DOCSLIB.ORG

Background to the Macedonian Question

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Background to the Macedonian Question rli ta U TI UE TEF , ISSN 1321-1560 Copyright Commonwealth of Australia 1994 Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyl-ight Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reprodud or transmitted in any form or by any means including information storage and retrieval system, without the prior written consent of the Department of the Parliamentqy Library, other than by Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official duties. Published by the Department of the Parliamen This paper has been prepared for general distribution to Members of the Australian Parliament. Readers outside the Parliament are reminded that this is not an Australian Government document, but a paper prepaxed by the author and published by the Parliamentary Research Service to contribute to consideration of the issues by Senators and Members. The views expressed in this Paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Research Service and are not to be attributed to the Department of the Parliamentary Library. .................................... 1 ........................................ 1 ................................. .................................... Oni. i_lilt;.DO.O........*.................. ................................... ......................................... 11 ition on the 's applicat~onfor U member§hip ommis§ion of the adinter Commission) P Recognition by the Federal Gove~mentof the Republic of Macedonia under the tempor the United Nations of 'Former Yugoslav Republi OM) on 15 February 1994 has iderable discussion, controversy and criticism from a The angry reaction of Greek-Australian community leaders was predictable. After all, they had been lobbying the Government not to recognise the government in Skopje ever since the break-up of Yugoslavia. It was subsequently revealed that the Federal Government had been debating its decision for some time. Macedonian community leaders were pleased with the Government's belated decision to recognise MOM,but equally predictably upset at the conditions imposed by Canberra for the opening of a FYROM consulate and at the insistence that community members be termed 'Slav-Macedonians' for official purposes. The Australian media was also critical of the Federal Government's handling of the affair, The firebombings of churches, attacks on business premises and proliferation of graffiti which, interestingly, did not appear to occur in other countries with large Greek and Macedonian populations, were widely deplored. The Victorian Ethnic Affairs Commissioner, Professor Trang Thomas, chaired a meeting of the two sides, following which community leaders blamed the violence on a small minority of hot-heads, which was undoubtedly accurate. However, the two communities themselves cannot escape some responsibility for appearing to have fanned the flames of this dispute for many years in the ethnic press and from the pulpit. State Premiers and Opposition leaders who took sides in the dispute were criticised by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, as well as by the media. This Current Issues Brief looks at the history of Macedonia and the stances of the two sides on the Macedonian Question as reflected in official statements and press comments. It also considers official Australian Government views on the subject. INhile there is a long and complex history to claims and counter-claims in this controversy, this region's history is both a cause and a consequence e oreover, since the nation and the state have often not coincided in determining units of government in inte~ational relations, as in the cases of the actors in this drama, this paper oncludes with erit or other~iseof stinct from the On 25 January 1991, the F~~Madopted a declaration of sovereignty. A referendum on the country's future was held on 8 September 1991 , however, boycotted by the Albanian minority, and on 17 ovember 1991 a new Constitution was adopted. The eclared its independence on 19 December 1991. The IF , like that of some other former Republics of the SF ch as Slovenia and Croatia, was finally r the name 'Former Yugoslav Republic of 15 February 1994 after 58 other countries had already done so .. and only after recognition by the United States. The ~~~~~~~Q~~~~~ rald reported that the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, enator the Won Nick Bolkus, had deter ined that it was 'too hard to sell (recognition) politically until, and unless, the U position.l2 a statement made in Brussels on ctober 1993, Greek. inister ~apandreouaffirmed that community members, including Greece, had recognised the state of the case from the moment it (F and there was thus reco formation's political existence and sovereignty. reece has imposed a blockade of the country, which is ece claims the sole right to u at the ancient territo 1 The majority of countries have recognised the F under the UN's 'temporary' designation of 'Former Yugoslav Republi donia,' although a number, including the othe have extended recognition to the 'Republic o e all ancient empir . It was a territory, not a people. plains watered by the Axius war adjoining regions. In the mounta cedonian principalities, which were separate kingdoms until the reign of Phillip 11, were counted as belonging to Epirus at various periods (see Map B). The acedonians did not regard themselves as Greek, although they were closely related in both language and culture. The name 'Macedonian' is, however, Greek. The original capital was Aigai (Edessa~odena),but from the 4th ~e~tu~BC was located at Pella in northern Greece. Ancient Macedonia was noted above all for its timber, which was essential for the Greek shipbuilding industry. Pre-Roman periud Unification began in the entury BC under the founded by Perdikkas I. een about 514-479 B Persian tributary. Un xander I (495-450/4 d elements of G ture as a deliberat the ruling house. Under a later monarch, Amyntas 111 (413-399 BC), Macedonia became influential in the neighbouring It achieved its greatest extent under Philip I1 'states' of Chalcidice and Th a confederatio eek 'states' at Chaeronea in s stage Macedonia extended der the Great (336- the empire throughout nor and as far as Afghanistan and the Punjab, defeating the Persians in several battles, Following his death, the empire fell apart, but Antigonus 111 (229-22~BC) regained control over the Greek 'states.' fter three wars against the Romans, the last 3 Actually, this dates only from the 1987 administrative reforms when the Regions of Macedonia Central, Macedonia East and Thrace, and Macedonia West were created. 