macedonian herald - january 2008

1Januari 2008 Makedonski Glasnik - Glasilo na Organizacijata Obedineti Makedonci vo Kanada

UNITEDMACEDONIANS Established 1959

Proudly Canadian

Makedonski Glasnik Glasilo na OrganizacijataObedineti Makedonci vo Kanada

Macedonian Herald Voice of the United MacedoniansOrganization of Canada

JANUARIJANUARY 2008 GODINA 49, BROJ 1

VOLUME 49, NUMBER 1ISSN 1488-6006

2 January 2008Macedonian Herald - Voice of the United Macedonians Organization of Canada

Established 1959Proudly Canadian

United Macedonians Organiza-tion of Canada is the publisherof “Macedonian Herald” as avoice of the Macedonians inNorth America.

Editor-in-Chief:Dragi Stojkovski

Editors:Borche Kulevski andSlobodan Petreski

Macedonian Heraldadvertising price list :

Business Card - $ 20.00Quarter Page - $ 65.00 Half Page - $ 100.00 Full Page - $ 200.00 Back Page (full page)

- $ 300.00 Front Page (quarter page)

-$ 250.00

Organizacijata ObedinetiMakedonci vo Kanada eizdava~ot na “MakedonskiGlasnik” kako glasilo naMakedoncite od SevernaAmerika.

Glaven i odgovoren urednik:Dragi Stojkovski

Urednici:Bor~e Kulevski iSlobodan Petreski

685 McCOWAN ROADP.O. BOX 66517

TORONTO, ONTARIO,CANADAM1J 3N8

TEL: (416) 490-0181FAX: (416) 490-0398

[email protected]

The Macedonian peopleyearned for their own nationalidentity toward the end of the19th and the early 20th and as aresult of this desire for nationalautonomy the Macedonian na-tional liberation movementemerged. This was a direct re-sult of the political, national,economic and cultural oppres-sion of the Macedonian people.The Turkish occupation hadlasted for over 500 years lead-ing to social, economic, admin-istrative and legislative crisis inMacedonia, and by the interfer-ence of other foreign states inMacedonian affairs.

The Macedonian Revo-lutionary Organization (MRO)was formed and quickly becamethe established leader of theMacedonian national liberationand social revolution move-ment, struggling for nationalindependence and social jus-tice. Goce Delchev, was an ex-traordinary visionary and ideo-logical leader who organizedand mobilized the MRO.Delchev had a brief but brilliantcareer and was completely dedi-cated to the cause ofMacedonian nationhood.

Goce Delchev, was bornto Macedonian parents, Nikolaand Sultana Delchevi on Febru-ary 4th, 1872, in Kukush, a town35 km north of Salonika. Hecompleted his primary educa-tion in Kukush, expanded hiseducation by completing hissecondary education inSalonika, with emphasis on sci-ence, literature and social stud-ies. Delchev furthered in educa-tion in the sciences at theSalonika Military Academy. Heread widely on Macedoniannational affairs whilst attendingthe Academy. He took an activerole in politics, and joined po-litical clubs in Salonika andSofia, and had close contactswith others, especially with thesocialist and the “Lozari”clubs in Sofia. Membership ofthese political organisationscontributed to the formation ofhis revolutionary ideals.

Goce Delchev’s mem-bership in the MRO was themost significant change in thecourse of in the history of theMacedonian national liberationmovement. While Delcev’s in-volvement with the MRO wasshort, the years between 1894and 1903 represent the efficientrevolutionary sequence of theMRO, and was directly attrib-

uted to the influence of Delcev.They comprise of Delchev’spublic education career as ascholar in Novo Selo (near Shtip)and Bansko (1894-1896), and ofhis involvement with revolution-ary ideals, making preparationsand seeking support for thearmed uprising from theMacedonian people.

After taking the oath ofmembership of the MacedonianRevolutionary Organization, ameeting of significant and his-torical importance took place inStip, in November 1894, betweenDelchev and Dame Gruev, thefounder of MRO. Gruev had al-ready realized the major impactthat Delcev had had upon theexpansion of the MRO, and itsorganized network throughoutMacedonia. Delchev believedthat the liberation of Macedoniawas an exclusively domestic af-fair, based on an internally orga-nized uprising. Delchev’s firstventure into the interior of theMacedonian land was in April1895. He oversaw the establish-ment of local branches of theMRO. These branches were re-sponsible for the spirit of free-dom widely among the popula-tion of the country.

Delcev was able to recog-nize the influence of other Balkanmonarchies, and in particularBulgaria (which continues in parttoday) and their aspirations forthe Macedonian state. The mostaggressive of this Bulgarian pro-paganda, was a destructive frac-tion called “Vrhovism” , becamethe target of Delcev’s most fer-vent opposition. Delchev con-tinued to attend district meetingsall over Macedonia and put intoplace a revision of the revolu-tionary districts in Macedonia in1895, by strengthening theweaker districts, by providingcontacts for a reliable network,and by the appointing of strongdistrict leadership of the MRO.Delcev continued his belief thatany revolution could only befought by Macedonian forces toprotect Macedonia from fallingunder any foreign control ofneighbouring Balkan states, inparticular Bulgaria.

At the First Congress ofMRO, in April of 1896, a revisedrestructure of the districts wasintroduced, and MRO was re-named TMORO (SecretMacedonian Odrin Revolution-ary Organization), a new Consti-tution and Charter was adopted(which was drawn up by Goce

Delchev and Gjorche Petrov), andan expatriate branch of TMOROwas established in Sofia. Delchevand Petrov became the first repre-sentatives of the expatriatebranch, and assumed total re-sponsibility in respect of materialsupplies, including weapons, am-munition, revolutionary literature,and other publications. Delchev’scorrespondence with the TMOROmembers covers extensive data onsupplies, transport and storage ofweapons and ammunition inMacedonia. Delchev beleived inthe independent production ofweapons, which resulted in theconstruction of a bomb manufac-turing plant in the OsogovoMountains.

The inclusion of the ruralareas into the TMORO resulted inthe expansion of the organizationand the obvious increase in itsmembership, while setting thefoundation for the military powerof the organization. Goce Delchevwas appointed as its military ad-visor. The clandestine character ofthe TMORO ended as a result ofthe Vinica Affair in November1897, when domestic and worldopinion was exposed to theTMORO’s existence and extent.The unity of the TMORO wassubject to the adverse infiltrationof the Vrhovism fraction into theTMORO, followed by frequentsubversions. These subversionsled to the reorganized structure ofsome districts, and this was imple-mented by Delchev during 1900-1902.

When was the uprising inMacedonia to take place? Delchevand his followers believed that apremature uprising could fail andhe regarding this as the ultimatecrime a leader can inflict upon anation and its history. On his way

to the Congress in Ser (nowin Greece), held at LovchanGrove of Ali Botush, Delchevstopped at the village ofBanica on the 4th of May1903. Goce Delchev foundhimself betrayed and sur-rounded, and he was shotdead. His tragic death can-celled many of his visions thathe had planned for that periodof the Macedonian history.The death of Delchev madeheadline news in Turkey andBulgaria. Delchev was only 31when he died and was themost dynamic personality ofthe Macedonian revolution-ary and national liberationmovement.

Delchev will be remem-bered for his famous quote: “Iunderstand the world solelyas a field for cultural compe-tition among nations” .

Even though Delchevstrongly resisted the prema-ture uprising, its date of theuprising was determined atthe Smilevo Congress. Theuprising was to start on Au-gust 2, 1903, the orthodoxChristian holiday of St. Elijah(Ilinden). This uprising wouldhence be known as the IlidenUprising (IlindenskoVostanie) and involved theentire Macedonian people,and the most intense actionstook place in the liberation ofNeveska, Klisura andKrushevo, where theKrushevo Republic was pro-claimed by its presidentNikola Karev.

The Ilinden traditionsre-emerged during the Na-tional Liberation War (NOV) inMacedonia. Their climax oc-curred at the Second Ilinden,

when the First Assembly ofASNOM took place on August 2,1944.

The remains of GoceDelchev were returned toMacedonia on the 10 October1946 after an agreement wasreached between the governmentof Macedonia and the Associa-tion of the Macedonian Fraterni-ties in Bulgaria. The followingday, they were solemnly embed-ded into a marble tomb ingrounds of the Holy SaviourChurch (Sv. Spas) in Skopje.

Goce Delchev’s effortepitomises the character of theproud Macedonian nation. TheMacedonian people considerDelcev a national hero, in admi-ration of his history-making per-sonality, tenacity, and hisunserving belief in Macedoniannational autonomy. Delchev’s as-pirations for an autonomous statebecame reality in 1991 whenMacedonia broke away from theYugoslav Federation. It is inter-esting to note that the 1991Macedonian breakaway from theYugoslav Federation wasachieved without armed uprisingor bloodshed. Other formerYugoslav Federation membershave not fared so well, and haveall endured some degree of armedconflict to achieve their indepen-dence.

Goce Delchev

In front of Delchev’s grave in the yard of the church St. Spas in Skopje, the capital of Macedonia.


prodolùvana slednata strana

Podolgo vreme,makedonskoto dràvnorakovodstvo n# ubeduva{edeka vo odnos nanametnatiot od Grcija sporza imeto, odime vopobedonosen pohod. Donekade toa i se nasetuva{espored zgolemeniot brojdràvi koi n# priznavaatpod ustavnoto i istoriskoime, Republika Makedonija,kako i spored poddr{katakoja me|unarodni golemci nija izrekuvaa vo razniizjavi. Me|utoa, ovaaprednost nikako neuspeavme da jadoiskoristime, celosno daja razobli~ime gr~katahegemonisti~ka politika voodnos na Makedonija imakedonskit narod i naGrcija da & zadademecelosen i nepopravlivporaz, bidej}i nivniotpritisok, barem vo odnos naimeto, }e stivne samo vouslov na celosen porazpred nejzinata i svetskatajavnost.

N a { a t akoleblivost (t.e. na vlastavo Republika Makedonija),ja ohrabri Grcija i & dadeprostor za protiv napad kojcelosno ja iznenadi na{atadiplomatija do toj stepen,{to bez postoewe naprotivnik odna{a stranavo borbata zai m e t o ,g r ~ k a t adiplomatijauspea skorocelosno da gos v r t is v e t s k o t omnenie vosvoja polza.

T o jp r i t i s o kdovede i don e k o l k ui z b r z a n igafovi odd v a j c a t a~elnici vod r ` a v a t a :Pretse-datelot nadràvata Crvenkovski zagr~ko glasilo izjavi dekanie bi vlegle vo NATO i podreferencata Porane{najugoslovenska RepublikaMakedonija, i na toj na~ingo prekr{i kardinalnotopravilo vo pregovaraweto,a toa e da se ~uvaat votajnost site karti doposledniot mig; dodeka pakpretsedatelot na VladataGruevski, pani~no izjavideka ako ne dobieme pokanaza NATO ili pak ako nebideme primeni po pokanatatoa }e bide isklu~ivoporadi gr~koto veto – {tovsu{nost, nesakaj}i,izjavata deluva{e pora-zitelno i & prepi{a naGrcija celosna kontrola vrzna{eto vleguvawe ili ne voNATO (i da e toa vistina,na{ata diplomatija netreba toa javno i da go

priznae).Sega nekoi duri ne

stavaat vo dilema – NATOili imeto! Za makedonskiotnarod taa dilema nikoga{ ine postoela. Imeto sekoga{bilo i ostanuva nad s#. Zana{a sre}a i makedonskite~elnici, pretstaveni odpretsedatelite na dràvatai Vladata, kako i verskitezaednici, nedvosmislenoizjavija deka izborotsekoga{ }e bide ustavnotoime. Ista bezrezervnapoddr{ka davaat iMakedoncite vo porobenitedelovi od Makedonija iisele-ni{tvoto.

Pra{aweto sega e:Koj e izlezot od nametnatiotspor so imeto?

Kako prvo, treba dagi ostavime nastraname|usebnite kavgi inedoverbi, nastrana siteli~ni i partiski interesi,i treba da zastaneme pozadimakedonskite nacionalniinteresi – a toa e deka morada se istrae vo borbata zaimeto, pa i po cena da nebideme pokaneti vo NATO,bez razlika poradi kojapri~ina (“neispolnuvawe” nanekoi uslovi ili gr~ko veto).Nie sme tuka i opstojuvamei bez ~lenstvo vo NATO –sorabotuvame so niv i

najva`niot sojuznik –Amerika. Vo sekoj slu~aj,pokanata za ~lenstvo epoliti~ka odluka – zaremBugarija i Romanija beapospremni od nas?Razlikata kaj nas e vo toa{to na{iot priem mora dapomine preku (~itaj, da bideodobren od) Atina, papriemot e ote`nat iodolèn.

Vtoro, treba mnogutrezveno i otvoreno, no bezsueti i oportunizam, da sepreispitaat site na{ipostapki, t.e. s# {to esraboteno ili nesrabotenodosega vo ovoj apsurden spor.

Makedonija {totukupotro{i 40 milioni zavra}awe “dolg” kon OKTA itoa kako {to velime, nagladno srce. Dolgo }eàlime za ovie pari. A zo{toda ne se potro{i i u{treedna{ tolkava suma pari (a

sigurno rabotata }e senapravi za mnogu pomalku sopogolem pridones), no ovojpat vo Skopje da gi soberemesite makedonski i svetskiumovi koi }e moàt da nipomognat vo zacrtuvawe napobedonosniot pat voborbata so Grcija za na{etoime i identitet. Razlikatae {to ovoj pat narodnitepari }e se potro{at i zanarodno dobro. Zna~i, da seotrgne sporot od racete navrhu{kata koja potajno i bezobjasnuvawe i ot~et prednarodot ja vode{e dosega{-nata borba za imeto.

Za ostvaruvawe naedno vakvo sovetuvawe ilisobir na umovi (bez razlikakako }e se nare~e), najdobroe ako se dobie soglasnost ipodr{ka od site vlijatelni~initeli vo dràvata: sitepoliti~ki partii, i tie odvlasta kako i tie nadvor odvlasta; site dràvni inau~ni ustanovi; site vrvniintelektualci od sood-vetnite nau~ni poliwa(istorija, me|unarodnopravo, diplomatija, stra-tegija i t.n.) od Makedonijai nadvor; site verskizaednici i t.n. Ako pak vakva{iroka soglasnost ipodr{ka ne moè da sedobie, toga{ tekovnava

Vlada imapred sebei s t o r i s k aodgovornostda gi sobereintelektualcitekoi sespremni bezpredrasudida osmislatnacionalnastartegija zac e l o s n onadminuvawena sporot.

E d e nvakov sobirna umovi }etreba daodgovori nam n o g u

pra{awa, me|u koi islednive:

- Dali voop{totreba{e da prifatimepriem vo OON podprivremenata (koja postanamnogu podolgotrajna)referenca ili ne?, ilitreba{e da istraeme nekoevreme do kone~en priem podustavnoto ime? Koi se (}e)bea pridobivkite iligubitocite od ednata ilidrugata postapka?

