Prespa Agreement’ on the Macedonia Name Issue

Home , Macedonia (terminology), Macedonia naming dispute, North Macedonia, Prespa, Prespa (medieval town), Prespa agreement

Ethnicity and Nationality in and around the ‘Prespa Agreement’ on the Macedonia Name Issue

Marija Adela Gjorgjioska*

Abstract

In June 2018 the Prespa Agreement1 was reached on the ‘Macedonia name issue’2 between the Hellenic Republic and the Republic of Macedonia.3 Following its ratification in the parliaments of the two countries under the terms of the Agreement, on February 14th 2019, the new name – Republic of North Macedonia – entered into force.4 Accord- ing to the erga omnes5 nature of the name change, it will be used both internationally and bilaterally, so that the 140 or more countries that had previously recognised the name (Republic of) Macedonia will also have to adopt (Republic of) North Macedo- nia.6 Issues of ethnicity and nationality have been inherent in and emerged out of each phase of the Prespa Agreement – the name dispute, the content of the Agreement, and its ratification process. It is argued that although the Agreement does not mention the word ‘ethnicity’, it represents a legal intervention in spheres pertaining to both ethnicity and nationality, with asymmetrical implications for the parties involved.

Keywords

Macedonia – Greece – Prespa Agreement – name change – ethnicity – nationality

* Marija Adela Gjorgjioska, PhD, holds a doctoral degree in Social Representations and Com- munications from Sapienza University and an MSc in Comparative Politics (Conflict Studies) from the London School of Economics. 1 Prespa is a region shared between Greece, Albania, and the Republic of North Macedonia. 2 Chris Harris, “Greece and fyr Macedonia name dispute: the controversial feud explained”, Euronews, January 2019, at . 3 Technically, the Agreement does not mention the Republic of Macedonia explicitly. In order to avoid the use of the name, it refers to it as the Second Party. 4 UN Note on the name change at . 5 Erga Omnes is a category in international law, which means (Latin: “toward all”) obligations, which apply to all states. 6 “Macedonia parliament agrees to change country’s name”, bbc, January 2019 at .

Ethnicity and Nationality in & around the ‘Prespa Agreement’ 191

1 The Macedonia Naming Dispute Post 1991

The break-up of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the late eight- ies/early nineties ushered in a period of tectonic changes across the Balkans, which markedly reshaped the geopolitical, socioeconomic and symbolic land- scape in the region. The Republic of Macedonia, which gained independence in 1991, entered into a period of post-socialist transition marked by deep-seated reforms aimed at its transformation into a market economy and a liberal de- mocracy. Membership of nato and the EU came to be considered as one of the state’s key strategic objectives.7 Their attainment conditioned the political imaginaries of the political elites, so much so that membership in nato and the EU took on an inherent civilizational value, signifying the only available pathway to progress and prosperity. In the years following independence one issue in particular emerged as an obstacle towards the realisation of these ‘strategic objectives’. Greece objected to the country’s name, as well as its flag and constitution. The objections took different forms over the years, each present- ing different challenges to the new state’s international recognition, as well as stifling its progress towards membership in nato and the EU. Greece delayed the country’s accession to the United Nations (UN). Al- though the Republic of Macedonia applied for membership in the UN in July 1992, it was only admitted in April 1993 under UN Security Council Resolution 817. The resolution recommended membership but also stated that the country “would provisionally for all purposes within the UN be referred to as ‘the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’ pending settlement of the difference that has arisen over the name of the state”.8 The delay, in the context of re- gional destabilisation and the war in Bosnia, led to deterioration in the already vulnerable economic and political conditions in the country. These were fur- ther compounded in February 1994, when Greece imposed a trade embargo on the Republic of Macedonia, which coincided with the existing UN embargo on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The combined blockade meant that in the 18 months during which the embargo lasted, the country suffered dam ages of around usd 2 billion.9 Relations between the two countries, however,

7 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of North Macedonia, “Goals and Priorities”, at: . 8 UN Security Council, Resolution 817, 7 April 1993, at . 9 “Greece has introduced a full trade embargo towards Macedonia”, November 2010, at .