The Name Game

I fail to see how this should "justifiably worry the Greeks." As you point out, Macedonia is a diverse country the size of the state of Vermont. Satisfaction of the state's irredentist claims would require it to engage in military conflict against a NATO member. For Greece to fear Macedonia would be like Russia fearing Georgia.

Furthermore, this particular argument disregards attitudes in some current EU member states. Many Hungarians, for example, view the Treaty of Trianon -- in which Hungary lost close to half of its former territory, much of it to Romania -- as a national tragedy. The streets of Hungary are packed with cars bearing bumper stickers in the image of the country's pre-Trianon borders, while maps of "Greater Hungary" hang from the walls of many stores and restaurants. Despite this source for possible military conflict between Romania and Hungary -- a more balanced match than between Greece and "FYROM" -- disagreements tend to be minor quibbles over trade or immigration. In that case, irredentism is hardly a flashpoint for the disintegration of Europe.

Rather than to waste time and energy on what you refer to as an acceptable compromise, I think it's time for Greece to suck it up and realize there are far bigger issues in this world than the names of its neighbors.

I'm imagining. I can't imagine any Californian would fell threatened. Ontario, California has never threatened me in the least... Yeah, if I were Greece I'd tell Macedonia to call itself whatever it wanted. Have fun.

Irredentism coming out of FYROM is merely a continuation of the policies of Tito which began during the period of the Greek civil war when Greek Communists along with Slavs from FYROM attempted to capture parts of Northern Greece.

The United States State Department even took note of this in a memo dated December 26, 1944.

“The Department [of State] has noted with considerable apprehension increasing propaganda rumors and semi-official statements in favor of an autonomous Macedonia, emanating principally from Bulgaria, but also from Yugoslav Partisan and other sources, with the implication that Greek territory would be included in the projected state. This government considers talk of Macedonian ”nation”, Macedonian “Fatherland”, or Macedonian “national consciousness” to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece.”

[Source: U.S. State Department, Foreign Relations vol viii,

Washington, D.C., Circular Airgram (868.014/26Dec1944)]

There is a great deal of misinformation in this article and I ask for the editors' indulgence to help clear some of it up.

Mr. Meaney and Mr. Mylonas note that Greece vetoed Macedonia's NATO membership last April, ostensibly because of "bad neighbourly relations". What they neglect to mention is that these "bad neighbourly relations" stem from the fact that Greece persecutes its indigenous Macedonian minority and doesn't want anyone rocking the boat. Greece has been given carte blanche by the European Union to persecute its minorities, now Macedonia's independence from Yugoslavia is a threat to Greece's anachronistic behaviour.

Just this past February none other than the United Nations "urge[d] the Government of Greece to withdraw from the dispute over whether there is a Macedonian or a Turkish minority in Greece and focus on protecting the rights to self-identification, freedom of expression and freedom of association of those communities." Furthermore, Greek Helsinki Monitor reports the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (UN CERD) will review Greece's compliance (or non-compliance) with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). This will occur from August 10-11, 2009 in Geneva, Switzerland. This is the crux of Greece's "problem" with Macedonia's name, but you'd never know it by reading this article.

The authors insinuate Macedonia wants to enter the EU under the name "Macedonia" because this is the name of Alexander the Great's Empire from the 4th century BC and therefore, this is some kind of evidence that Macedonia has "expansionist" aims toward Greece. Nothing could be further from the truth.

First of all "Macedonia" has applied to enter the European Union as the "Republic of Macedonia" and not as "Macedonia". The term "republic" distinguishes it from the Greek "province" of Macedonia. Furthermore, Alexander the Great's homeland was called "Macedon", not the "Republic of Macedonia".

Are "Foreign Policy" readers aware that the Socialist Republic of Macedonia was formed in 1945? Greece had no quarrel with the name until Yugoslavia fell apart. Greece even used the name "Macedonia" to refer to the Republic of Macedonia in its school geography textbooks. Am I the only one who finds Greece's recent about face curious?