- Dali voop{totreba{e da se vpu{time vopregovori za imeto (pa nelinie i nemame nikakovproblem so na{eto ime)?;Koi se pridobivkite iligubitokot od razgovorite akoi }e bea ako odbievmesekakvi razgovori za imeto?

- Zo{to sitedosega{ni Vladi (vklu~i-telno i tekovnata) ne seproiznele za stru~nite

predlozite od d-r. prof.Igor Janev zaprenesuvawe napra{aweto za imeto predMe|unarodniot sud zapravdata vo Hag? Koi sepozitivnite a koi nega-tivnite strani na pored-logot i dali istiot evoop{to ostvarliv?

- Dali e to~nodeka so u{te nekolkuzemji }e dostigneme dvetretini od zemjite voOON koi n# priznavaatpod ustavnoto ime i dekapotoa s# e re{eno (a {toako nekoi i od tie koi n#priznale, pod pritisokna Grcija se predo-mislat?).

Ishodot od “sred-bata na umovi” treba dabide edna dobroosmislena strategija sokoja dràvniot vrv }emoè vo najkratok moènrok da izdejstvuvazavr{nica na sporot vona{a polza. Umniteu~esnici }e treba daizberat i tim nastru~waci koi }esostavat edenMemorandum so kojop{irno, politi~ko-pravno i istoriski }e gop r e t s t a v a tmakedonskoto viduvawena sporot za istiot potoada se koristi predsvetskite mo}nici.

Memorandumot,pokraj pravnata inepobitnata istoriskastrana koja redovnona{ite istori~ari japrenesuvaat, }e treba davklu~i i nekoi drugidokazi koi nie retko giposo~uvame, kako naprimer:

- Celosnopobivawe na gr~kata tezadeka makedonskoto ime inasledstvoto na drev-nite Makedonci se podgr~ki patent, isledstveno na toa, dekanie nemame nikakvopravo na istite.Istori~arite (po~nuvaj}iod sovremenicite nadrevnite Makedonci dona{ite sovremenici kakoBorza i dr.) nedvo-smisleno potvrduvaatdeka drevnite Makedon-ci i Elinite bile

razli~ni narodi koizboruvale posebni jazici,so posebna kultura iobi~ai, a vo ponovo vremei geneti-~arite moàt dadokaàt deka tokmu nie,dene{-nite Makedonci,imame edinstveno pravona takvo nastojuvawe;

- Pobivawe nagr~kata teza deka }e dojdedo nejasnotija ilibrkotnica so imeto na“nivnata severnaprovincija - Makedonija”.Ovaa teza ja objasni i pobipartijata “Vino-ìto” sosvoeto pismo do Nimic od5 noemvri 2007 godina,kade ubedlivo objasnideka vo Grcija nema ednaprovincija so imetoMakedonija, tuku ima trioblasti (periferii) soimiwata isto~na, srednai zapadna Makedonija(“Periferija zapadnaMakedonija”, “Periferijacentralna Makedonia” soSolun i “Periferijaisto~na Makedonija”). Akokaj niv nemanedorazbirawe pome|utrite oblati, zo{totoga{ bi imalo zabuna soimeto na na{ata dràva,koja gi ima site ~initelina edna dràva, dodekaoblastite vo Grcijanemaat nikakva sojuzna(federalna) osobina i nese so me|unaroden priz-nanen status;

- Potsetuvawe nasvetot koj i koga po~na dago koristi imetoMakedonija: Ovaa Repub-lika Makedonija epriroden naslednik naporane{nata Socija-listi~ka (Narodna)Republika Makedonijakoja bez prekin go koristiimeto od 1944 godina; zarazlika od nas, vo Grcijaimeto Makedonija be{ezabraneto i za prv pat goupotrebija koga Mini-sterstvoto za severnaGrcija vo 1988 godina gopreimenuvaa vo Mini-sterstvo za Makedonija iTrakija – zna~i celi 44godini posle progla-suvaweto na Narodna

Komentar

POVTORNO ZA IMETO…NO DO KOGA?Pi{uva: Dragi Stojkovski

Gr~ka Geografija od 1977 godina kade e imenuvana iMakedonija pod svoeto ime.

Gr~ka Geografija od 1977 godina kade eimenuvana i Makedonija pod svoeto ime.


Republika Makedonija voprisustvo na sojuzni~kitemisii na SAD, Anglija iRusija. Potoa sleduvaadrugi preimenuvawa, kakona primer solunskiotaerodrom vo “AerodromTesaloniki - Makedonija”(1992 god.);

- Obelodenuvawepred svetot na site gr~kiknigi, atlasi, karti ienciklopedii kade beznikakov problem vominatoto be{e koristeno

imeto Makedonija zaoblasta na dene{naRepublika Makedonija,koga istata be{e voramkite na jugosloven-skiot sojuz; obelodenu-vawe na site prepiskipome|u Republika Grcija iSocijalisti~ka RepublikaMakedonija, kade gr~katastrana nema{e nikakovproblem da ja imenuvadràvata so nejzinotoustavno ime;

- Opseèn pregledna site sli~ni sostojbikade edno ime se koristivo dve dràvi i kakoniedna dràva ne espre~ena da se vklu~i vonekoja me|unarodna orga-nizacija poradi toa;

- Pretstavuvawe nasostojbata na makedonskomalcinstvo vo Grcija, koj eisto-vremeno i glaven trnvo okoto na Grcija, istavawe na Grcija nastolbot na sramot prednesramna Evropa. Da seohrabri Evropa da pobaraod Grcija da go obelodenipopisot od 1920 godina zanaselenite mesta voegejskiot del na Make-donija, koj seu{te se ~uvavo stroga tajnost;

- Obelodenuvawena gr~kiot nacional-{ovinizam vo nivniotobrazoven sistem (kojdoveduva vo site anketiGrcite da bidat progla-suvani za najgolemiksenofobi vo Evropa) igr~kiot ekspanzionizam koje pretstaven prekuslu`beno izdadeni kartikade teritorii na soseditese pretsta-vuvaat kakogr~ki (nasproti gr~kotobarawe nie da giotstranuvame na{iteistoriski karti od

Makedonija predpodelbite);

- Zapoznavawe nasvetot deka mnogu godinipred na{eto navodnosozdavawe od Tito iKominternata (sporedgr~kite “nau~ni” sozna-nija), Makedoncite isele-ni vo SAD se proizne-suvale za Makedonci koi gozboruvaat makedon-skiotjazik. Imeno, sporedamerikanskite podatoci naBiroto za doselenici, segleda deka pome|u 1895 i1925 godina, zna~i dodekavoop{to ne postoelamakedonska dràva, okolu15,000 doselenici seizjasnile za Makedonci(Braun, Sinadinovski).Istovremeno, vo upatstva-ta na popi{uva~ite zapopisite vo SAD od 1920 i1930 godina, makedonskiotjazik e imenuvan kakoposeben jazik, nasprotialbanskiot, srpskiot,bugarskiot i gr~kiot;Eminentniot istori~arBorza prona{ol nad 30nadgrobni plo~i voamerikanskiot grad Stil-ton, dràvata Pensil-vanija, kade pod imeto napo~inatite bilo ispi{anodeka bile rodeni voMakedonija. Interesno e{to najstarata nadgrobnaplo~a na istite grobi{tae na po~inat vo 1906 godina,pod ~ie ime stoi deka bilroden vo Prilep,Makedonija – zna~i dodekaMakedonija seu{te bilapod Otomanskoto carstvo i{est godini predpodelbata na Makedonijaod sosedite Bugarija,Grcija i Srbija;

Eden vaka opseènMemorandum treba da bide“biblijata” so kojMinisterot za nadvore{niraboti, Milo{oski, }e odipo svetskite prestolninikako {to se Brisel, Pariz,Berlin, London, Wu Jork,Va{ington i drugi, i tamuda im ja kaè makedonskatavistina. Makedonskatadiplomatija kako posebnaslu`ba treba i mora dadeluva poagresivno vopretstavuvawe na dràv-nite interesi, s# doohrabruvawe na me|una-rodnite faktori dasfatat deka s# dodekaRepublika Makedonija goima svoeto ime taa ne eopasnost za Grcija(nasproti gr~kite lagi dekasprotivnoto e vistina),tuku naprotiv, ako naRepublika Makedonija ibide odzemeno nacionalno– istoriskoto i ustavnoime, duri toga{ RepublikaMakedonija i makedonskiotnarod }e bidat prisilenida postanat “bure barut” zaGrcija i celiot Balkan…

A politi~arite(kako Gligorov i drugi) koine se razbiraat od istorijaneka ne komentiraat za taatema voop{to bidej}i samogo podgrevaat ognot naneprijatelite so izjavi odstilot deka “nie nemamenikakva vrska so drevnite

prodolùvaod prethodnatastrana

I m i w a t a“Makedonija” i “Makedonci”postoele i opstojuvale nizistorijata, no isto takabile i negirani. So ovieimiwa e povrzana borbataokolu legitimitetot vrzteritorijata na Make-donija.

Makedonskiot narodse formiral vo ramkite nageografsko-istoriskiotprostor na Makedonija voeden kontinuiran razvoenproces (pleme, narod,nacija). Toj se zdobil solegitimitet vrz terito-rijata na Makedonija istanal naslednik na siteistoriski i kulturniavtohtoni tradicii ivrednosti, nosej}i go imetoMakedonija niz vekovitekako svoe etni~ko iistoriski legitimno ime.

Postoeweto namakedonskata nacijakonstantno gi voznemi-ruvalo sosednite dràvi(Grcija, Bugarija, Srbija iAlbanija). Zaedni~ko vonivnata politika eneprifa}aweto na postoe-weto na makedonska nacija,jazik i dràva. Oviedràvi, osobeno popodelbite na Makedonijaod 1913 i 1919 god.,nastojuvale da god e n a c i o n a l i z i r a a tmakedonskiot narod. Natoa mu se sprotivstavilmakedonskiot narod vosite delovi na Makedonijapod tu|a vlast, vodej}iborba za nacionalnasloboda i sopstvenadràva. Predvoden odnacionalnite organizaciii komunisti~koto dvi-èwe, toj istovremeno seborel za makedonskotonacionalno i dràvno ime.

Po formiraweto namakedonskata federalnadràva (1944 god.) zaprvpat vo ponovataistorija na Makedonija seo f i c i j a l i - z i r aistoriskoto ime Makedo-nija - Makedonci.

Po Vtorata svetskavojna zapo~nuva procesot

na me|unarodna promocija iafirmacija na makedon-skata dràva, nacija, jaziki kultura.

Srbija vo 1944 god. japrizna makedonskatanacija i dràva, {to gopotvrdi so spogodbata od1996 god. so koja ja priznaRepublika Makedonija podustavnoto ime. Bugarija,osven vo periodot 1944 -1948 god., kontinuirano janegira makedonskata nacijai jazik, iako vo 1991 god. japrizna nezavisnosta naRepublika Makedonija.

Grcija, iako japriznava{e Makedonijakako dràva vo ramkite naSFR Jugosla-vija, od 1991god. go osporuva imeto naRepublika Makedonija, sotendencija da se negira iistoriskiot identitet ilegitimitet na makedon-skata nacija i jazik. SoPrivremenata spogodba od1995 god., Grcija ja priznanezavisnosta na RepublikaMakedonija i nejziniotteritorijalen integritet.

Vo procesot nasteknuvawe nezavisnost ime|unarodno priznavawe naRepublika Makedonija,celosno se afirmiramakedonskata dràva,nacija, jazik i kultura.Priznavaweto na Repu-blika Makedonija odstrana na golem broj zemji,od koi pove}eto ja priznaapod nejzinoto ustavno ime,ozna~uva triumf naistoriskata vistina ipravda i potvrda naistoriskiot legitimitet ikontinuitet na makedon-skata nacija i dràva.

Politikata za mir iaktivna sorabotka naRepublika Makedonija sososedite i drugite zemji inejzinata re{enost da giprimenuva me|unarodnitestandardi, e najdobriotpat za nejzin natamo{enprosperitet i za nadminu-vawe na recidivite odminatoto.

Makedonci i deka od zadKapratite sme doseleni voMakedonija vo sedmiotvek”. Takvite politi~aritreba da razberat deka nieMakedoncite ednostavnosme Makedonci! I toa edovolno. Nikoj drug narodne treba da objasnuva kojae negovata genetskastruktura, pa zo{to trebanie dobrovolno da davametakvi izjavi. Sekoj narod,vklu~itelno i tie kakoJaponcite koi ìveelemalku poizolirano oddrugite, se me{avina narazni plemiwa. NieMakedoncite ne smeisklu~ok (niti pak Grcite)od toa pravilo. Nie,dene{nite etni~kiMakedonci sme prekrasname{avina na genetskiotmaterijal od drevnitemakedonski plemiwa,pejonskite plemiwa,slovenskite plemiwa koise naselile (ako senaselile – ili pak seotselile od Makedonija) voMakedonija i site drugidodavki vo smesata. Ova eprirodno – koga razniplemiwa ìveat vo ednaista oblast, a nemaistoriski dokazi dekanekoj od niv e celosnouni{ten, prirodno e da sedojde do postepename{avina na plemiwata inivno pretopuvawe islevawe vo eden edinstvennarod, vo na{iot slu~aj –makedonski narod.

I za kraj, bezrazlika koj }e bide ishodotod sostanokot vo Buku-re{t, treba da ni bidejasno slednovo: Grcija }eima problem so nas s#dodeka ne bide silnoohrabrena i prisilena odme|unarodnata zaednica dagi priznae pravata naobespravenite Makedoncipod nejzina vlast i gopriznae postoeweto naposebna makedonskatanacija i jazik. A cenej}ispored dosega{nite nivnipostapki, Grcija nema da gostori toa s# dodeka ima iedna peda makedonskazemja pod svoe vladenie.

A taa tema da jaostavime za druga prilika.

ISTORISKIOTLEGITIMITET NA IMETO

MAKEDONIJA - MAKEDONCI

Gr~ka enciklopedijakade se nabrojuvaat {esterepubliki na SFRJjugoslavija, me|u koi eimenuvana i Makedonija.

Skopje, Dec 1, 3007-MIAT h e M a c e d o n i a n

Government has decided toannul the visa regime for thecitizens of Canada, spokes-man Ivica Bocevski toldjournalists on Saturday.

Many Macedonianslive in Canada and the freevisa regime will allow themto return to Macedonia afterretirement, Bocevski said.The move is also favorablefor tourist voyages.

MACEDONIA INTRODUCES FREE VISAREGIME FOR CANADIAN CITIZENS

Canada is amongthe most powerfulsupporters of Macedonia’saccession to NATO. It hasalso recognized Macedo-nia’s constitutional name,Bocevski said.

Delegacii navladite na Makedonija i naKanada, po odràniterazgovori vo Otava od 29oktomvri do 2 noemvri, gousoglasija i parafiraaDogovorot za socijalnoosiguruvawe me|u dvete

zemji. Ministerstvoto zatrud i socijala informiradeka dogovorot ovozmoùvaureduvawe na penziskoto iinvalidskoto osiguruvaweme|u Makedonija i KanadaI predviduva sobirawe napriznati periodi na

osiguruvawe sporedzakonodavstvoto na dvetedràvi, kako i transfer napenziite na makedonskitedràvjani koi }e odlu~atda ìveat vo RepublikaMakedonija.

