, as said before, this topic was deleted or moved.
  
  Q: So, how do we know what was written?
  A: Several people saved copies of the discussion.
  
  Q: Nice try, but one could easily forge these documents. Where's the proof?
  A: Let's use an independent third party then. Google caches data across the internet and presents small chunks of text below the search results. Using the appropriate search phrases, a larger text can be reconstructed from these bits.
  
  Q: Is that cheating?
  A: Of course not. See [www.google.com] for advanced search techniques.
  
  Q: OK, I believe you now. Still, I don't know what to do.
  A: Just follow these links then.
  
  [www.google.com]
  
  [www.google.com]
  
  [www.google.com] [www.google.com]
  
  [www.google.com]
  
  [www.google.com]
  
  [www.google.com] [www.google.com]
  
  [www.google.com] [www.google.com]
  
  [www.google.com]
  
  Q: This is time consuming. What's the text?
  A: Here it is.
  
  "There is only one Macedonian and that is the ethnic Macedonian.
  There are citizens of Macedonia who can be Albanian, Turkish, Vlach, Roma, etc.
  There can be citizens of Greece who live in the occupied part of Macedonia who may be Greeks, Vlachs, Pontians, Albanians, etc.
  There can be citizens of Bulgaria who live in the occupied part of Macedonia who may be Bulgarian, Turkish, Roma, etc.
  There can be citizens of Albania who live in the occupied part of Macedonia who may be Albanian, Turkish, etc.
  There can be citizens of Serbia who live in the occupied part of Macedonia who may be Serbian, Albanian, etc.
  But NONE of them are Macedonians. They just live in Macedonia.
  The only Macedonians are the ethnic Macedonians, who may live in Macedonia (all of) or anywhere in the world.
  The term Macedonian is an ethnic term, not a geographical term.
  I don't think I can be much clearer than that.
  Read this: www.artofmacedonism.com
  I assure you, that's what everyone involved at UMD's leadership level believes in and supports. That's what UMD is all about."
  
  Q: Granted, it doesn't look good. When did that happen?
  A: March 2009. See Google's preview text at [www.google.com] for more..
  
  Q: How is UMD connected?
  A: Participants in the discussion are UMD members. For an example, see [www.google.com] (same author as above).
  
  Q: Well, that could be a misunderstanding, right?
  A: Wrong. By now we've established bigotry and irredentism, using publicly available, independent third party means.
  
  Q: What about artofmacedonism.com?
  A: This site (now defunct) was mentioned in the maknews.com discussion. The registrant was UMD.
  
  Q: How do you know that?
  A: Just whois the domain.
  
  Q: What is whois?
  A: Whois is a procedure used for querying the domains' databases, in order to determine information about them - such as registrant data.
  
  Q: How do I do that?
  A: Use any free service available.
  
  Q: I'm not that technical.
  A: Use NetworkSolutions and DomainTools. These are the results from [www.networksolutions.com] and [whois.domaintools.com] regarding registrant data.
  
  United Macedonian Diaspora
  Private Avenue
  Melbourne, NA 3000
  AU
  
  Q: What was the content of that site?
  A: You'll find the complete text at [209.85.229.132] and a small excerpt below.
  
  "The Macedonian Cause
  
  ...national unification of all Macedonians living in all parts of Macedonia; the Republic of Macedonia, Aegean Macedonia, Pirin Macedonia, Mala Prespa & Golo Brdo and Gora..."
  
  Q: Can you explain the part about "...Aegean Macedonia, Pirin Macedonia, Mala Prespa & Golo Brdo and Gora..."?
  A: "Aegean Macedonia" is the greek and "Pirin Macedonia" the bulgarian part of the modern wider region of Macedonia (51% greek, 11% bulgarian). This terminology is frequently used by irredentists. "Mala Prespa & Golo Brdo" and "Gora" are regions of Albania and Kosovo respectively.
  
  Q: Aren't these parts inhabited by different ethnic groups?
  A: Today, 75% of the 5 million people living in the region of Macedonia do not identify as "ethnic Macedonians" but as Greeks (half of them), Albanians, Bulgarians, Roma, Turks and Serbs.
  
  Q: What about the "national unification" then? It doesn't make any sense.
  A: Irredentism isn't rational.
  
  Q: Where can I find more information to download, print out and share with my friends?
  A: There is a document (now updated) containing links, texts, screenshots and photos. Try the links below.
  
  ORIGINAL - [https:]]
  SHORT URL - [bit.ly]
  MIRROR - [www.scribd.com]
  
  
  =========END=========
  
  Regards,
  
  Milos Petrovic
  
  =======================================================
  SOURCE: MGSA
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 04.11.2009
• 23:32

  The President of the Hellenic Republic on the FYROM Name Issue

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  In his address at the lunch in honor of the UN Secretary Ban Ki-moon in Athens on November 4, 2009 the President of the Hellenic Republic Karolos Papoulias in regard to the issue of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (fYRoM) noted: “The problem is simple. The geographical area of Macedonia is since the Middle Ages a multiethnic region. It is not the homeland of one single nation.
  
  The tort of Skopje is that while as a state and an ethnicity is a Part, it portrays itself as if it is the Whole. They call their country ‘Macedonia’, their ethnicity and language ‘macedonian’, because through these names they are trying to register mortgages in all of Macedonia. The rhetoric for the great macedonian dismembered homeland is serving this view. “
  
  The President made clear that Greece is not seeking to baptize the neighboring state, but resists to this attempt of usurpation.
  
  “We support a composite name with a geographical qualifier for the state that is for all uses, with the exclusive aim of the names to reflect the reality of the region so as to act as a factor of good neighborhood and not as a factor that poisons the bilateral relations and the climate in the wider region.”
  
  “Good neighborly relations between countries are not built on outstanding issues” said the President, with a particular reference to his personal efforts as a foreign minister.
  
  “We signed the Interim Agreement in 1995 just to give the possibility to find in a consensual climate a compromise to be grounded in the reality of the region. Unfortunately, Skopje turned the planned negotiation to a speculation process.
  
  As a result, Greece has no choice but to set as a condition for the membership of the fYRoM in the European Union and the NATO, a mutually acceptable solution. As long as this outstanding issue finds no solution, Greece cannot give its consent. “
  
  “fYRoM itself has the key to its integration into the Euro-Atlantic institutions” he concluded.
  
  [www.kathimerini.gr] [www.macedonian.com.au]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 03.11.2009
• 01:12

  Papandreou and Gruevski meet

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou and Nikola Gruevski, his counterpart from the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), met for half an hour on the sidelines of the European Union summit in Brussels on Thursday.
  
  It was the first meeting between the two since Papandreou took over as Prime Minister and the first meeting between prime ministers of the two countries since March 2006.
  
  Both agreed that a mutually acceptable solution to the name dispute is a priority for both countries. In conversation with Mr. Gruevski, Mr. Papandreou is reported to have said that Greece intends to play a leading role in the EU accession of southeastern European states but that a resolution of the name dispute which respects Greece’s positions of a name with a geographical qualifier is a condition for accession talks.
  
  The meeting followed on from the lightning three day visit of Mr. Gruevski to Australia earlier in the week.
  
  The purpose of his visit was the signing of a bilateral Social Security Agreement between the FYROM and Australia. [neoskosmos.com]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 31.10.2009
• 12:29

  Pr. Nikos Zaikos as regards the FYROM name issue*

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  In the international relations, every state is free to choose the name that wants. But when exercising its right to choose its name and indeed when exercising any other right, it must do so in a manner that will not obstruct other states’ exercise of their own right or do, that does not differ in its aim from the aim for which this right was accorded, and that does not cause injury to another state. Prohibition of the abuse of rights is a general principle of law found time and again in international legal practice; and it comes higher up in the hierarchy than the rules governing the exercise, by the subjects of international law, of their individualized rights. [Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Amsterdam, Elsevier, I,1992, pages 4, 7-8).
  
  As regards the specific issue (the onomatology of states in international law) that examined in this chapter , international practice chows clearly and unequivocally that a state’s right to choose its name or its symbols may be ...
  
  restricted if international peace and security be placed in jeopardy by such name or symbols. It is also well known that the maintenance of peace may not only be endangered through the use of violence, but also by acts that are not at the outset contrary to international law.
  
  
  In the case in question, the practice of the United Nations and of the European Union shows that Greece’s claim that a state’s choice of name may constitute a form of aggression is not without foundation. Moreover, there is recognition of the possibility in theory that a state’s choice of name may be taken as hostile propaganda against a neighbouring state, inasmuch as that name is adjudged to conceal territorial ambitions.
  
  
  From this point of view, it is no secret that maps have been repeatedly published in FYROM with the current international boundaries altered in such a way as to portray the country with broadened geographical and ethnic borders taking in what FYROM refers to as Greece’s ‘irredenta territory’. It should be noted that the purpose of maps is not simply to give geographical information; they are a record of the limits of a state’s territorial sovereignty and may be cited in evidence as proof of title in international law. Though to speak of ‘cartographic aggression’ might seem excessive, publishing misleading maps does give the injured state, in this case Greece, every right to make a formal protest.
  
  
  But it is not just on maps that there is misinformation. To quote a claim from a speech made by FYROM’s former ambassador to the US, Ljubica Acevska, and published in the Valparaiso University Law Review:
  

  ‘The name controversy pertains to Greece objecting to the Republic of Macedonia referring to itself as “Macedonia” because Greece annexed a territory known as Aegean Macedonia earlier this century in the Balkan Wars and fears that Macedonia may seek back this land, populated by ethnic Macedonians’.(34,Summer 2000, 477 f, with 484 n. 9)
  

  At all events, going by current international regulations, in the six official languages of the UN list of country names, FYROM’s name is being referred to as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Consequently, the claim made by FYROM’s representatives at international meetings that the name FYROM is not the real name of the country is, besides being a direct violation of the Interim Accord, not acceptable by international organs. Going by current international regulations, FYROM has never been released from its legal obligation to choose a name after negotiation with, and agreement with, Greece.
  
  *This text is translation of the article “the onomatology of states in international law: the case of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” from the book “Macedonian identities” (Makedonikes taftotites, Patakis, edition 2008)
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 30.10.2009
• 14:21

  We need historical lectures basing on facts or in political motives? (The case of the so-called 7th Conference on Macedonia Studies at Utah.)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  First of all I want to apologize from my bad English grammar. As native Macedonian [1] my mother language is Greek and not Slavic as the postmodernists [2] professors that will participate in this Conference claim arbitrarily.[3]
  
  
  In November 5-8 ay the University of Utah in Salt Lake City will take place the so-called "7th Macedonian-North American Conference on Macedonian Studies".[4] Although a number of presenters strictly deal with subjects of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, there are politically motivated lectures that attack and disparage the people of Greece, the Greek Cultural identity and as they twist historical facts through their disturbing presentation. These motivated lectures are influence under the umbrella of the Slavmacedonism [5], a post modern nationalism ideology.
  
  
  In American universities today not everyone knows what extreme Slavmacedonists are doing in their ....
  
  
  classrooms/conference/lectures or even if they do know, they choose not to ask questions. Ordinarily if someone has a theory that involves a radical departure from what the experts have professed, he or she is expected to defend his or her position by providing evidence in its support. But no one seemed to think it was appropriate to ask for evidence from the professors who claimed that the Slav Macedonians of the FYROM have any kind of connection with the ancient Macedonian civilization.
  
  
  Normally, if one has a question about a text that another instructor is using, one simply asks why he or she is using that book. But since this conventional line of inquiry was closed to us, I have to raise my questions in a more public context.
  
  
  A lecture at which serious questions could not be asked, and in fact were greeted with hostility--the occasion seemed more like a political rally than an academic event as this that will take place in Utah. Arthur Schlesinger says in “The Disuniting of America” that the purpose of history is to promote not group self-esteem, but understanding of the world and the past, dispassionate analysis, judgment and perspective, respect for divergent cultures and traditions, and unflinching protection for those unifying ideas of tolerance, democracy, and human rights that make free historical inquiry possible.
  
  
  Slavmacedonists supporters have suggested many ways to revise the teaching of European history and science.[6] But if diversity does not apply to truth, then there are limits to academic freedom. That does not mean that we should try to keep students from knowing about erroneous theories or hypothetical possibilities, or from reading works like the Macedonians Slavs and the connection with the ancient Greek culture or the Slavic idiom that speak Greeks and Slavmavedonians is the same with the creation of the Slav Macedonian language that had as aim to de-Bulgarize the Slav Macedonians and create a separate national consciousness.[7]
  
  
  But lectures that are designed to conceal a considerable body of evidence, or that are intended to instill resentment and distrust in place of open discussion, have no place in the academaic curriculum. I believe it is essential for all of us to realize that some action needs to be taken. It is not simply a matter of doing justice to the ancient Greeks and their modern descendants. Universities must encourage free inquiry and debate, and not permit the classrooms/conference/lectures to be used as a means of political indoctrination. Even more important than that is our obligation to teach history, history that can be supported by warranted evidence and not in half evidence.
  
  
  As Pr. Mary Lefkowich points out the teachers of course need to have freedom to experiment and to test new theories and interpretations. But academic freedom does not give us the right to rewrite history without reference to the known facts—even if by doing so we imagine that we can bring about social improvement. The scientists among us, for example, do not have license to falsify data to achieve desired results. If a scientist in the "hard" sciences does so, he or she is disciplined and even dismissed. It is often more difficult to distinguish between false and true in the writing of history, but it is still usually possible to establish at least the broad outlines, and to give a clear account of the available evidence. Historians do not have the right to invent their own narratives or to misuse evidence.[8]
  
  
  In November 5-8 the up-coming conference will be a new link in the Slavmacedonism chain. The opposite opinion in this one-side conference will be forbidden. The re-invention of history has been the selected terrain of action. The dispute is not a question of survival and grandeur but an issue of challenging territorial stability. This has led to the extreme position of discarding Slav origin and labeling it as a "derogatory term", an "insult". It is indeed dangerous not to cut ties with the Slav past because this brings the country closer to Bulgaria. At the same time it is convenient to baptize Bulgarian national heroes "Macedonians", to deny the Bulgarian origin of the language spoken, to usurp Greek history and to suppress Bulgarophilia and Grecophilia within the country. A visit to Vergina, Pella and tens of archaeological sites in Greece would be enough to ridicule those who suggest that ancient Macedonians spoke Greek because it was a fashionable thing to do. In effect what some suggest here is that ancient Macedonians did not speak their mother tongue but a "foreign language".
  
  
  The finally questions that rose in my mind as regards in this revisionist conference are:
  
  
  (a) The ancient Macedonian culture was invented from the Greeks or the Slavs ?
  (b) How you segregate a Greek Macedonian identity with a Slav Macedonian one?
  (c) Utah University administrators ought to ask whether we need historical lectures basing on facts or in political motives ?
  
  
  Thanks for your timing.
  
  
  NOTES
  [1]- A Macedonian according to several sources [www.merriam-webster.com] [www.thefreedictionary.com] [Oxford English Dictionary] is a native or inhabitant of the (Ancient or Modern) Macedonian region. Any usage diffrent from this that give from the dictionaries has political and ambiguous motives.
  [2]- [www.hum.utah.edu]
  [3]-One of them is the Linguistics professor and Balkan Studies scholar Victor Friedman that portrays Greeks as a most undemocratic and oppressive nation, from ancient to present time, and places the role of Greece in the Balkans in a most negative light. The core of his arguments seems to lie in what he considers suppression of multilingualism and minorities in Greece, which he associates with the current dispute between Greece and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) on the name of the latter country. Scholars and academics invited Dr. Friedman to debate his views in the Hellenic Electronic Center/Professors' Forum*, but he declined their invitation. For more details see “Ime romeos e xeuro plus glose Fazio degli” ( [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com] )
  [4]- Post-modernism is a form of skepticism combined with self-consciousness. Its adherents believe that no historical narrative can be considered authoritative, because writers always have political motives, whether they are aware of them or not. For the post-modernist, the past is more problematic. Though nations are modern and the product of modern cultural conditions, nationalists who want to disseminate the concept of the nation will make liberal use of elements from the ethnic past, where they appear to answer to present needs and preoccupations. The present creates the past in its own image. So modem nationalist intellectuals will freely select, invent and mix traditions in their quest for the imagined political community. For more detail see the works of the Anthony D.Smith.
  [5]- Slav-Macedonism(also call as Macedonism and pseudo-Macedonism) is the political idea prevailing in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) which utilises historical revisionism to establish links between an ethnic group that formed in the 20th century - ethnic 'Macedonians' - and historical events and figures of the 19th century and Middle Ages. For example, Bulgarian Tsar Samuil, despite the overwhelming evidence, is portrayed as a "Macedonian" king. Further attempts are made to deny the Hellenic nature of the ancient kingdom of Macedon and to seek connections between present day ethnic Macedonians and the Ancient Macedonians. Unfortunately for extremist Macedonists , history bears witness to the fact that in the early 1940s the Bulgarian inhabitants of Vardar Macedonia were transformed into "Macedonians" for political reasons by communist dictators (Tito, Stalin, and Dimitrov) and infamous communist organizations (Comintern and the Balkan Communist Federation ).
  [6]- The ROSETTA STONE and the Tendov-Boshevski Controversy by Miltiades, Phoebos and Hephastion Bolaris.[ [ancient-medieval-macedonian-history.blogspot.com] ]
  [7]- “Yugoslav Communism and the Macedonian Question” by Stephen E. Palmer, Jr. Robert R. King, 1971.
  [8]-History Lesson, a race odyssey, Yale University Press, 2008
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 00:22

  former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (fYROM) Nikola Gruevski has made irredentist claims against Greece and Bulgaria

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  27 Oct 2009
  The Prime Minister of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (fYROM), Nikola Gruevski has made irredentist claims against Greece and Bulgaria during a speech to the the Skopjan community in Sydney.
  
  According to a report from fYROM's news agency MINA. Mr Gruevski urged the Skopjan community in Australia to be united.
  
  "Macedonians in Australia enjoy a unique opportunity to live together with their Aegean, Pirin compatriots, which is not the case in their native country, Gruevski said, calling them to not divide on these grounds as there are no Vardar, Aegean, Pirin Macedonians, but only Macedonians," Mr Gruevski is quoted as saying in the MINA report.
  
  Mr Gruevski also asked from the Diaspora to remain united on the issue of the name dispute with Greece.
  
  He noted that the negotiations with Greece are due to resume to find a compromise solution that he promised will not harm "Macedonian national interests, language, nation, culture, integrity, identity, pride and dignity, and will become valid only if embraced by citizens at a referendum."
  
  The response from the Greek deputy Foreign Affairs Minister, Dimitris Droutsas to Mr Gruevski's reference to "Aegean Macedonians" was clear cut.
  
  "We will not enter into any form of dialogue with Mr Gruevski or Skopje about nonexistent issues, " Mr Droutsas said. "Greece sees its relations with Skopje with an open mind and always constructively. Skopje's leadership has to realise that it is up to them to choose between the usual aggressive, nationalistic and irreedentist rhetoric or to invest into a constructive, honest and essential dialogue to resolve the name dispute issue."
  
  He reiterated Greece's position that the only solution is a definitive composite name with geographical qualification of the term Macedonia, for all purposes (erga omnes) and for all uses.
  
  http://www.neoskosmos.com/news/en/gruevski-claims-mina
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 29.10.2009
• 22:02

  Stern warning to Skopje from Parvanov over 'minority' claim

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  SOFIA (ANA-MPA - B. Borisov) Bulgarian President Georgi Parvanov on Thursday warned the government in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) to retract statements regarding the existence of an ethnic 'Macedonian' minority in Bulgaria's Pirin region or jeopardise the country's prospects of joining the EU.
  
  An announcement released by the Bulgarian presidency's press office on Thursday quotes Parvanov's stern reaction to a statement made by FYROM Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski - who referred to "Macedonians of Vardar, the Aegean and Pirin" - and his warning that Sofia's support for FYROM's EU accession was not "unconditional".
  
  "I am bewildered by the position that has been expressed by the Prime Minister of neighbouring [FYROM]. I see it as unacceptable, as an expression of territorial claims. It is all the more unacceptable as [FYROM] aspires to become a member of the EU,” Parvanov said on Thursday, during an official visit to Australia.
  
  Bulgaria's president stressed that Sofia's support for its neighbour's EU entry was largely dependent on that country's behaviour and he urged Skopje to immediately withdraw similar claims.
  
  Parvanov also underlined that Skopje must fulfill the criteria for EU membership, which included that of cultivating good relations with its members.
  
  Bulgaria's Deputy Foreign Minister Marin Raykov, who accompanied Parvanov on the trip to Australia, noted that FYROM would receive a date for the start of accession negotiations with the EU as soon as as it resolved the problems with its neighbours.
  
  Skopje's government claims the existence of ethnic 'Macedonian' minorities in northern Greece and southwest Bulgaria; claims disputed by the governments in both those countries. It is also in a dispute with Greece over the use of the name 'Macedonia', which Athens construes as an attempt to make territorial claims against a northern Greek province with the same name.
  
  According to the Greek argument, the name Macedonia actually describes a much broader geographic area, which spans parts of Greece, Bulgaria and also FYROM itself.
  
  [www.ana-mpa.gr]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 27.10.2009
• 09:56

  PanMacedonian Letter to the President of the University of Utah

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  October 26, 2009
  
  President Michael K. Young
  University of Utah
  201 Presidents Circle
  Salt Lake City, Utah 84112
  
  Dear President Young,
  
  On behalf of our multi-thousand membership of our organization and indeed of all U.S. citizens of Hellenic descent, we want to protest in the strongest possible terms the presentation of distorted facts pertaining to the history of Greece. Some of the presenters of the "7th Macedonian-North American Conference on Macedonian Studies" which will take place at the grounds of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, Utah on November 5-8, 2009 are promoting anti-Hellenic hate speech and disparagement: [www.hum.utah.edu] .
  
  Although a number of presenters strictly deal with issues of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), there are politically motivated lectures that attack and disparage the people of Greece as they twist historical facts through their disturbing presentation. We acknowledge the concept of academic freedom, but we are greatly concerned that your University is being used to promote a political agenda based on historical untruths and falsehoods. Anti-Hellenism is equal to anti-Semitism and the United Nations has enacted severe measures for such racism. Nationalists from the FYROM and its Diaspora (both at an official and unofficial level) have expressed hatred directed at Greeks and the Hellenic nation based on their impression of racial superiority and obsession with genetic purity. Official television advertisements in the FYROM have even informed the masses through God’s voice that they are “Macedonoids, progenitors of the white race” whereas others are “Mongoloids”, “Negroids”, and “Mullatoes” (see, especially from 4 minutes, 28 seconds on: [www.youtube.com] ). Official government and academic sources in the FYROM refuse to recognize Greece’s sovereignty over her lands referring to Greece’s northern region as “Aegean Macedonia”, or “the Macedonian region under Greek jurisdiction”. This is evident in Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski’s recent speech to his country’s Diaspora in Australia ( [macedoniaonline.eu] ) and throughout the newly written “Macedonian Encyclopedia” promoted by the “Macedonian Academy of Arts and Sciences (MANU)” in Skopje.
  
  We have heard some of the presenters of the"7th Macedonian-North American Conference on Macedonian Studies" in other forums, regarding the following topics and we would kindly ask the organizing committee of this symposium to provide us with a copy of their presentations:
  
  Alexander the Great and mythic homelands
  Tasos Kostopoulos on Macedonia and the Slavs in Greece: When a forbidden language speaks truth to power;
  Between nationalism and solidarity: Assessing the KKE’s post-war positioning of the Macedonian national liberation struggle;
  Macedonian refugee children from the Greek Civil War;
  From Trnaa to Toronto: The life story of a dete begalec;
  A Macedonian child in a Greek technical school during the Greek Civil War;
  Cleansing the national, polluting the natural: The politics of development and cultural homogeneity in the Florina region;
  
  It is true that we don’t know the content of the presentations. However referring to the title Alexander the Great and mythic homelands, we would like to call your attention to a letter to President Barack Obama, endorsed by 350 (and still growing) archaeologists and academics from worldwide universities and institutions of higher learning. This attests to the falsification and revision of history propagated by the FYROM and its supporters (please visit the web site: [macedonia-evidence.org] ). The letter to President Obama by the archeologists, the historians, and researchers was written to curtail the attempts of historical revision/distortion, and to protect the integrity of historic truth in their academic specialties. The decision of the 350 scholars who cosigned the letter to President Obama was made so that “the scholarly community has a duty to preserve historic truth.”
  
  The title of the presentation: Tasos Kostopoulos on Macedonia and the Slavs in Greece: When a forbidden language speaks truth to power alludes to the attempt of Skopje’s leadership to inflict a “Macedonian” minority in Greece who speak the “Macedonian” language. This so-called “forbidden language” however, is an idiom (which did not have a written form) and was detected around the 18th century forming a part of various slavophone idioms in northern Greece. Its creation was purely utilitarian and practical, and it was used as an unofficial lingua franca so to speak because the area during the Ottoman Era was a colorful tribal mosaic of linguistic and religious groups: Turkish conquerors, Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs, Albanians, Turkmen nomads (Yuruks), Gypsies, Bosnians, Armenians, and Jews among others. They needed a way to understand each other regarding the needs of their daily coexistence. The idiom therefore appeared gradually and has served well the purpose for which it was created, or rather, for which it emerged.
  
  Moreover, it should be noted that the idioms spoken in Ottoman Macedonia were in no way reflective of the ethnic affiliation of its inhabitants since the majority of the people espoused Hellenism. In addition, the present “Macedonian” language of the FYROM is a manufactured language with a Bulgarian base, inflicted on the inhabitants of what was roughly Vardarska Banovina by Marshal Josip Broz Tito and a group of linguists throughout the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s so that he can expedite his plans of annexing Greek Macedonia. The language spoken by the citizens of the FYROM and the idioms spoken in northern Greece are not the same. The leadership of Greece’s neighboring country is attempting to connect this idiom with the language spoken in Skopje, to further press Greece about an ethnic “Macedonian” minority in Greece.
  
  During this conference, time will be spent discussing the supposed expulsion of "Macedonian" children from Greece during the Greek Civil War. Not only is this a legitimization of Stalinist demagoguery, it is also a slap in the face to reality. As has been attested by numerous United Nations resolutions (UN Resolutions: 382 (V Section C), 1950; 618 (VII), 1952; 517 (VI), 1952), these children were Greek. Some were the children of those who collaborated with fascist Bulgarian and Italian forces and later with communist guerillas, many were unrelated children abducted by these fleeing communist guerillas, and most were never repatriated leaving them to the mercy of Communist propaganda in Iron Curtain countries. President Harry S. Truman and the United States of America were staunch supporters of these UN resolutions calling for the repatriation of these children having realized the re-education dangers they faced away from Greece as is clear in his April 19, 1950 address to the Speaker of the House of Representatives: [www.presidency.ucsb.edu] .
  
  Looking at this in the view of the then US Secretary of State's Stettinius's 1944 Circular Airgram to US Diplomatic and Consular Offices (868.014/26 Dec. 1944) as "aggressive intentions against Greece", these children and their offspring have been brought up to believe that they were once not Greek and that they were expelled. Although one must sympathize with their plight because they are truly victims of a dead ideology, perpetuating and sponsoring their ideas is a disservice to them and to history.
  
  Furthermore, a screening of the fictional film "The Secret Book" during this conference is oxymoronic for a meeting that is supposed to be scientific. It is akin to showing "The Da Vinci Code" during a meeting of Catholic bishops. The movie implies a unification of "the whole Macedonian fatherland" erroneously believed by Macedonist nationalists to have been split up in 1912. What is the motivation of showing this fictional film in a scientific conference, other than alluding that neighboring territories should be annexed? Would the University of Utah also open its halls to disgruntled supporters of a confederalist America? It's time to look at things with facts in mind.
  
  We are sure that you were not aware of the motivated sinister intentions of some of the participants of the conference in their quest to present their views on historical events of the area using hate speech in order to promote their “pseudo-Macedonism;” but please be aware that the fine institution of the University of Utah is being used as an accomplice to promote hate speech towards, and disparagement of the Hellenic nation.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  Nina Gatzoulis Supreme President
  Maria Hatzinakou Supreme Secretary
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 25.10.2009
• 22:23

  Dr Christos D. Katsetos answer to Pr Joseph as regards the upcoming conference at the University of Utah

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Dear Professor Joseph,
  
  The appalling and tragicomic tone of the announcement issued by a certain "Hellenic League of America," an obscure group, calling for censoring of the upcoming "7th Macedonian-North American Conference on Macedonian Studies" to be held at University of Utah on November 5-8, 2009, is denounced in no uncertain terms.
  
  Please refer to my previous post in this list:
  [maillists.uci.edu]
  
  At the same time, I submit that it would be somewhat disingenuous to portray the upcoming conference at the University of Utah as being solely an academic symposium devoid of political underpinnings. Indeed, the list of topics announced blend serious scholarship (i.e., on linguistics of Southern Slavic languages) with controversial topics bearing clear political overtones.
  [www.hum.utah.edu]
  
  Let us please agree to disagree that the terms "Macedonians" and "Macedonian" cannot be monopolized and as such, they are not synonymous to Slavic Macedonians (Makedonci/Makedontsi) and Slavic Macedonian (Makedonski) respectively. Macedonia is neither a single country nor the cradle of a single nation, but a geographic region parts of which belong nowadays to four sovereign states, each with its distinctive cultural heritage, national identity, and collective memory.
  