To claim that Macedonia, an impoverished former socialist state with two million citizens, has expansionist ambitions toward Greece, a NATO and EU member state of 11 million, is nonsense. No one takes such a claim seriously. Greece is making up excuse after excuse, but the problem will always come back to the Macedonian minority in Greece - which Greece claims doesn't exist.

I very much take exception to the authors' negation of Macedonians. When they refer to Macedonians, they do so in quotations as "Macedonians". In their description of the population of the country, they describe "[e]thnic Albanians, Turks, Roma, Serbians, Bulgarians, and Greeks." This is misleading as the Greek and Bulgarian element of the population is miniscule, probably less than 1%.

The United States Department of State lists the following ethnic profile for Macedonia: "Macedonian 64.18%, Albanian 25.17%, Turkish 3.85%, Roma 2.66%, Serb 1.78%." Note that ethnic Macedonians form the majority population whereas Greeks and Bulgarians aren't even listed. Note also that Mssrs Meaney and Mylonas deliberately omit to list ethnic Macedonians in their description of the population. As I said, the crux of this "name issue" is really the indigenous Macedonian population living in Greece and in the article above Mssrs Meaney and Mylonas are acting as Greek apologists.

Finally, the authors claim: "More troubling are the maps in "Macedonian" textbooks that show their ancestral homeland stretching far into present-day Greece (as well as Bulgaria and Albania) and describe Thessaloniki, the capital of the northern province of Greece, as occupied territory. These are irredentist claims that justifiably worry the Greeks." Note their use of quotation marks around the term "Macedonians".

This is yet another red herring. The maps referred to are ethnographic maps of Macedonia, prior to its partition in 1913. At that time, and for countless centuries before, Macedonia was still whole, and it is from this integral part of Macedonia that ethnic Macedonians derive. These are the very same maps used by the Great Powers in 1912 - 1913 when Macedonia was being carved up. A simple trip to the Imperial War Museum in London will establish this fact, but Greece already knows this and chooses to misrepresent it.

My own family comes from the part of Macedonia that in 1913 was incorporated into the new Greek kingdom. I'm sorry if Mssrs Meaney and Mylonas are offended by my ethnic identity, but I can't pretend that I'm an ethnic Greek when I know for a fact I'm an ethnic Macedonian. Perhaps they should heed the advice of the United Nations, recognize the ethnic Macedonians in Greece and move on from this issue. Instead, what we see happening is a situation wherein through the manipulation of Greece the European Union will soon find itself butting heads with the United Nations over its support of Greece's policy of ethnic genocide.

To all readers: please note that Thomas Meaney and Harris Mylonas present not one point that reflects critically on Greece’s bullying and destabilizing conduct during the 15-year name conflict. Macedonians may not have been saints during this ordeal, but Greek nationalism is frighteningly virulent as this too-long antagonism over the name amply illustrate.

The authors simplify the issues and stakes to such a large degree that this piece counts as nothing more than Greece propaganda.

To concerned readers, please seek better researched and historically nuanced positions elsewhere. (E.g., the briefing by the non-partisan NGO, the International Crisis Group: www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=5862).

FYROM likes to present itself as a helpless little country being "victimized" by big bad Greece. The reality of the situation is that it is the Greeks (especially the Macedonians) who have been victimized by a non-stop barrage of irredentist propaganda aimed directly at their heritage, identity, culture and land. It makes no difference how large or small FYROM is. Identity theft is a crime and irredentism is not conductive to good neighborly relations let alone alliances in organizations such as NATO or the EU.

The irredentism, however, is not new. The roots can be traced back to the communist Yugoslav dictator Tito and his attempt to lay claim to the northern Greek province of Macedonia and its port of Thessaloniki. Here is what US Secretary of State Edward R. Stettinius had to say about the situation in 1944 (Hellene already posted this but it is worth repeating):

"The Department has noted with considerable apprehension increasing propaganda rumors and semi-official statements in favor of an autonomous Macedonia emanating from Bulgaria, but also from Yugoslav partisan and other sources with the implication that Greek territory would be included in the projected State. This Government considers talk of "Macedonian Nation", "Macedonian Fatherland", or "Macedonian National Consciousness" to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic or political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece." (U.S. State Dep. Foreign Relations Vol. VII, Circular Airgram [868.014])

Although the Cold War literally "froze" this issue for several decades, the propaganda within Yugoslavia continued to simmer until it exploded onto the world scene with the independence of FYROM in 1991. Almost overnight, communism was replaced with ultra-nationalism and Greece was once again faced with an aggressively anti-Greek irredentist propaganda which sought to monopolize the name of Macedonia and the entire history, identity, culture and land associated with it. Understandably, the Greeks immediately rose in defense of their heritage and their historic northern province and have been fighting a defensive battle ever since.