MAKEDONIJA I KANADA GO PARAFIRAADOGOVOROT ZA SOCIJALNO OSIGURANIE


Shirak Meat Product Ltd.Original Importer of Macedonian Products

Avo Garabedian - Owner

Great Place for Macedonian and Balkan Groceries

Macedonian Style Coffee – Cheese

Novi proizvodi od Makedonija:Xem od smokvi, Dafinka, Pelisterka,

Gazoza, Strumka, sokovi i drugi.

Imame i makedonski burek!

- We Import Macedonian Products Regularly- New Products Come in Monthly- We Have the Best Prices in Town

Tel: (416) 266-75191375 Danforth Rd., Mews Plaza, Unit 8, Scarborough, Ontario, M1J 1G7


On Sunday November 4th,2007 the MacedonianCommunity of Canada held aspecial celebration to honourCanada’s recognition of theRepublic of Macedonia by itsconstitutional name which

took place on September 20th,2007. The Thank You Canadaevent which lasted from noonto six pm, took place at

Toronto’s St. Clement of OhridMacedonian OrthodoxCathedral. Activities began inside thegreat hall with speechesdelivered by the organizersand guests and were followedby music and dancing. Thegroup Rumba played outdoorswhile Sonja and Oliver Bandprovided music inside.Performances were alsoprovided by the St. Clementand St. Ilija Macedonianfolklore dance groups. The Thank you CanadaDay Celebration wasorganized by the MacedonianCommunity of Canada’sexecutive committee

consisting of Steve Saragil, BillPavlovski, Jim Sarkovski,Dragi Stojkovski and NickKuburovski. Peter Petkovski,Boris Stoikos, and SteveStojanovski also contributedto the organization and

execution of the event. It was a crisp and sunnyNovember Sunday morningwhen cars began to arrive

presenting a parking challengefor the organizers but thanksto their perseverance parkingspaces for thousands of carswere found. By noon St. Clements’sgreat hall was filled to capacityas people waited to meetguests and listen to thespeeches. “Many things had to bedone in a space of a couple ofweeks but the communityworked feverishly as a teamand got things moving” saysNick Kuburovski. Much of thepublicity was done throughthe local Macedonian mediawhile the preparatory workwas done by the four GreaterToronto Area Macedonian

churches and other localorganizations. The food and bakedgoods were prepared by the LadiesAuxiliaries of the various Churchorganizations. “This was a totalcommunity event” says NickKuburovski. “Our first task was toget the community’s support. Thefour churches, organizations andLadies Auxiliary Groups. Then weasked for volunteers to help outwith food preparation andassistance during the event. Wegot all that and we are grateful toeveryone who helped and madethis event a success.” At about half past noon thespecial guests began to arrive.They had to be escorted via theback stage doors because the greathall and hallways were jam packedwith people waiting for their arrival. Among the guests sitting at thehead table included were theHonourable Jason Kenney,Secretary of State(Multiculturalism and CanadianIdentity), Mike Wallace, MP forBurlington, Lazar Elenovski,Minister of Defense of theRepublic of Macedonia, SaskoNasev, Ambassador of theRepublic of Macedonia in Canada,Metodij, Metropolitan NorthAmerican Macedonian Orthodox

Diocese, Dragi Stojkovski,President of the UnitedMacedonian Organization ofCanada, Sasho Popovski,President of St. Clement of OhridMacedonian Orthodox Cathedraland Jovan Boseovski,Conservative Party Candidate forWillowdale, Macedonian liaisonbetween the Conservative partyand emcee for this event. Includedamong the special guests wereother Conservative MP’s andfuture candidates. After the introductions the firstto speak was Metropolitan Metodijwho among other things thankedthe Canadian government andpeople for recognizing Macedoniaby its constitutional name and forplanting the seeds of good will and

democracy. The next to speak was JovanBoseovski who delivered in part

the following speech:“This is a special occasionbecause this really marks the firsttime that the Government ofCanada affirms and respects theidentity of Macedonians, not onlyliving in Canada but also ourfamily members living back in theRepublic of Macedonia. Ourgovernment, under the leadershipof Prime Minister Harper and theConservative Party, has correcteda longstanding error of previousgovernments. Canadians can nowrefer to our ancestral home by itsrightful name - The Republic ofMacedonia. By recognizingMacedonia by its constitutionalname Canada joins over 120countries such as the US, Chinaand Russia in recognizing theinjustice of a country being forcedto accept the name it did notchoose. So on behalf of Canadians ofMacedonian descent I would liketo express our great appreciationin thanks for having the courageto do what’s right in correcting a

politically motivated error ofour past Canadian leadership.We will never forget this

gesture towards theMacedonian people and theRepublic of Macedonia. We have fought forrecognition since 1991 and inStephan Dion’s Canada hewould still refer to Macedoniaas FYROM. We have the abilityto make sure this neverhappens and as a communityMacedonians must rememberthis for the next election.” Jason Kenney Secretary ofState (Multiculturalsim andCanadian Identity) was nextwho spoke and among otherthings, delivered the following: “Ladies and gentlemen it isa distinct pleasure to be here onbehalf of my boss The RightHonourable Stephen Harper,our Prime Minister; a man whohas made us all proud to beCanadians. For too long Canada was acountry that followed and didnot lead. For too long Canadawas a country that didn’t liveup to its potential or its highest

Thank You Canada Day Celebration

On November 4th, 2007, the Macedonian Community of Canada Thanked Canada for the Recognition ofMacedonia’s Name

By Risto Stefov - [email protected]

Jovan Boseovski, Conservative Party Candidate forWillowdale, and emcee for this event.

Honourable Jason Kenney, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism andCanadian Identity)

Metodij, Metropolitan North American Macedonian OrthodoxDiocese


and truest principles but we havein this Prime Minister a man whois once again asserting Canadain the world as a champion ofprinciple, as a champion offreedom, democracy, humanrights and the rule of law. Thedecision he made in naming TheRepublic of Macedonia by thename that belongs to it was areflection of that principal policyof the Prime Minister. Let me tell you it wasn’t aneasy decision because, for all thewarm reception that you reflecthere today, as you know therewere others on Parliament Hilllast week led by Member ofParliament Jim Karygiannis and

others who were there to attackour government and to promiseif we lose the next election theywill reverse this decision. I’m here to tell you that wehave no intention of losing thatelection. But I want to be clearto my friends in the Greekcommunity and in thegovernment of Greece thatCanada is also a friend of Greeceand the Greek community is atremendous community muchlike the Macedonian communityand has made greatcontributions to Canada and Ithink we should all recognizethat as well.” Mike Wallace (MPBurlington) was next to speakand among other things he said:“The real congratulationsshould go to your leadership. Ithink you should know that Iattended a meeting with yourcommunity leaders [September17, 2007] and it was absolutelyfantastic. I am new to this issueand in a short time your leadersmade it perfectly clear and Iunderstood the need and desireof you as a people to have yourown country recognized as it

should be as The Republic ofMacedonia. So when you seethose folks, your communityleadership, make sure you thankthem as well. It is because ofthem that this happened.” (MikeWallace is referring here to ameeting that Jovan Boseovskiorganized between theConservative Party and theMacedonian Community onSeptember 17 th, 2007 duringwhich ideas were exchanged andthe foundation for therecognition was laid. I wasinvited to that meeting but Iregretfully was unable to makeit on time). The next to speak was DragiStojkovski who among other

things, delivered the following:“This is a festive occasion for allof us. This is the timewhen we can proudly saythank you Canada forrecognizing the Republicof Macedonia by theconstitutional andhistorical name TheRepublic of Macedonia.After 16 years of lobbyingthe Canadiangovernments and thepoliticians it finally cameto this CanadianGovernment, to PrimeMinister Harper and theConservative Party tofinally recognize theRepublic of Macedonia.The way we remember ourancestors from antiquitywe will remember you (theConservative Party) in thenext election. TraditionallyMacedonia and Canadahave been allies not justCanada and Macedoniabut the Canadians andMacedonians as people.Canadian soldiers fought

on the Macedonian front duringthe 1st World War. During the 2nd

World War both Canada andMacedonia, the Canadians andMacedonians fought togetheron the same side and manyCanadians of Macedonianorigin joined the CanadianArmed Forces that fought inEurope. After Macedonia’sindependence from the formerYugoslavia, Canadian soldiersor peace keepers wereinstrumental in keeping thepeace in Macedonia and theBalkans for which we are alwaysthankful. And now for the last, Ithink, 3 years Canadian andMacedonian soldiers foughtalongside each other inAfghanistan. It is our hope thatvery soon Macedonia will alsojoin NATO so we can be equalpartners with Canada inNATO.” Lazar Elenovski theMacedonian Defense Ministerspoke next and among otherthings he delivered thefollowing message: “It is a great honour for meto salute you the Canadian-Macedonians. You are thebridge between our two greatnations. You are the mostimportant component inMacedonia’s friendship withCanada. We will never forgetyour contribution in theCanadian Government’sdecision. Minister Kenney I wouldalso like to thank you, yourgovernment and the HonourablePrime Minister Stephen Harper

for your decision in recognizingour state by its proper name. Canada is a close partner andally of ours in the building ofdemocratic values throughoutthe world. I wish to underlinethat we greatly value our

friendship and partnership.” Lazar Elenovski also hadsome good news for Canadianswishing to travel to Macedonia.The Macedonian government isin the process of discussingways to eliminate the need ofvisas for Canadian citizens whowish to travel to Macedonia. Among the guests whoattended the event were alsothree Macedonian army officers

Mike Wallace, MP for Burlington

Lazar Elenovski, Minister of Defense of the Republic of Macedonia

who are currently training atBase Borden. After the speeches thecelebration continued bothinside and outside with muchsinging, dancing and flagwaving.

The organizers would like tothank St. Clement of Ohrid forproviding their facilities andvenue, the Ladies Auxiliaries forpreparing and serving the food,the parking attendants, thespeakers and special guests, themedia, the helpers, and mostimportantly all those people whoattended the event and made it asmashing success.

On behalf of the Macedonian Community of Canada, Dragi Stojkovski (President of the UnitedMacedonians Organization of Canada) presented a large depiction of Alexander of Macedon on achariot for Prime Minister Harper


OD PROSLAVATA NA ILINDENSKIOT PIKNIKAVGUST 5, 2007 GODINA

Na 4 avgust bea polo`eni venci vo ~est na padnatite borci zaslobodata na Makedonija i Kanada

Pretsedatelot Dragi Stojkovski imdodeli Blagodarnici nasopru‘nicite Sevda i PavlePendevski, kako i Kice Aleksovski,za dobrovolnata rabota koja ja dadoaza ovogodi{niot Ilindenski piknikda bide uspe{en.


Stiv Plijakas – pretsedatel na Kanadsko makedonskiotolimpiski klub, Edmond Temelko – gradona~alnik na op{tinaPustec (Mala Prespa), Dragi Stojkovski – pretsedatel naOrganizacijata Obedineti Makedonci vo Kanada, Uein Arturs sosoprugata – Pratenik vo sobranieto na Ontario za Pikering,Ejxaks i Aksbrix, i Sa{o Nasev – Ambasador na RepublikaMakedonija vo Kanada

Katerina Stojanovska – Ubavica naObedineti Makedonci za 2007 godina, sopratilkite Milica Kova~evi} i AngelaDigalovska

Najmladite Makedon~iwa se razonoduvaa skokaj}i na skoka~katatvrdina, igraj}i na lizgalkite, lula{kite i drugite igra~ki,

dodeka pogolemite igraa odbojka i fudbal. Na najlmadite im beapodeleni boi~ki i boenki.


IljadniciMakedonci budno go

sledeja izborot zaUbavica na Obedineti

makedonci za 2006 godina.


PO 95 GODINI PAK VO BUKURE[T

Po Prvata balkan-ska vojna, Otomanskotoropstvo zavr{i. Vo januari1913 godina, Otomanskotocarstvo mora{e da jaotstapi Makedonija.Balkanskite sijuznici sepobednici. Vedna{ po toa,se pojavuva te{kotija kajsojuznicite okolupodelbata na Makedo-nija.Sojuzni~kite zemji nemalenamera da postapat sporedklauzu-lata na sojuzniotdogo-vor, nitu pak da sezadovolat so osvoenatateritorija. Nivnite nasto-juvawa odele kon toa da se{irat na smetka napartnerot.

Vo toa vreme voSolun se nao|aat gr~ki ibugarski vojski. Venize-los, po nikakva cena nesaka da go napu{ti Soluni go zadrùva za Grcija, ana Bugarija i gi otstapuvaDrama i Seres, so {to iovozmoùva izlez na Egej.Srpskata nade` za izlezna Jadran is~ezna, sosozdavaweto na nezavisnaAlbanija, pod za{tita naAvstrija i Italija.Aftonomijata na Albanijae priznata na 20-tidekemvri 1912 godina. NaSrbija ne i ostana ni{todrugo, tuku da se zadovoliso osvoenate teritorija voMakedinija koja ja osvoikon krajot na prethodnata1912 godina i da se nadevana drugata alternativa zaizlez na more, a toa e Egej.Gladnata koko{ka prososonuva.

Rusite kako arbi-tri se obiduvaat da gismirat strastite. Grcite iSrbite potpi{uvaatdogovor na prvi juni 1913godina za zaedni~kaodbrana i si garantiraatosvoenite teritorii voMakedonija da im bidatzaedni~ki za vreme oddeset godini.

Bugarskiot carFerdinand, potiknat odAvstrija, zapo~na voeniAkcii bez objava na vojna na29 juni 1913 godina.Vojvodata Putnik gi zapirabugarskite napreduvawa naBregalnica. Grcitenapa|aat kon Seres.Romancite, po objavenatavojna na Bugarija, sedobliùvaat do Sofija.Turcite povtorno sevra}aat vo Edrene.Bugarija e pred kapitu-lacija. Vojnata brzozavr{i. Bugarija, nao|aj}ise pod pritisok nasrpskite i gr~kite vojski,kon koi se priklu~ileromanskite i turskite,pobarala mir.

So posredstvo naRomanija, pod pretseda-telstvo na Majoresko, bilasvikana mirovna konferen-cija vo Bukure{t na 28 juli1913 godina. Pobednicitegi zabrzaa diskusiite za

da se izbegne vme{uvawe naAvstrija vo ovie sferi i,na 10 avgust 1913 godina, namirovnata konferencijame|u pette pobedni~ki sili– Srbija, Crna Gora, Grcija,Osmanskata imperija iRomanija i pobedenataBugarija e potpi{anBUKURE[KIOT DOGOVOR,so koj se zagarantiranime|usebnite granici. Voovoj dogovor ne se spomnuvaza imeto na podelenatateritorija – Makedonija.

Srbija ja dobivateritorijata od Vardar-skiot del na Makedonija, so26.700 km/2 i 1,200.000ìteli. Grcija go dobivaEgejskiot del naMakedonija so Solun ili34.600 km/2 i 1,600.000ìteli. Bugarija go dobivaPirinskiot del naMakedonija od 6.800 km/2 so400.000 ìteli.