4 It should be borne in mind that boundaries change over time. Even China, with its long history, did n each its greatest historical extent until the Dynasty (1644-1911). at various periods, Sweden, Lithuania, England, Spain, Luxembourg and Germany (to mention only a few examples) ruled over much greater territories in ~~ro~~than they now comprise. acedonian king, Perseus, was defeated by L. Aemilius Paullus in 168 BC at Pydna (near Olympus). Roman province After their victory over Perseus, the Romans divided Macedonia into four regions. They also forbade the cutting of timber for shipbuilding and mining for gold and silver. In 148 BC the Romans joined Epirus to the four regions and created the Province of Macedonia which extended from Durres (Dyrrhachium) to Philippi and Skopje (Scupi) to Pharsalus. The Province was administered by a Proconsul with the rank of praetorian. Thessalia was joined to Macedonia under Antonius Pius (138-161 AD) and Salonika became the capital. Mediaeval period After the Roman Empire was divided in 395 AD, Macedonia became part of the Byzantine Empire. It was invaded by the Goths and Huns, and later came under Slav domination from the 6th Century AD. The Slavic element in the inhabitants of the region dates from this period. Macedonia was seized by Bulgaria in the 9th Century AD, but regained by the Byzantine Empire in the early 11th Century. After the temporary dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire at the hands of the Seljuq Turks, Normans and the Crusaders (Constantinople itself fell to a Western Crusade in 1204), several rulers fought over Macedonia. In 1261 it again became part of the Byzantine Empire, only to be conquered by Serbia in the 14th Century. From the late 14th-19th Century Macedonia formed part of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empire. Later history Under the Treaty of San Stefan0 (Yesilkoy) ending the last Russian- Turkish War, which was signed on 3 March 1878, most of Macedonia was given to Bulgaria (then protected by Russia). This treaty also created independent Rumania, Montenegro and Serbia and awarded part of Armenia to Russia. Because of fears of domination of the Balkans by 'Greater Bulgaria,' the powers amended these territorial changes at the 1878 Berlin Congress, returning Macedonia to Turkey.' The main Macedonian nationalist movement, IMRO (Independent Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation), formed in 1893, eventually split between those who wanted to unite with Bulgaria and those who 5 The Conference was convened by Germany at the request of Austrian-Hungarian Foreign Minister Andrassy and British Prime Minister Disraeli. Both Austria- Hungary and Great Britain feared that the new states would provide a pretext for Russian dorniazation of the Balkans. ere were purposes. In September 1924 Greece and Bulgaria signed a Protocol (Kalfov-Politis Agreement) placing the Macedonian mino under League of Nations protection. The Kingdom of d Slovenes (the precursor to Yugoslavia) thereupon abrogated the n 15 January 1925 Greece withdrew from the Protocol; henceforth all Macedonians were regarded as Greek, all placenames were chan all Slavic schools were closed and even Church Slavonic texts on icons adorning churches were overpainte with Greek texts. During the etaxas regime (1936-1941) large numbers of Macedonians were nterned because of Greek doubts about their loyalty, particularly following the outbreak of war with Italy in October 1940.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Draft Assessment Report: Skopje, North Macedonia
    Highlights of the draft Assessment report for Skopje, North Macedonia General highlights about the informal/illegal constructions in North Macedonia The Republic of North Macedonia belongs to the European continent, located at the heart of the Balkan Peninsula. It has approx. 2.1 million inhabitants and are of 25.713 km2. Skopje is the capital city, with 506,926 inhabitants (according to 2002 count). The country consists of 80 local self-government units (municipalities) and the city of Skopje as special form of local self-government unit. The City of Skopje consists of 10 municipalities, as follows: 1. Municipality of Aerodrom, 2. Municipality of Butel, 3. Municipality of Gazi Baba, 4. Municipality of Gorche Petrov, 5. Municipality of Karpos, 6. Municipality of Kisela Voda, 7. Municipality of Saraj, 8. Municipality of Centar, 9. Municipality of Chair and 10. Municipality of Shuto Orizari. During the transition period, the Republic of North Macedonia faced challenges in different sectors. The urban development is one of the sectors that was directly affected from the informal/illegally constructed buildings. According to statistical data, in 2019 there was a registration of 886 illegally built objects. Most of these objects (98.4 %) are built on private land. Considering the challenge for the urban development of the country, in 2011 the Government proposed, and the Parliament adopted a Law on the treatment of unlawful constructions. This Law introduced a legalization process. Institutions in charge for implementation of the legalization procedure are the municipalities in the City of Skopje (depending on the territory where the object is constructed) and the Ministry of Transport and Communication.