  In fairness, the positions on nomenclature embraced and actively promoted by certain scholars since the early 1990s, cannot be considered as unbiased or impartial. They are in keeping with the official narrative of the Former Yugoslav of Macedonia, which is based on an highly controversial ethnocentric doctrine effectively claiming the entire geographic Macedonian region of modern times as part of that nation’s “tatkovina” (fatherland).
  [www.eliamep.gr]
  [maillists.uci.edu]
  
  Regarding Professor Danforth's analogy as to whether "similar anti Greek material from a Turkish or a Macedonian list" would have been "allowed to appear on the MGSA list?", I wish to reiterate that the expatriate Makedonski organization "United Macedonian Diaspora" (UMD), which is one of the sponsors of the upcoming conference at the University of Utah, has engaged in extreme and virulent nationalist manifestations against Greece and the Greek heritage in Macedonia. This is an indisputable fact, which doubtless adds a political dimension to the conference.
  
  Last but not least, I would like to draw attention to a fundamental difference between the MGSA conferences and the upcoming conference at the University of Utah. The former are not sponsored by donors which foster nationalist agendas. Unfortunately, this is hardly the case with the Slavic Macedonian conference at the University of Utah, which is sponsored -in part- by bona fide lobbying groups of the likes of the "United Macedonian Diaspora" (UMD).
  
  And to set the record straight, once again, the "United Macedonian Diaspora" (UMD) is the recipient of funding from the Turkish Coalition of America (TCA) [umdiaspora.org] so is the University of Utah
  [www.mec.utah.edu]
  
  Respectfully submitted,
  
  Christos D. Katsetos
  
  ===================================================
  
  I want to add something as regards the usage of the "Macedonian" term. A Macedonian according to several sources [ [www.merriam-webster.com] [ [www.thefreedictionary.com] ], [Oxford English Dictionary] is a native or inhabitant of the (Ancient or Modern) Macedonian region. Any usage diffrent from this that give from the dictionaries has political and ambiguous motives.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 23.10.2009
• 20:53

  Treatment of Slav Macedonian history : to de-Bulgarize the Slav Macedonians *

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The treatment of Slav Macedonian history has the same primary goal as the creation of the Slav Macedonian language-to de-Bulgarize the Slav Macedonians and create a separate national consciousness. Since Marx claimed to have discovered the immutable laws of history. Communists have considered the "correct interpretation of history as the foundation of all social science and a Key element of nationality. In the Balkans, history is a primary ingredient in the development of national consciousness which possesses a current relevance that extends beyond mere academic interest. Hence, the Yugoslav Communists were most anxious to mold Macedonian history to fit their conception of Slav Macedonian consciousness.
  
  In setting the tone for the new interpretation of history, Communist experts found past Slav Macedonian history to suffer from two defects. First, "bourgeois historians, although they may have certain merits for the elaboration of the material facts of history, suffer from the weakness of their idealistic theoretic basis."[16] Hence, new historical works must be based on a correct Marxist-Leninist interpretation of history. Second, and perhaps more important, Slav Macedonian history had to sever the umbilical cord to Bulgaria. It was advanced as a principle of Slav Macedonian historiography that key aspects of Slav Macedonian culture had origins separate from Bulgaria, that Slav Macedonian history was distinctively different from Bulgarian history.
  
  Lazar Kolisevski gave the initial clues as to the correct interpretation of Slav Macedonian history in his report to the First Congress of the CPM in 1948. The resolution adopted by the First Congress stressed the importance of ideological conformity and emphasized the use of history to re-educate the Slav Macedonian masses:
  
  

  Great interest should be created [in history] and there should be a systematic approach, with a materialistic elucidation of the historical past of our people in general, and special elaboration of the socialist movement in our country. The history of the people's liberation struggle should be particularly elaborated. A struggle should be carried out for systematic studies of our past among the broad masses as well as among party members. This is a necessary condition for the ideological uplift of party cadres and for the education of the masses in the spirit of socialism. [17]

  
  Slav Macedonian historians, however, apparently had some difficulty in adjusting to the new guidelines for Slav Macedonian history-particularly in distinguishing Slav Macedonian from Bulgarian history. In an article in Komunist in January 1950, Vidoe Smilevski gave a summary of the correct interpretation of Slav Macedonian history. [18] Another article by Kiro Miljovski appeared about the same time but went farther, specifically criticizing Slav Macedonian historians and setting out in more detail the party guidelines for interpreting history. Miljovski was particularly critical of the failure to eliminate Bulgarian influences:
  
  

  Some of our people fail to understand correctly Kuzman Sapkarov's cultural activity in the struggle for the Macedonian language, and they are suspicious about the national character of our entire early national movement simply because Sapkarov or others in the movement were not clearly, explicitly and to the very end nationally inclined, because some of them felt "now a Macedonian, now a Bulgarian." In the same way, some people fall into uncertainty about the Macedonian character of the national liberation movement in Deltev's time simply because Goce Deltev wrote in Bulgarian, because he did not say definitely that Macedonia is one nation and that Bulgaria is another. [19]

  
  To avoid future uncertainty, Miljovski listed a number of expressions (most of them frequently used in Bulgarian historical writing) which were to be banned from Slav Macedonian history.
  
  Although Macedonian historical works began to appear, historians found that research on Slav Macedonia was "complex and difficult" because existing literature "is still permeated with Great Bulgarian spirit, with omissions, distortioqs and falsifications of many historical facts." [20] The Scientific Institute for National History of the Slav Macedonian Nation was established "to eliminate the influence" of the Slav Macedonian Scientific Institute in Sofia which during the interwar period "published most of the documentary and propaganda materials about Macedonia." [21] The Institute, which had indeed published a great deal of material on Slav Macedonia (including its periodical Makedonski pregled), was the principal scholarly advocate during the interwar period of the thesis that the Macedonian Slavs are' Bulgarians.
  
  The question of Bulgarian influence on Slav Macedonian history was the thorniest problem of the new historiography. Obviously it was impossible for the Yugoslav Communists to deny completely the role of Bulgaria in the Macedonian revolutionary movement. One of the early attempts to cope with Bulgarian influence utilized the device of "contradictions." According to this explanation Slav Macedonia's national revival developed as " Macedonian its inner content and Bulgarian in its outer forms," although late in the process some Macedonian national forms were used along with the Bulgarian forms. The "contradiction" between content and forms extended throughout the entire historical process of the Slav Macedonian revival; it was because of this conflict that Macedonian forms took shape, and it was through the development of these forms that Slav Macedonia "categorically proved its individual national character."[22]
  
  Reconciling progressive Marxist historiography with Slav Macedonian national history has proved to be especially difficult. The Slav Macedonian revolutionaries were generally not socialists and the Balkan socialists did not recognize the Macedonian nationality. To walk such a tightrope required great historical agility and the party was frequently called upon to restore balance for historians who went too far in one direction. A Nova Makedonija article for example, counselled historians to avoid errors of the epoch of bourgeois idealization, as there is"no reason for interpreting past events with a romantic pathos." The article explained that in approaching the past, all positive traditions should be included as the inheritance of the proletariat, but conservative tendencies should be rejected. The approach toward historical personalities was criticized as being idealized. For example, although Delcev was a forerunner of Marx in Macedonia, it would be mistaken to call him and others like him real Marxists. [23] In dealing with the Balkan socialist movement, writers had to exercise caution:
  
  

  Our socialists did not have a clear idea of the national belonging of the Macedonian people, nor of the need to establish it as a separate unit, and they adopted the stand that the population in Macedonia was composed of members of the Bulgarian, Serbian, and Greek nations and of the minorities.[24]

  
  Although the socialists were wrong on the Macedonian question, they were socialists - hence, progressive and instrumental in the eventual triumph of socialism in Vardar Macedonia. The socialist movement was an approved topic for history, but its treatment required delicate handling.
  
  In order to conform to the standards of Yugoslav Marxist historiography and at the same time degrade Bulgarian influence and affirm the Slav Macedonian nationality, Slav Macedonian historical writing has stressed certain themes. In order to create a continuous record of Macedonia as a nation, there is constant re-analysis and rediscovery of probable and improbable historical fragments. The medieval empire of Samuelo with its capital at Ohrid has been designated as a "Macedonian" empire (despite the fact that the empire was destroyed by Basil II who earned the title "Bulgar-slayer", for his campaigns against Samuelo). The "Slavic" missionaries Cyril and Methodius are treated with greatest respect and emphasis is placed on their IMacedonian birthplace (Salonika) and on their use of a "Macedonian" dialect ,as the first Slavic literary language. Macedonian revolutionary heroes are carefully treated. In addition to appropriating the historical legacies of the , key founders of the original IMRO-Goce Delcev, Damian Gruev and Pere Tosev-Macedonian historians play up lesser figures who might have given the slightest indication of "socialist" inclination or who were not openly Bulgarophiles. Thus there is glorification of men like Jane Sandansky, Dimo Hadji-Dimov, Petar Peparsev and Nikola Karev, who, because they defected from the IMRO or lost out in internecine organizational fights, have long been forgotten by chroniclers of the IMRO. The more recent IMRO leaders - Aleksandrov, Protogerov and Mihailov - are excluded from the ranks of the progressive for having been tools of Sofia. Besides, they are symbols which are too dangerous and too recent to attempt to manipulate. Pre-World War II Macedonian history orients events of the past towards the final successful climax of the liberation struggle during the war. However, it is emphasized that victory was possible only because of the fraternal assistance of the other Yugoslav nationalities under guidance of the Communist party.
  
  Despite the difficulties of dealing with the national history, in the beginning Slav Macedonian writers enjoyed a relatively larger degree of permissive action with regard to the employment of nationalist symbols than historians of the other Yugoslav republics. In Slav Macedonian history, the main concentration is on genuine national heroes like Delcev and on their nationalistic character, regardless of their attitudes toward the Serbs and socialism. The accepted heroes of other Yugoslav national groups are portrayed almost exclusively from the point of view of their progressive, anti-religious or anti-Hapsburg attitudes. In the case of Croatia and Slovenia, the heroes selected by the Communists are those who favored union with Serbia. However, Belgrade permitted Vardar Macedonia to treat the role of the Serbs rather negatively, usually as Serbian imperiahsm. But, to balance these concessions, Slav Macedonian historians are required to give special emphasis to the role of the CPY in their liberation from Bulgariuans and Serbs. The struggle in the twenties and thirties for the correct party line on the nationality question is often stressed. The Party's efforts to liberate the Slav Macedonians from the Bulgarian occupiers are combined in historical treatises with attacks against old Great Serbism.[25]
  
  Although the party had some difficulty in establishing a historiography to suit its political needs, numerous works on Slav Macedonian history were published by the Scientific Institute for the National History of the Macedonian People (since shorte'ned to the Institute for National History). The early institute publications include a large number of document collections and writings of early Macedonian revolutionaries. Though some monographs were published they were usually limited in scope. [26] In addition to publications of scholarly interest frequent historical articles and programs are carried in the newspapers and mass media of the Macedonian republic. In the campaign of inspiring a Macedonian consciousness among the population, the Communist approved interpretation of history was used as one of the primary tools.
  
  The first serious challenge to the new Slav Macedonian historiography came in 1958. Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, which had re-established close ties after 1955, had a second era of unfriendly relations beginning in Fall 1957 and Spring 1958. As part of the anti-Yugoslav program of the bloc, Bulgaria launched a vigorous campaign to deny the Slav Macedonian language, culture, and nationality and to reassert Slav Bulgarian claims to Macedonia. The Slav Macedonian Communist leadership countered by emphasizing more forcefully the elements of Slav Macedonian culture. Evidencing concern with Macedonian history, Lazar Kolisevski delivered a long speech on Slav Macedonian history at Titov Veles in November 1958. He explained at the beginning that his purpose in dealing with the Slav Macedonian past was "to contribute to the forming of trends towards a correct, scientific understanding of historical events and their underlying social processes," because "we are still faced with many major tasks in the field of clarification of our national history."
  
  The thrust of Kolisevski's treatment of history was two-fold-first, to reduce even further the significance of Bulgaria in Slav Macedonian history, and second, to stress positive treatment of Serb- Slav Macedonian relations. Although earlier Slav Macedonian historians had explain ned Bu1garian influence-by means of a contradiction with Macedonian inner forms and Bulgarian external forms, Kolisevski degraded Bulgarian influence even further. He argued
  
  

  the (Slav)Macedonian nation did not emerge as a result of political manipulations in the twentieth century, but it emerged from the general struggle, resistance and awareness of the people, which began early in the 19th century.

  
  Kolisevski went on to explain that from the very beginning of the 19th century Macedonian national consciousness grew independently and distinctively from Bulgarian consciousness. But with the development of Slav Macedonian consciousness, the Bulgarians developed imperialist ambitions towards Macedonia. The last part of his speech was particularly critical of the most recent Bulgarian denial of the Slav Macedonian nationality.
  
  The role of the Serbs in Macedonian history, however, he treated much more favorably than Slav Macedonian historians had been doing up to that time. Though admitting that the Serbian bourgeoisie intended to establish its hegemony over Macedonia, Kolisevski quoted extensively from Serbian diplomatic correspondence to show that some Serbs acknowledged a Slav Macedonian nationality and opposed the negation of Slav Macedonian consciousness by Bulgaria. The Serbian bourgeoisie came to deny the Slav Macedonian nationality, Kolisevski claimed, when they entered into a tacit agreement with the Bulgarian and Greek bourgeoisie that only Serbs, Greeks and Bulgarians lived in Macedonia "with their respective number to depend on the manner in which Macedonia was carved up." He asserted that nations can only be created by powerful forces at work among the people and never by the actions of politicians.
  
  Although Kolisevski's speech. placed new emphasis on the anti-Bulgarian aspects and softened the anti-Serbian aspects of Slav Macedonian history it did not represent a real departure for Slav Macedonian historiography. The same ideological line adopted after the Communist consolidation in Slav Macedonia is still the historical guideline. In recent years the quality and volume of Slav Macedonian historical writing has increased, but the themes and their treatment, although more sophisticated are much the same as before. The national - liberation struggle, the socialist movement in Yugoslavia and the Balkans, and the Slav Macedonian revolutionary tradition dominate historical works. There is still some reticence to treat Slav Macedonian relations with Yugoslavia and Serbia between the wars, but there is greater emphasis on Serb- Slav Macedonian relations during earlier periods.[28]
  
  The goals of the national history are unchanged-to reduce the Bulgarian role in Slav Macedonian history and to stress Slav Macedonian national development at the same time emphasizing the importance of close ties with other Yugoslav peoples. However, Slav Macedonian national history has not developed in a vacuum and external problems have affected its course. Since 1956 Bulgaria has not recognized the Slav Macedonian nationality and her historians have been permitted to reassert Bulgarian historical claims to the Macedonian territory and population. Even in periods when Bulgarian-Yugoslav relations have been very good, academic historical controversies have continued, frequently developing political repercussions. The Slav Macedonian historians have thus been forced to defend their dubious historical claims, with the result that their history has become even more polemical and political. The rising nationalism of the Yugoslav peoples has also had its effect in Vardar Macedonia. Although increased nationalism first reappeared as the result of economic problems in the late 1950's, it has since spread throughout Yugoslavia's cultural life. The problem reached the point that Tito denounced "nationalistic manifestations" in the field of history at the Eighth Party Congress.[29] The problem was as much present in Vardar Macedonia as the other republics. Crvenkovski, at the Fourth Congress of the LCM, just before the Eighth all-party congress, criticized "the still present phenomenon of national romanticism [i.e., over-glorification] in uncovering our national past." Although acknowledging the difficulties of dealing with Macedonian history, Crvenkovski called on historians to adopt the approach which would "contribute to the national consciousness of our people freeing itself of nationalist deviations [pro-Bulgarian and anti-Serb sentiments], to building respect for everything that is positive and common in the struggle of our neighbors [i.e., Serbs and other Yugoslav peoples] and which is a component part of our own national history." [30]
  
  *This text is from the book of “Yugoslav Communism and the Macedonian Question” by Stephen E. Palmer, Jr. Robert R. King, 1971. In order to segregate the Greek Macedonian cultural identity from the Slav one, I add for understating purposes the words “Slav and Vardar” in the front of the Greek adjective “Macedonia (n)” at the text. Also in the book you can find the original notes and bibliography that used in the specific article.
  
  **For fair use only
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 21.10.2009
• 17:34

  Slav Macedonian language: Contributor of the Slav Macedonian nationalism *

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The Slav Macedonian language is considered by most Slav Macedonians to be one of the most positive contributions to their separate status. The question of what language Slav Macedonians actually spoke prior to 1945 has caused disagreements among even the most disinterested linguists. The Slav Macedonian dialects made a gradual transition from Serbian north of Skopje to Bulgarian in Eastern Macedonia. Even those who claim that a separate Slav Macedonian language existed before 1945 admit that all these dialects have a very close affinity to Bulgarian. [1] The elements of distinction between the central Slav Macedonian group of dialects (i.e., the language spoken roughly within the region Prilep-Bitolj-Kicevo-Titov Veles) and western Bulgarian were noticeable but not significant. [2] Bulgarian linguistic influence was strengthened by intense secular and religious propaganda in the past and by the fact that Bulgarian was the language used by the old Slav Macedonian nationalists.
  
  It was natural that the Yugoslav government regarded a distinct Slav Macedonian language as a bulwark against Bulgarian irredentism. At the same time, it was a very real concession to the Macedonians vis-a-vis the Serbs. The First Assembly of the ASNOM in August 1944 passed a resolution declaring Slav Macedonian the republic's official language. A commission was created to determine which features of the spoken dialects were to be incorporated in the written language, and in May 1945 an alphabet was adopted by law.[3]
  
  As the basis for the new literary language the Central Vardar Macedonian dialect was chosen. The explanation was that this region was the most populous area and that it was important in Slav Macedonian history. In addition Krste Misirkov, an advocate of the creation of a separate Slav Macedonian language in the early twentieth century, and other Macedonian nationalists used the central dialects. [4] However, this dialect is also the Slav Macedonian dialect most unlike both Serbian and Bulgarian. This was probably a far more important consideration in the government's decision. It has been claimed that, in fact, the north-western Slav Macedonian dialects (those most similar to Serbo-Croatian and most unlike Bulgarian) had been originally chosen as the basis for the new language but had to be abandoned because of popular opposition.[5]
  
  From the very beginning, Slav Macedonian linguists concentrated on showing the Slav Macedonian language to be different from other languages. The first grammar, published in 1946, established nine distinctive traits of the new language and stressed its differences from other Slavic languages.[6] At first the language had many words, especially political, literary, philosophical, and technical terms, which were borrowed from Bulgarian, Serbian and Russian. However, from the beginning an effort was made to purge these foreign elements, particularly those from Bulgarian. The commission which codified the language was guided by the principle:
  
  

  The vocabulary of the literary language should be enriched with terms taken from all Slav Macedonian dialects. New words should be created with living inflections of the folk speech. Borrowed words from other languages should be retained only where necessary, [7]

  As a result, Bulgarian, Russian (after 1948) and other foreign words were replaced by words existing in one of the local Slav Macedonian dialects or by terms created by combining native elements.
  
  In addition to making the modern Slav Macedonian, literary language different from Bulgarian" Yugoslav' linguists also have gone to great effort in attempting to show that the old Slav Macedonian dialects were essentially a separate language. The Slav Macedonian (anti-Bulgarian) interpretation of their linguistic development is not considerd by party leaders to be an ivory tower matter; the campaign is carried on through the mass media. Numerous articles on the alleged historical differences, some dating back to the middle ages, are carried by newspapers. In an early pamphlet (1950) on this subject, the party expressed concern over the popular failure to acknowledge the separate existence of a distinct Slav Macedonian language in the past:
  
  

  We are meeting with blind acceptance of Great Bulgarian theories with regard to the struggle of our people for its national language. Study of the struggle for a national language is important, because language is one of the four basic elements without which there cannot be talk of a nation. The broad reading public, and even some teachers of national history, know little about the one hundred year struggle of our people for its own national language, or they underestimate it or misunderstand it, and thus they unconsciously become bearers of an anti-historical, unscientific stand with regard to our language. Some lecturers and publicists of our history are bringing to the masses the conception that the Slav Macedonians started in their schools and in their other cultural institutions with the use of the Bulgarian language as their literary language and that this language was used during the whole 19th and 20th centuries until the thirties, when progressive Slav Macedonian publicists took as their literary language one of the Slav Macedonian dialects. Thus it is made to seem that the Slav Macedonian literary language appeared as a shot out of the dark, because with such a conception the struggle for a national language, which started in the middle of the 19th century, is ignored.[8]

  
  This pamphlet then cites several of the historical examples of the use of a Macedonian language, including that "little masterpiece of political agitation," a manifesto made in the name of the ill-fated Krusevo Republic of 1903. The Slav Macedonian Communists do not deny that the language of Goce Delcev and most other national heroes was Bulgarian, or that Bulgarian was the written Slav Macedonian language generally until the Second World War. But Slav Macedonian linguists explain that the Macedonian and Bulgarian peoples were facing essentially the same conditions in their struggle for national liberation against Turkey therefore; they coordinated their efforts. Since the Bulgarian bourgeoisie was more advanced than the Slav Macedonian bourgeoisie, the Bulgarian literary language was further developed; hence, it was used by the Macedonians. The bulk of Slav Macedonian linguistic history is aimed at magnifying the few historical instances of the written use of Slav Macedonian dialects.[9]
  
  Much was done from the beginning to secure wide usage of the new language. The first grammar was published in 1946, an orthography in 1951. An 80,000 word dictionary was published in three volumes between 1961 and 1966. Two journals were started to encourage the use of the Slav Macedonian language-Makedonski jazik (1950) and Literaturen zbov (1954). The new literary language was employed from the very beginning by the mass media of the republic. However, in the early years there were many difficulties in securing wide usage of the still-changing Slav Macedonian language. Writings of the old Slav Macedonian revolutionaries and often even speeches and articles by party leaders had to be translated or adjusted before being used. The lack of adequate language standards and of experience in using the norms that had evolved resulted in linguistic hodgepodges in composition and speech. The vast majority of the population spoke the Slav Macedonian dialects of their regions and the new Slav Macedonian literary language only gradually penetrated the natural speech habits of a population just beginning to pull itself out of the depths of illiteracy and isolation.
  
  A decade after the war, special institutes had to be held for Slav Macedonian language instructors. Commenting on the use of the new Slav Macedonian in literature in 1952, Lunt wrote:
  
  

  Many Slav Macedonians have not yet learned to use their native Macedonian on all stylistic levels.... It is only the small group of intellectuals daily concerned with the written word who now write easily, without frequent Serbisms of Bulgarisms.... The writers were burdened by their education in Serbian or Bulgarian; they had learned in the long hard years of school Slav Macedonian was only for intimate friends and the most familiar ideas and feelings, but in broader spheres Serbian (or Bulgarian) must be used. This means that even today many Slav Macedonians unconsciously slip into Serbian when discussing political, philosophical or artistic matters. [10]

  The standardization of the new literary language has been a continuing process. But with its constant use in schools, the press, radio, books and theater, Slav Macedonians have gradually come to understand and use the new language. The major non- Slav Macedonian cultural pull, because of party pressure, has been to Serbo-Croatian rather than Bulgarian. Serbo-Croatian is the second language in Slav Macedonian schools. As the output of original Slav Macedonian literary works and even translations of standard Communist works into Macedonian was modest in the beginning, Serbo-Croatian was widely read. In time the supply of Slav Macedonian textbooks, manuals and propaganda pamphlets has improved. Bulgarian books were discouraged before 1948 and prohibited for a time after the Cominform break.[11] Although at times when Bulgarian-Yugoslav relations have been good, Bulgarian works have been available throughout Yugoslavia, their accessibility in Macedonia has always been more limited.
  
  It is not surprising that the output of Slav Macedonian literature has been limited both in quantity and quality. This is natural in view of the relative newness of the Macedonian language, the availability of Serbo-Croatian literature, and the fact that secondary linguistic problems are only now being solved. The early postwar literary efforts were limited primarily to poetry and a few short stories. As the language has become more firmly established and as writers have become accustomed to using it, literary works have increased both in volume and quality. Of those literary figures who have appeared, none can be said to be towering.[12]
  
  It is doubtful if the impact of Slav Macedonian literature as such on the development of nationalism will prove as powerful as the use of the new language in the mass media and increasingly in everyday speech. In addition to the difficulty of developing a separate literature for a group of one million people in the shadow of the well-established Serbian and Croatian literatures, the literary themes called for are not always such as will encourage a "nationalist" literature. Immediately after the war the main themes were the partisan struggle with emphasis on the brotherly struggle of all Yugoslav peoples as a precondition for Slav Macedonian liberation. Although since 1948 there has been a shift away from the sterile black-and-white Soviet style of "socialist realism," Nova Makedonija and the Macedonian party leadership have continued to exhort writers to deal with "progressive" subjects. A campaign in the early 1950's opposed literary concentration on folklore and encouraged treatment of universal Marxist motives. Works based on Macedonian national characteristics are frowned upon, but still produced.
  
  Reports on Slav Macedonian acceptance of the language have varied greatly. Some emigres claimed that the efforts to de-Bulgarize the language led to the inclusion of so many foreign elements that almost all Slav Macedonians instinctively reject it. One Serbian specialist in Yugoslav Macedonia in the early 1950's reported that the new Macedonian was used mostly by government employees loyal to Belgrade. However, one British expert on Macedonia held the language to be "immensely popular,"[13] and another expressed uncritical enthusiasm about the "happy" acceptance of it and the other new Slav Macedonian cultural forms.[14] A more realistic assessment comes from a Skopje schoolteacher who emigrated from Yugoslavia:
  
  
  

  Among the wide masses of the urban population and the intelligentsia, the Slav Macedonian language is accepted as the most important, and often the only good, aspect of the present day Yugoslavia. The children are learning it in the schools and their parents are very satisfied that this is the case. There are places in the country-side where people were reluctant to send their children to school in the days of old Yugoslavia, but now they do so willingly, for they want their children to learn the Slav Macedonian language....The new literature and poetry in the national language has aroused great interest, for through it is created and formed the new national spirit and language. This new literature, as well as the printing of prewar literature and poetry by Slav Macedonians in the national language, has resulted in much reading.

  
  Having been taught in schools and used extensively throughout the SRM for over twenty-five years, the Slav Macedonian language is accepted by most Slav Macedonians.
  
  The concern of the Slav Macedonian and Yugoslav Communist leaders whenever the existence of the Slav Macedonian language is questioned reflects their feeling that the language is one of the principal elements of a separate Slav Macedonian national consciousness. In 1958 several Bulgarian statements declared that the Slavic inhabitants of Macedonia spoke Bulgarian, not the "semi-Serbian literary language which is fabricated in Skopje." Lazar Kolisevski, defensively answering the Bulgarian claims, denied the "alleged 'Serbianization'" of the Slav Macedonian language but justified the frequent use of Serbian expressions:
  
  

  The Slav Macedonian language cannot be isolated from the mutual influence of the languages spoken by the Yugoslav peoples. Our common socio-economic development and socialist practice have created and are creating a number of new general expressions and terms accepted by all Yugoslav peoples.... The development of the languages of nations which have appeared late on the stage of history provides numerous examples showing that they are subjected to the influence of more developed languages and richer national cultures of related and neighboring peoples. [15]

  
  Denial of the existence of the Slav Macedonian language is considered so serious a challenge to the Slav Macedonian nationality that Belgrade has not hesitated to condemn the Bulgarians regardless of the state of relations with Sofia. Vigorous and vehement denunciations of Bulgarian academicians have been published by leading Yugoslav newspapers even during periods of good relations with Bulgaria. The Yugoslav leaders thus acknowledge that the wide, if imperfect, usage of the Slav Macedonian language is one of the most vital contributions to Slav Macedonian nationalism.
  
  *This text is from the book of “Yugoslav Communism and the Macedonian Question” by Stephen E. Palmer, Jr. Robert R. King, 1971. In order to segregate the Greek Macedonian cultural identity from the Slav one, I add for understating purposes the words “Slav and Vardar” in the front of the Greek adjective “Macedonia (n)” at the text. Also in the book you can find the original notes and bibliography that used in the specific article.
  
  **For fair use only
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 18.10.2009
• 00:31

  The Trouble with Knowledge

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  By Michael Celik
  
  Like an earthquake, the new Macedonian encyclopedia published in Skopje has shaken and undermined imperialist political architecture on the Balkan Peninsula. The imperialist conquest and gains in the Balkans were founded on “new thinking” or better still, no thinking at all. The new thinking was supposed to lead to new prosperity and the peoples and nationalities in the region were led to believe that embracing European and American imperialism must be accompanied by wholesale denial of people’s historical experiences. In other words, the smaller peoples in the Balkans were asked to adopt “new identity”, “foreign mentality” and to institute a regime of self denial in exchange for promised prosperity. Insecure in their post socialist neighbourhood, peoples like the Macedonians sought safety under the skirt of imperialism. However, there are two inherent problems with that strategy. First, all their ancient enemies are already under the same skirt and nobody was ever allowed to shout: “Imperialism stinks, I want out”.
  