M a k e d o n s k o t onaselenie, vozbudeno iispla{eno ne znaej}i koj esledniot gospodar. CarFerdinan ka~en natvrdinata na Kavala vodekemvri 1912 godina ipokaùvaj}i do kade e“negovata Makedonija” naistoto mesto vo avgust 1913godina, gr~kiot kral seka~uva i toj po~nuva da rikakako vol, pokaùvaj}i dokade e “negovata Makedo-nija” Da ~itame: Posle 95godini pak vo Bukure{t od2-ri do 4-ti april, 2008godina. – Dali zagonetniotBukure{t }e ja ispravinanesenata nepravda premaMakedonija ili }e jadozakopa.

Se pra{uvame…!?…Dali Grcija znae ne{to,{to nie ne go znaeme..?,tataka vo 1988 godina severnaGrcija ja imenuva kakoMakedonija. Fakt e dekaMakedoncite ne otidoa voGrcija, Grcite dojdoa voMakedonija. Vo taa nivnaseverna Grcija, nikoj nesmee{e da re~e deka eMakedonec. Temninata }e goprogolta{e vo srede belden. A sega sosemasprotivno, od 1988 godinaimeto Makedonija e gr~ko isamo gr~ko, nivno anti~koime.

B e s k o m p r o m i s ,imeto Makedonija ne impripa|a ni na Grcite, ni naSrbite, ni na Bugarite,tuku samo na Makedoncite“Makedonija na Makedon-cite.”

So podelbata, de-finitivno bila opredelenasudbinata na Makedonija.Taa si ostanala podelename|u trite rivalni bal-kanski dràvi. Nitu ednobarawe na makedonskiotnarod ne bilo zemeno vopredvid. Pariskata mirov-na konferencija ednostav-no gi sankcioniralaodredbite na Bukure{kiotdogovor od 1913 godina.

Edinstvena korekcija {toja vnesla e priklu-~uvaweto na Strumica iokolijata so okolu 60iljadi du{i kon Jugo-slavija. Kako rezultat odBalkanskite i Prvata

svetska vojna e razbienageopoliti~kata, etni~katai ekonomskata celina namakedonskiot narod

Vo okupiranitedelovi na Makedonija,okupatorskite sili vovelevonredni voeni reìmi,zapo~nuva gruba politikana sistematska denacio-nalizacija i asimilacijana makedonskiot narod.Fizi~ki potisnat, toj be{ei politi~ki zadu{en.Besmisleno e progonuvanasekoja aktivnost zanezavisnost na Makedo-nija.

Na 6 avgust 1914godina vo Odesa, KrsteP.Misirkov pobaral voimeto na pridonesot {to godava makedonskiot narodprotiv zdruènoto german-stvo, da mu se upati mani-fest za obedinuvaweto nacela Makedonija vo ednadràva. So argumentite narezultatite od revolucio-nernite borbi na makedon-skiot narod, makedonskataimigratcija barala odRusija, Anglija i Francijada se angaìraat voosloboduvaweto na Make-donija.Taa vo avtonomijatana Makedonija gledalaedinstven i najdobar izlezza site zainteresirani naBalkanot i za mirot voEvropa. Zaludni bileapelite na makedonskatainteligencija i imigracijai nivnite dru{tva. U{teod po~etokot na vojnata doEvropa so apeli imemorandumi se javile odRusija: Krste Misirkov,Dimitrija ûpovski,podocna i doktor Kozarevod [vajcarija, no“demokratska” Evropa si gizatvori u{ite gledaj}i sigi svoite ekonomski ipoliti~ki interesi.

@. Silon (sp. kn.

str.71) veli: “Po Berlin-skiot kongres, Grcijanekolku pati i sozdava{eproblemi na Evropa sonejzinite ekspanzio-nisti~ki aktivnosti konsever – Tesalija – koja {to

ja odeluva{e od Make-donija. So Carigradskiotdogovor na ambasadoriteod 14 juni 1881 taa dopredo Pind i do padinite naOlimp i se zgolemi so13.200 km/2 i 36.000ìteli. Taa toga{ negrani~e{e so Makedo-nija,no sepak ne samo {to sakada dopre do nejzinitegranici tuku i da zeme delod nejzinata teritorija”.

Ako malku, samomalku pro~epkame popobliskata i podale~nataistorija }e vidime dekaGrcite se velemajstori dago ubedat svetot deka tiesekoga{ se vo pravo i dekanekoj postojano im nanesuvanepravda.

Vo vremeto nakomunizmot, Grcija uspeada mu nametne na svetotdramati~na opasnost ponejziniot opstanok odkomunisti~ka Jugoslavija,od Titova Jugoslavija, odkomunisti~ka Bugarija,~lenka na Var{avskiotdogovor, od komunisti~kaAlbanija na Enver Hoxa, odvekovniot neprijatel –agresivna Turcija. Vakvotopla~ewe i ofkawe, {irokoi gi otvori portite naEvropskata unija, gi osvoisimpatiite na Amerika sogolemi investicii, ogromnipari, nepovratna pomo{, serazbira opasnosta nitibe{e ralna, niti pak ima{enekakva zakana.

So genocidot {toGrcija go napravi za vremena Gra|anskata vojna poVtorata svetska vojna, taastana galeni~e na golemitesvetski sili i naEvropskata unija,so {todobi sila da go ignorirame|unarodnoto pravo.

Po padot nakomunizmot gr~katarasipanost prodolì na

eden sosema drug na~in, soedna dràvna strategija nakoja moè da i se pozavidi.

Grcija, pred svetotuspe{no ja prezentira{eMakedonija kako ednaiskrivena i opasna slika

(kako odc r t a n i t efilmovi) kakoopasnost odsever. Sos t e k n a t i t esimpatii kajs v e t s k i t esili, vo ulogana velesilauspeva da sevme{a vovnatre{niteraboti naR e p u b l i k aMakedonija son e v i d e n aaroganci ja ,baraj}i ode d n amiroqubiva imala dràvada si gop r o m e n i

znameto, da si go promeniUstavot i da si go promeniimeto. Makedonijapotcenuva~ki pristapi dasi go smeni Ustavot, pri{to se otkaà za griàtana svoite malcinstva vososednite zemji, odnosnoza griàta na svoiteMakedonci vo Egejska iPirinska Makedonija kakoi za Makedoncite vo MalaPrespa. Makedonijaprifati ne viden, srameni poniùva~ki ~in vosvetot, da go smeni svoetozname, za koe samo Grcijaimala tapija. So ovoj gestMakedonija pokaà visokakultura i civilizacija.

Vo Obedinetitenacii, Grcija uspeva danametne edna “privremena”referenca “PJRM” koja traeso decenii a na koja isvetot i se potsmevnuva.So {to i ugledot na Grcijavo svetot opa|a, ne moève~no da ja prodavaprikaskata deka i sezakanuva opasnost odmaliot sosed na sever, kojmaka ma~i da go za~uvasopstveniot opstanok.

Denes RepublikaMakedonija e priznata od120 zemji pod ustavnotoime.

Grcija ni pove}e nipomalku e tipi~na balkan-ska zemja, edna od genera-torite na nestabilnosta voregionot.

Miroqubiva iispla{ena Makedonija,soo~ena so svoite seriozniproblemi i te{kotii zaopstanok na dràvata, sosvoite edinstveni perspe-ktivi da se vklu~i voEvropskata zaednica nanarodite i da izgradi

Pi{uva: Bor~e Kulevski

Mislewe

prodolùvana slednata strana


Obedineta Makedonija

Saturdays 9 – 10 am on CHKT AM 1430Macedonian Radio Program

Micko i Dragica Dimovski Tel/Fax: 905-265-2197

16 Condotti Dr., Woobridge, ON L4H 2C8

Istorijata e ~udesna“naprava” koja kontinuiranogi beleì, selektira iza~uvuva podatocite zanastani, lideri ili poedinili~nosti, koi imaat golemovlijanie, mu davaat beleg nasvoeto vreme. Taa epoprecizna od usnata,prenesena od koleno nakoleno, oralna istorija, noi kako kaj vtorava, so vreme,odredeni nastani is~eznu-vaat od nejzinite stranici,del od nastanite ilili~nostite go gubat onazna~ewe {to go imale,is~eznuvaat od memorijata,a eden del biduva sokrien,falsifikuvan ili uni{tenzasekoga{.

Zatoa lu|eto koi sebavat so ovaa naukanalikuvaat kako traga~i pozlato, treba da izmijat tonii toni obi~en pesok (vona{iov slu~aj material) iako imaat sre}a, moàt da sepofalat so nekolku zlatnigrumenki, koi nekoga{,zboruvaat mnogu za istori-jata na eden narod iliteritorija. Ne retko takvitenastani stanuvaat sostavendel od ìvotot na edenetnos, za da ostanat kakosimboli, svetilnici nizvremeto, patokazi koi ginaso~uvaat idnite slu~uva-wa, ja davaat smislata naidninata.

Vtoriot vid istori-ski podatoci ne samo {to seprimeri na koi bi sakale dane se povtorat, tuku kakostigmi ostavaat krvavi traginiz vremeto, luzni se koinagrduvaat, stra{ila koi japla{at idninata odpovtoruvawe. Zatvoreni voPandorinata kutija, kako dago ~ekaat svojot ~as pak daizlezat za da gi otvoratstarite, ili samo da dopuratsol vo starite neizle~enirani. Vo toj slu~aj nivniotboskresnuvawe e u{tepostra{no i potragi~eno.

Tretite se sokrie-nite, ukradenite, falsifi-kuvanite ili uni{teniteistoriski fakti. Toa sepravi od nekolku pri~ini:ednata e da se prisvoitu|ata istorija, bidej}isopstvenata ne e “dovolnoatraktivna”, se ukrasuva,prebojadisa sopstvenotominato za da i se dadesmisla na sega{nosta iliidninata. Ako ve}e toa nemoè, oti bi izgledalokomi~no i sramno, toga{ se

sokriva ili uni{tuva.Sokrivaweto, zakatan-~uvaweto vo najtemnitedolapi, zabranata zadostapnost do niv od oniekoi bi si prepoznale svoetominato.

Mnogumina koi sebavat so istorijata naMakedonija i koi seop{topriznati vo taaoblast, se na stavot dekapodale~noto minato nana{ata zemja e prisvoeno,ukradeno od sosedite ilisokrieno za da memlosa,izbledne, da se samou-ni{ti, a so cel da seuni{tat na{ite koreni, da

se uni{ti vistinata zaMakedonija, a so toa i neada ja snema, da go snemasopstvenikot, a potoa kebide polesno. StaraBalkanska praktika, konMakedonija i nejzinataistorija e vistinskiprimer.

Neprocenliva e{tetata koja pri toa enapravena-izguben e konti-nuitetot na istoriskiotrazvoj na eden narod,osakateni sme za ednoistorisko pametewe,vnesena e konfuzija voidentitetot, zatoa mani-pulaciite se olesneti,zabunata okolu toa koi sme,{to sme i do den-denes nese nadminati.

[tetata enapravena , no ne votolkava mera i so tolkavuspeh za da se realiziracelosno na{etopotomoruvawe, ipokrajsite nevoli, za ~udo i naop{to àlewe na na{itesosedi, uspeavame da si giprepoznaeme na{iteistoriski svetilnici, dagi is~istime od vekovnatapra{ina na{ite biseri,koi kako potpornistolbovi stanaa sostavendel od gradbata nare~enaMakedonska dràva. Kakotakvi zasekoga{ i }eostanat.

Vo ovaa prigoda }estane zbor za eden takovbiser od ponovotomakedonsko minato, kojzasekoga{ }e ostane da gikrasi vitrinite na na{ataistorija. Stanuva zbor zaGoce Del~ev, koj kako inegoviot dale~en slavenpredok Aleksandar Make-donski, sin na FilipVtori, umira mlad i ne jazavr{uva svojata misija dokraj. Ne ja zavr{uva, no ivdahnuva ~udesna dviè-~ka sila na definitiv-noto osloboduvawe naMakedonija.

Vo {to se sostoifenomenot na Del~ev,bidej}i i po pove}e ode denvek od negovata smrt, Goce

BISER VO VITRINITE NA ISTORIJATAPi{uva: Slobodan Petreski

Mislewe

kako da e tuka, so nas, kakoda postanal del od na{etosekojdnevie, kako da jabarame karizmati~nostakoja toj ja poseduval.Negovata qubov konsopsvenata rodina eprimer kako treba da sesaka svoeto, kako toarodoqubie treba da seizrazi, bez ostatok, bezkompromisi, no so razum ibarawe i so najsoodvetnire{enija. Pri toa, da senema strav od smrrta, da nese bara ni{to za vozvrat,se vo imeto na slobodatana Makedonija.

Zaradi toa, Del~evvisoko ja ima krenatoletvi~kata na levelot kojtreba da go dosegneme, dago preskokneme egoizmot,podelbite, da go vratime~ustvoto na doverbata vosebe i vo sopstvenitemo`nosti, da se prepo-znaeme koi sme i {to sme,kako treba da se dvi‘ime voidninata.

Ni treba Gocedenes za da ni pokaè dekane treba da otstapuvamepred nikogo, kako da se{titi sopstevniot, nacio-nalniot interes, bezfrlawe vo tu|i pregratki.Del~ev gi preponava irazobli~uva “dobritenameri na prijatelite”,jasno gi obeleùva i ne japrifa}a “pomo{ta” koja tienesebino ja pruàat.

Zaradi toa platili so sopstveniot ìvot,tokmu pred Vostanieto1903-ta, po {to Ilindenneminovno pretrpuvaporaz, oti e nedovolnoorganizirano, predvre-meno, sabotirano od stranana bugarskiot dvor inegovite slugi.

Decenii po nego-vata smrt se ostvaruvasonot za slobodna, neza-visna makedonska dràva,Goce i iljadnicite pa-trioti `rtvi zaradiMakedonija denes imaatsatisfakcija zaradi {to gopoloùvaat svojot ìvot.Za àl ne onaa celata zakoja Del~ev se borel i jakrstosuval, no koj znae...Eden den }e se smiratmoèbi negovite koski vocrkvata “Sveti Spas” voSkopje. Negoviot duhslobodno }e se raskriliniz obedineta Makedonija.

demokratsko i prosperi-tetno op{testvo.

Svetot poleka nosigurno po~na da veruvadeka Grcija postepeno sedavi vo vodite na svoitelagi. Imeto Makedonija eekskluzivno pravo naGrcija. Taa e edinstveniotnaslednik na celataanti~ka istorija,prisvojuvaj}i si gitapiite na Isto~notorimsko carstvo(Vizantija),na celataAnti~ka Makedo-nija,pretstavuvaj}i se kakokolepka na svetskatademokratija. Grcija te{komoè da go prikrie svojotevidenten {ovinizam iprimitiven nacionalizamkoj so istapkite naGr~kata crkva ~estopreminuva vo seriozniformi na fa{izmot.