    [Show full text]
  • The Making of Yugoslavia's People's Republic of Macedonia 377 Ward the Central Committee of the Yugoslav Communist Party Hardened
    THE MAKING OF YUGOSLAVIA’S PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA Fifty years since the liberation of Macedonia, the perennial "Ma­ cedonian Question” appears to remain alive. While in Greece it has deF­ initely been settled, the establishment of a "Macedonian State” within the framework of the People’s Federal Republic of Yugoslavia has given a new form to the old controversy which has long divided the three Balkan States, particularly Yugoslavia and Bulgaria. The present study tries to recount the events which led to its founding, the purposes which prompted its establishment and the methods employed in bringing about the tasks for which it was conceived. The region of Southern Yugoslavia,' which extends south of a line traversed by the Shar Mountains and the hills just north of Skopje, has been known in the past under a variety of names, each one clearly denoting the owner and his policy concerning the region.3 The Turks considered it an integral part of their Ottoman Empire; the Serbs, who succeeded them, promptly incorporated it into their Kingdom of Serbs and Croats and viewed it as a purely Serbian land; the Bulgarians, who seized it during the Nazi occupation of the Balkans, grasped the long-sought opportunity to extend their administrative control and labeled it part of the Bulgarian Father- land. As of 1944, the region, which reverted to Yugoslavia, has been known as the People’s Republic of Macedonia, one of the six federative republics of communist Yugoslavia. The new name and administrative structure, exactly as the previous ones, was intended for the purpose of serving the aims of the new re­ gime.
    [Show full text]
  • The Statistical Battle for the Population of Greek Macedonia
    XII. The Statistical Battle for the Population of Greek Macedonia by Iakovos D. Michailidis Most of the reports on Greece published by international organisations in the early 1990s spoke of the existence of 200,000 “Macedonians” in the northern part of the country. This “reasonable number”, in the words of the Greek section of the Minority Rights Group, heightened the confusion regarding the Macedonian Question and fuelled insecurity in Greece’s northern provinces.1 This in itself would be of minor importance if the authors of these reports had not insisted on citing statistics from the turn of the century to prove their points: mustering historical ethnological arguments inevitably strengthened the force of their own case and excited the interest of the historians. Tak- ing these reports as its starting-point, this present study will attempt an historical retrospective of the historiography of the early years of the century and a scientific tour d’horizon of the statistics – Greek, Slav and Western European – of that period, and thus endeavour to assess the accuracy of the arguments drawn from them. For Greece, the first three decades of the 20th century were a long period of tur- moil and change. Greek Macedonia at the end of the 1920s presented a totally different picture to that of the immediate post-Liberation period, just after the Balkan Wars. This was due on the one hand to the profound economic and social changes that followed its incorporation into Greece and on the other to the continual and extensive population shifts that marked that period. As has been noted, no fewer than 17 major population movements took place in Macedonia between 1913 and 1925.2 Of these, the most sig- nificant were the Greek-Bulgarian and the Greek-Turkish exchanges of population under the terms, respectively, of the 1919 Treaty of Neuilly and the 1923 Lausanne Convention.