  The formula is simple; everyone abandons his own self interest for the sake of U.S. imperialism, which then defines everyone else’s interests. And since imperialist needs and strategies shift with time, some nations become less or more valuable than others. This has happened to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Macedonia was very important for the breakup of Yugoslavia and now it is practically worthless. It is a captive nation with a gun to its head. At the end of the process, Macedonia is an economic basket case, internally divided and unable to do much about it. The promised prosperity, for which Macedonians did all the silly things, is nowhere on the horizon and Macedonians dream of prosperity and stability they once had in Yugoslavia.
  
  Skopje, the capital of Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has become the largest C.I.A. operational base for American espionage and manipulation in the Balkans. The Americans feel there more secure than anywhere else in the region. And now, when the Macedonians are expected to parrot imperialist falsehoods, there comes the new Macedonian Encyclopedia leaking forbidden knowledge. Just when the imperialists thought that they have supplanted truth with their self serving rhetoric, the encyclopedia speaks what the Macedonian Government does not dare to say. This is not an insignificant thing, as the encyclopedia was issued under the auspices of the Macedonian Academy of Science and Arts (MANU).
  
  What did the Macedonian Encyclopedia say that is so heretical? For one thing, the encyclopedia declares that the Macedonians are Slavs, which undermines the imperialist scheme of inventing new nations on the territory of former Yugoslavia. The encyclopedia further reveals that the Albanian inhabitants of Macedonia are not indigenous to that land and that they forcibly settled there in the sixteenth century, displacing the Macedonians. There is another more contemporary aspect in which once top secret information is revealed. The 2001 Albanian terrorist separatist plotters against Macedonia were trained by British SAS and American Special Forces in Albania and in the occupied Serbian province of Kosovo. On the one hand, the Americans have trained and supported the Albanian terrorist organization ONA for mischief and mayhem in Macedonia and on the other, they have designated the same organization as “terrorist”.
  
  This duplicitous American game is only possible because all the client states of the region have one and the same supreme master who promises the same land to two inimical peoples. While it is absurd that Americans should promise Macedonia to the Macedonians, it is even more despicable to promise parts of Macedonia to the Albanians and set them on the path of murder and terrorism as they did in Kosovo. However, this is imperialism’s modus operandi. Those who provide greater and more valuable services to the master reap greater rewards, (maybe and sometimes), for imperialism is selfish and immoral. In this case, the Albanians are more useful than the numerically insignificant and land locked Macedonians.
  
  The outcry against the Macedonian Encyclopedia and its authors and editors is nothing other than the cacophony of American, British and Albanian voices with veiled threats and demands that the Macedonians realize and correct their own mistakes. The embassies of all three countries have been active in threatening the Macedonians, demanding firing of people responsible for this publication, especially Blaža Ristovski. They claim the encyclopedia is “scandalous” and needs to be withdrawn from circulation.
  
  To understand how much pressure Macedonia is under, one only needs to look at Serbia where the EU already censors that country’s school textbooks, removing what it does not like and forcing the Serbs to publish what they do not like. Even the new Constitution of Serbia was co-authored by the former NATO Secretary General, Javier Solana, who had presided over that notorious organization during its savage bombing of Yugoslavia.
  
  In its relatively short period of independent existence, Macedonia has managed to intimidate its neighbours, Greece and Bulgaria and ally itself with its own historical enemy, Turkey. Turkey at the same time backs Albanian expansionism against all the Balkan states, including Macedonia. The imperialist powers have their own misgivings about the Macedonians who sympathize with and admire the Serbs and had staged massive protests against NATO during its bombing of Yugoslavia. Some British soldiers were even beaten up in Macedonia during that time. When it comes to the question of Kosovo, the Macedonian people are unequivocally on the side of Serbia’s right to her own province. As victims of Albanian terrorism themselves, the Macedonians feel that American interpretation of things there is cooked up for the consumption of more distant and naïve peoples. But Macedonian – Serb relations have also had their strains when Serb Orthodox Bishop Jovan was jailed 18 months for his religious conviction and for distributing Serbian Orthodox church calendars and pamphlets in his parish. Both Serbs and Macedonians share the same Orthodox religion but have separate religious hierarchies.
  
  Today, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has a government which aims to bring the country into NATO strictures and the European Union, as panacea for the plague of poverty (22%) and unemployment (37.2%). Ethnic instability and corruption do not readily attract foreign investment to Macedonia where Macedonians boast 64% of the population. While the subservient Macedonian Government dares not say what its academics reveal, the story would be even more shocking if the ordinary Macedonians’ lament were put to paper.
  
  Source: Pravda.Ru
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 14.10.2009
• 23:46

  Future of Macedonia name dispute

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  By Aristotle Tziampiris (1)
  ekathimerini.com
  
  Will the recent election landslide victory and comfortable parliamentary majority achieved by the Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) facilitate the resolution of the ongoing Macedonia name dispute? George Papandreou’s election was publicly welcomed by politicians in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), who indicated willingness to negotiate, and there is also a palpable feeling of renewed (if cautious) optimism by international decision-makers. At the same time, the almost two-decade-long diplomatic dispute is widely considered to have the potential to further destabilize the region of the Western Balkans.
  
  An apparent convergence is under way among most actors involved in the negotiations toward an agreement that is also viewed by the international community as the “best” possible – but not necessarily historically just – outcome. It would most likely consist of a final and comprehensive accord between Greece and FYROM involving a compromise international compound name with a geographical connotation (e.g. “Northern Macedonia”).
  
  If an agreement along these lines is achieved, FYROM would automatically join NATO under the new name, its accession path toward the EU would accelerate and the concerns of the country’s Albanian population (about a quarter of the population) assuaged in a manner conducive to regional stability. (Revealingly, 65 percent of FYROM’s ethnic Albanians support a compromise on the name issue to facilitate NATO and EU membership, though 95 percent of Slav-Macedonians are opposed.)
  
  Any such agreement would also have to address a series of legitimate Greek concerns, including the recent manifestations of Slav-Macedonian nationalism that have included the renaming of airports and highways, commission of giant statues, as well as other actions often indicating a fixation with Alexander the Great. It should furthermore be stressed that directly dealing with the controversial and “thorny” issues of FYROM’s identity and language has the potential of derailing negotiations.
  
  Solving the name dispute outright would undoubtedly represent a major diplomatic accomplishment. However, an equally likely scenario involves the issue’s nonresolution despite continuous diplomatic meetings and negotiations. As a top Slav-Macedonian politician, striking a note of realistic pessimism, recently told this author, “Almost every conceivable settlement has already been proposed at some time or another but rejected by one of the two sides.”
  
  If this scenario prevails, FYROM’s ruling party will probably continue the campaign to link Slav-Macedonian identity and history to antiquity. Furthermore, NATO and EU accession prospects will remain stalled. The country’s ethnic Albanians would be particularly disappointed by such an outcome and it is not alarmist to imagine that the Ohrid framework agreements (which ended the republic’s 2001 ethnic strife) could be challenged. As US State Department officials warn, this could produce perilous regional implications. (FYROM borders on Kosovo and, during periods of crisis, the influx of refugees, armed ethnic Albanian guerrilla fighting and illicit activities have linked the two places.)
  
  If a comprehensive agreement remains elusive and in order to avoid the dispute’s complete nonresolution, certain experts have began examining a third “interim” scenario. This is based on the realization that the only substantial agreement that has been reached between FYROM and Greece was the 1995 New York Interim Accord that normalized bilateral relations but (significantly) did not resolve the name dispute. (However, Athens did recognize the young republic and Skopje changed the country’s flag, which had featured the ancient Macedonian “Star of Vergina” symbol.)
  
  According to this interim scenario, FYROM would enter NATO under its provisional UN name, after having addressed all the recent actions deemed provocative by Greece (renaming airports and highways once again, dropping the case against Greece in the International Court of Justice at The Hague etc) thus proving in practice good-neighborly relations. The signing of a Treaty of Friendship could further codify the types of actions that would be unacceptable in the future.
  
  Nevertheless, since there can be no firm guarantee that Skopje would not revert to nationalist or other provocations (whereas NATO membership, once achieved, is effectively irreversible), Athens could publicly link any new nationalistic turn to a democratic referendum on the neighboring republic’s EU accession, with rather predictable results. (It should be noted that for FYROM, EU membership is ultimately even more significant than NATO membership.) Negotiations on the resolution of the name dispute would, of course, continue to be conducted, possibly within an improved bilateral climate.
  
  If this scenario is realized, regional stability might be enhanced. However, the resolution of the name dispute will be pushed even further into the future, while Athens will have lost an important source of diplomatic leverage.
  
  At this point, it is not clear which outcome will prevail. What is certain is that considerable statesmanship and diplomatic skills will have to be exhibited in order to resolve an urgent and important diplomatic problem that influences the domestic politics in both Greece and FYROM and has very real consequences for the Western Balkans.
  
  (1) Dr Aristotle Tziampiris is assistant professor of international relations at the University of Piraeus. The views expressed in this article are his own.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 12.10.2009
• 17:15

  The Macedonian language and the name dispute between Greece and FYROM

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  bu Tymphaios
  October 11, 2009
  
  In 1945, a committee set up by Yugoslav communist leader Josip Broz Tito invented for the first time an alphabet for the new "Macedonian" language. The official documents introducing the new alphabet and language were written in Bulgarian.
  
  
  
  Introduction of the "Macedonian" language in communist Yugoslavia in 1945. The document is written in the Bulgarian alphabet. It reads: "The Macedonian Orthography proposed by the Orthography and Language Commission at the Ministry of People's Education is accepted as an official orthography. The same will be printed in books as an edition of the Ministry of People's Education".
  
  Introduction of the "Macedonian" alphabet in communist Yugoslavia in 1945. The main document is written in the Bulgarian alphabet.
  
  Is this language Macedonian? In the absence of knowledge of Slavic, one unfamiliar with the Macedonist argument may rightly want to know how much this FYROMacedonian language resembles the language of the ancient Macedonians and how much it resembles Slavic. One simple way to test this without knowledge of Slavic is to take a FYROMacedonian document and use Google Translator to see how much of it can be understood if it is translated using the Bulgarian or Serbian Google translator, treating it in other words as either Bulgarian or Serbian text.
  
  I have randomly chosen an article I found on the internet called something like "When I was in the Coast I met Stalin".
  
  http://www.a1.com.mk/vesti/default.asp?VestID=53225
  
  The original text is appended at the end of this article. The Google translations using FYROMacedonian Translator, Bulgarian Translator and Serbian Translator are also shown at the end. Many parts remain untranslated by the Bulgarian and Serbian Google Translators but those that become translated agree well with the FYROMacedonian Translator. The Serbian Translator and Bulgarian Translator underperformed but between the two of them one can get a very good idea of what the article says. In fact some words that fail to become translated by the Bulgarian translator are translated by the Serbian one, so the problem must be partly the choice of Slavonic characters used and the choice between a Bulgarian or Serbian word.
  
  The Greek translation by Google failed completely. Google returned the FYROMacedonian text only. One may therefore ask, what is the link of the FYROMacedonians to the ancients? All we have attested from Macedonia in ancient times was in Greek. Until our own time historic Macedonia is being inhabited by Greeks. Why should the FYROMacedonian language be called Macedonian? Tito is dead.
  
  There are nations that at times have fostered extreme ideologies of superiority of race. There are individuals who may believe in flying saucers, proverbial red herrings and pink elephants. There is now and then someone who thinks he is Jesus. However, until this instance there have been no nations that attempted to reinvent themselves as an ancient and completely unrelated people. This is perhaps a first in human history. It is so strange, it had left for 18 years classical scholars speechless. In fact it is so strange, diplomats have almost no means to say "that´s crazy" in a diplomatic way. It is so incomprehensible that one ponders if a logical or diplomatic response to this claim may be appreciated at all.
  
  The way this goes, it will not be long before calling something Macedonian becomes a proverbial allusion to reaching way beyond one´s depth. Macedonism is already becoming a byword for the reinvention of "facts". Speaking of a "Macedonian theory" may soon become an alternative to using the expression "living in a parallel universe".
  
  Though most people are stunned and some may assume they have been simply ignorant of Macedonian history, a few are rightly upset and they are not just the Greeks. One´s history and language can be tossed about to some extent but cannot be just ridiculed and misappropriated to further someone else´s lack of self esteem, outdated communist dogma and nefarious territorial ambitions. There was for example the following frustrated comment posted in an internet forum from a Syrian national:
  
  Habib, UK: "Syrians say, get a life south Slavians. Yugoslavs never ever ruled over Syria, a thousand curses on those who tell lies … you have no history with Syria ok. Macedonians are Greek Hellenic (Yunan) people, they left us good history for Syria."
  
  Unfortunately for the poor Syrian, little does he know that the Falsedonian community supporting the cult-like macedonist ideology in FYROM and abroad has become desensitized to the disbelief of others. The so-called Antique Macedonians still march on regardless, no matter how strong are the words of dismay they hear. Presumably for decades they had been told to turn a deaf ear to evil capitalists from the west, to the "false prophets" of western imperialism, who harboured fascist beliefs and false ideologies. One must ask, how can an educational system based on propagandist ideology be destroyed without a rebellion against it? FYROM became an independent country by historical accident.
  
  Before closing, let us remember who the Macedonians were.
  
  The words of Alexander have been cut into stone in his dedication to Athena at a temple in Priene. The dedication is mentioned by Arrian. It was discovered by archaeologists and is kept today at the British Museum. It says, in Alexander´s Macedonian language:
  
  ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ ΑΝΕΘΗΚΕ ΤΟΝ ΝΑΟΝ ΑΘΗΝΑΙ ΠΟΛΙΑΔΙ
  
  "King Alexander dedicated this temple to Athena Polias".
  
  http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_image.aspx?image=k63220.jpg&retpage=18026
  
  The language is Greek.
  
  Macedon is a word found in Hesiod and in Homer (6-8th C BC).
  

  "And she conceived and bare to Zeus who delights in the thunderbolt two sons, Magnes and Macedon, rejoicing in horses, who dwell round about Pieria and Olympus".
  Hesiod (8th C BC), fragment; Constantinos Porphyrogenitos, 2 de Them. 2 p. 48B

  
  Macedon was a Greek hero, the mythical progenitor of a Greek tribe who only left written records in Greek. At the time of Homer and Hesiod, the Slavs probably lived in the steppes of Russia. The Slavs did not appear in the Balkans until about the 6th C AD, 1300 years after Hesiod wrote about Macedon.
  
  It is obvious that the citizens of FYROM have many words in their Slavic language. Their country was once called South Serbia and their dialect Western Bulgarian. If neither of these are suitable today, it should really not be so difficult to find a way to describe their ethnic identity in words that are not Greek. Slavonic is historically, ethnically and geographically suitable. Why this insistence in reinventing history?
  
  APPENDIX
  
  PACO RABBANY: WHEN I WAS IN THE COAST I MET STALIN.
  http://www.a1.com.mk/vesti/default.asp?VestID=53225
  
  Original so called "Macedonian" text:
  

  Имав 16 години кога ме претставија на Јосиф Сталин, изјави еден од водечките светски модни креатори Пако Рабан во Москва, каде на руската публика прв пат и ја претстави изложбата на своите цртежи,
  
  Сеќавајќи се на таа средба, 70-годишниот Рабан, кој тогаш со мајка му престојувал во Москва, посочи дека Сталин му оставил силен впечаток и оти имал некаква магнетска привлечност.
  
  Мојата мајка беше еден од основачите на Комунистичката партија на Шпанија. Таа беше многу прагматична жена, голем реалист и силна личност", истакна Рабан за весникот „Известија".
  
  Рабан е роден во Баскија, Шпанија, но пораснал со Франција.
  
  Креаторот, чии модели од пластика, метал и хартија се изложени во музеи на современа уметност, смета дека модата денеска е во криза поради отсуство на идеи, но оти „има надеж за тоа што доаѓа од истокот".

  
  1. FYROMacedonian Google Translator result:
  

  Paco Rabbany: When I was in the Coast I met Stalin
  
  I had 16 years ago when I was introduced to Joseph Stalin, said one of the leading fashion designers Paco Rabbany in Moscow where the Russian public for the first time and presented an exhibition of his drawings.
  
  Recalling that meeting, 70-year-old Rabbany, who then resided with his mother in Moscow, Stalin said that he left a strong impression and that he had a magnetic attraction.
  
  "My mother was one of the founders of the Communist Party of Spain. It was a very pragmatic woman, a realist and a strong personality, "said Rabbany newspaper Izvestija.
  
  Rabbany was born in the Basque Country, Spain, but grew up in France.
  
  Creator, whose models of plastic, metal and paper are exposed in museums of modern art, believes that fashion today is in crisis due to lack of ideas, but that "there is hope for what comes from the east".

  
  2. Bulgarian Google Translator result.

  Paco Rabanne: When Bev st Koskva introduced him to Stalin
  
  Imav 16 years when I претставија of Јосиф Stalin изјави Eden sh vodechkite secular fashion kreatori Paco Rabanne st Moscow, the Russian audience Kade FTE ја pretstavi stalemate and the exhibition of their tsrtezhi,
  
  Сеќавајќи to taa sredba, 70-godishniot Rabanne, кој gown pm мајка his престојувал st Moscow, Stalin said his deck remains strong and BTI had vpechatok nekakva magnetska privlechnost.
  
  "Eden was Мојата мајка sh osnovachite of Komunistichkata партија of Шпанија. Таа беше многу прагматична жена, голем реалист и силна личност", истакна Рабан за весникот „Известија". Taa was многу pragmatic woman, realistic and strong personality, istakna Rabanne for vesnikot "Известија.
  
  Raban was born st Баскија, Шпанија but grown Франција pm.
  
  Kreatorot, whose models sh plastic, metal and exposed to хартија st museums sovremena umetnost, trash fashion deck is deneska st crisis due otsustvo ideas, "but BTI has hope for SG & A sh што доаѓа istokot".

  3. Serbian Google Translator result.

  Paco Raban: Where I was in Koskva go met Stalin
  
  I had 16 years to when I presented the Joseph Stalin, said one of the world vodečkite fashion designers Paco Raban in Moscow, where the audience ruskata first time I presented izložbata on their drawings,
  
  Seḱavajḱi at that meeting, 70-godišniot Raban, which then, with his mother stayed in Moscow, Stalin posoči that he ostavil strong vpečatok went and had a some kind of magnetic privlečnost.
  
  "My mother was one of the founder of Komunističkata parties in Spain. It was very pragmatic woman, great realists and strong personality, "Raban pointed to newspaper" Izvestia ".
  
  Raban was born in the Basque Country, Spain, no porasnal with France.
  
  Kreatorot, CII models of plastic, metal and paper are exposed in museums of modern art, considers that fashion today is in crisis due to the absence of ideas, no go "for it has nadež which doaǵa of istokot".

  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 07.10.2009
• 14:18

  Greek comments as regards the FYROM issues at ECRI’s report(pages 61-62)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  With respect to the references to ‘’Macedonian’’ community and language (paras. 111-120), we would like to stress that a small number of people in Greek Macedonia, mainly in the prefecture of Florina, apart from Greek, speak a Slavic dialect, which is confined to family or colloquial use. This dialect has similarities with the language spoken by the Slav-Macedonians in the neighbouring Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Cross-border contacts, such as tourism and trade, keep this dialect alive,as is the case with the Greek language spoken in the southern part of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. All people in Greece speaking this dialect are bilingual (Slavic/Greek).
  
  Subjective claims or perceptions of some of the above-mentioned individuals, which are not based on objective facts and criteria, that they are ethnically “Macedonians” do not establish by themselves a corresponding obligation of Greece to officially recognize this group as a «minority» and to guarantee to its members specific minority rights, additional to those guaranteed by human rights treaties. Moreover, the use on their behalf of the term “Macedonian” in order to define a distinct ethnicity creates confusion with the 2,5 million Greeks who identify themselves as Macedonians in the regional/cultural sense.
  
  In any case, in Greece, even if a group is not recognised as a minority enjoying specific minority rights, individuals are free to declare that they belong to a distinct ethnic or cultural group, without any negative consequences resulting from such a statement. In addition, these persons enjoy fully all their civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, which are recognized by the provisions of national and international law. Both the judiciary and the administration are obliged to implement these provisions. Persons who consider that their rights are
  being violated can bring their case before the Greek courts and also have the possibility to appeal to the competent international bodies, as provided for by the relevant treaties binding Greece.
  
  A couple of examples prove the above mentioned affirmations:
  
  

  - There is a political party in Greece, which claims to represent the “Macedonian minority”. This party operates freely and participates without any impediments in the elections. One of the leading figures of the party is a civil servant, working for the Greek State, regardless of his political activities and views.
  
  - There are regular cultural events and festivities organised by the Slav-speaking persons in the region of Florina, where everyone is free to participate, including nationals of the neighbouring Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

  
  
  In conclusion, all persons residing in Greece, regardless of their nationality, ethic origin, language, religious or political affiliation enjoy full protection of their human rights and liberties. Everyone is free to declare his/her origin, speak his/her language, exercise his/her religion and observe his/her particular customs and traditions.
  
  Finally, with regard to the implementation of measures of reconciliation, the Greek State, in order to definitely heal the wounds of the Civil War, proceeded to the reinstatement of the citizenship and the return of confiscated property of persons of Greek origin who had fled the country after this traumatic historical experience. However, all individuals, irrespective of their ethic origin, have the possibility to bring before Greek courts any claims regarding property or other issues, under the general provisions of law.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 04.10.2009
• 15:38

  The "Albanian myth" from William Maxwell.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  With a great surprise I have read a amazing historical quote that concern many periods from the European history that came from William Maxwell and contained in an article with the head name “Journey to Albania” ( [gaiaschool.info] ). This quote says:
  

  The Albanians are universally acknowledged as the descendants of the Illyrians who gave the world Alexander the Great, Emperor Constantine, several other Roman and Byzantine Emperors, one of the popes of the Roman Catholic Church, several Grand Vizirs of the Ottoman Empire, Muhammad Ali Pasha, father of modern Egypt, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder of modern Turkey, as well as Mother Teresa destined for sainthood because of her services to the poor of India. Albania was also the only country in Europe that protected all the Jews, i.e. the only European country where the Jewish population was increased during WWII.

  I will try to analyze step by step the accuracies of the above quote. Not all of them because I am not expert of all these that William Maxwell wrote such as the Ottoman history.
  

  Albanians are universally acknowledged as the descendants of the Illyrians…..

  This myth systemically cultivated from known Albanian centres that promote the historical revisionism and extreme nationalism in the Balkans. Albanians are not universally acknowledged as the descendants of the Illyrians. This confirms from several studies and works such as “Illyrians” by John Wilkes, several works from the expert of the Albanian history Mrs Miranda Vickers, Albanian identities: myth and history by Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers and Bernd Jürgen Fischer, global wide collectively works such as the ancient, modern and medieval history of the Cambridge and Oxford Universities e.t.c.
  

  …Albanians are universally acknowledged…who gave the world Alexander the Great…

  This is one from the most historical revisionist argument; similar with this that Alexander was a Slavonic origin as circulate from the Slavmacedonians in the neighbour FYROM State. Thousands historical works and tens of writers(Hammond, Worthington, Borza, Stoneman, Ulrich Wilcken e.t.c.) have agree that Great Alexander was born in July 356 (Arr. 7.28.1, Plut. Alex. 3.5), was the son of Macedonian Philip’s fourth wife Olympias, a princess from Epirus, situated to Macedon’s west. None of them mention that Alexander was Illyrian and the most inaccurate…Albanian as William Maxwell quoted. Macedonians according the same sources were a mix of Greek and older ancient tribes or were just Greek or unknown origin (Borza). Epirotans according the same sources were Greeks and the most known tribe was the Mollosian. None of them mention that was Illyrian or Albanian.
  

  …Albanians are universally acknowledged…who gave…Emperor Constantine, several other Roman and Byzantine Emperors (were Albanians)…

  Emperor Constantine and several other Roman and Byzantine Emperors were not Albanians as William Maxwell claim. Byzantine Dynasties were Greek, Armenian, Roman, Anatolian origin. This confirmed from tens of writers and experts of the Byzantine history like George Ostrogorski, Paul Stephenson, Cyril Mango, Joan Hussey, John Norwich as also from global wide collectively works like European medieval history of the Cambridge, Oxford and Michigan Universities e.t.c..
  

  …Albanians are universally acknowledged…who gave…pope in the Roman Catholic Church…

  Catholic Encyclopaedia ( [www.newadvent.org] ), the most known source it doesn’t mention that one from the Pope was…Albanian. Where William Maxwell find this thing is …unknown.
  
  

  … Albania was also the only country in Europe that protected all the Jews, i.e. the only European country where the Jewish population was increased during WWII…

  At the 30s and 40s and according the Albanian sources only 200 Jews lived! Jewish population actually grew during the Axis occupation; it is estimated that there were 1800 jews in Albania at the end of war but the small Jewish community (200 souls) of Vlore was expelled from the country at the Nazis concentration’s camp. The recorded numbers of 1800 were Jews from the neighbored occupy Greece that has returned with the end of the war.
  
  Albania at the WWII also as is known was allied of the fascist Italy and thousands Albanians were enlisted in the known SS regiments (SS Division Skanderbeg and Handschar Division.
  
  CONCLUSION
  There is an Illyrian myth, with which Albanian culture has been flirting for at least 150 years, and as a myth it can't be questioned for it has all the answers. There is also a very tentative Illyrian science, based mainly on archaeology, and on some data transmitted by Ancient Greek and Roman Historians. Those who are ready to accept that Illyrians and Albanians were one people, should have a look at the Messapic inscriptions, in Puglia. These inscriptions, being totally alien to Albanian, show that the Illyrian question is extremely complicated, and that it isn't likely to be resolved, unless fundamental epigraphic discoveries are made.
  
  From me and in the real world there are no examples of ancient Illyrian literature surviving (aside from the Messapian writings if they can be considered Illyrian), it is difficult to clarify its place within the Indo-European language family. Albanians first appear in the historical record in Byzantine sources of the late 11th century. At this point, they are already fully Christianized. Very little evidence of pre-Christian Albanian culture survives, and Albanian mythology and folklore as it presents itself is notoriously syncretized from various sources, showing in particular Greek influence. Albanians are and have been referred to by other terms as well. Some of them are:
  
  

  --Arbër, Arbën, Arbëreshë; the old native term denoting ancient and medieval Albanians and sharing the same root with the latter. At the time the country was called Arbër (Gheg: Arbën) and Arbëria (Gheg: Arbënia). This term is still used for the Albanians that migrated to Italy during the Middle Ages.
  
  --Arnauts; old term used mainly from Turks and by extension by European authors during the Ottoman Empire. A derivate of Arbër, Albanian.
  
  -- Skipetars; the historical rendering of the ethnonym Shqiptar (or Shqyptar by French, Austrian and German authors) in use from the 18th century (but probably earlier) to the present, the literal translation of which is subject of the eagle. The term Šiptari is a derivation used by Yugoslavs which the Albanians consider derogatory.

  
  
  There is not any historical record as regards the connection of the Illyrians (that were last mentioned in 7th century AD, during the Slavic migration to the Balkans) and Albanians. Also there is not any linguistic connection of the unkonwn Illyrian language with the Albanian language that initial recorded in 208-page parchment mansuscript written by Theodor of Shkodra, dating 600 years after.
  
  William Maxwell must be more cautious when write these things as regards the history. Historical revisionism and historical ignorance has a close border line that either goes to the legitimate scholastic correction of existing knowledge about an historical event, or goes to the illegitimate distortion of the historical record such that certain events appear in a more or less favourable ligh.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 12:31

  The Albanian myth from William Maxwell.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  With a great surprise I have read a amazing historical quote that concern many periods from the European history that came from William Maxwell and contained in an article with the head name “Journey to Albania” ( [gaiaschool.info] ). This quote says:
  
  

  The Albanians are universally acknowledged as the descendants of the Illyrians who gave the world Alexander the Great, Emperor Constantine, several other Roman and Byzantine Emperors, one of the popes of the Roman Catholic Church, several Grand Vizirs of the Ottoman Empire, Muhammad Ali Pasha, father of modern Egypt, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, founder of modern Turkey, as well as Mother Teresa destined for sainthood because of her services to the poor of India. Albania was also the only country in Europe that protected all the Jews, i.e. the only European country where the Jewish population was increased during WWII.

  I will try to analyze step by step the accuracies of the above quote. Not all of them because I am not expert of all these that William Maxwell wrote such as the Ottoman history.
  
  

  Albanians are universally acknowledged as the descendants of the Illyrians…..

  This myth systemically cultivated from known Albanian centres that promote the historical revisionism and extreme nationalism in the Balkans. Albanians are not universally acknowledged as the descendants of the Illyrians. This confirms from several studies and works such as “Illyrians” by John Wilkes, several works from the expert of the Albanian history Mrs Miranda Vickers, Albanian identities: myth and history by Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers and Bernd Jürgen Fischer, global wide collectively works such as the ancient, modern and medieval history of the Cambridge and Oxford Universities e.t.c.
  
  

  …Albanians are universally acknowledged…who gave the world Alexander the Great…

  This is one from the most historical revisionist argument; similar with this that Alexander was a Slavonic origin as circulate from the Slavmacedonians in the neighbour FYROM State. Thousands historical works and tens of writers(Hammond, Worthington, Borza, Stoneman, Ulrich Wilcken e.t.c.) have agree that Great Alexander was born in July 356 (Arr. 7.28.1, Plut. Alex. 3.5), was the son of Macedonian Philip’s fourth wife Olympias, a princess from Epirus, situated to Macedon’s west. None of them mention that Alexander was Illyrian and the most inaccurate…Albanian as William Maxwell quoted. Macedonians according the same sources were a mix of Greek and older ancient tribes or were just Greek or unknown origin (Borza). Epirotans according the same sources were Greeks and the most known tribe was the Mollosian. None of them mention that was Illyrian or Albanian.
  