Vetoto za NATO iza Evropskata unija zaGrcite e neminovnost. Tietvrdat deka toa ebezbednosen, bilateralenproblem, a vsu{nost epsiholo{ki, emocionaleni nacionalisti~ki prob-lem. Grcija }e go stopiranapredokot na Makedonijakon NATO i Evropskataunija.

Posrednikot naON vo sporot okolu imetoMatju Nimic povtorno voSkopje pri krajot najanuari o.g.

-Dali makedon-skata Vlada }e go odbraniustavnoto ime..?

-Dali makedon-skata Vlada }e izdrì..?

Makedonija e vopostojana neizvesnost dosamitot na NATO voBukure{t od 2 do 4 april2008 godina.

- Dali Makedonija}e dobie pokana za~lenstvo voNATO..!?…ili ne…

- Dali SAD }e japodrì RepiblikaMakedo-nija ili PJRM?

- Dali imeto }ebidi pre~ka..!?

- Kakvo iznena-duvawe podgotvi Grcija.

Dali Bukure{t eonoj istiot od pred 95godini (10 avgust 1913god.)..?

Dali,..dali…dali…

prodolùvaod prethodnatastrana


RAINBOW - VINOZITO, POLITICAL PARTY OF THE MACEDONIAN MINORITY IN GREECE

To the Attention of:General Secretary of UN- Mr. Ban Ki-MoonMinister of Foreign Affairsof Greece – Mrs.Dora BakogiannisMinister of Foreign Affairsof the Republic ofMacedonia - MrAntonio Milososki

Dear Mr Nimetz,As members of the

ethnic Macedonian minority ofGreece, we would like to takethis opportunity to express theviews of our party* in relationto the opposition of the Greekstate to the use of the name“Republic of Macedonia” byits northern neighbour.

In our opinion thereare two main aspects to this is-sue. The first is a purely tech-nical one regarding the generaluse of the term “Macedonia”by Greece and the Republic ofMacedonia. The second aspectis a political one, which can beviewed in the context of the so-called “Macedonian question”in south-eastern Europe whichis well known to us and whichhas existed since the beginningof the last century.

In relation to the po-litical aspect of the issue wetried in our last letter to you toshed some light on some as-pects of this question. As mem-bers of the ethnic Macedonianminority of Greece we have theopportunity to analyse the is-sue from a unique position be-cause we are also citizens ofGreece. We understand verywell the situation ‘on theground’, the ‘system within thestate’, Greek society and thegeneral political viewpointsfrom ‘within’, as our educationand life is no different to therest of Greek society to whichwe belong.

Member of the European Free Alliance - European Political Party (E.F.A-E.P.P)Member of the Federal Union of European Nationalities (F.U.E.N.)

LETTER TO MATTHEW NIMITZUnited Nations Special Envoy on the Name Dispute between Greece and Republic of Macedonia

5 November 2007

1. THE POLITICAL ASPECT

1.1 - The denial by theGreek state of the right of aneighbouring people and stateto be called by the name , whichit has chosen for itself indi-rectly influences our Macedo-nian identity. As members ofthe ethnic Macedonian minor-ity of Greece, we feel it is of cru-cial importance for our contin-ued existence that our nationalidentity and distinctiveness isrespected. We believe that wetoo should be able to freelychoose our identity, to enjoythat right and to be respected.If Macedonian identity is de-nied generally, then so is thecase with our own identity.Unfortunately such a denial isbeing done by the state, whichwe are citizens of. The right toself-determination and choos-ing one’s own identity is basedon universal principles of re-spect for human and minority

rights. As ethnic Macedonianswe respect the right of any of ourfellow Greek citizens to self-iden-tification.

1.2 - We believe that thepolitical aspect of the problem isan internal problem of the Greekstate. Unfortunately the majorityof the Greek public (and indeedthe public in other countries in theregion) have never had the oppor-tunity to be fully and objectivelyinformed about questions relatedto respect for individual and col-lective self-identification of a peo-ple or a nation. As a result of thisfactor we are pessimistic with re-spect to the perspectives for theregion when we speak of the so-called “Macedonian question” ingeneral. Our pessimism increaseswhen we see the position of notonly Greek, but also Bulgarian na-tionalism in relation to this ques-tion. However this is a topic foranother time.

1.3 Greek nationalismhas the following main character-istic: it has created a ‘nationalmyth’ that modern Greek citizensare descendants and the directinheritors of Ancient Greece. Fordecades now, the Greek state hasaccordingly educated its citizensin such a manner. This is thedominant ideology not only to-day but ever since the formationof the modern Greek state in 1827.When the Greek state acquired apart of the territory of Macedo-nia in 1912/1913, it extended this‘myth’ to the new territories. Inother words, the average Greekcitizen and indeed the vast major-ity of Greek politicians have thefollowing views:

’We are Greeks, de-scendants of the AncientHellenes. The Ancient Macedoni-ans were also Greek. AncientMacedonia was a Greek(Hellene) district. Therefore weare the inheritors of this ancientworld as a whole and nobodyelse has a right to this.’

This is the ideologicalconstruction, which continuallydictates the political standpointof the Greek political elite in rela-tion to the “Macedonian ques-tion”. This construction is alsodominant in Greek society. Ofcourse, as members of the Mac-edonian minority of Greece weREJECT all ‘ancient’ approacheswhen we speak of modern nation-states. We are ethnic Macedoni-ans on the basis of the right toself-identification and self-deter-mination as is understood by to-day’s progressive world.

1.4 - According to ouropinion, it is unfortunate thatGreek nationalism (and indeedBulgarian nationalism) has stillyet to come to terms with the factthat a separate ethnic Macedo-nian nation exists. This is pre-cisely the key to the Macedonianquestion. Therefore it is no coin-cidence that Greece has consist-ently argued for a name for theneighbouring state, which will not

be of a national character, butrather of a geographic one. Asimilar policy is being pursued byBulgaria. This idea today is be-ing promoted by Greek diplomaticrepresentatives as a “compromisesolution”. So for the Greek side,the national abandonment anddenationalisation of the majorityof the citizens of the Republic ofMacedonia and indirectly theethnic Macedonian minority ofGreece is a “compromise” andsomewhat of a “democratic” of-fer, representing a “huge conces-sion” from its initial and funda-mental position that Greece hasthe exclusive right to the term“Macedonia”. In other words, theGreek position denies the right ofa people and a nation to exist assuch, as well as the right of that

nation to choose its own name,identity, symbols, etc.

1.5 - The essence of theinternal problem of this questionfor Greece is the denial of the rec-ognition and the respect of aseparate and distinct Macedo-nian ethnic/national identity dif-ferent from the Greek one, be-cause to do so would result in thecollapse of the Greek myth of na-tional homogeneity that the statehas imposed for decades now.

1.6 - As we pointed outin our last letter to you, the Mac-edonian question representsa problem for Greece, above allbecause of the fact that a Mac-edonian minority exists on its ter-ritory. This is the ‘secret’, whichexists in the Greek argumentationabout the supposed “irredentismof Skopje”. We are convincedthat if an ethnic Macedonian mi-nority did not exist in Greece, it isalmost certain that the term“Macedonia” by the neighbour-ing state would not have been aproblem at all for Greece. The ar-gument, which could theoreti-cally be placed on the Europeanand world scene in relation to this‘irrational’ dispute, could readsomething like this:

‘Respected persons ofthe international community …if the state to the north of ourborder is called ‘Macedonia’ wefear that in future there will beirredentist aspirations on north-ern Greece by the ethnic Mac-edonian minority of Greece.’

However such a thingcould not be said by Greece be-cause it knows all too well thatthe answer to such an assertion

could be nothing other than:’Well, respect the

rights of the minority and rec-ognise i t , so that no suchirredentist problems will ap-pear.’

Due to the fact that itis difficult to convince the in-ternational community about“Skopje’s irreden-tism” if onetakes into consideration thefact that the Republic of Mac-edonia is a small and relativelyweak state in relation to Greece.The Macedonian minority ofGreece is the ‘weak link’ in thechain of Greek arguments re-garding the question of“irredentism” and indeed onthe Macedonian question ingeneral.

2. THE TECHNICAL ASPECT

2.1 - Here, we muststate that as a matter ofprinciple, it is not ‘fair’ for the“first” party (i.e. Greece) todemand that the “secondparty” (i.e. the Republic ofMacedonia) change its namewhen the “second” party sidehas not demanded this from the“first” party.

2.2 - The startingpoint of the technical part of thequestion is based on the factthat the wider region ofMacedonia, as it is known to usall at the least in the lastcentury, comprises of territorieswhich today forms the Republicof Macedonia, parts of Bulgaria(Pirin Macedonia), Albania (thePrespa region) and of course aswell as northern parts of Greecewhich carry the name“Macedonia”. In relation toAlbania and Bulgaria, thesestates do not have anyobjections to the use of theterm “Republic of Macedonia”.

2.3 - What are thefacts? In Greece there is nosingle official administrativeprovince called “Macedo-nia”.Of the 13 administrative regionsof Greece, three of them carrythe name “Macedonia”. Theyare, the “Region of WesternMacedonia”, the “Region ofCentral Macedonia” inclusiveof Thessaloniki / Solun, and the“Region of EasternMacedonia” all located innorthern Greece. Despite thefact that more than oneadministrative entity carries thename “Macedonia”, there isabsolutely no confusionbetween one or more of thesethree regions. This is becauseself-evidently each region hasa prefix (“Region of Western”,“Region of Central” and“Region of Eastern”) before theword “Macedonia”, thusdistinguishing one fromanother. In this context andhaving this logic in mind, therecan also be no confusionbetween one or more of theseadministrative regions of

Greece and the independent andsovereign state called theRepublic of Macedonia , whichhas the prefix “Republic of”before the word “Macedonia”.

2.4 - When we speakabout the Greek political system,it should be noted that Greecedoes not have a federalstructure, nor does it have adecentralised state akin to afederal system. Moreover, wewish to point out that mainly inthe last 15-20 years, there hasbeen an introduction (read:renaming) of a number of Greekpublic bodies incorporating theword “Macedonia”. The mosttypical example is the “Ministryof Northern Greece” which in1988 the Greek governmentrenamed the “Ministry ofMacedonia and Thrace” when itbecame evident that thedissolution of Yugoslavia wasimminent and as a result therewas a possibility that anindependent Macedonian statewould be declared. Anothersuch examples were the“Industrial School ofThessaloniki” which wasrenamed the “University ofMacedonia” in 1990 and theairport “Thessaloniki - Mikra”renamed “Thessaloniki -Macedonia” in 1992, etc, whenthe Republic of Macedonia hadalready declared itsindependence.

2.5 - The above-men-tioned examples have been citedto demonstrate that behind allthis “renaming” stood, above all,a political motive. The purposewas to “consolidate” and tosome extent to “promote” theGreek side of “Macedonian-ness” as an integral part of Greekworld, i.e. to acquire a type of“copyright” on the use of theterm “Macedonia”.

2.6 - On the other hand,we have a state entity, which iscalled the “Republic of Macedo-nia”. From 1944 – 1991 the “Peo-ple’s Republic of Macedonia”and later the “Socialist Republicof Macedonia” existed as one ofthe six constituent units of theformer Yugoslavia. As of 1991,this federal entity became an in-dependent sovereign statecalled the “Republic of Macedo-nia”. The term “Macedonia” wasused by Greece’s neighbouringstate continuously for almosthalf a century from 1944 until thebeginning of the 1990’s withouta problem, i.e. without any “re-actions” by the Greek side. Infact, many official documentsexist regarding bilateral coopera-tion between the then “SocialistRepublic of Macedonia” andGreece (as a federal unit of Yu-goslavia, the Socialist Republicof Macedonia, in certain condi-tions, had the right to concludesuch agreements).

2.7 - There are also a

Continues on next page

The White Tower in Solun


number of Greek documents,which long before 1945 defined“Macedonian” as somethingdifferent to “Greek.” Theseinclude the primer in theMacedonian language, the“Abecedar”, printed in 1925 forthe Macedonian minority ofGreece, which we recently hadthe pleasure of sending a copyto you. Another tellingdocument was the 1920 Greekcensus document, whichexplicitly lists the existence ofthe Macedonian language inGreece.

2.8 - As has been thecase in the past, we stronglybelieve that there cannot be anyobjection or rejection at theinternational level on the use ofthe name “Republic ofMacedonia”. This term purelyand clearly, describes anddefines an international state.The naming of certain regions innorthern Greece with the name“Macedonia” is for internal useof Greece. In fact, theexpressions “Republic ofMacedonia” and the “Region ofWestern Macedonia” forexample are different from eachother with the exception of theword “Macedonia”.

2.9 - In relation to uni-versities, airports, ministries,etc, in Greece which have ac-quired “Macedonian” character-istics to their titles in the last 15-20 years, they can just as easilybe called something else or theirold names can be restored in or-der not to create any “confu-sion” if the Greek state feels thisis necessary. Even if theabovementioned retain their ex-isting names, there is no prob-lem or confusion with this, asthese are internal names, the useof which is largely confined todomestic use within Greece.

2.10 - In this context, itis interesting to note that thereis not a single region and placein Greece which is called “Re-public of Macedonia”. Nor arethere any other Greek citizenswhich self-identify as “ethnicMacedonians” other than thosebelonging to the Macedonianminority of Greece. Therefore,there can be no confusion evenin this area about the issue.

2.11 - As was statedpreviously, before the term“Macedonia” there is a prefix“Republic of”. The regions ofMacedonia in Greece also havethe prefixes “Region of West-ern” “Region of Central” and“Region of Eastern” before theterm “Macedonia”. If Greecefeels that a further differentia-tion is needed to distinguish itfrom the Republic of Macedoniathen it is logical for Greece to fur-ther define the regions with ad-ditional prefixes or suffixes.

2.12 - Generally, we feelthat the technical aspect of thequestion can easily be solved ifexperts from both sides con-clude an agreement (if at all it isnecessary) in regards to thenaming of articles, products,

services, etc in bilateral relationsbetween the two states.

3. GOODNEIGHBOURINLY RELA-

TIONS AND THE ROLE OFINTERNATIONAL

COMMUNITY

3.1 - We believe that inorder to have a lasting peace,good neighbourly relations andsolidarity between the Balkancountries, the larger nation-states, specifically, Serbia, Greeceand Bulgaria, must finally cometo terms with the right of theMacedonian people to full self-determination, respecting at thesame time the rights of the ethnicMacedonian minorities withintheir borders. At the same time,the minorities in the Balkansshould reject to be instrumentsfor irredentist policies of states,which unfortunately was the casein the last decades with the warsin the former Yugoslavia.

3.2 - It is true that whenthe international communityconstituted that there wereviolations of basic human rightsin the wars in Bosnia andHerzegovina, and Kosovo, itdecisively took action andintervened by military means withUN consent. The purpose of thisintervention was to protect thelocal population, to stabilise theregion and also to teach a‘lesson’ to the totalitarian andundemocratic regime, as was theMilosevic regime in the formerYugoslavia.