    [Show full text]
  • Royal Power, Law and Justice in Ancient Macedonia Joseph Roisman
    Royal Power, Law and Justice in Ancient Macedonia Joseph Roisman In his speech On the Crown Demosthenes often lionizes himself by suggesting that his actions and policy required him to overcome insurmountable obstacles. Thus he contrasts Athens’ weakness around 346 B.C.E. with Macedonia’s strength, and Philip’s II unlimited power with the more constrained and cumbersome decision-making process at home, before asserting that in spite of these difficulties he succeeded in forging later a large Greek coalition to confront Philip in the battle of Chaeronea (Dem.18.234–37). [F]irst, he (Philip) ruled in his own person as full sovereign over subservient people, which is the most important factor of all in waging war . he was flush with money, and he did whatever he wished. He did not announce his intentions in official decrees, did not deliberate in public, was not hauled into the courts by sycophants, was not prosecuted for moving illegal proposals, was not accountable to anyone. In short, he was ruler, commander, in control of everything.1 For his depiction of Philip’s authority Demosthenes looks less to Macedonia than to Athens, because what makes the king powerful in his speech is his freedom from democratic checks. Nevertheless, his observations on the Macedonian royal power is more informative and helpful than Aristotle’s references to it in his Politics, though modern historians tend to privilege the philosopher for what he says or even does not say on the subject. Aristotle’s seldom mentions Macedonian kings, and when he does it is for limited, exemplary purposes, lumping them with other kings who came to power through benefaction and public service, or who were assassinated by men they had insulted.2 Moreover, according to Aristotle, the extreme of tyranny is distinguished from ideal kingship (pambasilea) by the fact that tyranny is a government that is not called to account.
    [Show full text]
  • Carol Migdalovitz Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Defense Division
    Order Code RS21855 Updated October 16, 2007 Greece Update Carol Migdalovitz Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Defense Division Summary The conservative New Democracy party won reelection in September 2007. Kostas Karamanlis, its leader, remained prime minister and pledged to continue free-market economic reforms to enhance growth and create jobs. The government’s foreign policy focuses on the European Union (EU), relations with Turkey, reunifying Cyprus, resolving a dispute with Macedonia over its name, other Balkan issues, and relations with the United States. Greece has assisted with the war on terrorism, but is not a member of the coalition in Iraq. This report will be updated if developments warrant. See also CRS Report RL33497, Cyprus: Status of U.N. Negotiations and Related Issues, by Carol Migdalovitz. Government and Politics Prime Minister Kostas Karamanlis called for early parliamentary elections to be held on September 16, 2007, instead of in March 2008 as otherwise scheduled, believing that his government’s economic record would ensure easy reelection. In August, however, Greece experienced severe and widespread wildfires, resulting in 76 deaths and 270,000 hectares burned. The government attempted to deflect attention from what was widely viewed as its ineffective performance in combating the fires by blaming the catastrophe on terrorists, without proof, and by providing generous compensation for victims. This crisis came on top of a scandal over the state pension fund’s purchase of government bonds at inflated prices. Under these circumstances, Karamanlis’s New Democracy party’s (ND) ability to win of a slim majority of 152 seats in the unicameral 300-seat parliament and four more years in office was viewed as a victory.
    [Show full text]
  • Amendment to Registration Statement
    Received by NSD/FARA Registration Unit 08/14/2020 3:22:34 PM OMB No. 1124-0003; Expires July 31, 2023 U.S. Department of Justice Amendment to Registration Statement Washington, dc 20530 Pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended INSTRUCTIONS. File this amendment form for any changes to a registration. Compliance is accomplished by filing an electronic amendment to registration statement and uploading any supporting documents at https://www.fara.gov. Privacy Act Statement. The filing of this document is required for the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, 22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq., for the purposes of registration under the Act and public disclosure. Provision of the information requested is mandatory, and failure to provide the information is subject to the penalty and enforcement provisions established in Section 8 of the Act. Every registration statement, short form registration statement, supplemental statement, exhibit, amendment, copy of informational materials or other document or information filed with the Attorney General under this Act is a public record open to public examination, inspection and copying during the posted business hours of the FARA Unit in Washington, DC. Statements are also available online at the FARA Unit’s webpage: https://www.fara.gov. One copy of eveiy such document, other than informational materials, is automatically provided to the Secretary of State pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, and copies of any and all documents are routinely made available to other agencies, departments and Congress pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Act. The Attorney General also transmits a semi-annual report to Congress on the administration of the Act which lists the names of all agents registered under the Act and the foreign principals they represent.
    [Show full text]
  • The Macedonian “Name” Dispute: the Macedonian Question—Resolved?