  

  …Albanians are universally acknowledged…who gave…Emperor Constantine, several other Roman and Byzantine Emperors (were Albanians)…

  Emperor Constantine and several other Roman and Byzantine Emperors were not Albanians as William Maxwell claim. Byzantine Dynasties were Greek, Armenian, Roman, Anatolian origin. This confirmed from tens of writers and experts of the Byzantine history like George Ostrogorski, Paul Stephenson, Cyril Mango, Joan Hussey, John Norwich as also from global wide collectively works like European medieval history of the Cambridge, Oxford and Michigan Universities e.t.c..
  
  

  …Albanians are universally acknowledged…who gave…pope in the Roman Catholic Church…

  Catholic Encyclopaedia ( [www.newadvent.org] ), the most known source it doesn’t mention that one from the Pope was…Albanian. Where William Maxwell find this thing is …unknown.
  
  

  … Albania was also the only country in Europe that protected all the Jews, i.e. the only European country where the Jewish population was increased during WWII…

  At the 30s and 40s and according the Albanian sources only 200 Jews lived! Jewish population actually grew during the Axis occupation; it is estimated that there were 1800 jews in Albania at the end of war but the small Jewish community (200 souls) of Vlore was expelled from the country at the Nazis concentration’s camp. The recorded numbers of 1800 were Jews from the neighbored occupy Greece that has returned with the end of the war.
  
  Albania at the WWII also as is known was allied of the fascist Italy and thousands Albanians were enlisted in the known SS regiments (SS Division Skanderbeg and Handschar Division.
  
  CONCLUSION
  There is an Illyrian myth, with which Albanian culture has been flirting for at least 150 years, and as a myth it can't be questioned for it has all the answers. There is also a very tentative Illyrian science, based mainly on archaeology, and on some data transmitted by Ancient Greek and Roman Historians. Those who are ready to accept that Illyrians and Albanians were one people, should have a look at the Messapic inscriptions, in Puglia. These inscriptions, being totally alien to Albanian, show that the Illyrian question is extremely complicated, and that it isn't likely to be resolved, unless fundamental epigraphic discoveries are made.
  
  From me and in the real world there are no examples of ancient Illyrian literature surviving (aside from the Messapian writings if they can be considered Illyrian), it is difficult to clarify its place within the Indo-European language family. Albanians first appear in the historical record in Byzantine sources of the late 11th century. At this point, they are already fully Christianized. Very little evidence of pre-Christian Albanian culture survives, and Albanian mythology and folklore as it presents itself is notoriously syncretized from various sources, showing in particular Greek influence. Albanians are and have been referred to by other terms as well. Some of them are:
  
  --Arbër, Arbën, Arbëreshë; the old native term denoting ancient and medieval Albanians and sharing the same root with the latter. At the time the country was called Arbër (Gheg: Arbën) and Arbëria (Gheg: Arbënia). This term is still used for the Albanians that migrated to Italy during the Middle Ages.
  --Arnauts; old term used mainly from Turks and by extension by European authors during the Ottoman Empire. A derivate of Arbër, Albanian.
  -- Skipetars; the historical rendering of the ethnonym Shqiptar (or Shqyptar by French, Austrian and German authors) in use from the 18th century (but probably earlier) to the present, the literal translation of which is subject of the eagle. The term Šiptari is a derivation used by Yugoslavs which the Albanians consider derogatory.
  
  There is not any historical record as regards the connection of the Illyrians (that were last mentioned in 7th century AD, during the Slavic migration to the Balkans) and Albanians. Also there is not any linguistic connection of the unkonwn Illyrian language with the Albanian language that initial recorded in 208-page parchment mansuscript written by Theodor of Shkodra, dating 600 years after.
  
  William Maxwell must be more cautious when write these things as regards the history. Historical revisionism and historical ignorance has a close border line that either goes to the legitimate scholastic correction of existing knowledge about an historical event, or goes to the illegitimate distortion of the historical record such that certain events appear in a more or less favourable ligh.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 02.10.2009
• 21:34

  Slavmacedonians are not related with the ancient Macedonians that were Greek, German scholar says

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Mannheim, Germany -
  The head of a German museum which is set to show an exhibition about Alexander the Great weighed into a dispute between Skopje and Athens on Friday, saying the ancient leader had been predominantly Greek.
  
  The modern state of Macedonia, where the main language is a Slavic one, claims the heritage of ancient Macedonia.
  
  'Alexander was predominantly Greek and definitely not an ancestor of contemporary Slavic Macedonians,' said Alfried Wieczorek, head of the Reiss-Engelhorn Museums in the southern German city of Mannheim.
  
  The exhibition devoted to the ancient general and ruler, who lived from 356 to 323 BC, opens on Saturday and runs till February 21.
  
  For two decades, Athens has been objecting to its northern neighbour calling itself Macedonia. Skopje has named its airport after Alexander and insists on having Alexander's 'star of Vergina' symbol on its coat of arms.
  
  In an interview with the German Press Agency dpa, Wieczorek said, 'The latest research shows very clearly yet again that the Macedonians in the days of Alexander were closely related to the contemporary Greeks.'
  
  He added, 'In antiquity, Greeks and Macedonians could interact because they spoke the same language.'
  
  Athens has been insisting that the name Macedonia can only been applied to a province in its own north.
  
  The country of Macedonia became independent in 1991 when Yugoslavia split up. The name issue has held up efforts to bring the new country into NATO and into formal assocation with the European Union.
  
  The museum director referred to findings that its population of 2 million, one quarter of them Albanian speakers and three quarters Slavic speakers, are descended from people who immigrated in the 6th century of the modern era, long after Alexander's death.
  
  http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/europe/news/article_1504631.php/German-museum-man-says-Alexander-the-Great-was-mainly-Greek
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 01.10.2009
• 15:43

  "Macedonian Airlines" soon into the air again.!!!

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  During a similar ceremony upon arrival at Thessaloniki's Macedonia Airport, Vgenopoulos announced that MIG possesses an internationally registered trademark for the title "Macedonian Airlines". "We have received the codes, and no one else can fly with this name," he stressed.Vgenopoulos explained that an Olympic Air subsidiary company, named Macedonian Airlines, will be set up, headquartered in Thessaloniki, for the purpose of soon serving the business and tourism needs of the region. Next week, he added, he will have a meeting with officials and agencies of Northern Greece to discuss procedural issues, while the new subsidiary will be up and flying in a few months' time.According to sources, the first flights to be carried out by Macedonian Airlines will be to Germany and Amsterdam. The flight was greeted on arrival at Macedonia Airport by Macedonia-Thrace minister Stavros Kalafatis, Thessaloniki prefect Panayotis Psomiadis and other officials. source :www.ana-mpa.gr
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 09:50

  The Impact of the Macedonian Question on Civil Conflict in Greece (1943-1949) by Evagelos Kofos

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The Impact of the Macedonian Question on Civil Conflict in Greece (1943-1949) by Evagelos Kofos
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 30.09.2009
• 09:59

  Radical racists views circulate from the so called (FYR)Macedonia Encyclopedia.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  New incredible provocation contained in the so-called "Macedonians Encyclopedia, which have written, at the behest of the extreme-right Prime Minister Gruevski, the historians of the Academy of Sciences and Arts of Skopje and presented himself with all solemnity on 16 September[1] . The two-volume work of 1671 pages, the version of which was financed by public funds of this Multietnnic Balkan new born State, according to Mr. Gruevski is absolutely express “the cultural and political past and our present”, the Skopje government not only tries to rewrite history region at will, but consciously alter key elements of Greek national status.

  Specifically, on page 67 of the encyclopaedia and under the word "Greek" states that "recent research has shown that the Greek nation as having been descended from black African tribes of the Sahara desert!"

  The 260 Slav Macedonians historians, bringing out the government arranged the shipment was, they note that the Greeks, coming from the continent, with virtually cultural backgrounds, "settled by the local appropriating Balkan cultures, which were advanced and shown as its own achievements."

  The unprecedented provocation of Skopje government reaches in the point to characterize the Greek culture as result of counterfeiting and intercepting other cultures, while not hesitating to seize the historic Parthenon and even the Homeric epics! "Even the epics of Homer and the Parthenon is not the result of Greek culture, but as result of counterfeiting, adoption and even interception of these local indigenous cultures such as ours, the Macedonia!"

  Slav Macedonian academics base theirs view in a paper [2] that have published from a Spanish lab with the corporation of three Slav Macedonians genetic scientists. This paper had concluded that "Greeks are found to have a substantial relatedness to sub-Saharan (Ethiopian and West African) people, which separate them from other Mediterranean groups." The conclusions of the paper were related to the "Black Athena" debate and became embroiled in disputes between Greek and Slavmacedonians nationalists.

  Shortly after this, three respected geneticists, Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Alberto Piazza and Neil Risch, argued that the scientific limitations of Arnaiz-Villena's methodology.[3] They stated that "Using results from the analysis of a single marker, particularly one likely to have undergone selection, for the purpose of reconstructing genealogies is unreliable and unacceptable practice in population genetics.", making specific allusion to the findings on Greeks (among others) as "anomalous results, which contradict history, geography, anthropology and all prior population-genetic studies of these groups."

  Arnaiz-Villena countered this criticism in a response, stating "single-locus studies, whether using HLA or other markers, are common in this field and are regularly published in the specialist literature" .

  No multiple-marker analysis has ever duplicated Arnaiz-Villena's results. In The History and Geography of Human Genes (Princeton, 1994), Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi and Piazza grouped Greeks with other European and Mediterranean populations based on 120 loci . See the below MDS plot

  

  
  

  
  

  Then Aryub [4] did the same thing using 182 loci and again no sub-Saharan admixture was detected in the Greek sample. Another study was conducted in 2004 at Skopje's University of S. Kiril and Metodij, using high-resolution typing of HLA-DRB1 according to Arnaiz-Villena's methodology. Contrary to Arnaiz-Villena's conclusion, and no sub-Saharan admixture was detected in the Greek sample.[5]

  It seems that even the last study that conducted from FYROM University averted Slav Macedonians of the FYROM to write such as racists comments as regards the Greek nation and the ancient Greek civilization. The disputed data continues to be cited all over the internet, mostly by white supremacists, afrocentrists and Slavmacedonians nationalists (usually VMRO fans and Diaspora Centers like maknews.com) who have political motivations to relate modern and/or ancient Greeks to black Africans.

  But now officially FYROM administration adopted these radical views and publish a encyclopaedia that flourish of lies, accuracies and racists views. The genetics, with its appearance of scientific objectivity, holds obvious—albeit illusory—appeal. As Appelbaums [6] remarked for nations with strong claims to territorial sovereignty, genetic data will be irrelevant; for nations with weak claims, such data will always be inadequate. Advocates who look to genetics for a decisive victory are certain to be disappointed.

  Nationality is a matter of culture and education and not genetic (mixtures) issue. Who is the person that put blood standards as about the nationality (race)?

  The racistS and the "white arryan" supremacistS that think the colour of the skin and eye or the blood markers are the definition of the race.

  Modern Greeks are the descendants of all the peoples who have adopted and retained that language and that civilization from classical times to the present. I am not claim that genetic purity is an ideal for the Greek people and the others racist thinks.Asa I said even Sforza put two others factors except the clusters and these are the language and the history. Modern Greek nation is not an entirely modern formation, for it is based on much older cultural groups (ethnies). Greek ethnies (like Arvanites, Vlachs, Slavophones etc.) present "permanent cultural attributes" such as memory, value, myths and symbolisms. Greek ethnies present a common cultural origin descending from ancient Greece and Byzantium. Thus, as Smith points out, "the challenge for scholars is to represent more accurately and convincingly the relationship of ethnic, cultural (Greek) past to modern (Greek) nation". [7]

  
  

  REFERENCES

  [1]- [macedoniaonline.eu]

  [2]- [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

  [3]- Dropped genetics paper lacked scientific merit, [www.nature.com]

  [4]- Ayub et al. (2003 Nov). "Reconstruction of human evolutionary tree using polymorphic autosomal microsatellites". American Journal of Physical Anthropology 122 (3): 259-68.

  [5]- High-resolution typing of HLA-DRB1 locus in the Macedonian population, [www3.interscience.wiley.com]

  [6]- The Gene Wars, Diana and Paul Appelbaum.

  [7]- A. D. Smith, National Identity, pp. 51, 236-237

  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 28.09.2009
• 08:24

  FYROM academy and Gruevski administration: Greeks are black Africans, Parthenon and Homer is a part Slavic!!!!

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  As revealed yesterday, the "Thema" newspaper, the new incredible provocation contained in the so-called "Macedonians Encyclopedia, which have written, at the behest of the extreme-right Prime Minister Gruevski, the historians of the Academy of Sciences and Arts of Skopje and presented himself with all solemnity on 16 September . The two-volume work of 1671 pages, the version of which was financed by public funds of the neighbouring country, according to Mr. Gruevski is absolutely express “the cultural and political past and our present”, the Skopje government not only tries to rewrite history region at will, but consciously alter key elements of our national Greek status.
  
  Specifically, on page 67 of the encyclopaedia and under the word "Greek" states that "recent research has shown that the Greek nation as having been descended from black African tribes of the Sahara desert!"
  
  The 260 Skopjans historians, bringing out the government arranged the shipment was, they note that the Greeks, coming from the continent, with virtually cultural backgrounds, "settled by the local appropriating Balkan cultures, which were advanced and shown as its own achievements.
  
  The unprecedented provocation of Skopje government reaches in the point to characterize the Greek culture as result of counterfeiting and intercepting other cultures, while not hesitating to seize the historic Parthenon and even the Homeric epics! "Even the epics of Homer and the Parthenon is not the result of Greek culture, but as result of counterfeiting, adoption and even interception of these local indigenous cultures such as ours, the Macedonia!"
  
  The new methodology of Skopje unacceptable, has not been any reaction from the Greek Foreign Ministry, this time not as a result of political unacceptable compliance applied systematically to national issues in recent years, but because apparently not even noticed! At the same time when the particular case has received international dimension with the involvement of the United States, Great Britain, Albania and Bulgaria.
  
  Of course as I said Greek administration is absent in this new provocation from the ultranationalists.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 25.09.2009
• 22:23

  Flawed FYROM encyclopedia sparks row over ethnic past

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  AP
  Ethnic Albanians are seen fleeing the village of Lojane in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), during a standoff between ethnic Albanians and FYROM police back in 2003. A new encyclopedia has fueled controversy in the multiethnic country.
  
  By Kole Casule - Reuters
  
  SKOPJE – The leading academic institution in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) said yesterday it would revise a new encyclopedia after protests by the Balkan country’s ethnic Albanian minority as well as in neighboring Kosovo and Albania.
  
  The row has highlighted the still fragile ethnic balance that led to fighting in FYROM in 2001 and wars during the 1990s elsewhere in the former Yugoslavia.
  
  The encyclopedia sparked outrage by recounting that ethnic Albanians settled the region in 16th century. Albanians say they were present long before Slavic tribes arrived centuries ago.
  
  It also refers to Ali Ahmeti, leader of country’s 2001 ethnic Albanian insurgency, as a war crimes suspect.
  
  Ahmeti now heads the Democratic Union for Integration, DUI, which is a junior partner in the government. The Netherlands-based UN war crimes court has investigated atrocities in the conflict but never implicated Ahmeti.
  
  “While [the encyclopedia] will be partly rewritten, the edition will not be withdrawn,” Georgi Stardelov, head of the editorial committee of FYROM’s Academy of Sciences and Arts, said in a statement.
  
  The book was first promoted last week as a key national document at an event attended by Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski.
  
  Albanian media quoted Albanian Prime Minister Sali Berisha as saying the encyclopedia was “absurd and unacceptable” and said he warned FYROM President Georgi Ivanov that no one can build “identity based on the forgery of history.”
  
  In Kosovo, which has unresolved border issues with FYROM, parliament leader Jakup Krasniqi said that Skopje was “isolating itself and making enemies.” Ethnic Albanians account for a quarter of the population in the country of 2 million which peacefully seceded from Yugoslavia in 1992.
  
  In 2001, ethnic Albanians launched an insurgency which ended after a Western-brokered peace deal disarmed rebels in exchange for broader Albanian rights and their inclusion in the society, something that riles many Slav-Macedonians.
  
  Some academics in FYROM criticized the book as hastily prepared and politically motivated.
  
  “Any encyclopedia cannot be written under the influence of politicians,” said Milan Gjurcinov, an Academy of Arts and Sciences member. “It is a book teeming with politics and that’s not good.”
  
  Gjurcinov warned that a similar dispute between Serb and Croat academics in the 1980s contributed to the rise in nationalism that led to the bloody breakup of the former Yugoslavia.
  
  ekathimerini.com
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 22.09.2009
• 12:19

  Taliban targets descendants of Alexander the Great

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  For centuries, the blond-haired, blue-eyed people of the Kalash tribes of North West Pakistan have lived a libertine lifestyle.
  
  By Dean Nelson in New Delhi and Emal Khan in Peshawar
  Published: 6:48PM BST 21 Sep 2009
  telegraph.co.uk
  
  The group, believed to be descendants of Alexander the Great's invading army, were shielded from conservative Islam by the steep slopes of their remote valleys.
  While Sikhs, Hindus, and Christians were slowly driven out of Pakistan's North West Frontier Province by Muslim militants, the Kalash were free to drink their own distilled spirits and smoke cannabis.
  But the militant maulanas of the Taliban have finally caught up with them and declared war on their culture and heritage by kidnapping their most devoted supporter.
  Taliban commanders have taken Professor Athanasion Larounis, a Greek aid worker who has generated £2.5 million in donations to build schools, clinics, clean water projects and a museum.
  They are now demanding £1.25 million and the release of three militant leaders in exchange for his safe return.
  According to local police, it was Professor Larounis's dedication to preserving Kalasha culture that Taliban commanders in Nuristan, on the Afghan side of the border that made him a target.
  Confirmation of the Taliban's role in his kidnapping came as their leader Mullah Omar urged American and Nato leaders to learn from the history of Alexander the Great's invasion of Afghanistan and his defeat by Pushtun tribesmen in the 4BC.
  He was kidnapped on Sep 8, when five masked Taliban broke into the three storey museum where he was living, killed a policeman guarding the building, tied a teacher to a post and grabbed the professor from his bed.
  Ajmeer Kalash, a Kalash teacher who witnessed the incident, said he had saved his own life by pretending to be a Muslim.
  "I did not understand their language and they did not understand mine. I tried to make them understand in Urdu language that I'm a teacher at the school."
  He said the men asked for his religion and "I told them that I'm a Muslim by reciting Kalma, though I'm a Kalash."
  "They brought out the Greek national and they opened fire at his police guard. The policeman died on the spot. They took me and the Greek citizen to the forest. There they tied my hands to a tree and left me there and went away," he said.
  Locals said the professor had been visiting the area since 1994 when he first came as a tourist and fell in love with the area's unique culture and its people's links to his own in Greece and Macedonia.
  Today there are an estimated 3,000 Kalasha left in three remote and steep valleys in Chitral in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province. The children wear their hair in orthodox Jewish-style ringlets and sport bright coloured topi hats. The women occasionally have tattooed faces, wear long black robes with coloured embroidery.
  The Kalash are known as 'Black Kafirs' to local Muslims who regard them, and their women in particular, as immoral. They are scornful of their festivals and rituals, which include a rite of passage in which a prepubescent boy is fattened in the mountains over a summer and then when he returns is allowed to have sex with any woman he chooses.
  Married Kalash women are able to elope with other men if the object of their desire accepts a written proposal and agrees to may double her dowry to the abandoned husband – often in cows.
  Professor Larounis, who is believed to have been living in the Kalash Valleys with his wife, had generated around two and a half million pounds in aid for 20 projects in the Kalash Valleys, including clean water schemes, and the museum in Broon village in Bumburet.
  Since his kidnapping Kalash women have demonstrated for his release, while elders have travelled to Nuristan to try to negotiate with his kidnappers.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 18.09.2009
• 13:03

  Let’s stop discrimination and torture against people with Bulgarian self-consciousness in FYROM

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  PRESS-RELEASE
  Peaceful Citizen’s Protest in Support of Spaska Mitrova
  

  ibox.bg

  The Citizens' Initiative Committee “Spaska Mitrova” is organising a peaceful, non-partisan, civil protest in support of Ms. Spaska Mitrova (an academic graduate who holds both
  Bulgarian and Macedonian citizenships), jailed behind the bars of the infamous communist prison “Idrizovo”, near Skopje, because of her Bulgarian self-consciousness. This protest is born of the dismay of free Bulgarians and Europeans from both the Republic of Bulgaria and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). The draconian middle-age sentence of the 23 year-old mother of a little child brings back horrible old-gone times and methods, which the democratic World endeavours to forget. We insist for Spaska’s immediate release as well as for public apologies and compensations on behalf of the Macedonian authorities for their ill-minded reading of the Law and the politically motivated repression over a seriously ailing young mother with a sick baby girl. We are deeply concerned whether the EU could recommend starting accession negotiations with a country holding political prisoners (thereby breaching the Copenhagen political criteria for EU membership) and whether the Republic of Bulgaria could support the accession attempts of such a country?
  
  We feel obliged to stress that the “Spaska” case is not at all unique and forms integral part of a centrally planned, permanent and ubiquitous anti-Bulgarian campaign in FYROM and beyond, which is totally incompatible with the country’s aspirations to join a democratic, law-ruled and tolerant Europe. We want to alert that anyone, who dares to declare Bulgarian self-consciousness in FYROM, is subject to brutal repressions – sacking from work, jailing after absurd convictions, severe economic and moral deprivation, malicious ridiculing by authorities and media and even physical tortures. Europe and the democratic world cannot just observe and tolerate such a policy.
  
  Spaska does not conceal her Bulgarian self-consciousness originating from her predeces-sors. She is among the key founders of the non-government association “Radko”, which brings together FYROM's citizens of Bulgarian nationality. Spaska Mirova has the basic human right to freely raise and educate her child in the tradition of her Bulgarian predecessors from Macedonia, who remained outside the modern Bulgaria's borders and spent their life as Ottoman, Serbian and Yugoslav citizens. But we have today another Europe !
  
  Everyone is welcome to the protest. It will be a peaceful, non-political and mass event of free European citizens for defending principal human rights in FYROM. Please forget your political affiliations and join us to raise our common voice and to express prominently our solidarity in a civilized way – by singing and dancing, without threats and demonstration of power. Let us show that we love and cherish Vardar Macedonia, since not very long time ago (just before 1944) to be a Macedonian from the Vardar region simply meant to be a decent Bulgarian.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 17.09.2009
• 00:49

  EU enlargement, revisionism and nationalism

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Dr. George Voskopoulos in American Chronicle
  August 04, 2009
  
  In international affairs scholars have long scrutinized the issue of conflict and cooperation among state actors. These directly or indirectly refer to the issue of war and peace. Revisionist states are unsatisfied with the territorial status quo and use all means available to pursue what they see as valued ends.
  
  In south-eastern Europe this has been the main feature of the framework of local interaction among states lacking a developed political culture and an operationally democratic demos. Whether they are "reformed" communists, remnants of the old communist regime, descendants of Nazi collaborators or militarists, they have identi-cal aims pursued under the pretext of ideologically or politically oriented goals.
  
  The end of the Cold War did not bring about the end of history in south-eastern Europe but assisted the reemergence of the long supported irredentist policies of those political vampires who have been in a dormant state waiting for the right moment to become once again a threat to the rest. The means used may be shortly categorized in military and non-military. Eventually the selection of those means relates to what is at hand, to the power available, the determination to use it, the inadequacy of international law and ignorance.
  
  The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) and Turkey have taken parallel routes in becoming in-system and out of system destabilizers in the region. Their means are not similar but their nominal aim identical. Actually this has provided them with the most powerful motive in bilateral cooperation in terms of policies, multi-level support, mutual funding and establishment of NGOs operating on a clearly geo-political framework. It has led to a relationship typically described through the patron and client state framework.
  
  On the one hand the re-invention of history has been the selected terrain of action. The dispute is not a question of survival and grandeur but an issue of challenging territorial stability. This has led to the extreme position of discarding Slav origin and la-beling it as a "derogatory term", an "insult". It is indeed dangerous not to cut ties with the Slav past because this brings the country closer to Bulgaria. At the same time it is convenient to baptize Bulgarian national heroes "Macedonians", to deny the Bulgarian origin of the language spoken, to usurp Greek history and to suppress Bulgarophilia and Grecophilia within the country. A visit to Vergina, Pella and tens of archaeological sites in Greece would be enough to ridicule those who suggest that ancient Macedonians spoke Greek because it was a fashionable thing to do. In effect what some suggest here is that ancient Macedonians did not speak their mother tongue but a "foreign language".
  
  The aim of this historical conundrum and the elimination of historical facts take place under the pretext of the freedom to chose an identity at will. Yet, identities have long been associated with control of territories and eventually this brings to the surface their aim, namely to challenge the territorial status quo. Some suggest that legal action could be a useful tool to materialize their irredentist dreams, yet, they forget that territorial changes in the region have taken place only after wars.
  
  For long, inaction, ideologically-stemmed utopia and politically correct behaviour have sidelined the real danger of supporting revisionist states. These are the kind of states that do not belong to the EU, a nuleus of parochial states representing the worst side of Balkan history and its Hobbesian microcosm. This is the mentality Bulgaria, Greece and Romania have long discarded and a major hurdle in building a pan-European zone of stability, security, development and prosperity.
  
  A second country that wishes to join he EU is Turkey. Yet, a number of defining features of its national value system, operational mode of democracy and legitimacy of its international behaviour should be dealt with in an efficient and radical way. For long it has been a militaristic regime, a less mature democracy, a country that constitutes an actual military threat to an EU member. On top of the indicative only failures of its constitutional and behavioural record the country illegally occupies a part of Cyprus refusing to apply the European acquis. Greek air space violations and overflying Greek islands in the Aegean are a daily routine leading to dogfights. These are not signs of modernity but remnants of an empire mentality alien to European values. These facts distance Turkey politically from the EU and turn it into the odd man out.
  
  Nationalisms and irredentism in the region have been suppressed or "legitimized" whenever this has served an intrusive power´s purpose, a policy that has turned the Balkans into a cost-effective battleground for big power practices. Yet, not all dis-putes should be analysed under the rubric of nationalism. There are different forms of nationalism which is or can be a powerful, emancipating political force. As under-pinned, "nationalism…conceals within itself extreme opposites and contradictions. It can mean emancipation…Nationalism, it seems, is a repository of dangers as well as opportunities. It has so many different forms and "national" variations in space and time that is often argued whether they can all be accommodated under one roof".
  
  On the other hand militarism glorifies the use of military means in "resolving" any differences. It is by far a distant practice within the European regulatory system and values. Any future compromise on the issue is bound to have two simultaneous ef-fects. First, it will jeopardise the sustainability of the European edifice since flexibility leads to the application of double standards and second it will certainly lead to veto situations in defence of national interests.
  
  The newly-elected President of the European Parliament Jerzy Buzek estimated that the Western Balkans present an "interesting and promising situation…
  
  Countries queuing up to join is a symbol of our success". Yet, success is measured at every single step the EU is taking. Success should be defined in terms of imposing norms of international behavior in an uncompromising way. Eradicating irredentism and politically isolate those who have turned it into a national ideology should be the first step in ensuring the homogeneity of value application. Also, demilitarizing the political system of a candidate country should be a guarantee for future success of the enlargement endeavor.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 13.09.2009
• 08:59

  FYROM's False Claims to "Macedonianism" debunked

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  By George C. Papavizas
  source:panmacedonian.info
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 11.09.2009
• 21:33

  The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. A Challenge to the Macedonism of the Slavs © Marcus A. Templar, 2008.(Reloaded)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 10.09.2009
• 22:10

  Vasilije Gligorijevic

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  After the latest events that are not known in the wide public, this blog it deletes all the threads that concern Vasilije Gligorijevic.
  Each one decides alone the path that wants to choose it.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 20:57

  Polish newspaper promotes FYROM extreme nationalism , known as Slavmacedonism!!!!!!

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  On a Gazetta Pozan article we read with big letters "Macedonia, powerful as the King Alexander". This article speaks for the FYROM basketball team and hosts comments from Slavmacedonians that speak for theirs "ancient" great past. Is obvious that promotes the Slav-Macedonism, a political idea that prevailing in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) which utilises historical revisionism to establish links between an ethnic group that formed in the 20th century - ethnic 'Macedonians' - and historical events and figures of the 19th century and Middle Ages. For example, Bulgarian Tsar Samuil, despite the overwhelming evidence, is portrayed as a "Macedonian" king. Further attempts are made to deny the Hellenic nature of the ancient kingdom of Macedon and to seek connections between present day ethnic Macedonians and the Ancient Macedonians.
  