3.3 - In the case of theMacedonian question we feelthat the international communitycan (in this context, the UN too)play a key role when it comes topeace, stability and the future ofthe region. Greek policy,unfortunately, in the last decadeor so, has been extremelydestabilising in the Balkanregion, firstly by giving supportto the Milosevic regime in the1990s and secondly by denyingthe right of is neighbouringcountry, the Republic ofMacedonia and people to chooseits own name, i.e. its identity.

3.4 - Such beha-viour,luckily, has not had any negativeconsequences in relation to thecohesion and stability of theRepublic of Macedonia, thanksto the support of the internationalcommunity towards thisrelatively young state. Howeverit is a fact that Greek policyindirectly in the last 15-20 yearswas an ‘obstacle’ on the road ofthe Republic of Macedonia toEuropean and world integration.

3.5 - In this context, wetrust that the internationalcommunity will not make themistake of supporting aggressiveBalkan nationa-lisms, specificallyin this case Greek nationalism, bydenying Macedonian identity.We know that this stateantagonism at the beginning ofthe last century together with thedenial of Macedonian identity bythe Balkan states ‘fed’ thisantagonism for the purpose ofterritorial expansion of the Balkanstates at the time. Unfortunately,the interna-tional communityback them did not respect the willof the Macedonian people fornational and state emancipation

which would have resulted inthe formation of a Macedonianstate with a separate ethnic andnational identity. As aconsequence of those Balkanpolicies there was muchhardship and sufferingoccurred, as documented anddescribed by internationalreports such the CarnegieCommission. We sincerelyhope that history will not berepeated.

3.6 - For these rea-sons, we believe that the inter-national community should fi-nally send a clear political mes-sage in relation the existingnegative position of our state,Greece, regarding the Republicof Macedonia. We believe thatsuch this will assist in the taskof beginning a progressiveideological reform of the Greekstate and indeed of Greek soci-ety, which are essential in or-der to make Greek policy in theregion positive and construc-tive. This is of particular impor-tance for the peace and stabil-ity of our region, especiallygiven that the “Yugoslav cri-sis” is coming to an end withthe imminent decision on thefuture status of Kosovo.

Yours sincerely,

On behalf of the Members ofthe PartyTHE POLITICAL SECRE-TARIAT OF THE EUROPEANFREE ALLIANCE - RAIN-BOWAnastasiadis StavrosParisis AthanasiosVoskopoulos Filipov PavlosVasiliadis PetrosDimtsis PetrosKazias PetrosKligkatsis PantelisMantzas LevterisBoules Anastasios

*Letter to Matthew Nimetz,May 2005.

http://www.florina.org/h t m l / 2 0 0 5 /2005_letter_to_nimetz.html

LETTER TO MAT-THEW NIMITZ

Continued from previouspage

Menuvaweto naustavnoto ime na Repu-blika Makedonija po ̀ elbana Grcija e previsoka cenaza golemiot prioritet –za~lenuvawe vo alijansata– i toa za nas e apsolutnoneprifatlivo, duri i pocena na NATO, istaknapremierot Nikola Gruevskivo intervjuto za dràvnataagencija MIA.

Nie sme podgotvenida razgovarame so Grcija,da gi prodolìmerazgovorite i da baramere{enija za ovoj problem,no ne sme podgotveni daprifatime tolku visokacena. Smetame deka Grcija}e napravi golem problemza celiot region ako goblokira vlezot naRepublika Makedonija voNATO, osobeno vo oviepresudni momenti koga sere{ava kosovskotopra{awe, koga regionot etenzi~en i koga na siteradikalni grupacii voregionot treba da im seisprati poraka i koga trebada se ohrabrat i drugitedràvi. Ne smee da sedozvoli bilateralniteproblemi pome|u Grcija iMakedonija da se stavatpred intersite na NATO,pred interesite na celiotregion, a vo korist naradikalnite grupacii naBalkanot – re~e Gruevski.

Toj smeta dekaGrcija ima strategija bezupotreba na pravoto na vetoda go spre~i vlezot naMakedonija vo NATO,nastojuva}i na Samitot voBukure{t na{ata zemja dane dobie pokana. Gruevskire~e deka na{ata zemja imaogromna podr{ka od re~isisite dràvi-~lenki naNATO, osobeno od SAD i otipokanata za priem vo NATOvo april e sosema izvesna,no, i deka ne smee da sezanemari problemot soGrcija za na{eto ustavnoime.

Grcija bara podr{kaod dràvite-partneri voEU, da ne dojde do situacijada ima veto vo Bukure{t,tuku da se izdejstvuvavoop{to da ne dojde dopokanata, obiduvaj}i se nasite evropski dràvi da imprikaè lo{a slika zaMakedonija, deka taa ne ezrela za pokana za NATO.So drugi zborovi, najmnogurabotat na toa, objasnuvaj}ideka Makedonija treba dapravi u{te mnogu reformi– veli Gruevski. Toj dodadedeka negovite kolegi goinformirale, oti nekoi sepla{at od vlo{uvawe nanivnite odnosi so Grcija, odaspekt {to taa e vnatre voUnijata,kade {to odlukitese nosat so konsenzus.

GRUEVSKI : NE GO DAVAMEIMETO NI ZA NATO

27 dekemvri 2007Ako izborot na krajot

bide NATO ili promena naimeto nie }e zastaneme voodbrana na imeto, velipretsedatelot BrankoCrvenkovski.

- Dokolku Grcijastavi veto na priemot naMakedonija vo NATO toa bizna~elo grubo kr{ewe naprivremenata spogodba od1995 godina i ve}e ovojdocument nema da bide vosila nitu za Republika

CRVENKOVSKI: AKOIZBOROT NA KRAJ BIDENATO ILI PROMENA NA

IMETO ]E ZASTANEME VOODBRANA NA IMETO

Makedonija. Sega se pravipritisok na dvete strain.Kon nas da bidemepokonstruktivni spremaGrcija, a kon Grcija da ne goiskoristi mo`noto veto,istaknuva pretsedatelotCrvenkovski. Toj sepakizrazuva nade` deka doveto nema da dojde, no ideka vo ovoj moment e mnogute{ko da se pretpostavi{to vo april }e napraviGrcija.

MAKEDONSKITE ÊLNICI EDINSTVENI ZA IMETO

UPRAVATANA

ORGANIZACIJATAOBEDINETIMAKEDONCIVO KANADA

IM GOÊSTITABO@I] I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

NASVOITE

^LENOVII SITE

MAKEDONCIVO SVETOT

SO @ELBI ZAZDRAVJE,

SRE]A,NAPREDOK I

NACIONALNOEDINSTVO


Records on earlyMacedonian immigration to theUnited States of America at theturn of the 20th century are ofparamount importance for reaf-firming a support of theMacedonian ethnic identity. Butthey also serve another ex-tremely useful purpose: reflect-ing away attacks against theMacedonian ethnicity perpe-trated by the Greek and Bulgar-ian states. Knowing the vital im-pact that these records will haveon the many current debates andquest ions about theMacedonian identity, one canonly wonder how it is possiblethat such a wealth of informationremains obscure and basicallyuntapped. A simple snapshot ofit reveals startling discoverieswhich could shatter the oppo-nents’ claim that theMacedonian ethnic identity is arecent creation.

Based on the UnitedStates Immigration and Natural-ization records, approximately15,000 people who entered theUnited States of America be-tween 1895 and 1925 identifiedthemselves as Macedonians —even though the state ofMacedonia did not exist at thetime. The existence of a separateand a distinct Macedonian eth-nic identity is still being fever-ishly denied by Greece and Bul-garia (two Balkan countries thatare members of the EuropeanUnion, but still trenched in 19th

century Balkan ethnocentrism),who claim that the Macedonianstate and Macedonians are notan outcome of a long and his-torically proven process, butrather a recent act of creation byStalin and Tito during World WarII. If this argument is true, thenwe are faced with a paradox: howis it possible for such a relativelylarge number of people to de-clare themselves Macedoniansbefore, as the Greeks claim, theMacedonian existence was evencreated?

It is very difficult to de-termine the exact number ofMacedonians who immigratedto America for many varying rea-sons. The main reason is thatMacedonia did not become anindependent country until 1991,after the break up of Yugoslavia.Throughout the centuries, espe-cially in modern times,Macedonia was either a part ofthe Turkish empire as a whole or,after the Balkan wars, it was di-vided amongst Greece, Bulgaria,Albania and Serbia (Yugoslaviaafter 1945). Thus, manyMacedonians who immigratedfrom these countries carried theirpassports and were identified asnationals from Greece, Bulgariaor Serbia (Yugoslavia). The abil-ity to determine the exact num-ber of Macedonian immigrantsto America is further compli-cated by the fact that there waslack of recorded and verifiablestandardized data in the abovementioned countries for the im-migrants to carry with them for

identification purposes. If anysuch records exist, it is doubtfulthat those records would haveshown entries such as date ofbirth, place of birth, first and lastname, current residence,ethnicity or nationality, gender,or occupation. It is reasonableto assume, therefore, that manyMacedonian immigrants mayhave listed the name of theircountry of origin as their ethnicidentity (whichever countryhappened to occupy Macedoniaduring that specific historicalperiod). It is also likely thatMacedonians, as well as otherethnic groups, may have not dis-tinguished between the con-cepts of nationality andethnicity since both were rela-tively new to the indigenouspeoples of Macedonia. Butmany Macedonians, despite allodds in the wake of unprec-edented and relentless attemptsat the suppression of their eth-nic identity and nationality, de-clared themselves asMacedonians upon arrival toAmerica.

The data below (whichwas extracted from the UnitedStates Immigration and Natural-ization records, as copied fromthe National Archives andRecords Administration(MARA) microfilm), show thenumber of passengers that en-tered the various ports of theUnited States of America anddeclared themselvesMacedonians:

# of Passengers-Port ofEntry

13, 776 - New York PassengerLists, 1820 - 1957;

338 - Baltimore PassengerLists, 1820 - 1948;

256 - Galveston PassengerLists, 1896 - 1948;

173 - Boston Passenger Lists,1820 - 1943;

130 - Atlantic Ports PassengerLists, 1820-1873 and 1893-1959;46 - Philadelphia Passen-

ger Lists, 1800 - 1945;8 - Detroit Border Crossing

and Passenger Crew Lists,1905- 1957;

6 - New Orleans PassengerLists, 1820 - 1945;

2 - Border Crossings fromCanada to US, 1895 - 1956;

2 - Seattle Passenger andCrew Lists, 1882 - 1957

It is astonishing to dis-cover that 14,737 passengersdeclared themselves asMacedonians during timeswhen there was no official rec-ognition of the Macedonian eth-nic identity and no Macedonianstate in existence (Yugoslaviarecognized Macedonians as anation but the Yugoslav pass-ports had no separate entry fornationalities). These numbers inthemselves are not significant incomparison to the millions ofimmigrants of other nationalitieswho entered the United Satesduring those times. These num-bers also pale in comparison to

the approximately 600,000 Greekimmigrants who came to theUnited States. However, what issignificant is that these immi-grants chose freely and con-sciously to identify themselvesas Macedonians upon their ar-rival to America. There is nodoubt that those people musthave not only felt different fromthe Greeks, Serbs, Bulgariansand the Turks, but they also hadto have felt that they belongedto a unique ethnic group of theirown — which they identified asMacedonian.

These Macedonians areclearly and unambiguouslyspeaking to those who still ob-ject to the Macedonian ethnicidentity and who argue that themodern Macedonians are prod-ucts of Stalin’s and Tito’s hallu-cinations. Hence, the argumentthat the modern state of the Re-public of Macedonia and theMacedonian ethnic nationalitywas not historical but a political“creation” cannot explain howthese people suddenly andmagically “became“ Macedo-nians upon their arrival to theUnited States.

Another very importantset of data contained in the USImmigration and Naturalizationrecords regarding the earlyMacedonian immigration toAmerica indicates that theylisted different countries as acountry of origin as shown be-low:

Country of Origin - # ofPassengersTurkey - 4,979;Greece - 906;

Macedonia - 4,194;Bulgaria - 267;

Albania - 5;Serbia - 188;

Here it is clearly shownthat the largest number ofMacedonian immigrants, 4,979Macedonians to be exact, listedTurkey as their country of ori-gin. This is because prior to theBalkan wars of 1913, all ofMacedonia belonged to Turkey.But what really sticks out hereis that almost an equal numberof Macedonians listedMacedonia as their country oforigin even though it had notbecome a state. Additionally,what pokes at the Greek andBulgarian ethnically chauvinis-tic eyes is how such small num-bers of Macedonians declareGreece and Bulgaria as theircountries of origin. The reasonfor this, as we will see later, isthat immediately after the Balkanwars, Greece, Bulgaria andSerbia did not have their propa-ganda campaigns for convertingthe Macedonian population intotheir own nationalities estab-lished within their newly “liber-ated” parts of Macedonia.

This was a period of mas-sive migration from Macedoniato neighboring countries and toAmerica because of depressiveeconomic conditions and politi-

cal persecutions. Soon after-wards, Bulgaria, Greece andSerbia intensified their efforts ofconverting the Macedonians tothe point where they would sendmany of their own teachers andpriests to Macedonia so thatthere were more educators inMacedonia than in their coun-ties combined. As the data willshow later, Greece, the “cradle”of democracy, would go evenfurther by making sure that therewould never again beMacedonians to emigrate fromGreece to the United States ofAmerica.

However, not all immi-grants who listed Macedonia astheir country of origin declaredthemselves as Macedonians. Inaddition to the 14,737Macedonians, many other immi-grants from Macedonia identi-fied themselves as follows:

Nationality - No. ofPassengers

Greek - 13,199Turkish - 1,083Bulgarian - 3,594

Serbian - 13Albanian - 331

It is shown here that thelargest number of them identifiedthemselves as Greeks. Signifi-cant numbers also declaredthemselves as Bulgarian andTurks. The large number ofGreeks from Macedonia can beexplained mostly by the fact thatthere were many Greeks living inthe Aegean part of Macedonia.Some Macedonians may havebeen already converted toGreeks. However, what thesenumbers do not tell us iswhether all of those immigrantswere Greeks, Turks or Bulgar-ians, or whether they simplychose whichever way was mostexpedient to arrive at the shoresof America. But to appropriatelyclarify their true nationality, ad-ditional research of other rel-evant data is needed, such asbirth places, first and last names,the language which they spoke,customs which they practiced,and etc. For instance, therecords show that some peopledeclared themselves Turkisheven tough their names wereclearly Christian and Slavic.However, it also fair to assumethat there were many immigrantsfrom Macedonia of different na-tionalities since Macedonia wastruly a multi-ethnic country priorto its subdivision by Greece,Bulgaria and Serbia..

The picture of theMacedonian immigrants fromMacedonia and the neighboringcountries starts to look very dif-ferent after World War I. As theBalkan countries started toemerge from the devastation ofWWI and began to take hold oftheir destinies, they also startedto inflame their nationalism byintensifying their efforts to crackdown on the Macedonian eth-nic identity. Thus, as soon asMacedonia disappeared from

the Balkan map after WWI, sodid the Macedonians. As we cansee from the next table, the num-ber of Macedonians comingfrom Greece dropped sharplyuntil they completely disap-peared from 1930s and on.