    Nationalities Papers (2020), 48: 2, 205–214 doi:10.1017/nps.2020.10 ANALYSIS OF CURRENT EVENTS The Macedonian “Name” Dispute: The Macedonian Question—Resolved? Matthew Nimetz* Former Personal Envoy of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and former Special Envoy of President Bill Clinton, New York, USA *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] Abstract The dispute between Greece and the newly formed state referred to as the “Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” that emerged out of the collapse of Yugoslavia in 1991 was a major source of instability in the Western Balkans for more than 25 years. It was resolved through negotiations between Athens and Skopje, mediated by the United Nations, resulting in the Prespa (or Prespes) Agreement, which was signed on June 17, 2018, and ratified by both parliaments amid controversy in their countries. The underlying issues involved deeply held and differing views relating to national identity, history, and the future of the region, which were resolved through a change in the name of the new state and various agreements as to identity issues. The author, the United Nations mediator in the dispute for 20 years and previously the United States presidential envoy with reference to the dispute, describes the basis of the dispute, the positions of the parties, and the factors that led to a successful resolution. Keywords: Macedonia; Greece; North Macedonia; “Name” dispute The Macedonian “name” dispute was, to most outsiders who somehow were faced with trying to understand it, certainly one of the more unusual international confrontations. When the dispute was resolved through the Prespa Agreement between Greece and (now) the Republic of North Macedonia in June 2018, most outsiders (as frequently expressed to me, the United Nations mediator for 20 years) responded, “Why did it take you so long?” And yet, as protracted conflicts go, the Macedonian “name” dispute is instructive as to the types of issues that go to the heart of a people’s identity and a nation’s sense of security.
    [Show full text]
  • Blood Ties: Religion, Violence, and the Politics of Nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia, 1878
    BLOOD TIES BLOOD TIES Religion, Violence, and the Politics of Nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia, 1878–1908 I˙pek Yosmaog˘lu Cornell University Press Ithaca & London Copyright © 2014 by Cornell University All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in a review, this book, or parts thereof, must not be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher. For information, address Cornell University Press, Sage House, 512 East State Street, Ithaca, New York 14850. First published 2014 by Cornell University Press First printing, Cornell Paperbacks, 2014 Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Yosmaog˘lu, I˙pek, author. Blood ties : religion, violence,. and the politics of nationhood in Ottoman Macedonia, 1878–1908 / Ipek K. Yosmaog˘lu. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8014-5226-0 (cloth : alk. paper) ISBN 978-0-8014-7924-3 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Macedonia—History—1878–1912. 2. Nationalism—Macedonia—History. 3. Macedonian question. 4. Macedonia—Ethnic relations. 5. Ethnic conflict— Macedonia—History. 6. Political violence—Macedonia—History. I. Title. DR2215.Y67 2013 949.76′01—dc23 2013021661 Cornell University Press strives to use environmentally responsible suppliers and materials to the fullest extent possible in the publishing of its books. Such materials include vegetable-based, low-VOC inks and acid-free papers that are recycled, totally chlorine-free, or partly composed of nonwood fibers. For further information, visit our website at www.cornellpress.cornell.edu. Cloth printing 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Paperback printing 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 To Josh Contents Acknowledgments ix Note on Transliteration xiii Introduction 1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization and the Idea for Autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople Thrace
    The Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization and the Idea for Autonomy for Macedonia and Adrianople Thrace, 1893-1912 By Martin Valkov Submitted to Central European University Department of History In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Supervisor: Prof. Tolga Esmer Second Reader: Prof. Roumen Daskalov CEU eTD Collection Budapest, Hungary 2010 “Copyright in the text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies by any process, either in full or part, may be made only in accordance with the instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European Library. Details may be obtained from the librarian. This page must form a part of any such copies made. Further copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the written permission of the Author.” CEU eTD Collection ii Abstract The current thesis narrates an important episode of the history of South Eastern Europe, namely the history of the Internal Macedonian-Adrianople Revolutionary Organization and its demand for political autonomy within the Ottoman Empire. Far from being “ancient hatreds” the communal conflicts that emerged in Macedonia in this period were a result of the ongoing processes of nationalization among the different communities and the competing visions of their national projects. These conflicts were greatly influenced by inter-imperial rivalries on the Balkans and the combination of increasing interference of the Great European Powers and small Balkan states of the Ottoman domestic affairs. I argue that autonomy was a multidimensional concept covering various meanings white-washed later on into the clean narratives of nationalism and rebirth.