  Polish newspaper with such as articles and headlines promotes the extreme nationalism of this Slav new-born nation, a nation that born under communist era, a era that seems the editors forget it. Unfortunately the editor and the writer , history bears witness to the fact that in the early 1940s the Bulgarian inhabitants of Vardar Macedonia were transformed into "Macedonians" for political reasons by communist dictators (Tito, Stalin, and Dimitrov) and infamous communist organizations (Comintern and the Balkan Communist Federation ).
  
  The editor and the writer are so many biased and erroneous statements in this article that one fails to comprehend how a journalist who writes for an esteemed newspaper could write something like this. This come to conclusion that either you have been duped by FYROM's propaganda, or you have deliberately written a propaganda piece. A little more professionalism on your part would have avoided this unfortunate circumstance. History and human morality demand this of journalists.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 09.09.2009
• 15:55

  Resolving the FYROM name dispute

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  A supporter of FYROM wears an ancient Greek helmet during a 2009 Eurobasket preliminary round game against Greece in Poznan on Monday. By Aristotle Tziampiris (1)
  
  The states of the Western Balkans are confronting a multiplicity of challenges and problems within the context of an acute international economic crisis. Bosnia faces significant internal challenges and is far from functioning as an effective unitary state. Kosovo remains unrecognized by most states, including several European Union members and is in a perilous economic situation. Montenegro is being hit hard by the global crisis, as is Serbia, which is still ostracized by some in the international community. Croatia’s border dispute with Slovenia threatens its EU future, while Albania seems to lack an adequate administrative capacity and remains poor overall.
  
  Within this worrisome context, the ongoing Macedonian name dispute, centering on what the new republic in the Western Balkans should be called, has the potential to further destabilize the region.
  
  Because of Greek concerns and objections first to the use and currently to the monopolization of the term Macedonia by their neighbors (as well as various cases of irredentist propaganda), “Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” (FYROM) remains the country’s provisional, international United Nations name, though many states (including the United States, Russia and China) have extended recognition for bilateral purposes under its constitutional name, “Republic of Macedonia.”
  
  During almost two decades, several international diplomatic efforts have come up with various proposals, all of which proved unsuccessful. In April 2008, Greece effectively blocked FYROM from acceding to NATO due to the name dispute and other bilateral matters (the Alliance’s decision was unanimous). In July, the UN’s special mediator Matthew Nimetz suggested that a deal “could be done in a period of months.” However, the issue’s past history only allows for (at best) guarded optimism.
  
  Following a series of interviews and discussions with decision-makers dealing directly with this issue, this author sees three possible scenarios. They could be labeled “best,” “worst” and “interim.”
  
  The “best” scenario (from the viewpoint of the international community and not necessarily historically just), consists of a final and comprehensive agreement between Greece and FYROM. Such an outcome would almost certainly involve a compromise compound name with a geographical connotation (e.g. “Northern Macedonia”). If an agreement among these lines is achieved, FYROM would automatically join NATO under the new name, its accession path toward the EU would accelerate and the concerns of the country’s Albanian population (about a quarter of the total) assuaged in a manner that would be conducive to regional stability (65 percent of FYROM’s Albanians support a compromise on the name issue to facilitate NATO and EU membership, though 95 percent of Slav-Macedonians are opposed). It should be stressed that any such agreement would also have to address a series of legitimate Greek concerns (including the recent manifestations of Slav-Macedonian nationalism that have included the renaming of airports and highways, commissioning of giant statues as well as other actions often connected to a fixation with Alexander the Great). Solving outright the Macedonian name dispute would undoubtedly represent a major diplomatic accomplishment.
  
  The most likely scenario, however, probably remains the “worst” and involves the issue’s non-resolution despite continuous diplomatic meetings and negotiations. As a top Slav-Macedonian politician, striking a note of realistic pessimism, recently told this author: “Almost every conceivable settlement has already been proposed at some time or another but rejected by one of the two sides.”
  
  If this scenario prevails, FYROM’s ruling party will probably continue the campaign to link Slav-Macedonian identity and history to antiquity. Furthermore, NATO and EU accession prospects will remain stalled. The country’s Albanians would be particularly disappointed by such an outcome and it is not alarmist to imagine that the Ohrid framework agreements (that ended the republic’s 2001 ethnic strife) could be challenged. As State Department officials warn, this could produce perilous regional implications. (FYROM neighbors Kosovo and during periods of crisis the influx of refugees, armed Albanian guerilla fighting and illicit activities have linked the two places).
  
  At the same time, it should be kept in mind that the political “space” for a compromise in Athens is decreasing, given the government’s slim parliamentary majority, early elections and continuous majority popular disapproval of a compound name. In addition, FYROM’s Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski appears to many in Greece as untrustworthy because of his intense nationalism and continuous provocations and there is understandably little enthusiasm to reach an agreement with him in particular.
  
  A third scenario can be labeled “interim.” It is based on the realization that the only substantial agreement reached between FYROM and Greece was the 1995 New York Interim Accord that normalized bilateral relations but (significantly) did not resolve the name dispute. (However, Athens did recognize the young republic and Skopje changed the country’s flag which had featured the ancient Macedonian “Star of Vergina” symbol).
  
  According to this “interim” scenario, FYROM would enter NATO under its provisional UN name, after having addressed all the recent actions deemed provocative by Greece (renaming airports and highways anew, dropping the case against Greece at the International Court of Justice at the Hague etc.), thus proving in practice good neighborly relations. The signing of a Treaty of Friendship could further codify the types of actions that would be unacceptable in the future.
  
  Nevertheless, since there can be no firm guarantee against Skopje returning to nationalist or other provocations (whereas NATO membership, once achieved, is effectively irreversible), Athens could publicly link any new nationalistic turn to a democratic referendum on the neighboring republic’s EU accession, with rather predictable results. (It should be kept in mind that for FYROM, EU membership is ultimately even more significant than NATO membership). Negotiations on the resolution of the name dispute would, of course, continue to be conducted, possibly within an improved bilateral climate.
  
  If this scenario is actualized, regional stability might be enhanced. However, the resolution of the name dispute will be pushed even further into the future, while Athens will have lost an important source of diplomatic leverage.
  
  At this point, it is not clear which scenario might prevail. What is certain is that considerable statesmanship and diplomatic skills will have to be exhibited in order to resolve an urgent and important diplomatic problem that influences domestic politics in both Greece and FYROM and has very real consequences for the Western Balkans.
  
  (1) Aristotle Tziampiris is assistant professor of International Relations at the University of Piraeus and visiting scholar at Columbia University (The Harriman Institute). His views are personal. source:ekathimerini.com
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 28.08.2009
• 00:06

  V.K. Sugareff article as regards the Bulgarian Nationality of the Macedonian (Slavs)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 24.08.2009
• 19:32

  Slav Macedonians

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  source: encyclopedia of world cultures, volume 4, europe
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 20.08.2009
• 00:50

  BBC again presenting falsifications, distortions of historical facts as regards Krushevo history

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  In an video that presented from Slavmacedonians BBC presenting falsifications, distortions of historical facts as regards Krushevo history
  
  Here are my remarks:
  
  None from the BBC mentioned that this uprising was staged by the Bulgarians and the Bulgarians were inviting all the nationalities in the area, even the peasant Turkish population, to revolt against the Sultan.
  
  None from the BBC pointed out that the Manifesto of Krushevo was written in Bulgarian.
  
  None from the BBC revealed that during the revolt, with Krushevo as its epicenter, the Turks who had been bribed by the Bulgarians exterminated the Greek population and the Hellenized Vlachs of Krushevo.
  
  None from the BBC mentioned that 366 Greek homes and 203 Greek shops were destroyed by the vengeance of the Turks and Bulgarians. The Slavs, today's self-proclaimed "Macedonians" were coerced to finance the "revolution", but as soon as they found the chance, they escaped to the mountains. The scholars totally glorified individuals such as Damien Grueff and their horrid actions during that period. Dr. Duncan Perry in his book The Politics of Terror: The MacEdonian Liberation Movement, 1893-1904, identified this uprising as an act of terror. It is not known under which circumstances he changed his opinion and why during the deliverance of his theme he concluded that the Ilinten revolution "awakened the "Macedonian" national consciousness".
  
  Below is a article from the TIMES that show a small description as regards the reality.
  
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 19.08.2009
• 16:18

  I am an Indigenous Macedonian I am Greek

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 18.08.2009
• 19:54

  UN Committee: Slavmacedonians must recognise its “Slavic Macedonian” culture.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has considered the combined sixteenth to nineteenth periodic reports">[httpNewsByYear_en)] of Greece on its implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Below you can read the points that consern the Slavmacedonians in Greece.
  
  Report of Greece
  

  In the context of minorities, references made by a very small number of non-governmental organizations to a so-called “Macedonian minority” in Greece do not correspond to existing realities. The fact that a small number of persons who live in Northern Greece use, in addition to the Greek language, Slavic oral idioms, does not indicate the existence of a national minority. Furthermore, the use of the term “Macedonian” to describe a so-called minority usurps the name and national and cultural identity of some two and a half million Greeks who identify themselves for many centuries as Macedonians (Makedones) in the regional and cultural context and can therefore not be accepted.

  Presentation of Report
  

  In this connection, claims that Greece did not recognize the existence of a national linguistic minority by the name of “Macedonian” were totally unsubstantiated and threatened to create potential tensions over existing identities in the region, as well as serious confusion over that name, as it was also used by hundreds of thousands Greek Macedonians living in the northern part of the country, said Ms. Telalian. Also, the non-recognition of numerically small groups as a national minority did not imply discriminatory treatment.

  Oral Questions Raised by the Rapporteur and Experts
  

  JOSE LINDGREN ALVES, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Greece, said he could not agree more with Greece’s answer to his question as to why Greece had not ratified the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of the Council of Europe, while it had signed it in 1997. In its response Greece had said that the diversity of legal and socio-political circumstances and historic traditions prevailing in each country called for tailor-made rather than “one size fits all” conceptual approaches and practical solutions. If this response held true for Europe, it held truer for the rest of the world.
  
  Turning to the question of those who insisted on a Slavic Macedonian minority, Mr. Lindgren Alves said that the most important thing was to assure their human rights in general, including their right to use their dialect or mother language, as any other group. The non-recognition of a group as a minority did not deprive such a group from the enjoyment of its rights. He had been interested to learn that even a political party to foster the claims of Slavic Macedonians had been accepted and had been freely participating in parliamentary elections.
  
  One Expert noted that there was a group speaking a Slavic language in the country, they did not need to be considered as Macedonians, if this led to confusion over the name, but they were still using a Slavic language, which they had not invented and they should have the right to use it. Also political parties should not be divided by ethnicities as this could undermine the unity of the State. Further, for him it was more important to know whether a minority had the right to use its language, not if it had the right to form a political party.

  Response by Delegation to Oral Questions
  

  On the so-called Slavic “Macedonians” the delegation said that this was not a case of self identification as this group did not base its identification on objective criteria. The “Slavic” qualifier was not used in this case. The only qualifier used by this community was the “Macedonian” one. The problem was that the “Macedonian” term was already used by thousands of people in Greece. Up until recently, this group of “Slavic Macedonians” had been completely unknown, not only to Greece but to the whole Balkan region.
  
  The delegation said that the “Slavic Macedonians” were however not prevented from speaking their oral idiom or from stating that they were part of a certain group. The fact that the Greek State had not officially recognised them did not mean that this community was not fully enjoying its rights and that its members were not fully respected by the Greek State.
  
  The delegation underscored that there was a dignity in the name of the Greek Macedonians and said that Greece had not gotten any answer yet on why the State should not respect the cultural and historical heritage of the Greek Macedonians. It had nothing to do with the denial of the existence of a minority group but the denial of a name that was already used since a long time.

  
  Further Oral Questions Posed by Experts
  

  Jose Lindgren Alves, the Committee Expert serving as country Rapporteur for the report of Greece, said that, on the question of the so-called “Slavic Macedonians”, he did not know that they were denying their Slavic origin, even though he had been an ambassador to the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. He wondered if it would change something if this community would recognise its “Slavic Macedonian” culture.

  
  Replies by the Delegation
  

  Responding to this question, the delegation said that they were not in a position to respond in a hypothetical sense. Very recently, Greece had said that the “Slavic Macedonians” should have used a qualifier to clarify their origin. Why were they constantly using the name Macedonian, which already identified 2.5 million Macedonians in the cultural sense? Even the former leaders of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia had admitted that they were of Slavic origin. This question had only come up in the last years. Everyone in the Balkans knew very well what minorities there were in the Balkans, as the question of minorities in the Balkans had created so many tensions in the region. This was the very first time that they had heard of a “Macedonian” group in this region. It was a question of dignity of the name “Macedonian”.

  This difference had created a tension with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and even the United Nations Security Council had said that there was a difference in the name. This situation had to be solved. In Security Council resolution 1845, the Council had asked the two parties to settle the question under the auspices of the United Nations.
  
  This clearly showed that what was in a name had several historical and political implications. It was not a question of a specific denial but the risk of creating tension among identities in the Balkans.

  
  
  The use of the Macedonian name as a state appellation in no way confers the right to appropriate everything and anything derived from or pertained to the entire region of Macedonia. This needs to be legally clarified and remain binding erga omnes. The state name needs specifically to refer to and describe the present region of FYROM. It should apply erga omnes in multilateral and bilateral international relations and transactions and should be observed by all organizations, states, and other non-governmental international organizations, including the government and the agencies of FYROM. As Kofos said [7] Greek and FYROM parties should accept the name used by the inhabitants of FYROM for their region of geographical Macedonia, i.e. Vardar Macedonia, or preferably Vardar Makedonija.
  
  It is therefore clear that the appropriation of the name Macedonia by the FYROM, on which they have based all their propaganda and even their national existence, does not even correspond to their own false national identity since their artificially created state does not have any national homogeneity. This appropriation of the Macedonian name goes against every principle of justice and conceals other expediencies which directly insult Greek national and Macedonian Cultural Identities as shows the unchanging nature of their continuous propaganda.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 13.08.2009
• 17:42

  “Boreal Macedonians”: A New Project Analyzing the Historical Anthropology of Greeks of Southern FYROM

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  [www.borealmacedonians.info]
  
  Yesterday, a new project begin which should analyze some topical issues regarding presence of Greeks in Northenmost Macedonia (todays Southern FYROM). The end result has not been contemplated and subsequently planned as a conventional ethnographic history. It shall be rather, primarily an attempt at systematic documentation of sight, symbols and other material vestiges of Hellenism in which the non-material, metaphysical power of Greek civilization made its imprint. While the end goal is to produce one to two high-end peer-reviewed journal articles, the greatest part of the work shall be systematic and methodical documentation of the Greek legacy from Antiquity to Present day in form of a combined bundle of archive of images, manuscripts, other archival documents, coinage. By far the most of that has been published, analyzed within the domain of FYROMian national humanities academia, but with a twisted interpretations, omitting Greek presence in the last few hundred years.
  
  The key idea is: centralization, easy approach through the capabilities of multimedia, coupled with brief factual explanation and occasional original thoughts on the colossal and dynamic history of this-it should be said, forgotten, part of the Greek people. Finally, the emphasis will be on contemporary Greek community in FYROM: their origin, the Greek and the Vlach language, their ethnological (still survived) Greek customs, their life as an individuals in hostile legal context and Greacophobic atmosphere, their attempt to organize culturally and politically, their contacts-or absence of it-with the rest of the Greek world.
  
  This is ambitious task. It is by no means meant to be all-inclusive in terms of the enormous theme. Work of such of type would require couple of dozens of expert in several fields: archaeologist, epigraphists, historian, archivist, anthropolologist, working through at minimum several years. This is intended as a compilation of ultraspecalized, narrow-focused views on several aspects of the distant and near past, as well as current affairs. Among the databases that shall be produced there will be certainly an all-inclusive bibliography on works of academic merit of Greeks in Povardarje during the last 100 or so years
  
  CEO of the project: Vasko Gligorijević
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 12.08.2009
• 18:38

  Correspondence between Craig Whitlock and Christos Karatzios as regards the Washington Post article.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  June 31, 2009 Craig Whitlock wrote:
  
  Dear Dr. Karatzios,Thanks for the note and for taking the time to write, though I'm sorry you didn't like the article.I don't think it would be productive or satisfying for either of us to engage in a running debate regarding each of the lengthy points you outlined in your email. I certainly respect your opinions, however, and feel you deserve the respect of a thoughtful reply.First, just because I interviewed and quoted individuals in Skopje and elsewhere does not mean that The Washington Post endorses or supports their views. We are a newspaper; we interview people of all stripes and let our readers make up their own minds whether to agree with their views or not. I'm sure many people -- including very many Greeks -- find the views of Todor Petrov and Pasko Kuzman to be irritating, or worse. That's OK. I have enough confidence in our readers to decide whether to take someone like Petrov seriously, given his assertions of "genocide" and so forth. But it's not the job of a journalist to suppress or ignore or censor people when it comes to a newsworthy topic.A few factual points to counter the ones you raised:1) I'm sure you know that the Republic of Macedonia changed its constitution and flag in 1995 (as reported in the article). The constitution in particular makes clear that the Republic of Macedonia harbors no territorial ambitions and considers current national borders to be binding. I'm sure you know this, but it seems disingenuous of you not to mention it when you imply the opposite is still the case today.2) You're certainly entitled to your views regarding US-Cuban relations, but I really don't see what that has to do with my article. Furthermore, The Washington Post is an independent newspaper and not responsible or connected to US foreign policy, despite your efforts to link the two.3) I think it is completely accurate to report, as we did, that Greece vetoed the Republic of Macedonia's membership application to NATO. I think you know as well as I do that if Greece had not objected, the Republic of Macedonia would be a member of NATO today. Personally, I have no stake or opinion in the matter. But I think you're distorting what happened at the Bucharest summit last year.
  
  Sincerely,
  Craig Whitlock
  Berlin bureau chief
  The Washington Post
  
  =================================================================================
  
  Athens and Skopje - Reply to Mr. Craig Whitlock from Christos Karatzios
  
  Dear Mr. Whitlock,
  Friday, July 31, 2009
  
  I thank you for taking the time to respond to my e-mail. It was courteous of you to do so in view of your busy schedule, and since many readers on this issue have probably contacted you.
  However, and unfortunately I continue to disagree with your views. You state that you would prefer not to argue each of the points I outline in my letter to you. In my view, these .. points that you dismiss are testament to the bias in your article. How can you state that the article has no bias when you interviewed no less than 6 individuals from Skopje and its Diaspora, and quote them without verifying the facts, all the while presenting their opinions as if they are the Gospel truth? In the meantime, you only quote the Deputy Foreign Minister of Greece and in a very conscious way, you state that Greece's views stem only from the government. You state that it is not the job of the journalist to censor anyone. I agree with you however, it is the job of the journalist to report truthfully. Otherwise you reduce your newspaper to the level of a supermarket tabloid. Would you have devoted word after word to a Holocaust denier or the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan? Would you have written a story about how the CIA flew airplanes into the World Trade Center in 2001? I can provide you with examples of overt racism uttered by elite members of organizations like the World Macedonian Congress (WMC), and United Macedonian Diaspora [1, 2, 3]. Yet you give Todor Petrov a platform.Mr. Whitlock, despite the freedom of expression, and the right of journalistic freedom, hate and fringe ideas do need to be censored or at least presented with counterarguments. Statements like: "The Athens government says there is no question that he [Alexander the Great] was Greek" reflect your view as well. You seem to collude with pseudohistorian Pasko Kuzman. How then are you not putting The Washington Post's reputation on the line?
  
  I will now focus on your counterpoints to me. In your first counterpoint, you claim that I am disingenuous when I discuss the first constitution written in Skopje. I know very well that Skopje changed its constitution and flag in 1995. You state that Skopje has stopped all irredentist activity (including land claims) and I am not truthful when I state (with supporting references and pictures) that Skopje still harbours such feelings. Did you not see the picture of Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski laying a wreath on [Bulgarian] hero Goče Delčev's grave under a poster of a "United Macedonia"? Despite changing their flag, the Diaspora and even members of Skopje's government still use the old irredentist flag in their offices and in public [4, 5, 6, 7]. There are even official calls to revert back to the old flag. Did you not see the video of Antonio Milososki that I linked in my original letter? If he denies that a Macedonia existed in Greece before 1988, how then is his government to be trusted? If Skopje would have adhered to the Interim Accord, its government would not promote the idea of an unredeemed "Aegean Macedonia" in the school curriculum [8], and its government would not encourage the plight of land claims in Greece by "Aegean Macedonians"[9, 10, 11]. Last summer, in a pre-election strategy, instead of focusing on his country's economic and social problems, Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski started chasing waterfalls by writing to the Greek Prime Minister, to the United Nations, and to the European Union, requesting human rights for the "Macedonian" minority in Greece. Did he not violate the Interim Accord by doing this? Why has the country, whose official name is the cumbersome but accepted FYROM until a mutually acceptable name is agreed upon, gone around and marketed itself as "Republika Makedonija"? Why have they brought suit against Greece at the International Court of Justice in The Hague claiming that Athens violated the Interim Accord when she objected in Bucharest in 2008? They will likely lose the suit (which will probably be heard in 3 to 5 years) but again this was a pre-election coup by the VMRO for internal consumption only.
  
  Mr. Whitlock, the constitution and (arguably) the flag may have changed but the ATTITUDE in Skopje has not changed. We know very well that a constitution and flag can easily be reverted back to the original by parliamentary decree if there is enough will and power by the government, the Assembly, and the people (Articles 68, 74, and 129 of the country's new constitution discuss how "changes in the [Republic's] borders" can be achieved): The governing VMRO overwhelmingly holds the Presidency, the Prime Minister's office, and controls the parliament. There are laws that make it a crime to research ethnicity and to question ultra-Macedonism (Article 179 of the country's Criminal and Penal Code). People in that country have been jailed and sent to psychiatric institutions for questioning these laws [12, 13]. For goodness sake Mr. Whitlock, God appeared on TV and spoke to the nation, edging them on in their struggle against Greece and reaffirming their view that they are the progenitors of the white race [14]!
  
  As for the 2008 NATO Summit in Bucharest: I am not distorting any facts. Greece did not use any veto. As I have mentioned before, Skopje was not invited to join NATO (to the personal dismay of then-President George W. Bush) because there were many countries concerned with the lack of democratic and good-neighbourly progress by Skopje. As NATO Secretary General Jan de Hoop officially stated, "There has never been a veto" [15, 16 (see par. 20), 17]. Despite your claims to not really have an opinion on the matter, you state that if Greece had not objected, "Macedonia" would be in NATO right now. Is this the crux of the problem as you see it? Is this the bone you have to pick with Greece? Is FYROM ready to be a NATO or EU country before countries like Croatia? If you support NATO expansion at any cost, then yes you and your newspaper are reflecting ex-President George W. Bush's US Foreign Policy. By the way, Skopje's bid was sponsored by the United States as "Republic of Macedonia", and not FYROM. Greece has no obligation to accept the country as anything but FYROM as per the Interim Accord of 1995. As a result, I did not distort any facts on the matter.
  
  Finally, I fail to see how you fail to see the analogy I give with US-Cuban relations. It is a very clear analogy of a larger country rightfully reacting to the irredentism of a smaller one and yet you criticize Greece. This is an obvious double standard.
  
  Mr. Whitlock, we are both educated people and you can't deny the influence the media has on public opinion and on a country's internal and foreign policy. US senators and congressmen/women frequently quote newspapers when making their arguments in the Senate and the House of Representatives. As a recent example, the media was very much responsible for propagating the idea that Iraq possessed "weapons of mass destruction" and had direct links to Al Qaeda. However, in the view of many people around the world, the US went to war against a ruthless dictator but under false pretense as was evident later. I hope you can see the analogy of how the media influences public and governmental opinion and the responsibility you have as a journalist to present balanced news.
  
  I would be more than happy to continue a discourse with you. In closing, I invite you to write a balanced article on the Athens-Skopje debate. I invite you to give some of the worldwide classicists who deride pseudohistory [18] a voice, I invite you to interview members of the PanMacedonian Association [19] and bilingual Greeks, and I invite you to visit Vergina, Pella, Philippoi, and Dion and see the real Macedonia.
  
  Sincerely,
  Christos Karatzios MD
  
  References:
  1) [macedoniaonline.eu]
  2) [history-of-macedonia.com]
  3) [maktruth.blogspot.com]
  4) [akritas-history-of-makedonia.blogspot.com]
  5) [akritas-history-of-makedonia.blogspot.com]
  6) [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  7) [history-of-macedonia.com]
  8) [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  9) [macedoniaonline.eu]
  10) [www.ethnos.gr]
  11) [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  12) [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  13) [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  14) [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  15) [www.mfa.gr]
  16) [www.nato.int]
  17) [www.summitbucharest.ro]
  18) [macedonia-evidence.org]
  19) [www.panmacedonian.info]
  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 11.08.2009
• 21:59

  5 Cypriot POW confirm as dead

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  Cyprus soldiers’ remains traced
  
  AP
  In this iconic image that became available after the Turkish photographer who shot it strayed into the hands of Greek-Cypriot soldiers, a member of the Turk invasion force lights the cigarette of a prisoner, Yiannis Papayianni. The latter’s funeral is due to take place in Nicosia on Friday after officials confirmed that his remains had been found.
  
  
  Thirty-five years after iconic photographs were taken of a group of five Greek-Cypriot soldiers surrendering to Turkish troops on Cyprus, authorities have confirmed that their remains have been identified, prompting accusations they were executed.
  The United Nations-led Committee on Missing Persons confirmed that the families of the five soldiers in the photographs, which have become synonymous with the struggle of Greek Cypriots to discover the fate of hundreds of missing people, had been informed of the results of forensic tests.
  The remains of the five soldiers, named as Antonakis Korelli, Panayiotis Nikolaou, Yiannis Papayianni, Christoforos Skordi and Filippos Chatzikiriakou, were found in a well along with the relics of 14 others, also thought to be Greek-Cypriot soldiers.
  “For the soldiers to be discovered the way they were, in a well, proves they were murdered,” said Cypriot government spokesman Stefanos Stefanou, who urged Turkey to investigate what happened.
  “The discoveries confirm the crimes and flagrant breach of international law and human rights during the Turkish invasion of Cyprus,” said Greek Foreign Ministry spokes-man Grigoris Delavekouras.
  “It is a cold-blooded execution,” said Andreas Chatzikiriakou, the brother of one of those killed on August 14, 1974. “I can never accept this.”
  The Turkish government had not commented on the findings by last night.
  Since starting exhumations three years ago, the UN-sponsored program has unearthed the remains of 537 people and has returned those of 119 Greek Cypriots and 44 Turkish Cypriots to their families.
  
  [www.ekathimerini.com]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 02.08.2009
• 21:28

  Vasko (Vasilije Gligorijevic) is free.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Vasko contact me and inform me that was released from FYROM regime. Personally I want to thanks all the people that help in this cause. Below you can read a statement from Vasko (Vasilije Gligorijevic) as regards the issue....
  
  

  "Vasko Gligorijević is again free and in good general health. Be informed that his will, convictions, morale and clarity of reason and mind are strong. He was incarcerated involuntarily and illegitimately with regard to the cause, domestic Constitution, relevant laws and medico-legal procedures in the "Bardovci" psychiatric hospital from 04th of July to 01th of August 2009. Political arrest is certainly the name of the game.
  
  The perversion of the case history which shall be offered by the regime's mouthpieces, belonging to the very same regime which invented a perversion of an entire national history should not be considered credible at all. Vasko continues his temporarily halted activism in full understanding that the circumstances radically changed and that they demand adaptation on which future action should be based, as a condition for any beneficial effect.
  
  In light of the aforementioned situation, he is determined to pursuit his goals as an activist, publicist and philosopher as strongly as ever He is currently in Skoplje and available for contact at his email: vasko.gligorijevic@live.com .
  
  He extends his gratitude to all individuals who launched the international campaign for his release from the imprisonment facilitated by Europe's most totalitarian and absurdist regime: activist, bloggers, publicists, journalists and others, with a special gratitude to Ms. Nina Gatzoulis and Mr. Stavros Vitalis, who visited the Balkan gulag of FYROM in defense of the norms on which the civilized world is based."

  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 01.08.2009
• 11:10

  Vasko (Vasilije Gligorijevic) is found by the mission of PAMME to Scopje

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The traces of the Serbian archaeologist and historian Vasko Gligorievits,whom the authorities of FYROM once again attempted to "disappear",were found after full-day efforts.Vasco was detected in the psychiatric clinic Barkovits where he was reportedly committed a few days ago and is in good health.
  
  The Greek mission returns to Greece having informed on Vasco's issue European representatives,the American Consul and the Greek Liaison Office in FYROM that operates there as well and having submitted a resolution to Gruevski's office.
  
  Vasko's release is expected,while there were given assurances by the FYROM side-through the spokesman of the Prime Minister-that Gruevski will meet the Greek mission.
  
  [pammet.blogspot.com]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 31.07.2009
• 15:13

  New answer to Washington Post article and Mr. Whitlock erroneous points

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  Dear Mr. Whitlock,
  Thursday, July 30, 2009
  
  I am sorry to see that your article “Another Rift Between Greece, Macedonia” published online on The Washington Post’s website on July 28, 2009 is completely off mark, biased, and reflects a generally unprofessional attitude on your part. This is not what international reporting is supposed to be like, in my opinion. The article’s tone smacks of political lobbying and not of investigative journalism. You have taken a very sensitive political, and historical topic and have trivialized it in such a way that paints Greece as a spoiled bully who needs to be “corrected” by the United States and the rest of the West. You conjure up romantic images of “Indiana Jones” and “Santa Claus” which are endearing to the average American reader (who by the way knows very little about European history and politics) and as a result you portray Skopje as the underdog who should be winning the hearts and minds of the West because it is being threatened by Greece. I respectfully would like to inform you that this is propaganda and not unbiased journalism.
  