The table below ofMacedonian immigrants to theUnited States of America com-ing from Greece clearly demon-strates to us the fate of theMacedonians in Greece:

Immigration Period - # ofMacedonians from

Greece1890 - 1910 - 2051911 - 1930 - 6941931 - 1950 - 161951 - 1970 - 01971 - 1990 - 0

1991 - Present - 0

Since all of Macedoniawas under the Ottoman Empireprior to 1910, it is highly likelythat the 205 Macedonians immi-grants during this period musthave come from Greece proper,otherwise they would havestated either Turkey orMacedonia as their country oforigin. In addition, it can also beseen that the larger number ofMacedonian immigrants fromGreece came during the periodbetween 1911 - 1930. However,the majority of the 694 immi-grants came prior to 1925. To beprecise, 557 Macedonians camebetween 1911 and 1925. But hereis what is really distressingabout this table: what happenedto the Macedonians in Greeceafter 1930, when we know thatat least half of the Macedonianterritory ended up with Greece?Is it possible that the part ofMacedonia which ended up inGreece had no Macedonians liv-ing there? Or is it quite possiblethat no Macedonian ever againleft Greece for the United Statesof America? Is it, perhaps, con-ceivable to assume that the en-tire Macedonian population inGreece freely assimilated intoGreek culture in a few decadeswhile they survived as separatepeople for thousands of years!No matter what question isasked, it can be safely assumedthat when it comes to ethnicityand the practice of chauvinisticpolitics in Greece, it all becomesGreek magic!

Of course, much of thedata contained in the Immigra-tion and Naturalization archiveis raw data and it needs to besupported and evaluated in or-der for us to draw any meaning-ful conclusion about the earlyMacedonian immigration to theUnited States. But even this rawdata highlights the unsustain-able denials of the Macedonianethnic identity. Unless onesomehow believes that this datawas either manipulated, or thepassengers were coerced to de-

A SNAPSHOT OF EARLY MACEDONIAN IMMIGRATION TO USA

By Dusan Sinadinoski



clare themselves asMacedonian (both of whichwould make no sense), the pres-ence of a unique Macedonianethnic identity coming to UnitedStates from Macedonia is unde-niable. How far back theMacedonians date is the task ofhistorians, archeologists andother scientific researchers. Butit is obvious that theMacedonian people freelyspoke at the doorstep of theirnew country that welcomedthem with the open arms.

People who are familiarwith the history of the Balkancountries understand that therewas not much standardizedpopulation record-keeping;such as births, deaths, names ofinhabitants, and etc. Whateverrecords did exist were usuallydestroyed during the many warsthey fought against each otherand together against foreign in-vaders. In addition, the remain-ing data on the Macedonianswere manipulated by Greece,Bulgaria and Serbia throughchanging their last names,names of villages and cities,practice of customs, and otherdefining characteristic of theMacedonia ethnicity. Therefore,in light of these reasons, the USimmigration records speak muchlouder when it comes to the truereality of the Macedonian na-tionality. For instance, when weexamine the first and last namesof the Macedonian immigrants,it is quite noticeable that theyare typically Macedonian ofChristian and Slavic back-ground, such as : Petre Boris,Anta Bozin, Mire Arsa, StankoAvram, Stojan Coteff, MilanDime, Naum Foteff, VidojaSinadin, Ilija Mladen, etc. Butafter World War I, theMacedonian last names some-how changed over night andacquired typical Greek, Serbian,and Bulgarian endings of -os, -ichand -off. It is just another Balkantwist of the Macedonian ethnicidentity.

In conclusion, this snap-shot of the early Macedonian im-migration is not meant to be prooffor the existence of a separate anddistinct Macedonian ethnic identity.The centuries-old continuous exist-ence of the Macedonian people onthe same territory is a fact requir-ing no proof. But this data doesprovide us with information sup-porting the notion that the Greekclaim that the Macedonian nationwas invented by Stalin and Tito isa ridiculous one. Therefore, thequestion which begs to be answeredis how do we re-name people whohave already named themselves?The Macedonians who sought therefuge under the torch of the wel-coming lady spoke clearly andloudly that they are Macedonians.This is just another testamentagainst the Greek’s attempt at re-naming the Macedonian peoplewith dreamed up and derogatorynames.


An essay on modernpolitical culture in a volumedevoted to reciprocity in life andart in the ancient world mayrequire a word or two ofexplanation. The theme of whatfollows is the modem rebirth ofancient Macedonia as a symbolof nationalism in a part of theBalkans that has been a killingground in recent times. Manycontemporary observers haveattempted to reinvent the ancienthistory of the region in order tofit the necessities of their ownlives and the vagaries of modemBalkan politics. It is a distortedreflection of the past, which, inits warped form, serves apurpose useful beyond theromantic antiquarianism of theclassroom, the tourist path, andthe museum. Midst the greatbody of Peter Green’ sscholarship on literature, art, andthe history of antiquity, one mustnot lose sight of the fact that heis one of our most perceptiveobservers of modem Greece,having lived among Greeks forseveral years, and havingunderstood them better,perhaps, than they might havewished. Green’s essays inpublications such as the NewYork Review, the New Republic,and the Times LiterarySupplement are a rich source ofinsight for anyone who not onlywishes to know something aboutcontemporary Greece, but alsorequires some understanding ofthe issue of continuity anddiscontinuity between the pastand present. I hope that he willaccept this essay in the spirit hehas expressed in his own workon like subjects.

In the spring of 1993 Itaught an undergraduate seniorseminar to History majors, thetopic of which was “EthnicMinorities and the Rise ofNational States in the ModemBalkans.” We examined thestatus of minorities following thefounding of Serbia (1815), Greece(1832), Bulgaria (1878), Albania(1913), and Yugoslavia (1918).Not long into the semester Iasked my American students toidentify their own ethnicbackgrounds. One youngwoman said proudly that shewas “Macedonian.” Grist for mymill. I asked her what that meant:was she Greek or Slav? Sheanswered that she wasMacedonian, and certainly notGreek, although she pointed outthat she had spent most of herschool life pretending that shewas Greek, for, whenever herteachers asked about her ethnicbackground and she answered“Macedonian,” they responded,‘’Oh, you must be Greek.” Now,as an honors student and asenior at a major university, shehad stopped pretending she wasGreek, and took my seminar inpart to help her learn somethingabout her Slavic Macedonianbackground.

Her family lived near adecaying central Pennsylvaniamill town called, appropriately,

ONE DOES NOT NEED TO GO TO MACEDONIA TO FIND MACEDONIANS

By Eugene N. BorzaSteelton. About halfwaythrough the semester, thestudent told me that she hadvisited her church cemetery inSteelton, and that she had seena number of gravestones onwhich the deceased had beenidentified as having been bornin “Macedonia.” I asked whatthe dates of burial were, and shesaid “Oh, the 1950s.” “Not goodenough,” I responded, ‘’Nexttime you visit, look for earlierdates,” knowing that by the1950s it would not be unusualfor birthplaces to be given as“Macedonia” in light of thefederal status of Macedonia asa Yugoslav Republic. About twoweeks later my student informedme that she had seengravestones of the 1930s withthe Macedonian identification.I jumped at the chance. “I’mgoing to pay you a visit inSteelton,” I told her. “Find someold-timer in your church, andlet’s go looking forgravestones.”

Steelton is locatedalong the Susquehanna River,just south of Harrisburg. Thedeteriorated mills, now largelydeserted, stretch along the river,separated from a dilapidated oldworking-class community by ahighway. Affluence has luredmany people into the suburbs ofHarrisburg a few miles away, andthe houses and people whoremain have clearly seen bettertimes. The town climbs a blufffrom the river. The higher partsare marked by greenery, betterkept and larger homes, and bitsof parkland. On the summit ofone of the highest bluffs is anopen, grassy area of severalacres, the site of the Baldwincemetery. Within lie the remainsof immigrants who escaped theviolence and poverty of Balkanlife generations ago to seekeconomic well-being in the millsof Steelton.

The old woman whoaccompanied us knew thehistory of the cemetery and thechurches whose members wereburied there. One of the firstthings that struck me was that,by and large, the deceased whowere identified as Serbs,Bulgarians, or Macedonianswere buried in separate parts ofthe cemetery. In death, theysought the separation thatsometimes eluded them in life.The old Macedonian womanhad little but contempt for theSerbs, many of whom she hadknown, but she sometimesappeared confused by thedistinctions between Macedo-nians and Bulgarians. For untilthe establishment of theMacedonian AutocephalousOrthodox Church in 1967, theMacedonians belonged toeither the Bulgarian OrthodoxChurch or to the “Macedonian-Bulgarian” Orthodox Churchdescribed on a few gravestones.Indeed, the Macedoniancommunity in Steelton hadapparently experienced internaldivision over whether their

priests should most legitimatelyhave been trained in Macedoniaor in Bulgaria.

We picked our waypast hundreds of gravestones,stopping to take photographsand looking for earlier dates.Some stones were engraved inLatin letters, most in Cyrillic. Afew decrepit headstones hadbeen replaced with new ones,but most were original, and Imused that my old teachers ofepigraphy would have beenpleased that many of thetechniques used to examineancient inscribed stones wereuseful in this twentieth-centuryAmerican cemetery.

Nearly all the deceasedhad been born in the southwestern Macedonian town ofPrilep, about forty milesnortheast of the Greek frontierabove Florina (Lerin). Severalstones appeared with deathdates in the 1920s, and a few inthe ‘teens. We halted at the edgeof the cemetery, where thehillside had begun to collapseinto a valley. I was told that theearliest gravestones had fallenaway down the slope, and thatthe presence of snakes and ticksmade the descent perilous. I wassatisfied, for at my feet was anintact gravestone with the nameof the deceased who had beenborn in “Prilep, Macedonia” in1892, and who had died inSteelton in 1915. I was stunned.Here was clear evidence of a manwho died in a centralPennsylvania mill town only twoyears after the Second BalkanWar, and was identified at hisburial as a Macedonian.

A subsequent trip tothe cemetery in 1995 confirmedand enlarged the data base. Inow have 30 gravestones in myphoto file, the most interestingone of which was discovered inmy 1995 visit. It is a simple,weather-worn headstone withthe name of the deceasedfollowed by (in English) “Mace-done [sic] died Sep. 20, 1906 atSteelton Pa.” Thus, six yearsbefore the First Balkan War inwhich the region of Macedoniawas detached from the OttomanEmpire by Serb, Greek, andBulgarian armies, the reality ofM a c e d o n i a / M a c e d o n i a nalready existed amongMacedonian immigrants incentral Pennsylvania.

All of which isconfirmed by reference to the1920 United States census reportfrom Steelton. The census-takercollected data from about 250persons who lived along MainStreet in Steelton. Of the total 76claimed to have been born in“Macedonia,” and to have“Macedonian” as their mothertongue. All 76 listed theirparents as having been born in“Macedonia,” With “Macedo-nian” as their mother tongue.Thus 228 persons wereidentified by a U.S. census takerin 1920 on a single street inSteelton as having aMacedonian connection.

A SNAPSHOT OFEARLY

MACEDONIANIMMIGRATION

TO USA

ÊSTIT BO@I]I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

ODDRAGI

STOJKOVSKI SOSEMEJSTVOTO

ÊSTIT BO@I]I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

ODMENDO

BAKALOVSKI SOSEMEJSTVOTO

ÊSTIT BO@I]I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

ODPECO

PETLI^KOVSKISO SEMEJSTVOTO

ÊSTIT BO@I]I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

ODBORÊ

KULEVSKI SOSEMEJSTVOTO

ÊSTIT BO@I]I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

ODKIRE

KARAPALEVSKISO SEMEJSTVOTO

ÊSTIT BO@I]I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

ODAMI[

SELMANOVSKI SOSEMEJSTVOTO

ÊSTIT BO@I]I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

ODSTASE

YUNYUROV SOSEMEJSTVOTO

ÊSTIT BO@I]I

NOVATA 2008GODINA

ODVLADE

STERIOVSKI SOSEMEJSTVOTO


The ideal of the Euro-pean Union presupposes thatmember-states will pursue na-tional policies that take intoaccount the interests of theunion as a whole. This meansthey should not try to dragthe EU behind policiesthat are wholly against its in-terests, and that merely reflectthe exclusive nationalism ofthe member-states inquestion. Yet this is preciselywhat the EU’s two mostsouth-easterly member-states,first Greece and thenCyprus, have tried to dorepeatedly since the early1990s. In severals p h e r e s , G r e e c eand Cyprus are pursuing poli-cies that are wholly deter-mined by nationalist motives,that have nothing to do withEU or Western interests orvalues and that are potentiallyhighly damaging anddangerous. This cannot be al-lowed to continue if we are tomaintain stability in SouthEast Europe.

Greece threatens toveto the entry of Macedoniainto NATO unless Macedoniachanges its name. This repre-sents the continuation of oneof the most farcical episodesin the history of nationalchauvinism in Europe in thelast two decades: Greece’s at-tempt since the early 1990s toprevent Macedonia using itsname. Greece’s ‘justification’for this, if that word can beused in this context, is that thehistoric land of Macedonia

was solely ‘Greek’, that the an-cient Macedonian conquerorAlexan-der the Great was ‘Greek’, andthat therefore Greece has an ex-clusive right to the use of thename ‘Macedonia’, rather like acorporation’s exclusive right toits logo.

It should not be neces-sary to engage in the childishdebate about whetherAlexander or ancient Macedonreally was ‘Greek’ or not - everyundergraduate student of na-tionalism knows that one cannotsimply transpose modern na-tional identities back onto an-cient historical figures andlands; still less can ancient his-tory be allowed to determinemodern geopolitics. The veryfact that contemporary Greekpoliticians and intellectuals at-tempt to do just this is evidencethat Greece has not yet made thetransition to genuinely post-nationalist, twenty-first-centurypolitics. The backgroundto Greece’s bizarre hang-up overthe Macedonian name is theconquest of part of the Ottomanterritory of Macedonia by theGreek state in 1912-13 - a partthat was less than 50% Greek inethnic terms at the time -and the subsequent brutalHellenisation of this territorythrough the expulsion of hun-dreds of thousands of Muslimsand Slavs, the settling on it ofOrthodox Greek refugees andthe forced assimilation of the re-maining non-Greeks through thesuppression of their languageand identity - something thatreached its peak under the fas-cist dictatorship of Ioannis

31st December 2007

The Hellenic tail must notwag the European dog

By Marko Attila Hoare


Re~isi sekoj Grkmoè da raskaè slu~ka odnegoviot ìvot koja epovrzana so mentalitetotna potkupuvawe, koj od denna den e se’ pozastapen vosite sveri na ìveewe vozemjata.

Nekoi od gr~kitegra|ani se somnevaat dekaposlednite izbori {to seodràa neodamna, }e imaatnekakvo vlijanie vrzmenuvaweto na ovaatradicija, {to opstojuva nizpove}e generacii na vladi,od koi site vetuvaa deka }ego re{at problemot.