    [Show full text]
  • Very Short History of the Macedonian People from Prehistory to the Present
    Very Short History of the Macedonian People From Prehistory to the Present By Risto Stefov 1 Very Short History of the Macedonian People From Pre-History to the Present Published by: Risto Stefov Publications [email protected] Toronto, Canada All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without written consent from the author, except for the inclusion of brief and documented quotations in a review. Copyright 2008 by Risto Stefov e-book edition 2 Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................4 Pre-Historic Macedonia...............................................................................6 Ancient Macedonia......................................................................................8 Roman Macedonia.....................................................................................12 The Macedonians in India and Pakistan....................................................14 Rise of Christianity....................................................................................15 Byzantine Macedonia................................................................................17 Kiril and Metodi ........................................................................................19 Medieval Macedonia .................................................................................21
    [Show full text]
  • Dimitris Christopoulos Kostis Karpozilos
    Dimitris Christopoulos Kostis Karpozilos 10+1 QUESTIONS & ANSWERS on the MACEDONIAN QUESTION 10+ 1 QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ON THE MACEDONIAN QUESTION 10+1 QUESTIONS & ANSWERS on the MACEDONIAN QUESTION DIMITRIS CHRISTOPOULOS KOSTIS KARPOZILOS ROSA LUXEMBURG STIFTUNG OFFICE IN GREECE To all those Greek women and men who spoke out regarding the Macedonian Question in a documented and critical way in the decisive decade of the 1990s. For the women and men who stood up as citizens. CONTENTS Introduction to the English-language edition: The suspended step of the Prespa Agreement . 11 Introduction to the Greek-language edition: To get the conversation going . 19 1 . “ But isn’t the name of our neighbouring country a ‘national matter’ for Greece?” . 25 2 . “ Macedonia has been Greek since antiquity . How can some people appropriate all that history today?” . 31 3 . “ Isn’t there only one Macedonia and isn’t it Greek?” . 37 4 . “ But is there a Macedonian nation? Isn’t it nonexistent?” 41 5 . “ Okay, it’s not nonexistent . But it is artificial . Didn’t Tito create it?” . 49 6 . “ What is the relationship between the Greek left and the Macedonian question?” . 53 7 . “ Is there a Macedonian language?” . 59 8 . “ Are we placing Greece on the same level as a statelet, the statelet of Skopje?” . 65 9 . “ Their constitution is irredentist . Shouldn’t it be changed if we want to reach a compromise?” . 69 10 . “ So is it wrong to refer to that state as Skopje and its citizens as Skopjans?” . 77 10 + 1 . “So, is Greece not right?” . 83 Why did all this happen and what can be done about it today? .
    [Show full text]
  • REGIONAL ACTION PLAN for the REGION of CENTRAL MACEDONIA –GREECE
    REGIONAL ACTION PLAN for the REGION OF CENTRAL MACEDONIA –GREECE In the context of PURE COSMOS Project- Public Authorities Role Enhancing Competitiveness of SMEs March 2019 Development Agency of Eastern Thessaloniki’s Local Authorities- ANATOLIKI SA REGION OF CENTRAL MACEDONIA HELLENIC REPUBLIC Thessaloniki 19 /9/2019 REGION OF CENTRAL MACEDONIA, Prot. Number:. Oik.586311(1681) DIRECTORATE OF INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEUSHIP SUPPORT Address :Vasilissis Olgas 198, PC :GR 54655, Thessaloniki, Greece Information : Mr Michailides Constantinos Telephone : +302313 319790 Email :[email protected] TO: Development Agency of Eastern Thessaloniki’s Local Authorities- ANATOLIKI SA SUBJECT: Approval of the REGIONAL ACTION PLAN for the REGION OF CENTRAL MACEDONIA –GREECE in the context of PURE COSMOS Project-“Public Authorities Role Enhancing Competitiveness of SMEs” Dear All With this letter we would like to confirm ñ that we were informed about the progress of the Pure Cosmos project throughout its phase 1, ñ that we were in regular contact with the project partner regarding the influence of the policy instrument and the elaboration of the action plan, ñ that the activities described in the action plan are in line with the priorities of the axis 1 of the ROP of Central Macedonia, ñ that we acknowledge its contribution to the expected results and impact on the ROP and specifically on the mechanism for supporting innovation and entrepreneurship of the Region of Central Macedonia, ñ that we will support the implementation of the Action Plan during
    [Show full text]