  I would like to analyze many of your erroneous points and back up my arguments with references and facts:
  
  1) Your point:
  
  
  

  “The Greek government refuses to recognize its neighbor's constitutional name, the Republic of Macedonia, which it sees as a thinly veiled bid to lay claim to three of its northern districts, a region known as Greek Macedonia. After Macedonia declared independence in 1991, Greece prevented it from joining the United Nations and imposed an economic blockade that nearly strangled the fledgling country.”

  
  
  This is correct however you seem not to know why Greece did this. Skopje’s original constitution mentioned its right to intervene on behalf of its people to protect “Macedonians” living in the general area of Macedonia. In the constitution, this land-locked country mentioned it has the right to a navy. This idea has continued to this day: [macedoniaonline.eu] .
  May I also remind you that the new country’s first state flag showcased the star of Vergina, an ancient Greek emblem and the Ancient Macedonian royal family emblem?
  Considering the recent historical conflict Greece had with Yugoslavia and Josip Tito’s plan to annex Greek Macedonia after World War 2, this was seen as continued irredentism by Skopje. There have been multiple examples of official maps published in this new country (especially after 1991) showing a fictitious “United Macedonia”. The US State Department recognized the threat to Greece by Skopje and Yugoslavia back in 1944 and warned all of its missions abroad to be aware of such irredentism against its Greek ally in the war against fascism and then communism [1]. Why has this piece of information evaded you?
  
  The United States tried to invade Cuba (another poor and defenseless country), and has imposed a decades long crippling economic blockade on it when it was found out that Havana courted the USSR militarily and politically. If it is OK for the United States to never forget Cuba’s irredentism, why do you not think it is OK for Greece to react to Skopje’s irredentism? Why did many Americans rightfully react to a 2008 advertising campaign by Absolut Vodka showing California as part of Mexico? I want to make this point clear: This ADVERTISING campaign angered Americans. Greece is dealing with Skopje’s GOVERNMENTAL campaigns [2, 3].
  
  2) Your point:
  
  

  “Greece also vetoed Macedonia's bid to join NATO last year and is blocking its admission to the European Union until it changes its name to the Republic of Skopje, the Slavic Republic of Macedonia or something similar.”

  
  Contrary to popular belief, Greece never had to use its veto against Skopje in Bucharest in 2008. In a closed room meeting of NATO members the night before the official announcement, the Greek government was able to convince member states like France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Luxemburg, Iceland, Belgium, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Netherlands that Skopje had not met the criteria for NATO membership because it had not fulfilled its obligations under the Interim Accord of 1995. As a result of this non-unanimity, a non-invitation was given to Skopje unless it resolves its dispute with Greece.
  More importantly, Greece has never tabled the suggestions: “the Slavic Republic of Macedonia”, or the “Republic of Skopje”. Please research your facts before taking anything you are told at face value. Greece did suggest “Slavomacedonia” as a name but this was rejected by Skopje based on the ground that its large Albanian minority would reject it. Understandably so but if this new country is trying to find a name and identity for its people, should it not be a neutral name that encompasses all of its inhabitants without irredentism against its neighbours? In my opinion, The Central Balkan Republic is the most neutral name but I am not part of the negotiation process.
  
  3) Your point:
  

  “Macedonian officials said they cannot understand why Greece sees their country's name as a threat or thinks they have a secret plan to annex northern Greece.”

  I don’t know where to start with references here. However, I will offer some:
  [www.mfa.gr]
  [online.wsj.com]
  [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  [www.telegraph.co.uk]
  [international.ibox.bg]
  [news.bbc.co.uk]
  [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  [www.macedoniaontheweb.com]
  [www.ethnos.gr]
  [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  [macedoniaonline.eu]
  [macedoniaonline.eu]
  The above posts show how deeply engrained into Skopje’s society is the hatred against Greece. Moreover, they are just a few examples over the last 5 years. There are numerous others spanning decades.
  
  4) Your point:
  

  "It's laughable," said Foreign Minister Antonio Milososki, noting that the Macedonian military consists of 8,000 troops and a fleet of eight helicopters. "In America, you have a good phrase to describe a confusing situation. You say, 'It's all Greek to me.' Sometimes we say it's all Greek to us as well." “

  Funny indeed…the issue has nothing to do with the current state of affairs in the Balkans. One needs to look at the coming horizon and be able to avoid any potential conflicts: Skopje has courted Ankara openly both for military and political cooperation [4].
  It should not be news to anyone that despite being NATO allies, Greece and Turkey have historical antagonism in the region, and are really not the best of allies to put this lightly. Turkey has served as a destabilizing power for the South East Mediterranean for many years: it invaded Cyprus in 1974, its warplanes violate Greek sovereign airspace daily, and it is a major source of transit for illegal immigrants from the East into Europe. Currently, the European Union has asked Turkey to cooperate by not allowing illegal immigration to occur at such alarming rates into Greece. When Skopje courts Ankara, Greece will react. Similarly, Washington reacted with even less restraint when Havana courted Moscow.
  For your information, Antonio Milososki (Skopje’s Foreign Minister) has officially propagated the propagandistic and false idea that there existed no Macedonia in Greece before 1988 [5, 6].
  If such an official man of Skopje can publicly state such claims without shame, how can anything he says be taken seriously and believed? As an investigative journalist, these questions should be coming from you and not from your readers.
  
  5) Your point:
  

  “The Athens government says there is no question that he [Alexander the Great] was Greek.”

  
  This is an unfortunate statement and reflects your lack of knowledge on the subject. You could not be further from the truth. Yes, the Greek government states this but it is because of history (and Alexander himself). It is not a government inspired propaganda campaign; the whole nation and the whole world know who the ancient Macedonians were. Was Abraham Lincoln American because the White House says so? If you feel that this question is absurd, then you should automatically realize how absurd your statement about Alexander is. I would like to respectfully refer you to the letter of protest written to US President Barack Obama by over 300 classic scholars of worldwide repute against Skopje’s historical revisionism. You may find the link here:
  [macedonia-evidence.org]
  
  6) Your point:
  

  “Under a truce brokered in 1995 by former U.S. secretary of state Cyrus Vance, Macedonia was allowed to join the United Nations on the Greek condition that it refer to itself in multinational institutions as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, or FYROM. It was also required to change its flag and rewrite its constitution to include a promise never to violate Greek territory or interfere in Greece's internal affairs.”

  You have not asked the question: “Why did the United Nations require of FYROM to do this?” A famous cliché states that where there is smoke there usually is fire. Think about it: Why indeed? If Greece was simply being a silly bully, why would this still be true of the United Nations, NATO, and European Union conditions? The 1995 Accord also required of Skopje to stop its irredentist activities against Athens. It is obvious that this has not happened.
  
  7) Your point:
  

  “Leaders in Macedonia, a poor, landlocked country about the size of New Hampshire, warned they may have trouble holding the nation together if Greece does not relent soon. Internal unrest, they said, could easily spread to other fragile nations in the Balkans, such as neighboring Kosovo, where 1,500 U.S. troops serve as part of a peacekeeping force.
  "The problem is threatening the fabric of our society," Gjorge Ivanov, the president of Macedonia, said in an interview. "The pressure that Greece is making is destabilizing the whole region." “

  The issue of the stability in the Balkans has nothing to do with Athens and everything to do with Skopje’s irredentism. In a famous diatribe, Skopje contributes to its own instability: [panmacedonian.info]
  Skopje has many internal problems: upwards of 35% unemployment, and a large Albanian minority (25 – 30% of the population) that is growing very impatient with Skopje’s irredentism and the megalomania of the ruling nationalist VMRO party. In 2001, the country nearly broke apart after Albanians revolted against governmental and societal oppression. This is the crux of the instability in the region and not Greece’s objection to the name issue. However, the ultranationalist government in Skopje is trying to scapegoat Greece for its internal problems. This coupled with irredentist claims of a “United Macedonia” by official and unofficial sources, claims of racial purity and continuity, an official ban on researching its citizens’ roots in the Penal Code articles 178 and 179, and its disregard of its neighbours have contributed to instability in that country and reminds one of another regime that flourished in Europe around 1938-1945 [7, 8, 9, 10]. I suppose if God Himself spoke to the people of FYROM on national TV, then all is correct with the government’s course [10].
  
  8) Your point:
  

  “Historically, territory inhabited by ethnic Macedonians has belonged to other nations: Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia. Those countries have been reluctant to recognize ethnic Macedonians as a separate people, to recognize their Slavic language as a distinct tongue or even to recognize the Macedonian Orthodox Church.”

  From what reliable sources have you seen or heard that Greece rejects their national consciousness as a separate people, who have a separate language? Despite the world’s awareness of Skopje’s artificial nation building campaign [11], Greece does not reject the country’s right to self determination. Greece rejects the term “Macedonian” for their identity and language simply because there are 3 million Macedonians in Greece who have been using this regional qualifier as self-identification for over 3000 years. They are Greek and in the regional sense they are Macedonians. Similarly, Texans are Americans, and Bavarians are Germans aren’t they?
  The self-proclaimed “Macedonian Orthodox Church” is not recognized by any Christian denomination (Orthodox and Catholic) anywhere in the world. An oxymoronic cold war creation, this schismatic Christian sect broke off its previous affiliation, as part of a conscious nation building campaign in 1967 and has since asked for recognition by its fellow Christians. It supports irredentist claims and thus has been rejected by other Christians since [10, 12]. Close attention should be paid to its support of the false theory that the Rosetta Stone shows the “Ancient Macedonian” language [12].
  
  9) Your point:
  

  “In an interview, he accused Greece of "practicing ethnic cleansing and genocide on the Macedonian nation" for the past 100 years. "They're denying our nationality and culture and church and history and our borders," he said. “

  This is probably the most unfortunate paragraph in your article. You can now rest assured that outside ultranationalist websites and circles, the Washington Post has brought this ugly lie to the eyes if many readers by quoting an ultranationalist propagandist. History has recorded that Greece fought with Bulgaria in the Second Balkan War when Bulgaria tried to annex “Greater Macedonia” to “Greater Bulgaria”. The Carnegie Commission Report of 1914 attests to this [13 14]. History has also recorded that Greece fought against Yugoslavia when Belgrade (through Skopje) tried to annex “Greater Macedonia” to the Yugoslav nation after World War 2. Where may I ask is it recorded that Greece committed genocide on a “Macedonian nation”? Based on historical fact the question then as to who is denying borders in the area does not require a journalistic degree to answer.
  
  10) Your point:
  

  “It is not just Macedonia's national identity that is at stake. The Greek government does not recognize ethnic minorities within its own borders, including Macedonian-speaking residents of northern Greece.”

  Mr. Whitlock, Greece has not denied that a small bilingual community exists in Greek Macedonia. They speak Greek and a local Bulgarian-based dialect (a throw back from the time Greek Macedonia was under Ottoman Turkish rule) with many Greek, and Turkish words, which is completely removed from the language codified in Skopje under communist influence in 1944 [11]. The vast majority of this Greek community though rejects any claim that they are not Greek. Self-determination is defined as the free choice of a person's own acts and desires without external compulsion. This is the real reason why Greeks object to what Macedonism is attempting to accomplish in Greek Macedonia. Macedonism is acting as a pounding external agitator driven by a State-sponsored ethnocentric nationalist creed with 21st century irredentist visions. The Greek people see a spade and call the spade. Let me make this clear: There is no pervasive support coming from Slavophone bilingual Greeks for self-determination as "Macedonians" with the connotation of the word that Skopje wants to give. Nor is there an overt expression of yearning by the local inhabitants to learn the Slavonic language of FYROM (in its standard form) – contrary to what Skopje and its Diaspora activists would like the international community to believe. "Macedonian" is not a language that we want to call our dialects, which we have been calling "Bulgarian (Voulgarika)" In you article, you quote Mr. Pavlos Voskopoulos, the representative of the self proclaimed “Macedonian Political Party of Greece” or Vinozhito (Ouranio Tokso/Rainbow Party). It is worth mentioning here that Vinozhito received a total of 4524 votes in all of Greece during last month's European Parliamentary elections. Only 2594 votes came from Greek Macedonia itself. That Vinozhito is free to hold associations, and promote their agenda throughout Greece is evident. However, their website is run by ultranationalist Macedonist circles from overseas (the people behind Maknews.com) who repeatedly engage in malicious expressions of rampant hatred and racist slurs while demonstrating virulent hostility against the modern Greek state. There are more people who believe in UFOs in Greece. The Hunters’ Party received more votes. However, you make no mention of this anywhere. 11) Your point:
  “Pasko Kuzman, the government's director of cultural heritage, is a driving force behind Macedonia's surge of interest in the past. With flowing white hair, three heavy-duty watches strapped to his thick wrists and a National Geographic fanny pack, he has been described as a cross between Indiana Jones and Santa Claus.
  In an interview in his office, sitting next to a wall-size copy of a 13th-century icon of Alexander, Kuzman insisted that Greece had stolen the conqueror's legacy from Macedonia, not the other way around.
  "The Greeks are sorry that they are called Greece and not Macedonia," he said. "What else can I tell you?" “
  This is the same Pasko Kuzman who on FYROM’s national television admitted that if they can’t prove that they are the descendants of the ancient Macedonians, they would lose the political game with Greece [15].
  Mr. Whitlock, there are so many biased and erroneous statements in your article that one fails to comprehend how a journalist who writes for an esteemed newspaper could write something like this. I am very sorry to inform you that either you have been duped by Skopje’s propaganda, or you have deliberately written a propaganda piece. A little more professionalism on your part would have avoided this unfortunate circumstance. History and human morality demand this of journalists. You are writing for The Washington Post.
  
  Sincerely,
  Christos Karatzios MD
  Assistant Professor of Pediatrics
  McGill University Health Centre
  
  References:
  1) [www.panmacedonian.info]
  
  2) [articles.latimes.com]
  3) [www.brisbanetimes.com.au]
  4) [www.dunyagazetesi.com.tr]
  5) [history-of-macedonia.com]
  6) [www.newsweek.com]
  7) [history-of-macedonia.com]
  8) [history-of-macedonia.com]
  9) [history-of-macedonia.com]
  10) [modern-macedonian-history.blogspot.com]
  11) [www.panmacedonian.info]
  12) [www.mpc.org.mk]
  13) [www.einaudi.cornell.edu]
  14) [historyofmacedonia.wordpress.com]
  15) [history-of-macedonia.com]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 29.07.2009
• 18:48

  Is there a Rift between Greece and the Former Yugoslav Republic of "Macedonia" on Alexander? (answer to Washington Post)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  by Miltiades Elias Bolaris
  americanchronicle.com
  
  
  On a Washington Post article, ("Another Rift Between Greece, Macedonia, Both Lay Claim to Alexander the Great", July 28, 2009) Craig Whitlock is intend on sending us scrambling back to our History books. Should we be talking about Alexandros o Megas /ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΣ o ΜΕΓΑΣ or Aleksandar Veliki / Александар Велики? Was he Greek or was he Slavic? I will let the reader do their own reading and research. Any encyclopaedia, in any language, anywhere in the world, except for the ones published in the former Yugoslav republic will be fine.
  
  Mr. Whitlock is correctly pointing out that Alexander's "cult of personality is just starting to grip this tiny Balkan country", speaking of FYROM, informing us that among other childish actions that the government in Skopje is doing to annoy the Greeks is the erection of "a 72-foot-tall marble colossus of Alexander astride his favorite warhorse, Bucephalus, which will dominate the skyline of the capital, Skopje". Our information is that it is actually a bronze statue, not marble, but the rest is correct: Greeks are understandably annoyed by the ethno-religious cult that has hijacked the political debate of their neighbor. Why did I say "childish"? Because only little children do things to annoy others...not governments, not nations. Someone who getting "annoyed" will become hardened and less willing to give in. This is something that FYROM's "diplomats in training" have yet to grasp. When they try to "annoy" the Greek government, what they essentially end up achieving is is aggravate the Greek electorate, especially the Greek Macedonian (of Historic Macedonia, in Nothern Greece, not FYROM) into demanding a tougher stance from Athens against the "Skopianoi". The article is correctly pointing out that "this glorification of Alexander and other ancient heroes" is derided by critics in Skopje as "antiquization." I have also heard the term Bukefalism (Bucephalism), a more sarcastic term by rightfully embarrassed intellectuals in FYROM.
  
  The issue, as presented in Mr. Whitlock's article, is stated as follows: Does a country have the right to be call itself what it wants? A second issue, but more important is this issue's "potential to destabilize a region still trying to recover from the Balkan wars of the 1990s".
  
  Let us start with the name issue itself. If the reader goes to any encyclopaedia, he or she will quickly find out who Alexander was, who the Macedonians were and what language the ancient Macedonians spoke. For the reader who would want to read further on this, then another article would be more appropriate: "The alleged differences between the Macedonians and the other ancient Greeks", [www.americanchronicle.com]
  
  The name Macedonia itself is Greek, meaning the "high lands", and Makednoi/Μακεδνοί or Makedones/Μακεδόνες are the highlanders. "Hesiod first mentioned 'Makedon', the eponym of the people and the country, as a son of Zeus, a grandson of Deukalion, and so a first cousin of Aeolus, Dorus, and Xuthus; in other words he considered the 'Makedones' to be an outlying branch of the Greek-speaking tribes, with a distinctive dialect of their own, 'Macedonian', is what we read in the "Oxford Classical Dictionary", 3rd ed. (1996), pp.904,905.
  
  There are about a half a million marble inscriptions that have been found in Macedonia, all written in Greek, with the occasional Latin one, after the Roman conquest, but then still in the small minority. None has been found in any other language.
  
  Finally, we have the strongest indication on the ethnicity of the Ancient Macedonians, in their Greek language: This is precisely the language that Alexander and his victorious Macedonians spread throughout the Asian lands they took over, including the dominion of Egypt in Africa. The Slavs whose descendants now claim exclusivity over the use of the name Macedonia, appeared in the Balkan peninsula more than a thousand years AFTER Alexander. Hence the irritation of the Greeks when others try to claim their ancient history. When someone claims your history, what they also claim is your land. If someone claims the title to your house, he is not simply claiming a piece of paper to hang on a wall as a souvenir: he is actually claiming your house, land, walls and roof.
  
  Craig Whitlock seems to be siding with "Macedonian officials" who "said they cannot understand why Greece sees their country's name as a threat or thinks they have a secret plan to annex northern Greece. "It's laughable," said Foreign Minister Antonio Milososki, noting that the Macedonian military consists of 8,000 troops and a fleet of eight helicopters.
  
  I would beg to differ with Mr. Whitlock's seeming naivete, for I cannot imagine that he has not read the 20th century history of the land that is Macedonia, before he wrote what he wrote. I am very certain that he knows that two Balkan wars have been fought over the control of Macedonia, the land. Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria, and later Yugoslavia, along with numerous other players, including Austrians, Germans, Italians and Albanians fought in two world wars in their attempt to become masters of Macedonia. Yugoslavia and Greece almost came to a clash right after WWII, when Tito made a thinly veiled attempt to carve parts of Macedonia from Greece and incorporate them into Yugoslavia, but actively joining one side in the Greek civil war of the 1940's. His reasons were far from ideological, it was purely a land grab. You may read some of the background in another, related article: "A brief overview of the Macedonian name issue" [www.americanchronicle.com]
  
  As for Anton Milososki, FYROM's foreign minister, he may try to appear laughing at the suggestion of the threat his country is posing to Greece, but his boss's trips to Ankara and the rousing welcome the Turkish Political-Military establishment prepared for Nikola Gruevski there, did not go unnoticed in Athens. As for FYROM's eight helicopters, lined up against Greece's formidable air force, we know that Greece is not arming itself against FYROM, it is an attack from Turkey that it is always prepared to confront. In such a confrontation, FYROM can easily become the straw that will break the camel's back. Alternatively, we need to remember that only a few years ago, the Kosovar Albanians "defeated" the all powerful Serbian army, without firing a winning shot: others, Americans and Western Europeans, even Turks did the fighting for them. In history, you cannot pretend to play naive. You can always expect the worse case scenario. When Bulgaria entered the second Balkan war, all it had against it was the Greek and the Serbian armies, and the Bulgarian army was larger than the other two combined. It expected a quick victory in two weeks' time, long enough for the Great powers to intervene. Things did not go as planned, the Greeks and Serbs started winning, and then hell broke loose: Turks and Romanians joined the war against Bulgaria, and Bulgaria from formidable attacker ended up the defender, fighting for its existence. Moral of the story: If someone has land claims on your home, you do not simply shrug your shoulders and walk away. You confront the issue, until there is a resolution.
  
  The former Yugoslav republic, under the 1995 agreement agreed to change its flag (which hitherto had used a Greek Macedonian Symbol). It also agreed "to rewrite its constitution to include a promise never to violate Greek territory or interfere in Greece's internal affairs". This basically means that the original constitution had made explicit references to a United Makedonija/Обединета Македонија/Obedineta Makedonija, the old Bulgarian and later Yugoslav slogan which was a war cry for land grab of historic Macedonia, from Northern Greece. Obviously they had to change it. They felt humiliated in the process, that is probably true. On the other hand, any little boy that senselessly tries to bully a stronger classmate in school and ends up getting slapped around, feels rightfully humiliated. The 30 year old amateur diplomats who have been running the little country's foreign policy for the last eighteen years are good at creating peaks of crises with bravado and hullabaloo, only to smash their heads on the wall, bringing unnecessary disappointment to their own people. This is precisely what they did in last year's NATO conference in Romania, when, with G.W.Bush's full support they tried to slip into NATO, bypassing the name issue, with champagne bottles ready to pop. When disaster struck, they did not know what to do and they were crying in front of the TV cameras, talking of a national catastrophe.
  
  Mr. Whitlock's tells his readers that "Leaders in Macedonia, a poor, landlocked country about the size of New Hampshire, warned they may have trouble holding the nation together if Greece does not relent soon. Internal unrest, they said, could easily spread to other fragile nations in the Balkans...". let us take this argument and consider its opposite side: Greeks have been warning FYROM's politicians that may have trouble holding their nation together if the governing clique in Skopje does not relent soon and stop playing with Balkan fire.
  
  Why is this line of arguments more correct? For several reasons. First of all, it was not Greece that started this whole mess, it was the Ultra-nationalist hotheads in Skopje. they are the ones who started and they are the ones who can instantly stop it. They adopted for themselves the name Macedonian, as if this name was existing in vacuum as a "freeware". Not so, since a province of Macedonia exists since 1913 in Greece.
  
  While the name Macedonia was Greek in antiquity, by the early 20th century a multiple of people were considered geographically "Macedonians", for being inhabitants of Macedonia, in the same way people who lived in Bosnia Herzegovina were all Bosnians Herzegovinans but others were catholic, others Orthodox yet others Muslim. Macedonia was even more complex: people of a multiple linguistic, ethnic and religious affiliations made up its multiethnic mix. Everyone was a Macedonian, BUT NONE was an ethnic "Macedonian". This had to wait until 1943, when the Communist Party of Yugoslavia established a Communist Party of "Makedonija" and became determined to turn its Serbian, Bulgarian and other (Slavic and not only) inhabitants into full-bloodied "Makedonci".
  
  Since the 2.6 million Greeks of Macedonia have a cultural Macedonian identity, they cannot forgo their own identity just because half as many Slavs north of their land decided to usurp the name Macedonian and try to make it an "ethnic" name. This needs to be understood. I will repeat it. When there is a shared name, a shared geographic identity, you cannot have one of them claim that THEY are the ones, the REAL ones, the TRUE ones and that the others now have to change into something else. Nothing aggravated a Macedonian Greek more than someone telling him "...so are you a Greek or a Macedonian?".
  
  To a Greek this sounds like..."are you an American or a Californian?". If Baja California at some point in its future decides to become an independent state, cutting itself off from Mexico and calls itself California, will this give the Bajan Californians the right to be called the "ethnic" Californians subsequently refusing persons from San Francisco or Los Angeles their right to have a "Californian" identity?
  
  Now, let's see again how it sounds: "Oh, you are from Los Angeles?...So, are you an American or a Californian? Do you speak Californian (which is of course perfectly Spanish, just the Mexican dialect of Baja California Spanish, now renamed "Californian") or you speak American"? It will not sound too convincing to many Californians, will it? Well, this is precisely what the Greeks have to deal with, for the last eighteen years. The Bulgarian and Serbian speaking Slavic population decides to change the name of their land and call it Makedonija. Then they decide to rename their Bulgarian dialect "Makedonski" and now they demand that the Greeks of Macedonia forgo their cultural and geographic identity as Macedonians. This is not going to happen, no matter how much the governments in Athens decide to "cooperate" and give in to seem cooperative.
  
  But, "The problem is threatening the fabric of our society," Gjorge Ivanov, the president of Macedonia, said in an interview. "The pressure that Greece is making is destabilizing the whole region." is that so? And who told you to base your ethnic identity on a BIG LIE? If you have been lying to your own people for two generations about their true identity, is this now OUR problem? the Greeks of Macedonia can counter. And who is destabilizing "the whole region"? Who has been screaming about "United Makedonija!", who is polluting the internet with screams of "Solun" (the capital of Greek Macedonia, the one million strong city of Thessaloniki) "is the capital of United Makedonija!", who is being 19th century style irredentist?
  
  Who is refusing to see reality in the eyes and tries to dig up ancient Greek Kings and adopt them as their own, refuting the true Slavic identity of their own people? Who is publishing State-sanctioned History books (the latest one came out a month ago), declaring that the Makedonci are not a Slavic nation! Is it the Greeks? The Serbs, The Bulgarians? No, it is people like this very same President Mr. Ivanov, and his boss, Nikola Gruevski.
  
  Lincoln said it very eloquently that you cannot lie to ALL the people ALL the time. The BIG LIE will eventually catch up with you, at some point or another! It surely caught about with more than a hundred thousand Skopjan citizens to date who, fed up with the 35% unemployment, and unable to cash Alexander the Great's 72ft tall bronze statue for food stamps, have opted to go to the Bulgarian embassy in Skopje and declare themselves "ethnic Bulgarians". How many of them in reality feel Bulgarian is difficult to say, and at the end of the day it will not make any difference. For sure, every single one of them greatly appreciates the brand new red EU passport that allows them to find a job anywhere in Europe! The Slavs leave, the Albanians stay...the future Kosovo-style crises is beginning to brew...and whose fault it this?
  
  This, Mr. Ivanov should be told, is the dynamite under the foundations of your multi-ethnic country: while you are busy creating and defending THE BIG LIE, you seem to have forgotten the big lessons of the collapse of Yugoslavia: "It's the Economy, Stupid!" Once people start going hungry, no lies will stand in front of their children's future and their family's survival!
  
  In the same article we see mention of the Albanian minority and some of its concerns, which led in 1991 to an armed uprising. I would dare suggest that maybe the anti-Albanian riots in Monastir/Bitola and extreme pseudo-Makedonism is what led the Albanians to feel as second rate citizens in a "Macedonian state". Maybe I am wrong, but I will need to see some strong proof, because arguments like that "the assumption that Macedonia would join NATO" was going to act as a "guarantee of internal stability", sounds to me like empty talk. "It would give us medicine for our hot heads," said Menduh Tachi, leader of the opposition Democratic Party of Albanians." we read in the article. That is a remote possibility, I suppose, but we need to distinguish between what the leader of a political Party says, and what his constituents in the street say. The Albanian in the street needs a job, he needs a police that is not engaged in ethnic brutality and he needs a future, for him, for his family. People do not simply get to the guns and start a revolt unless they feel desperate that their future is taken from them. What does NATO have to do with the INTERNAL stability of FYROM and the Albanian issue? An argument can be convincingly be made for the EXTERNAL stability, but not the internal
  
  In Mr. Whitlock's article we are told that "Macedonians say the name of the country is crucial to developing their still wobbly national identity." This is interesting. Greeks do not have a "wobbly" national identity, Serbs or Albanians do not either. They know who they are. Is it maybe because the so called "Macedonian" have been given a fake identity, for the last sixty-odd years, a make-believe identity that has not stuck well with them? And why is it so important to sweep all the half baked inventions of Yugolavia's Titoism under a NATO woven rug of convenience, and have the neighbors deal with the INEVITABLY ugly aftermath, whenever (not if...) that comes? No...while FYROM's Titoist rebaptized nomenclatura may be just jolly and fine with the perpetuation of pseudo-Makedonism's BIG LIE; a BIG LIE from which they can keep their stranglehold on this poor country and its resources, and the future EU funds, ready for VMRO corruption and plunder, the people of the area deserve a better future than that: THEY DEMAND A FINAL RESOLUTION OF THIS BAD JOKE OF AN ISSUE!
  