- Ako si podgotvenda plati{, moè{ dadobie{ se’ {to saka{,izjavi Tomas, mlad Grk, kojneodamna go “podma~kaldràvniot aparat” za dadobie voza~ka dozvola. -Padnav na voza~kiot test,no mi be{e kaàno prekuposrednik da platam pari iza deset dena ja dobivmojata dozvola, veli toj.Bez razlika dali stanuvazbor za obezbeduvawedozvova za ilegalna gradba,za bri{ewe na dano~nitedolgovi, izbegnuvawe nadolgi redici za operacijaili zakaùvawe sostanokso popularen doktor, Grciteznaat deka e najdobro daimaat “Fakelaki” - mal plikso gotovina, koj treba da gopredadat za da se prese~ecrvenata lenta.

- Grcite preferi-raat da platat za danapreduvaat vo ìvotot,takov e mentalitetot,izjavi Leandros Rakincis,glaven inspektor vo gr~katajavna administracija.Formiran vo 2002 godina za

da ja nadgleduva rabotatana gr~kiot javen servis.Odelot na Rakincis,utvrdil deka korupcijata enajprisutna vo urbanisti-~kite planovi i dano~niteslu`bi. Grcija vo momentove rangirana na 54-to mestona listata na korumpiranidràvi na Transparensiinterne{nl, pred KostaRika i Namibija, duri iprivatniot sektor ne eisklu~ok.

- Borbata sokorupcijata e pra{awe nakultura, izjavi Rakincis.

- Nekoi gra|aninekoga{ }e alarmiraat zatakvata praksa, amalkumina od nivmoàt da obezbedatadekvaten dokaz za toa.Kako rezultat na toa ovieslu~ai naj~esto zavr{uvaatvo fiokite, naglasi toj.

Ilias, agronom, kojne saka{e da go kaè svoetoprezime, moral da ~ekaedna godina za gr~kiot sudda presudi po negovataàlba. Toj go poloìlispitot za rabotnoto mestosovetnik vo Minister-stvoto za zemjodelstvo, zapotoa da bide staven nastrana poradi drugkandidat, koj duri i ne ekvalifikuvan za taarabota.

- Jas imav sre}a, noima mnogumina koi nemaathrabrost da se borat zanivnite prava, re~e Ilias.

- Problemot sogr~kite institucii e toa{to ne uspeaja da jadostignat zrelostakarakteristi~na za Evropa,{to se dolì naturbolentnata istorija na

dràvata, izjavi ekono-mistot Hristos Cugaris,mislej}i pri toa nagra|anskata vojna od 1944 -1949 godina i desni~ar-skata diktatura od 1967 do1974. KonzervativnataVlada koja dojde na vlast vo2004 godina so vetuvawedeka }e se spravi soproblemot, nabrzo se soo~iso korupcija, vo koja beavme{ani funkcioneri odnejzinite redovi.

N e o d a m n e { n i o tskandal so fondovite zasocijalno osiguruvawe, koizagubija milioni evra,navodno kupuvaj}i prece-neti obvrznici, ima{e zaposledica ostavka naministerot za trud voapril. Spored opozicijata,odlukata na Vladata zasvikuvawe predvremeniizvori na 16 septemvridelumno e povrzana so ovojslu~aj.

Raspu{taweto naParlamentot kon sredinatana avgust go spre~iobjavuvaweto na izve{tajotna gr~kata organizacija zanadzor na pereweto pari sokontroverznite zdelki soobvrznici, vo koi sevklu~eni globalnitefinansiski servisi od XejPi Morgan i ~etiri fondoviza socijalno osiguruvawe.

Nadle`nite re{ijaslu~ajot da go povrzat sodvajca ministri od vladatavo zaminuvawe, smetaatopozicijata i mediumite.

AFP - Paris

F A K E L A K IGR^KI NAVIKI


Metaxas in the late 1930s and af-ter the Greek Civil War of the1940s.

Greece’s policy of deny-ing the existence of aMacedonian nation while assert-ing the exclusively ‘Greek’ char-acter of historic Macedonia thusrepresents the last dregs of a na-tionalist policy of forcedhomogenisation. It is equivalentto Turkey’s attempt forcibly toassimilate its ethnic Kurds on thegrounds that they are ‘really’Turks and its continued denial ofthe Armenian Genocide, or toSerbia’s claim to Kosovo as a‘Serb land’ on the grounds thatthere are a handful of medievalSerbian monasteries there. If theEU is to have any meaning at all,it has to have a zero-tolerance ap-proach to exclusivist nationalideologies of this type. The Turk-ish Kurds can call themselvesKurds and speak, write and beeducated in Kurdish if they wantto; the people of Kosovocan decide for themselves if theywant to be part of Serbia or not;and the Macedonians and theGreeks both have the same rightto use the Macedonian name. Endof discussion.

Yet it is not solely for thesake of our values, but also forthe sake of our geopolitical inter-ests that we must take a hard linein opposing Greece overMacedonia. The embargo im-posed by Greece on Macedoniaafter the latter seceded from Yu-goslavia in 1991-92 and the bul-lying that forced Macedoniato change its flag, and to enter theUN under the clumsy acronym‘FYROM’ (Former Yugoslav Re-public of Macedonia) dange-rously contributed to thedestabilisation of this fragile andstrategically sensitive state.

Western policy-makershave long been aware thatMacedonia could not be allowedto collapse - unlike Bosnia, its col-lapse could lead to two NATOstates, Greece and Turkey, com-ing into conflict with one another.Hence the US made it clear toSlobodan Milosevic, right fromthe start in the early 1990s, thatSerbia would not be permitted toextend the war into Macedonia;hence Macedonia’s peaceful se-cession from Yugoslavia; henceNATO’s intervention in Kosovoin 1999, as Milosevic’s ethnic-cleansing of the Kosovo Alba-nians threatened to upsetMacedonia’s own delicate ethnicbalance between ethnicMacedonians and Albanians. Inrecent weeks, Turkey and Greecehave rebuked each other over theissue of Macedonia’s name. Al-though Turkey is wrong about alot of things (including Cyprusand Iraqi Kurdistan), on this is-sue it is entirely in the right andplaying a constructive role. For

the sake of its own fragile sta-bility and the equally fragile sta-bility of South East Europe,Macedonia’s rapid entry intoNATO is imperative.

Greece’s obstructionismover Macedonia is not an iso-lated quirk, but forms part of awider regional policy guided bynationalist concerns thathas significantly damagedWestern interests since the early1990s - although, to be fair, itwas not entirely out of keepingwith the narrow-minded West-ern policy toward the Balkans ofthe first half of the 1990s. Greecesupported Milosevic’s Serbiamore wholeheartedly than didany other state; Milosevic wasmore popular in Greece than heever was in Serbia itself; Greekfascist paramilitaries partici-pated in the Serb conquest ofSrebrenica in 1995.

The Greek journalistTakis Michas has described thevirulence of Greek support, bothat the elite and at the popularlevel, for Serbian imperialism andethnic-cleansing in his brilliantbut shocking book, ‘Unholy Al-liance: Greece and Milosevic’sSerbia’ (Texas A&M UniversityPress, 2002). KostasSimitis’s PASOK governmenthalf-heartedly acquiesced inNATO’s intervention againstMilosevic in Kosovo in the faceof almost total public oppositionand an outpouring of anti-American and anti-Western bilethat found murderous expres-sion in the assassination in June2000 of the British defence atta-che in Athens, BrigadierStephen Saunders, by the terror-ist group ‘November 17’, sup-posedly in revenge for theKosovo war. More recently, inJanuary of this year left-wingterrorists launched an anti-tankgrenade at the US embassy inAthens. In Greece, as in Serbiaand Russia, the extremes of leftand right find common groundin hatred of the US and the West.This red-brown current tends toagitate for more extreme nation-alistic and anti-Western policiesthan those actually pursued byGreek governments themselves,which is another reason whysuch policies should be op-posed on principle.Greece remains Serbia’s mostloyal ally in the EU, and is cur-rently attempting to lead aBalkan bloc, made up of Roma-nia and a more lukewarm Bul-garia, that favours Serbia’s rapidentry into the EU, irrespectiveof Serbia’s behaviour overKosovo and over the arrest ofwar-criminals. This is damagingto Western efforts to resolve theissue of Kosovo and the war-criminals, and to establish aunited diplomatic front vis-a-visRussia. Ironically, Greece’sbehaviour shows why weshould not allow countries suchas Serbia and Turkey into the EU

unless they are prepared toabandon national chauvinismand small-mindedness; we wantthem in, but as responsible de-mocracies, not as nationalistictrouble-makers.

It is not only in theBalkans where Greece has pur-sued a selfish and destruc-tive policy at the expense ofEU interests. Earlier this de-cade, indicating just how farit was prepared to jeopardisethe entire EU project for itsown ends, Greece threat-ened to veto the EU’s expan-sion into Eastern Europe un-less Cyprus were included inthe expansion. There werevery sound reasons why adivided Cyprus should nothave been allowed to jointhe EU, and these immedi-ately became clear. In a referen-dum in 2004, the Greek Cypriotelectorate, under the guidanceof Cyprus’s crude nationalistpresident, TassosPapadopoulos, overwhelm-ingly rejected the Annan Planfor Cyprus’s reunification. WithEU membership already safelyin the bag, Papadopoulosjudged that Cyprus as an EUmember would be in a strongposition to extract a better dealfrom Turkey. Greece’s New De-mocracy government underKostas Karamanlis, for itspart, refused unambiguously toendorse the Annan Plan, some-thing that might have encour-aged the Greek Cypriots to votein favour; Greece thus studi-ously failed to help clear up themess it had made.

Had EU membershipbeen made conditional upon ac-ceptance of the Annan Plan bythe Greek Cypriotelectorate, the latter would al-most certainly have voted infavour, and this old wound inthe flank of the Western alliancewould finally have been healed.As things stand, a settlement isnow less likely than ever. Thereis every reason to believe thatPapadopoulos and other GreekCypriot politicians prefer thestatus quo in Cyprus to any rea-sonable compromise settle-ment, and are entirely ready inprinciple to veto Turkish EUmembership indefinitely,p e n d i n g t h e t o t a lTurkish capitulation that willnever happen. Paradoxically, ofcourse, the Cypriots do notwish to see Turkey driven awayfrom the EU entirely, as thentheir veto loses all coercivepower; Papadopoulos’s strat-egy is a contradictory and self-defeating one. However wrongTurkey’s policy toward Cypruswas and remains, over theAnnan Plan it showed itself tobe the more reasonable and flex-ible side. Greece’s pursuit of itsown nationalist agenda has in-troduced the Cyprus dispute,like a foreign disease, into the

The Hellenic tail must not wag the European dog1. Greece and Cyprus are, over Macedonia,Serbia and Kosovo, pursuing policies moti-vated by nationalist concerns that are out ofkeeping with democratic values and counterto EU interests.

2. Greece and Cyprus have since the early1990s consistently pursued destructive policiesin South East Europe that have proved highlydamaging vis-a-vis both Turkey and the formerYugoslavia.

3. For the sake of regional stability, and toset an example for how new EU member-states should behave, it is time for the West-ern alliance to cease to tolerate Greek andCypriot mischief-making.

very heart of the EU; last au-tumn, the EU suspended eightof the negotiating chapters ofTurkey’s accession talks in re-taliation for Turkey’s refusal toopen its ports and airports toCypriot ships and planes.Cyprus is now in a position to

p u r s u e i n d e f i n i t e l y i t sown selfish and self-defeatingnationalist agenda at the ex-pense of EU-Turkish relations.The Hellenic tail has wagged theEuropean dog.

One of the smallest andnewest EU member-states,Cyprus is also the most hard-linein its outright opposition toKosovo’s independence. So faras the Papadopoulos regime isconcerned, EU unity, Westerninterests and regional stabilitycount for nothing: all that mat-ters is that Kosovo’s indepen-dence should be opposed, lestit set a precedent for the inter-national recognition of Turkish-occupied northern Cyprus. Thatthere are no indications whatso-ever that Western states or any-one else will follow up the rec-ognition of Kosovo byrecognising northern Cyprus isdeemed irrelevant. ThePapadopoulos regime, pursuingits own policy of indefinite ob-structionism, is no doubt dis-concerted by the fact thatSerbia’s similar obstructionismover Kosovo is going to be defi-nitely punished by the US andthe EU. The so-called ‘TurkishRepublic of Northern Cyprus’ issimply a creation of the illegiti-mate Turkish occupation, there-fore not equivalent to Kosovo,which was a recognised memberof the former Yugoslav Federa-tion. Still, it will do Cyprus noharm if it learns from the Serbianexample that the principle of ‘in-violable territorial integrity’ isnot a trump card that bloody-minded states can play indefi-nitely.

For too long, we have al-lowed Greek nationalism to poi-son Western policy. To some ex-tent, this is the result of our ownpolicy errors toward the peopleof Greece and Cyprus over thelast sixty years or more. In oneof the sorrier episodes of theearly Cold War, we allowed ashort-sighted anti-Communistagenda to lead us to support themotley alliance of chauvinistand ultra-reactionary elements,

many of them formerNazi collaborators, which madeup the anti-Communist side inthe Greek Civil War, against aGreek left that had led one of themost impressive anti-Nazi resis-tance movements in all occupiedEurope. It is a moot

point whether the anti-Communist victory inGreece served our inter-ests any better than theCommunist victory inYugoslavia; Tito’s Yugo-slavia proved more thanadept at resisting Sovietdomination, while thebrutal anti-Communistvictory in Greece laiddown a repressive andchauvinistic legacyfor the country thatfound its most extreme

expression in theColonels’ dictatorship of 1967-74, and from which Greece hasstill not entirely recovered. Theextreme anti-Communist andformer Nazi-collaborator,Georgios Grivas, repaid our sup-port to his side in the Greek CivilWar by launching an uprisingagainst British rule in Cyprus in1955 through the EOKA move-ment; Grivas’s attackson Turkish Cypriot civilianssowed the seeds of Cyprus’sfuture tragedy. Our misguidedresponse to the Greek Cypriotnational movement for unionwith Greece was to play Turkeyoff against Greece over Cyprus;this policy of divide-and-rule,coupled with the suicidal ultra-nationalist policy of first Grivasand then the GreekColonels, paved the way in 1974for the Turkish occupation ofCyprus, something that remainsa thorn in the side of the West-ern alliance to this day.

It is time to turn our backon this long and undistin-guished tradition of a modus viv-endi between the Western alli-ance and Greek nationalism, onethat has proved consistentlydamaging to all concerned.There must be zero tolerance ofGreek and Cypriot obstructionover Macedonia, Turkey andKosovo (to be fair, Greece itselfhas bravely come out in supportof Turkish EU membership, indefiance of popular Greek opin-ion, indicating an enligh-tened stance on this issue atleast).

Every time the Greeks orCypriots try to undermine EUpolicy or drag it behind them forthe sake of their own retrogradenationalism, we should pursue adetermined effort to isolatethem. Such an effort will paydividends: not only will it put anend to a persistant policy oftrouble-making, but it will set anexample for how other new EUmember-states should behave.

http://henryjacksonsociety.org/stories.asp?pageid=49&id=473


Dora Bakoyani, Greek Foreign Minister

macedonian herald - january 2008

Documents