  Craig Whitlock informs us that "Ethnic Albanians say they would revolt if the Slavic Republic of Macedonia was the new name because they are not Slavs". I honestly wonder, whom is he trying to convince? Where is the logic in his argument? First of all Greeks never said they want a Slavic Republic of "Macedonia", they suggested Slavomacedonia, which includes the word Macedonia in a "syn-thetic" name. If the "Makedonci" claim to be "ethnic Macedonians", and they want to call their name "Macedonia", their supposed name, then where do the Albanians fit into this? By the "Ethnic Macedonian" formula, the Albanians are NOT considered Macedonians, so, then, if it is called Slavomacedonia, what difference will it make to the Albanians? Call it Japanese Macedonia, Chinese Macedonia if you like, it still does not make any difference to the Albanians. If anything, the so called "Albanian" argument against Slavomacedonia, inevitably leads to a PURELY GEOGRAPHIC, purely non-ethnic, neutral name, that excludes nobody! Yes or no? If we try to be logical, we need to start making sense after some point, and not simply regurgitate arguments thrown arround by others with greater interests and bigger knifes to grind.
  
  Towards the end we are given the argument of a hard liner Slavmacedonian big hat, a certain "Todor Petrov, president of the World Macedonian Congress" obviously some ultra-nationalist emigre', who "said the country should stop kowtowing to Greece and just call itself the Republic of Macedonia, regardless of how badly it wants to join NATO or the European Union." Perfect...and why should this gentleman give a hoot about whether "his" country joins the European Union and sees untold amounts of investment flow in that will create jobs for his "co-patriots"? Simply because, technically, I assume, he is not even THEIR compatriot. he does not live their misery and poverty. He is probably sitting in his office somewhere in Toronto, Sydney or Indianapolis, and he makes a comfortable living away from them. All he cares about is HIS identity as an emigre, which is light years away from the identity of the person on the ground in FYROM, the average unemployed SlavoMacedonian man who sells his family's "Makedonskata" identity for a EU passport that says EUROPEAN UNION outside in golden letter over red.
  
  Then, and here the article becomes suspect of being more like a paid lobbyists stroke of genius rather than genuine journalism, we are quoted the same gentleman, Todor Petrov who "In an interview, he accused Greece of "practicing ethnic cleansing and genocide on the Macedonian nation" for the past 100 years. "They're denying our nationality and culture and church and history and our borders," he said." Really, now? I have seen photographs of Jews in crematoria and piles of corpses in Nazi concentration camps. I have seen pictures of beheaded Armenians, men women and children, in Turkey, during WWI, but I have still to see a photo of Greek Genocide against the "Macedonian" "nation".
  
  Journalism, I would expect, demands fairness and balance. How can the rumblings of an ultra-nationalist emigre be given space to defame the Greeks through an imaginary BIG LIE, (which by the way is a very recent invention, they have come up witht hsi "genocide theory" post 2000) without allowing the reader the chance to hear so much as even a question mark on this? But lest I forget, did anyone notice what this Titoist nationalist just say at the end of his sentence? Let us revisit his uttering:
  
  "They're denying our nationality and culture and church and history and our borders," he said." Your borders? Which borders? The United Macedonia borders? Where do your borders start and where do they end? Is the so called "Aegean Macedonia" (they will never be caught alive saying Greek Macedonia, so they invented the misnomer :"Aegean Macedonia") part of the borders you feel the Greeks are denying you?
  
  Then the juicy fruits start coming one by one: "It is not just Macedonia's national identity that is at stake. The Greek government does not recognize ethnic minorities within its own borders, including Macedonian-speaking residents of northern Greece."
  
  We are even offered the distinguished opinion of a very important gentleman: "Pavle Voskopoulos, a Greek citizen who leads the Rainbow Party, a group of ethnic Macedonians in northern Greece, said the country subscribes to a myth of a "pure" Greek people who are directly descended from Alexander and others from his era. "This is all about modern Greek identity," he said. "If there is a Macedonia as an independent state, this is a great threat against Greek policy and Greek ideology."
  
  I grew up in Greece and went through most of my formative years there and that included even the years under the ludicrous colonels' Junta. I do not recall anyone teaching me about a "pure" Greek nation, yet I see our friends from Skopje repeatedly accusing Greeks of this very same myth. Greeks since antiquity know that it is not blood lines that make a nation, but common living, commonality in culture and common interests. though it sounds like a puzzle to others from outside, Americans do constitute a nation, and so do Australians and Canadians. There are subgroups that is for sure, but there is unity in diversity. Greek are the same.
  
  Ancient Greeks were a dynamic mix of local Pelasgians, and other local tribes, Indo-European speaking Greeks, who arrived in Greece around 2000 BC, and as time went by they mixed with slaves, and others who came as a result of Alexander's expeditions in Asia, and later with Romans, Thracians, etc. Greek culture has been evolving the last 4000 years and it is the language that more than anything (religion too, to a smaller of greater degree, depending on the historic frame) that makes their nation. Who ever talked about racial purity? Only Dog breeders and Nazis are thinking in these terms. As for Pavlos Voskopoulos, the leader of the Party of the Ethnic Macedonians of Greece, I will ask the readers permission to copy here what I recently wrote in another recent article on this issue, about the political Party Mr Voskopoulos leads:
  
  "When Ouranio Toxo/Ουράνιο Τόξο - Vinozhito (Raibow) a political Party representing the "ethnic Macedonians" slated candidates under the banners of the European Free Alliance (Eyropaiki Eleytheri Symmachia – Ouranio Toxo) for the in June 2009 Europarliament, the total votes tally they were able to receive in the districts of Macedonia were two thousand five hundred ninety four votes (2594), out of a population of 2.5 million Greek Macedonians
  
  ( [ekloges-prev.singularlogic.eu] ).
  
  This is hardly making a case for allowing one third of Greece, Macedonia, to be split and given as a land grant to the FYROM ultra-nationalists in Skopje.
  
  By comparison, the Komma Ellinon Kynigon (Fysi - Kynigi - Psarema - Paradosi)/Party of Greek Hunters (Nature -Hunting - Fishing - Tradition), the quintessential joke of a party in Greece, in the very same districts (Districts of Drama, Kavala, A' Thessalonikis, B' Thessalonikis, Serres, Chalkidiki, Kilkis, Pella, Imathia, Pieria, Florina, Kozani, Kastoria and Grevena) received 5900 votes, twice as many as Eyropaiki Eleytheri Symmachia – Ouranio Toxo / Vinozhito.
  
  ( [ekloges-prev.singularlogic.eu] ).
  
  We are given here the opinion of the leader of a Party that was able to gather less than one vote per thousand people in Greek Macedonia supporting their cause, although they had tv time, and freedom to say whatever they wanted, yet they managed to gather half the votes of the hunter's party! What minority are we talking about then? the best statistics may be talking of some fifty thousand bilingual people who speak Slavic ALSO, besides Greek. And that is true especially of the older generations, but that again makes no difference: it is identity that counts, not language not blood, not anything else. Several, though not all, Muslim Slavs in Greece (Pomaks) consider themselves to be Turkish though they speak no word in Turkish. And Many Jews worldwide think of themselves as Jews though they speak no Hebrew. These are instances where one part of the identity, the religious one, overcomes language and other aspects of culture. I have met not a few Americans who are Greek Orthodox in religion and Greek in culture and identity, though they speak no word in Greek, and they revel in their double identity as both Americans and Greeks. It is self identity that counts. It is who and what you want to be. A huge part of identity, sometimes even primary, is of course language, but not the only one. A bilingual person can always chose the identity he prefers. Many families in pre-war Macedonia were split in half when one brother would decide to "became" a Bulgarian ("ethnic Macedonians" had not been invented yet) and another to "became" a Greek. A bilingual of Macedonia who speaks both Greek and Slavic, but considers himself to be a Greek and derogatorily calls the people across the frontiers "Yugoslavs", cannot be counted as one of Mr. Voskopoulos's voters or "ethnic minority" supporters. A Cuban-American in Miami, is typically a fully bilingual Spanish and English speaking, and while he has a strong Spanich/Cuban identity is also at the same time very much an American.
  
  The Washington Post article continues by informing us that FYROM "has renamed its national stadium for King Philip II, Alexander's father, and organized dozens of archaeological digs." It is not what you dig out that matters to Greeks, but the language found written in the artifacts, and the culture that created these artifacts. Claiming for example prehistoric stone-age artifacts as "proof" of an age-long continuum of (Slavo)"Macedonian" culture is as ludicrous as naming Greek funerary, religious and political Greek inscriptions "ancient-Macedonian" epigraphy. The Zenith of "Fyromian-antiquization" kitsch is displayed in the governing Palace in Skopje, where a series of priceless ancient Greek statues have been arranged with total disregard to their care, on the sidewalk, as proof of "ancient Macedonian" art. Similarly, a huge Greek inscription which mentions the Makedonarchs (leaders of Macedonia) has been hauled from the Archaeological site and taken to decorate the entry to Mr. Gruevski's Gubernatorial building.
  
  "Officials", we are reminded, "also like to needle Greeks that the philosopher Aristotle, who tutored the teenage Alexander, was from the kingdom of Macedonia, not Athens". This is a true statement: Athens was not Greece, Athens was IN Greece. Macedonia was in Greece too. The fact that someone was from Macedonia, like Aristotle, does not make him any less a Greek than someone from Athens as someone from Sparta or Hellenistic Egypt or Syracuse in southern Italy. the fact that Eratosthenes was from Egypt does not make him an Arab, since Arabs came into Egypt seven Hundred years after him. He was Greek. The fact that Archimedes was from Syracuse, does not make him a Roman, he was a Greek who was in fact killed by a Roman during the capture of his country, his city state by the Romans. And after all, Aristotle is not known for simply being Alexander's tutor...he is the man that established the scientific method and one of the two pillars, along with Plato, of ancient Greek Philosophy. And there is no question as to what language he wrote in. If he was a "Slavo-Makedonski" Macedonian, why did he not write in Slavic? The Romans were brutes and uneducated in the beginning yet when they started writing they wrote in their own language, Latin. Where is that elusive language of the Macedonians, the ancient conquerors of the known world, the language of Alexander, Philip II and Aristotle, if it was not the Greek they left us in their incriptions?
  
  The fact that there are plenty of pseudo-scientists in FYROM, like the Archaeologist "Pasko Kuzman, the government's director of cultural heritage" who prostitute their allegiance to science for the sake of pseudo-scientific political ends, is not surprising. Hitler found doctors who killed their fellow humans in order to execute SS-ordered human "experiments". I would never call Pasko Kuzman an SS officer, far from it (though I have no problem describing some of his political bosses in VMRO as such). No, his description "as a cross between Indiana Jones and Santa Claus" goes along way to create a good picture of him, but I would definitely add a bit of Goebbels into the mix: it is the BIG LIE "thing"...with which he has been raised, in Tito's Yugoslavia and from which, like a second skin, he cannot get out of.
  
  Someone could easily claim that Greeks are too emotionally involved to be credible, when speaking of ancient Macedonia. I can say that this might be correct with some. On the other hand, the facts are facts and nobody can escape from them, not even FYROM government's own "director of cultural heritage". Then, who would be the best to expose the falacy and fakeness of pseudoMacedonist theories? None other than the ex prime minister of the country, i suppoze, Ljupco Georgievski, who abandoned Pseudomakedonism and went to maika Bulgaria and got a Bulgarian passport, remembering that his grandparents were all Bulgarian, after all. This is how the ex-Prime Minister countered Pasko Kuzman's nebulous theories, logically and point to point:
  
  [www.youtube.com]
  
  But in Craig Whitlock's interview, the professor had other things to say:
  
  "The Greeks are sorry that they are called Greece and not Macedonia," he said. "What else can I tell you?"
  
  Don't say anything professor...polla eipas/πολλά είπας and, as Aristotle, that timeless Macedonian philosopher said: "ouk en to pollo to eu"/"ούκ εν τώ πολλώ τό εύ"!...I do not need to translate what he said, you are eis Makedon/είς Μακεδών/a Macedonian, as you claim; I am sure you can read Aristotle in the original...
  
  Then, after you finish Aristotle, please go and read what 350 Classics professors world wide are saying, on the Macedonia issue, in their Open Letter to President Obama:
  
  [macedonia-evidence.org]
  
  What was Pasko Kuzman's reply to that letter?
  
  It is right here, on national tv:
  
  [www.youtube.com]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 28.07.2009
• 19:21

  Errata in Craig Witlock’s Article: Another Rift between Greece, Macedonia

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  Craig Witlock’s articles in the Washington Post, Another Rift Between Greece, Macedonia Both Lay Claim to Alexander the Great, of July 28th is hardly an objective piece of reporting.
  
  I find it highly questionable, for instance, that Mr. Witlock refers to no less than 6 pro-FYROM sources in the article (Foreign Minister Antonio Milososki; President Gjorge Ivanov, opposition leader Menduh Tachi; Todor Petrov, president of the World Macedonian Congress; Pavle Voskopoulos, leader of the pro-“Macedonian” Rainbow Party; and Mr. Pasko Kuzman, the FYROM’s Director of Cultural Heritage), versus only only pro-Greek source: Deputy Foreign Minister Yannis Valinakis. This is hardly an objective or balanced composition of sources, and I wonder at the validity of the Washington Post’s editorial policy that allowed this.
  
  Beyond this, there are a number of salient facts which are omitted, while other crucial misrepresentations—not to say, propaganda—are accepted as fact:
  
  1. In contrast to the avowed peaceful intentions expressed by the FYROM side, a number of maps, textbook content and speeches in FYROM have made reference to a “Greater Macedonia.” This refers to a Slavic-speaking “Macedonian” political entity which includes parts of the Greek province of Macedonia, including the city of Thessaloniki, as well as parts of Bulgaria. While these had their origin in Tito’s Yugoslavia, and were in part a Soviet attempt to destabilise Greece during the Greek Civil War, their continuation in FYROM on a number of instances since 1991 are regrettable.
  
  2. The argument that Greece is destabilising the region by refusing FYROM entry into NATO is disingenuous, and incorrect. The conflict between the Slavic majority and the Albanian minority in FYROM is an internal matter, and stems from the government’s treatment of the Albanian minority in the recent past. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Greece, or NATO. The article neglects to mention that Greece supported the NATO peacekeeping force in FYROM, and that it has made its general support for FYROM’s entry—subject to a mutual resolution of the name issue—a matter of public record. The article also fails to note that Greece has publicly supported the candidacies of Bulgaria, Romania and other Balkan countries to both NATO and the European Union.
  
  3. Historically speaking, Alexander the Great and his father, Philip II of Macedon, spoke a dialect of Doric Greek. There are over 6,000 inscriptions, epigraphs, coins and other artefacts in museums all over the world as well as the archaeological sites of Pella or Vergina which attest to this. The citizens of FYROM speak an entirely different language, which could be termed “Slavic”. There is absolutely no historical continuity between the Hellenic/Hellenistic culture and influence of the ancient Kingdom of Macedon, and the current state of FYROM.
  
  4. Whether or not the government of Greece recognises the existence of ethnic minorities within its borders is besides the point. In fact, minorities are recognised in Greece, as national policies regarding the Roma or ethnic-Turkish minorities indicate. But this has literally nothing to do with the attempt to create a “Macedonian” cultural identity based on Alexander the Great that is currently taking place in FYROM, or the naturally opposing reaction of that country’s ethnic Albanian minority.
  
  The policy of Greece is to negotiate with FYROM until a mutually-acceptable, exclusive name is found: This has been the Greek position for over 15 years now, and has been clearly and repeatedly expressed by successive governments. Greece joined NATO in 1951, and the EU in 1981, and has made major contributions to both organisations. I see no reason why both Greek policy and history should be challenged or indeed misrepresented in an article which is so biased and one-sided, unless of course the Washington Post has decided to change its long-standing journalistic and editorial policy.
  
  source:philip-atticus.com
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 26.07.2009
• 12:05

  Why Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have a conspicuous absence as regards the case of missing of Vasko Gligorijevic ?

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  As you know there are two two western-oriented international human rights organizations operating worldwide in most situations of severe oppression or abuse.
  
  The Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
  
  Both NGO’s have shown an conspicuous absence as regards the missing of the known Serb Macedonian activist Vasko Gligorov(Gligorijevic). Vasko Gligorijevic, is a Civil Rights Activist and one of the from the leading criticizers of the ficticious construct of "Macedonism" (an extreme nationalist ideology) in Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) . He has now been missing for almost three weeks. Before his disappearance, in July 3rd he had sent an email by saying:
  
  "I may be arrested again. I know that from my sources. Please check me on this email in the next 12 hours. Do not alert nobody for now, please, it is not certain. But do check me every 12 hours for few days. If repeatedly do not answer in next hours or days, I´m dead, I´m gone."
  
  I remind also that Vasko Gligorijevic had been arrested again by the FYROM police previously at two in the morning on 28 January 2009. On that occasion he had been eventually taken to the psychiatric clinic Bardovci [www.youtube.com] He had been drugged and kept tied up for three days. While in the psychiatric clinic, he was kept effectively incommunicado, he was essentially stripped of his legal rights and had no access to a lawyer or to a doctor of his own choice. The director of the Clinic refused a meeting with a Greek doctor, journalists and supporters, claiming that she did not know if this patient was in her hospital. At that time, Vasko Gligorijevic was imprisoned in a "mental institution" where he was subjected to physical and mental torture and came close to death. He was subsequently released after strenuous objections from the international community.
  
  Both NGO’s were absence as regards and in this case.
  WHY ?
  
  Now again and because of his free voice Vasko Gligorijevic is missing again. There are rumours that the orders for his arrest and disappearance came from the very top. The antidemocratic practices of the current FYROM administration(VMRO is a extreme right nationalist partie) are known, particularly afterwards the absolute majority that ensured in the FYROM Parliament, with prosecutions(case of Archbishop Jovan) and arrests of political opponents(case of Social Democratic Alliance of Macedonia vice-president Zoran Zaev), the effort to be debited the “traitor stigma” those who have different opinion and express it in public, the nationalistic hysteria but also the piracy that becomes round of the call national issues, they cause concern, who day with the day grows.
  
  Even and the top the x-FYROM President Branko Crvenkovski was offended and was blackmailed with control of all his assets and his banking deposits in all the neighbouring countries and is faced as a political opponent that should must undermined. The approximately hundred laws that passed from the Parliament, without discussion, the most at the time of the abstention of Opposition, grow the concerns that adopt and the factors of EU and OCSE.
  
  FYROM State is under the mentality of its communist past era that has resulted in ill treatment of its minorities and hostile irredentist behavior towards its neighbors. The FYROM leadership's eerie fascist performance is continuous. Once more this alleged government-supported action is a blatant case of extremely repressive behavior akin to a totalitarian regime as opposed to a country, which aspires to become a member of the European Union and NATO. In any free democratic society, voices such as Vasko Gligorijevic cannot and must not be suppressed. When a misfortune such as Vasko Gligorijevic occurs, it becomes the concern of all peace-loving nations on earth.
  
  I call these two Human Rights NGOs to investigate the aforementioned case and facilitate the immediate release of Vasko Gligorijevic –if he is still alive.
  
  FIND HIM.!!!
  
  DO YOUR WORK!!!
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 25.07.2009
• 19:44

  Andreas Willi on Macedonia

   »  Modern Macedonian History

  Andreas Willi has written a rebuttal of sorts (pdf) to the letter of the Macedonia Evidence Initiative. It is an extremely interesting piece of doublethink, and as such, it is useful to address in some detail.

  Willi (henceforth W.) writes:
  

  The internet documentation which is referred to in the letter may be right when it sees nothing but “a personal grudge” behind Demosthenes’ calling Philip II a “barbarian,” but to cite Herodotus 5.22 as conclusive evidence that Alexander the Great was “thoroughly and indisputably Greek” is seriously misleading, since Herodotus’ statement “I happen to know that [the forefathers of Alexander] are Greek” is triggered precisely by the existence of a dispute over the matter, long before the age of Demosthenes.

  
  
  Indeed, there was a dispute over the matter, but the key point is that the dispute was resolved in favor of the Macedonian claims of Hellenicity. So, if the Hellanodikai of ancient Olympia accepted the Macedonian king as a Hellene, what reason does W. have to doubt them? Indeed, this acceptance occurred a century and a half at least before the ascent of Macedonians as a great power, so there is no reason to think that the judges' acceptance was the result of pressure.
  Thus, we know that Alexander affirmed his Hellenicity --by choosing to compete at the Olympic games-- and this affirmation (and that of his successors who also competed) were affirmed by the other Greeks. We have both a proclamation and an acceptance of his Hellenicity.
  
  W. writes:
  

  As for (b), the question “Why was Greek the lingua franca all over Alexander’s empire if he was a ‘Macedonian’?” cannot be adequately answered with the words “[Because] Alexander the Great was Greek,” given that we have numerous examples of ancient empires in which the lingua franca was not the language of the ruler.

  The unnamed examples of "ancient empires" notwithstanding, it is the case that Empires usually spread their own language. The Romans much esteemed Greek as a language of learning, but they spread Latin, not Greek to most of their Empire. Centuries later, the Europeans, who much esteemed Latin, spread Spanish or English to their empires.
  
  Languages are spread by people, and Empires spread the languages of their peoples. What wondrous miracle would result in myriads of Macedonians settling throughout Asia not to leaving a single trace of their non-Hellenic presence? Did the Macedonians decide to abandon their language at precisely the time of their own triumph? A simpler explanation is that they did not.
  
  But, here comes the doublethink, as W. writes of the ancient Paionians:
  

  What is at the core of the letter is a mistaken and unhealthy notion of historical identity. “While it is true that the Paionians were subdued by Philip II, father of Alexander, in 358 B.C. they were not Macedonians and did not live in Macedonia”—but is that really so? How many Paionians did we ask about it, and at what point in history?

  Thus, W. questions the letter's statement that the Paionians were not Macedonians. None of the ancient sources ever confuse the two people, or assert that the Paionians were Macedonians. But, let us grant, for the sake of argument, that at some point in their history, the Paionians felt like Macedonians.
  
  But, if feelings sufficed, then how can W. deny the feelings of the Macedonian kings to be Hellenes? If Paionians may be Macedonians since they may have considered themselves to be such, how can W. simultaneously cast doubt to the claims of the Macedonian kings to be Hellenes, when they certainly did consider themselves to be such.
  
  W. continues:
  

  The comparison with Egypt is awkward, for at least after the incorporation of “Paionia” under Antigonos Gonatas (249 BCE) a territorially continuous political unity had come into being which survived as such in the Roman provincial administration. That the case of Egypt is rather different in this respect need hardly be stressed.

  Suppose that Paionians did start feeling like Macedonians during Roman times. Certainly, in Strabo's time, who lived after the Roman conquest, the Paionians continue to be reckoned as a different people, while Macedonia is reckoned as part of Hellas. But, let's suppose that indeed a "Macedonian identity" formed.
  
  But, then, in Byzantine times, the Macedonian theme, consisted of a completely different region, in Thrace. So, whatever, "Macedonian" identity may have formed, it was no lasting thing, having disappeared by medieval times, and transferred to Thrace. Thus, the argument that FYROM Slavs can be seen as inheritors of a distinctive "Macedonian" identity from antiquity collapses. Their only relationship to Macedonia is that they happen to live in what was the Ottoman province of Macedonia.
  
  W. writes:
  

  Moreover, to use an ancient but immediately relevant analogy, are we really to think that Thucydides got it all wrong when he wrote that, decades before the conquest of Paionia, the term “Macedonia” also applied to lands not inhabited by “ethnic” Macedonians (Thuc. 2.99)?

  But, Thucydides statement actually opposes W's argument:
  Assembling in Doberus, they prepared for descending from the heights upon Lower Macedonia, where the dominions of Perdiccas lay; [2] for the Lyncestae, Elimiots, and other tribes more inland, though Macedonians by blood and allies and, dependents of their kindred, still have their own separate governments. [3] The country on the sea coast, now called Macedonia, was first acquired by Alexander, the father of Perdiccas, and his ancestors, originally Temenids from Argos. This was effected by the expulsion from Pieria of the Pierians, who afterwards inhabited Phagres and other places under Mount Pangaeus, beyond the Strymon (indeed the country between Pangaeus and the sea is still called the Pierian gulf) of the Bottiaeans, at present neighbors of the Chalcidians, from Bottia, [4] and by the acquisition in Paeonia of a narrow strip along the river Axius extending to Pella and the sea; the district of Mygdonia, between the Axius and the Strymon, being also added by the expulsion of the Edonians. [5] From Eordia also were driven the Eordians, most of whom perished, though a few of them still live round Physca, and the Almopians from Almopia. [6] These Macedonians also conquered places belonging to the other tribes, which are still theirs--Anthemus, Crestonia, Bisaltia, and much of Macedonia proper. The whole is now called Macedonia, and at the time of the invasion of Sitalces, Perdiccas, Alexander's son, was the reigning king.
  It is clear from this passage that Macedonians e.g., the Lyncestae) existed outside the Macedonian state, while some people who lived within it were not reckoned as Macedonians. Macedonians and the "Kingdom of Macedonia" are not conterminous entities. Thucydides does not assert that the non-Macedonians within the Macedonian state become, by reason of their inclusion in this state, Macedonians.
  
  Thus, there were non-Macedonians within the Kingdom of Macedonia, and none of the independent self-governing Macedonians listed by Thucydides lived in present-day FYROM.
  
  W. writes:
  

  But to call Cleopatra a “Macedonian” gives away what constitutes true identity in the eyes of the letter’s authors: to them, identity seems defined by ancestry and blood-lines, by the past more than the present. Are we then to conclude that, for example, John F. Kennedy—or George W. Bush or Barack Obama, for that matter—were never real Americans? And if John F. Kennedy’s ancestors spoke Irish at one point, is it preposterous for all English-speaking Americans to use him today in their construction of a national identity because of that?

  On what basis was Cleopatra not a Macedonian? She was a Macedonian by blood, and indeed by a fairly inbred pedigree full of Macedonians. But, suppose we discount, for the sake of argument, the importance of ancestry. Why, still, was Cleopatra not a Macedonian?
  
  According to W. the conquered Paionians became Macedonians on account of them being conquered, but Cleopatra, the descendant of the conquerors of Egypt became a non-Macedonian, and, presumably, an Egyptian.
  
  In W's strange world of doublethink, it appears that conquerors become the conquered (Cleopatra becomes an Egyptian), and the conquered become the conquerors (Paionians become Macedonians).
  
  W. continues the JFK analogy:
  

  By coming to America John F. Kennedy’s ancestors chose to become Americans (with Irish roots); but why could the Slavs coming to Macedonia then not become Macedonians (with Slavic roots)?

  The analogy is false, for several reasons. First of all, JFK's ancestors came to the US as peaceful immigrants while the Slavs came to Macedonia as enemies of the local inhabitants. One needs to read the Miracula Sancti Demetrii to see what the local Macedonians thought of Slavs during the time of their arrival.
  
  But, for the sake of argument, let's accept that the Slavs after several centuries, and because they live in part of Ottoman Macedonia, have some reason to consider themselves some kind of Macedonian. If this was all they did, no Greek would mind; after all, Greeks speak of Turkocretans, or Turkocypriots, or Slavomacedonians.
  
  No, the real issue is that the Slavs of FYROM want to usurp the rights to the use of Macedonians exclusively for Slavs. Consider the official FYROM state policy about the existence of a "Macedonian" minority in Greece, which is -supposedly- oppressed by Greeks.
  
  Going back to the Irish immigrants example, imagine if Irish immigrants not only started calling themselves Americans, but also started speaking about an American minority (by which they meant Americans of Irish origin) oppressed by "Anglos." That is, they tried to dispossess the original bearers of the name and take it as their property. Yet, this is precisely what FYROM Slavs are attempting to do.
  
  W. writes:
  

  No matter what its ethnic mix was—and what serious scholar would nowadays want to argue that the only “good” states are ethnically “pure” states, in which everyone must speak the same language?—the tendentiously-labeled “pseudo-greater Macedonia,” far from being a recent invention, did exist as a real recent invention, did exist as a real identitarian concept well before the 20th century. And in a sense its roots can be traced back to the conquests of Philip II, Alexander the Great and their successors in “Paionia”; for if those conquests had never taken place, the history of the region would have looked different and the territory of “Paionia” might not have shared the fate and fortune of “Aegean” Macedonia for long stretches of its history. Thus, unless one subscribes to a dangerous “blood-and-soil ideology,” there is no reason why the modern Slavic Macedonians should not be allowed to continue to call their country “Macedonia” and to pride themselves in Alexander the Great just as much as the modern Hellenic Greeks do. What does it matter if Alexander “was Greek, not Slavic,” as long as no one claims the opposite?
  This is a truly peculiar argument. Alexander's conquests influenced the history of much of the known world, so, should they all be called Macedonians on account of being conquered by the actual Macedonians?

  Also, what can one make of the statement about sharing the "fate and fortune"? Was a Macedonian Greek in any case closer to a Skopje Slav because they both happened to live in a territory that Ottoman Sultans claimed to be Macedonia? Was he not closer --Ottoman borders notwithstanding-- to a Thessalian or Thracian Greek? If we abandon the "blood-and-soil ideology", should we replace it with a "borders-and-history ideology", whereby an annexation of Paionia 23 centuries ago has forever marked the territory as Macedonia?
  
  FYROM Slavs may, of course, feel pride that the ancient Paionians were conquered by Philip and Alexander a thousand years before their linguistic ancestors came to Macedonia. I don't feel particular pride that Greece was conquered by the Romans or the Ottomans or the Nazis, but there's no accounting for taste.
  
  One cannot fail to notice, however, how thoroughly un-Macedonian this attitude is. Philip and Alexander loved Greek culture, and proudly proclaimed their Greekness, while these modern "Macedonians" despise Greeks, and proudly proclaim their non-Greekness. I submit this as exhibit A in the case that they are not, indeed, Macedonians at all.

  source: dienekes.blogspot.com

  ===========================================================

  I want to add a remark as regards Pr Willi article and Dienekes comments. Andrew Rossos is not a Greek Macedonian as false has written from Pr Willi but a known Slav Macedonian Professor that lives and teach in Canada. His articles and his latest book is a hymn of propaganda and unbalanced critique. This show that Andreas Willi is missiformed as regards the Macedonian Issue.

  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 24.07.2009
• 21:01

  The Name Game....The future of EU expansion? It all depends on what the meaning of the word "Macedonia" is.

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  BY THOMAS MEANEY, HARRIS MYLONAS
  source: foreignpolicy.com
  
  The European Union is a club with a long line out the door. Just ask Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia, Albania, or Turkey. But for one Balkan country, the biggest problem is showing the right ID at the velvet rope. Seven former communist countries were able to enter both NATO and the EU by the end of the Bush years. But last year the Greek government blocked the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia from joining NATO, citing bad neighborly relations, and is determined to torpedo its EU bid as well. The reason? It's all in a name.
  
  FYROM, perhaps due to the unwieldiness of its acronym, has tried to enter as just "Macedonia," the name of the ancient empire of Alexander the Great. But Greece also has a northern province called "Macedonia" and worries that Skopje has expansionist ambitions.
  
  The United States supports the eastward expansion of NATO in an effort to shrink the Russian sphere of influence and -- the name issue notwithstanding -- FYROM would seem to be a perfect candidate for membership. The Obama administration can help the United Nations solve the dispute by abandoning the Bush administration policy of stubbornly backing the "Macedonians" and talk its fledgling friend into a compromise that will push it over the Balkan hump.
  
  But doing so won't be easy. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia understandably doesn't like to be known by its cumbersome post-Titoist tag. "Don't You FYROM Me!" is a favorite bumper sticker on the streets of Skopje. In the 1990s, foreign observers doubted the viability of this landlocked country with an explosive cultural makeup and powerful neighbors. Ethnic Albanians, Turks, Roma, Serbians, Bulgarians, and Greeks are all packed together in a state the size of Vermont. It's not surprising that such a fragile country would want to cling its oldest and most respectable heritage.
  
  The largest minority in FYROM are Albanians, who desperately want to become members of the EU and NATO. Besides the obvious economic benefits, membership would ultimately allow these Albanians closer ties with their coethnics in the western Balkans. They are growing impatient with the recent surge in "Alexandermania" backed by the Slav majority that promotes an exclusively "Macedonian" identity for the country. Last month, the government unveiled plans to erect an $8 million, 72-foot statue of Alexander the Great atop his horse, Bucephalus, in the capital square. Never mind that the historical Alexander's actual capital was located inside modern Greece.
  
  More troubling are the maps in "Macedonian" textbooks that show their ancestral homeland stretching far into present-day Greece (as well as Bulgaria and Albania) and describe Thessaloniki, the capital of the northern province of Greece, as occupied territory. These are irredentist claims that justifiably worry the Greeks.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 23.07.2009
• 16:46

  Disappearance of Vasko Gligorijevic in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  July 15, 2009
  
  Disappearance of civil rights activist Vasko Gligorijevic in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM).
  
  The FYROMacedonian civil rights activist Vasko Gligorijevic (or Vasco, previously known by his Bulgarian name Vasil Gligorov), a strong criticiser of FYROMacedonian president Nikola Gruevski, disappeared on the 4th of July. Before his disappearance he had sent an email to a trusted individual saying:
  
  "I may be arrested again. I know that from my sources. Please check me on this email in the next 12 hours. Do not alert nobody for now, please, it is not certain. But do check me every 12 hours for few days. If repeatedly do not answer in next hours or days, I´m dead, I´m gone."
  
  Mt Gligorijevic had been arrested by police previously at two in the morning on 28 January 2009. On that occasion he had been eventually taken to the psychiatric clinic Bardovci [www.youtube.com] He had been drugged and kept tied up for three days. While in the psychiatric clinic, he was kept effectively incommunicado, he was essentially stripped of his legal rights and had no access to a lawyer or to a doctor of his own choice. The director of the Clinic refused a meeting with a Greek doctor, journalists and supporters, claiming that she did not know if this patient was in her hospital. Mr Gligorijevic remained in the clinic until discussions in the European Parliament and intervention of human rights groups resulted in his release a month hence.
  
  Vasko Gligorijevic was a member of the Slavic Philhellenic network and had criticised the current government in FYROM. Mr Gligorijevic had sought to publicise and ridicule a FYROM law about "private research on matters of national identity regarding the genesis and ethnic anthropology of peoples historically present in FYROM is forbidden by the 1996 Law for scientific-exploring activity ("zakon za naučno-istražuvačkata dejnost"), article 16, which reads: "The approval (for performing public scientific work-V. G. ) can be given for all areas designated as a public interest in scientific-exploring activity, with the exception of scientific research in the area of historical and cultural identity of the Macedonian people and the nationalities which live in the Republic of Macedonia, defense and security.""
  
  About a year ago, Mr Gligorijevic, then a history student at the University of Skopje, had filed an Averment pro se with the FYROM judiciary in which he was invtiting the FYROM government on a legal challenge regarding the stated facts. Some of these facts were:
  
  "XIX) By stating the facts in the previous chapter, to the uttermost of my knowledge, the truth, nothing more, nothing less, without guilty mind or in dissimulation, 1. I, Vasil Gligorov, as an act of free will,[…] do affirm these truths, remaining ready to prove them in case of any challenge, being assured in them as a result of a critical, open-minded study of the matters exposed, that: 2. Macedonians were and are Hellenes, from their genesis in antiquity to the present day.[…] The existence of these Pseudomacedonians was first brought by their "recognition", in spite of historical and ethnologic realities, by the acts of the 53 illegitimate AVNOJ organization. Many people, primarily conscious Bulgarians and also Serbs and others, suffered by the post-WW II regime in Yugoslavia because of their rejection of the forced "Macedonisation". The wrongful Yugoslav intrusion into the 1946-1949 Civil War in Greece is a crime, the motive of which was in accordance with the Pseudomacedonian ideology of expropriation of the real Macedonia. 5. The usurpation of Hellenic heritage and expansionist agenda by the many Pseudomacedonians, including segments of their state, where the fake doctrine of "Macedonism" is an official creed, is not only one of the main generators of crisis in the Balkans, but it is a self-injury of the Slavic Pseudomacedonians to their true, traditional heritages: Bulgarian and Serbian. I, Vasil Gligorov, thereby, affirm that the victory of truth and reason over the forces of Bolshevik Pseudomacedonism will benefit Slavs of FYROM, Slavs in general, Greeks and all other parties involved in these unfortunate circumstances."
  
  The FYROM government never challenged Mr Gligorijevic in court. Nevertheless after his release from the Bardovci Clinic he stopped writing original essays and restricted himself to reporting news and the political analysis of newspapers and tv stations of FYROM as well as translating into FYROMacedonian international criticism of the Gruevski policies.
  
  Vasko Vassilje Gligorijevic sought through the creation of the Slavic Philhellenic Network to reconcile the two sides in the name argument and to bring constructive insight into the debate. In his own words the motives were to work "against Anti-Hellenism and Anti-Slavism produced by the current regime in Skoplje". On the 31st of May Vasko Gligorijevic surprisingly announced that the Slav Philhellenic Network would cease.
  
  Below is an excerpt from one of Vasko Gligorijevic´s essays from the website of the Slavic Philhellenic Network [vardaraxios.wordpress.com):]
  
  

  "The problems arose with the way in which the totalitarian VMRO-DPMNE government energized the masses among which the national confusion brought by media exposure of contradictory data grew. Firstly, it reactivated the conflict with Greece by multitude of irredentist moves. Secondly, within FYROM it carried massive policy of introduction of Ancient Macedonian symbols (names of institutions, statues) after the expected and natural Greek negative reaction. The population, feeling threatened, mistook the attitude of aggressive "Macedonization" sponsored by the government as "defiance" against a hostile state (the hostility of which was precisely provoked by FYROM´s initial provocations). Capitalizing on the fact that the vast majority of the general population does not have neither a capability nor a will for sustained scientific research regarding ethnology, history and linguistics, the government managed to capture attention of the whole body of citizens. One can presume that the sheer authority the organized government yields in a conformist society where libertarian principles of critical thinking and individual self-reliance regarding the process of opinion-forming are practically absent is sufficient to impose an entirely absurd idea of identity. In FYROM it is unchallenged by organized bodies from which a better knowledge of the true state of affairs might be expected, including universities, institutes, museums etc. With the sole exception of Internet, all electronic and printed media are participants in government´s monopoly over identity dogmas. Only few individual voices of distaste and revolt against the lies have insofar voiced their concerns (Denko Maleski, Petar Hr. Ilievski) but they got a hostile, unsympathetic public response.
  
  While the prospect of organized challenge of the pro-governmental stances regarding the identity issues is something expected given the conventional political dynamics within pluralist societies, this is not quite a case. Nikola Gruevski achieved dominance of his party by calling premature elections in 2008 at the time of peak in the approval rating of his first mandate caused by populist measures. That gave him an unprecedented might against which FYROM has no institutionalized mechanisms of control. Furthermore, in a state of affairs whereby the larger part of the Slavs have abandoned their Bulgarian and Serbian culture in belief that they represent a separate ancient ethnicity in a category of its own, creators of the policy of the opposition (led by the leftist SDSM party) must carefully measure their words of opposition to the lavish Pseudomacedonian rhetorics, since they may be branded as "traitors" given the appropriate circumstances. Consequently, in such occasion they would find themselves ostracized from the ongoing debate.
  
  This leads to the conclusion that the solution to the Pseudomacedonian hysteria which totally dominates public life in FYROM is not only confined to the change in the internal situation which may come as a result of economic collapse or a full-scale civil war, but also from strong pressure from outside which would enable FYROM to conform itself to reality and to rational way of conducting cultural policy. The reign of VMRO-DPMNE, characterized by collectivist, group-centered policies, extensive role of the police in society, new legislature sponsoring religious education, subsidizing biological procreation with wealth redistribution, enforcing ethics of service to the "common good", emphasizing the feral, folklorist and medieval aspects of local national culture in opposition to modern as well as apolitical high culture, is the greatest political catastrophe FYROM faces in early 21st century. A hope remains that the Slavs of FYROM will reject the artificial and overbearing attempts to instill a connection with chronologically and ethnically distant Greek kingdom as well as to make history the most important aspect of their everyday lives. Only through enduring action from within and from abroad the local state-worshiping, centrally-planned tribal way of life may be liquidated and replaced with a political system based on freedom, a change which will forever put the era of Pseudomacedonism behind, as a doomed ideology based on lies."

  
  
  by Typhaios
  [www.americanchronicle.com]
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 22.07.2009
• 13:20

  Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch should call on FYROM’s government to take all necessary steps to ensure Vasko Gligorijevic safety

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  The government of FYROM should immediately disclose the whereabouts of Vasko Gligorijevic, a Serbian Civil Rights Activist and one of the leading criticizers of the ficticious construct of "Macedonism". He "disappeared" almost two weeks ago.
  
  Just before his disappearance on the 4th of July 2009, Vasko had sent an e-mail to one of his trusted friends writing:
  
  “I may be arrested again. I know that from my sources. Please check me on this email in the next 12 hours. Do not alert anyone for now please, it is not certain. But do check for me every 12 hours for a few days. If I repeatedly do not answer in next hours or days, I´m dead, I´m gone.”
  
  Vasko himself expressed fears about his own life if he would be rearrested and two days after sending his e-mail, he "dissapeared" mysteriously. 16 days after his dissapearance has brought no new news about his whereabouts.
  
  We remind Vasko Gligorijevic had been arrested previously by police at two in the morning of 28th January 2009. On that occasion he had been eventually taken to the psychiatric clinic Bardovci [www.youtube.com] He had been drugged and kept tied up for three days. While in the psychiatric clinic, he was kept effectively incommunicado. He was essentially stripped of his legal rights and had no access to a lawyer or to a doctor of his own choice. The director of the Clinic refused a meeting with a Greek doctor, journalists and supporters, claiming that she did not know if this patient was in her hospital. Mr Gligorijevic remained in the clinic until discussions in the European Parliament and intervention of human rights groups resulted in his release a month thereafter.
  
  Most of these flawed FYROM's policies that led to "disappearances" and arbitrary detentions, remain in place, and could be used again and again as already shown. We are intensely fearful for Vasko Gligorijevic safety at this time, a fact that he expressed also in his last e-mail, given the security authorities’ previous history of arresting and mistreating him. In addition we are deeply concerned about the continued reports, corroborated by numerous International sources like reports by the Counsil of Europe's Committee for the prevention of Torture and others, of routine and widespread use of torture and ill-treatment of suspects in police custody, along with the terrible conditions in FYROM's prisons as it is shown in the above report. Justifiably our fears for Vasko's safety are becoming stronger.
  
  A characteristical part of the above report about FYROM's tremendous conditions inside their jails, includes conclusions like:
  
  "We examined the conditions in our jails, but also the cases of torture. Although in the next two years of the project realization we have to go a long way, even now it is more than clear that we will have to pay due attention to the issue of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in the jails finding out appropriate forms for alarming the public due to a simple reason that what happens in the jails is below the elementary human dignity and is a type of continued, highly concerning violation of basic human rights."
  
  Human Rights Agencies and Amnesty International should be strongly concerned about the "dissapearance" of the civil rights activist Vasko Gligorijevic and call on the FYROM government to take all necessary steps to ensure Vasko's safety and well being. The characteristical apathy of FYROM's state in Vasko's case is at least suspect and sources pointing to the direction he is secretly detained because of his strong critics against the State policies, shows that this is a blantant case of assault against international law, against fundamental Human Rights standards. They prove undoubtedly that FYROM, a country aspiring to become a member of the EU and NATO, still cant get rid of its communist era’s mentality.
  
  A person has "dissapeared" for 16 days straight. The same person left behind an e-mail stating that most likely he is going to be arrested and in this case "he is dead... he is gone". Unfortunately noone seems to care in FYROM about one of their fellow citizens.
  
  International Organizations and especially Human Rights Agencies should address a number of issues regarding critical detentions, solely because of expressing their fundamental right of Free Speech and must publicly demand the immediate and unconditional release of the Serbian Activist Vasko Gligorijevic, if he is being held in one of FYROM's prisons at the earliest possible date.
  
  We are living in the 21st century. The systematic practice of enforced disappearances, especially when it happens in a European State with aspirations to become a member of EU and NATO, constitutes a crime against humanity!!!
  
  By Jason
  source: history of macedonia
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 09.07.2009
• 14:09

  letter of the Pammacedonian USA as regards the arrest of Vasil Gligorov (Vasko Gligorijevic) in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  
  URGENT: YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION & ACTION IS REQUIRED.
  
  July 9, 2009
  
  To:
  
  The EU Parliament,
  UN Missions,
  Human Rights Agencies,
  World Media,
  US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,
  Hellenic Foreign Minister Dora Bakogianni,
  & the Hellenic Parliament
  
  On January 29, 2009 we brought to your attention the arrest on January 28, 2009 of Mr. Vasil Gligorov (aka Vasko Gligorijevic) in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (the FYROM) after police charged into Mr. Gligorov's apartment where they arrested him purportedly because of his activist actions. Mr. Gligorov, a university graduate in history, has devoted his efforts at improving Slavic-Greek friendship through the advancement of historiographic and anthropological scholarship about Southern Slavs in the Balkans and Greeks as well as the various aspects of their mutual cultural and political relations. He is a strong critic of the extreme nationalistic narrative of "Makedonism" in FYROM and one of the leading members of the Slavic Philhellenic Network.
  
  At that time, Mr. Gligorov was imprisoned in a "mental institution" where he was subjected to physical and mental torture and came close to death. He was subsequently released after strenuous objections from the international community.
  
  On July 4, 2009 Mr. Gligorov sent the following message to a trusted individual: "I may be arrested again. I know that from my sources. Please check me on this email in the next 12 hours. Do not alert nobody for now, please, it is not certain. But do check me every 12 hours for few days. If repeatedly do not answer in next hours or days, I'm dead, I'm gone."
  
  Mr. Gligorov has not been heard from since then and according to our sources he has been arrested again per direct order of Prime Minister Gruevski and has been sent to prison in Tetovo.
  
  FYROM must abandon the mentality of its communist past era that has resulted in ill treatment of its minorities and hostile irredentist behavior towards its neighbors. The FYROM leadership's eerie fascist performance is continuous. Once more this alleged government-supported action is a blatant case of extremely repressive behavior akin to a totalitarian regime as opposed to a country, which aspires to become a member of the European Union and NATO. In any free democratic society, voices such as Mr. Gligorov's cannot and must not be suppressed. When a misfortune such as Mr. Grigorov's, occurs, it becomes the concern of all peace-loving nations on earth. We call upon your Agency and other Human Rights NGOs to investigate the aforementioned case and facilitate the immediate release of Mr. Gligorov from detention.
  We thank you in advance for your attention and appropriate action on this matter.
  Sincerely,
  
  Nina Gatzoulis, President
  Maria Hatzinakos, Secretary
  
  panmacedonian.info
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• 11:29

  Vasko (Vasilije Gligorijevic) in FYROM jail

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  
  by RapidoGr
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 06.07.2009
• 22:03

  Vasko (Vasilije Gligorijevic) has been arrested again ?

   »  Modern Macedonian History
  
  According to uncorroborated evidences , Vasko Gligorijevic has been arrested again, on Saturday, July 4th.The last communication that I had with him was 2 days ago where has notified me that after information that he had, FYROM regime will be arrested him again. Vasko needs our help.
  Extract from his last e-mail.....
  I remind Vasko Gligorijevic is an Serbian origin activist, strong criticizer of “Pseudomacedonism” . Every one remember the case of the first arrest and detention of Vasko to the Bardovci Psychiatric Hospital at FYROM in Skopje capital, about only 5 months ago. A case which resulted to inspire a gigantic outrage and International pressure against FYROM’s regime which resulted Vasko finally to be released. The international community and especially the Human Rights Organizations should intervene energetically and put an end to stop this comedy.
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 04.07.2009
• 00:06

  Alexander the Great: how Slavic was he?

   »  Modern Macedonian History

  

  27 January 2009

  The real question is not whether Alexandre trhe Great was Greek or not. He has. The real question is whether the Slavic invaders to the Balkans during the 7th century AD, more than one thousand years after Alexandre, can claim today any other nationality than Slavic and have the right to hold any other passport than Bulgarian. And the answer is simply NO.

  by Prof. Paul Cartledge, Cambridge University

  Nation-state building in its most urgent form was a particularly prominent 19th-century phenomenon. Small proto-states then were seeking to get out from under the stifling embrace of the big empires of the day - whether British, Turkish, French or Russian. But that process of political emancipation was not confined by any means to the 19th century; indeed, it continues, in places very strongly or even violently, to this day. And new nation-states that choose to base their essential identity on ethnicity, in order to determine who ‘the people’ are, tend to need heroes. Not least, they feel the need for founding-father type heroes from the past who can be seamlessly re-appropriated (and of course made over) as the nation’s living ancestors.

  The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia - or just plain ‘Macedonia’, as it is known officially to its inhabitants and, more surprisingly, to George Bush’s United States of America - is exactly one such emergent ethnic nation-state of today in search of retrospective founding-father ancestors. Unfortunately, one of its ‘ancestors’ of choice, Alexander the Great, is already very well spoken for - in fact, most vigorously claimed and appropriated - by the neighbouring state of Greece. Though Greece began the process of independent nation-state building as early as the 1820s, it did not achieve its present geopolitical configuration until the 1940s, well within the living memory of its oldest generations. Hence it too is still not a little sensitive about its founding-father ancestors; and though it has a far huger pool to choose from than does FYROM, it too chooses to make a song and dance about Alexander as a true-blue Hellene, because the area of northern Greece centred on Greek Macedonia with its capital at Thessaloniki is the most ethnically diverse and the most ethnically contested in all the present-day Greek state. Therein lie the source, and the cause of its intensity, of the conflict between Greece and FYROM over the question of Alexander’s true ethnicity - a fundamentally historical question, but one that has become twisted out of all recognition by politics: just how Greek or Hellenic was he, really?

  It’s very difficult today to classify precisely the language of the ancient Macedonians, because so few examples of it have been preserved. But two things about it are reasonably certain, or at least agreed among the experts. It was basically a dialect of Greek, but so interlarded with words of non-Greek, mainly Thracian origin that not just because of accent but also because of vocabulary it could be incomprehensible to speakers of ’standard’ Greek dialects. For example, Alexander himself when under the stress of huge emotion is recorded as speaking ‘in Macedonian’. The issue of difference of customs is also complex, but two features may be salient. Unlike Greeks elsewhere, both in mainland Greece and in the diaspora, the Macedonians had not developed a civilisation based on cities (poleis), and correspondingly they had not developed a strong political notion of citizenship. To try to convey an idea of this difference, scholars speak - however misleadingly - of Macedonian tribalism, even feudalism. That traditional way of doing politics was not significantly altered until only a couple of generations before Alexander the Great, in the late 5th century BCE.

  Apart from the lack of citification, what would have astonished all other Greeks - except the Spartans perhaps - was the practice of royal polygamy. King Philip II, Alexander the Great’s father, amassed a collection of seven wives in all, only two of whom were Macedonian Greeks. Alexander’s own mother Olympias was a Greek Greek, as it were, a royal princess from Epirus. Elsewhere, monogamy was not just required for all Greeks - but also regarded as a defining feature of Greek as opposed to barbarian culture.

  These linguistic and cultural differences could be exploited politically, then as now. Demosthenes of Athens complained you used not even to be able to buy a decent slave from Macedonia (implying it was a barbarian territory) whereas now Macedonia under Philip II lorded it over the rest of mainland Greece including Athens as if its subjects were barbarian slaves themselves. At the battle of Issus in Asia Minor in 333, Alexander’s difficulties in fighting the forces of the Persian king Darius III were compounded by the fact that many Greeks had enlisted as mercenaries on the side of Darius precisely because they hated Macedonians so.

  My point in reminding readers of these ancient contentions over the ethnicity and meaning of ‘Macedonian’ is to emphasise how far the disputes were manufactured and exploited for political reasons, rather than based on scientific historical knowledge and understanding of the facts (such as they are and were). The same seems to me true today. On October the 28th 2007 the United Macedonian Diaspora organised a protest outside Parliament House in Canberra against FYROM’s assertion that Alexander was a (non-Greek) Macedonian. It is vital, I believe, that the Greek-Australian community’s response is measured, well articulated and clear. It is my view that neo-nationalist perspectives on ancient history do little to generate cohesion or cross-cultural harmony - particularly in immigrant nations such as Australia. I am also of the view that it is somewhat irrelevant whether Alexander was Greek or Macedonian according to any modern, retrospective, reappropriating notion of those terms. What matters is that he was a hugely significant leader, imbued with Hellenic values, but blessed also with a global and no less importantly multicultural perspective on the world.

  I say ‘Greek or Hellenic’, because in English the very term ‘Greek’ is itself the result of ethnocentrism, a very ancient ethnocentrism admittedly, since it goes back to the ancient Romans, the Americans of their day. The Graikoi were indeed Greek - or Hellenic, as the Greeks themselves would have put it. They lived in Thessaly, the region immediately adjoining Greek Macedonia on the south. But they were small fry, bit-part players in the major ancient dramas. The ancient Greeks as a whole, who called themselves collectively ‘Hellenes’, would no more have considered calling themselves all ‘Graikoi’ than all Australians would today consider calling themselves Darwinites. Perhaps that’s another, historically conditioned reason why Greeks today or people of Greek descent, when speaking Greek insist so strongly that Macedonia is, was and always has been Greek, I mean Hellenic.

  Yet, thereby hangs another irony, and another ancient one. Because even in ancient times there was a debate in Greece over the ethnicity of the Macedonians, that is over whether they were - or all of them were, and had always been - Greek (Hellenic Greek). This debate surfaces in Herodotus, at a critical moment in his account of the Graeco-Persian Wars. Ancient Macedonia, including a part of what is today FYROM, was then a subject province of the Persian empire, that empire’s European toehold or bridgehead. That was embarrassing enough for patriotic Greeks - but perhaps their consciences could be salved by saying that the Macedonians weren’t ‘really’ Hellenes? Herodotus was on the case, though only in retrospect of course. His enquiries led him to confirm the report he was given by the Macedonians themselves - that they were indeed Greek.

  However - and it is a big ‘however’ - honesty compelled Herodotus to add that, when the Macedonian king of the day, another Alexander (Alexander the First), had applied to compete in the all-Greek and only-Greek Olympic Games, his fellow- competitors had objected that he was a ‘barbarian’ (non-Greek). But the judges of the Games, who were known as Hellenodikai or ‘Judges of the Hellenes’, had decided in his favour - on grounds of descent, as follows. The royal family to which Alexander belonged called themselves Argeadai, descendants of Argeas, and their family tradition held that Argeas, the ultimate founding father of their family line, took his name from Argos in the Peloponnese - indeed that he had originally emigrated from Argos to Macedonia to found the line. The Olympic Judges accepted that tradition as true. But - and again, it is a big ‘but’ - they did not then go on to declare that henceforth all Macedonians were entitled, as Hellenes, to compete in the Olympics. Entitlement was extended only to the royal Aegead family, not to all other Macedonians as well ….

  Why so? Put it another way, why was there such dispute and discord, even among ancient Greeks, over the Hellenic identity and authenticity of the Macedonians? Even though, it has to be added, this dispute and discord flew in the face of very ancient Hellenic mythic genealogy, according to which Makedon, the eponymous forefather of all Macedonians, occupied an exalted position high up in the family-tree agreed on by all Hellenes. There were I think two main reasons. First, language, and second, customs - remembering that Herodotus, when he placed a definition of Greekness in the mouths of the Athenians, singled out precisely those two factors as crucially definitional.

  Paul Cartledge is a Professor of Greek History at Cambridge University, and a fellow of Clare College. A world expert on Athens and Sparta in the Classical Age he has been described as a Laconophile. He was chief historical consultant for the BBC TV series The Greeks and the Channel 4 series The Spartans, presented by Bettany Hughes.
  He has published The Greeks: A Portrait of Self and Others (2nd ed, 2002), the product of research into Greek self-definition; Kosmos: essays in Order, Conflict and Community in Classical Athens (coauthor Millet, Paul.) (2002) Cambridge University Press; The Spartans: An Epic History (2nd ed, 2003); Alexander the Great: The Hunt for a New Past (2004) Helots and Their Masters in Laconia and Messenia: Histories, Ideologies, Structures (2004) Center for Hellenic Studies.; Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World (2006). The Overlook Press.

  source: hellenesonline.com

  
  
  Περισσότερα... »
  
  
• Μακεδονία - Macedonia, 03.07.2009
• 17:11

  Was Alexander the Great a Slav?

   »  Modern Macedonian History

  This is a row I really don't get. Over the last few years FYROM (the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) has been investing heavily in Alexander the Great. FYROM's main airport is now called "Alexander the Great Airport" (better than "John Lennon" or "Bob Hope" airports, you might think). A vast statue of Alexander (eight storeys high, apparently) is planned for the centre of Skopje. And the word on the street is that Alexander was a Slav.

  This seems to me to be at best rather touching. It's nice to think that there is still enough symbolic life in this drunken juvenile thug that someone wants him for their nation. At worst, it is faintly silly. The antecedents of Alexander are a bit murky, but in truth there isn't a cat in hell's chance that he was a Slav. I can see also that it could be a bit annoying to some Greeks who might want to try to claim Alexander for themselves (this is a better claim than the Slavic one, but not exactly cast iron).

  But what on earth has persuaded over 300 classical scholars (several of whom are good friends of mine) to sign a letter to President Obama (copy to Mrs Clinton et al.) asking him to intervene personally to clear up this FYROM historical travesty.

  I hope Obama has got some more important wrongs to right. But supposing that he has had a minute to look at this missive, I trust that he won't be won over by the outraged arguments.

  

  
  

  The territory of FYROM, they point out, is more strictly that of ancient Paionia, not Macedonia (fair enough, but so what -- we dont stop Northern Ireland calling itself part of Great Britain, even though it wasn't part of ancient Britannia). The other arguments in the letter are decidedly dodgier, and not the kid of thing that the learned signatories would (I hope) give high marks to in an undergraduate essay.

  
  

  There is the usual stuff about how Alexander's ancestors must have been Greek as they competed in the Olympic Games (in fact there was originally some dispute at the time about whether they were, or were not, Greek enough to qualify). But the worst argument is the claim that 'the Macedonians traced their ancestry to Argos", and so were bona fide, not FYROM-style, Greeks. Well of course the Macedonians said that. It was a convenient and self-serving MYTH, no truer than the Athenians' claim that they were born from the soil of Athens.

  By putting their names to this rubbish, I cant help feeling that my friends are stooping to exactly the kind of nationalsm that they are trying to oppose. If you really wanted to undermine the Macedonian claims, wouldn't it be better (and academically more credible) simply to laugh at them and just refuse to take them seriously?

  by Mary Beard on July 03, 2009 at 12:16 AM
  timesonline

  
  
  Περισσότερα... »