As Meaney and Mylonas point out, imagine how Californians (and all Americans) would feel if Baja California wanted to be called simply "California." Or, to take it a step further, imagine if the people of this new country declared themselves "ethnic Californians" and claimed that all Spanish-speakers living in the state of California are "ethnic Californians" being oppressed by the US government. How would Americans react? Would they react any differently than Greece or any other country? In fact, we don't need to speculate. In 2008, the Absolut vodka company created an advertisement depicting the entire American southwest as part of Mexico. This provoked outrage among millions of Americans and the advertisement was immediately pulled with apologies from the company.

Analogies aside, a newly-minted nation cannot monopolize a name which has been deeply associated with one of its neighbors since antiquity. The Greeks have rightfully stood their ground on this issue and, aside from an early embargo, have been supportive of FYROM's entry into NATO and the EU while insisting on the protection of their own national interests. The Greek position is clear, valid and reasonable: a compound name with a geographic qualifier to be used for all purposes, i.e., New Macedonia. Unfortunately, the Slavs of FYROM insist on perpetuating the propaganda started by Tito to the detriment of their own prosperity. They need to stop playing the "victim" card and come to the negotiating table in a spirit of friendship and mutual understanding. Greece, NATO and the EU are waiting for that day.

FYROM is known for its extensive “emotionally fortified” propaganda, a great example of which can be viewed in the above comments. This article on the contary, adopts a critical stance on the issue calling upon realistic politicians to take critical steps for resolving this crucial matter. So let me clear out a couple points and restore the truth.
Starting with the claims that FYROM is a small and poor country that Greece has no reason to be afraid of, let me reiterate the fact that Greece is being threatened on two fronts, by FYROM and Turkey, so it has every right to feel like that. As for FYROM’s helicopters lined up against Greece’s formidable air force, we know for a fact that Greece is not arming itself against FYROM, it is an attack from Turkey that it is always prepared to confront.
The same “alliance” goes on regarding Greece “not showing respect to its minorities”. The Greek government does not recognize ethnic minorities within its own borders, including Macedonian-speaking residents of northern Greece. I grew up in Greece and do not recall anyone teaching me about a “pure” Greek nation. We know since antiquity that it is not blood lines that make a nation, but the community. Americans for instance do constitute a nation. There are subgroups offcourse, but there is unity in this diversity. Same goes with Greeks. All this is hardly making a case for allowing one third of Greece, Macedonia, to be split and given as a land grant to the FYROM ultra-nationalists in Skopje. It is identity that counts, not language not blood, not anything else. Several, though not all, Muslim Slavs in Greece (Pomaks) consider themselves to be Turkish though they do not even speak a word of Turkish. Same goes with many Jews worldwide think of themselves as Jews though they speak no Hebrew. These are instances where one part of the identity, the religious one, overcomes language and parts of culture. I agree that it is self identity that counts and it is who and what you want to be. Many families in pre-war Macedonia were split in half when one would decide to become a Bulgarian (”ethnic Macedonians” were not been invented yet) and another to become Greek.
I agree that everyone has the right of self identification but what happens when the name in issue is already in use? How would a Navajo native feel if Quebec declared independence and renamed itself to Republic of Navajo and its French speaking people called themselves ethnic Navajos, called their language Navajo and reproduced Navajo myths and heroes?
The region is not known as Greek Macedonia, but simply as Makedonia for almost 3000 years now. The region of the neighbouring Republic was historically Paeonia and was later included in the greater Kingdom of Philip II. Following the same logic Macedonia can be called anything from Egypt, central Asia until Pakistan.
While the name Macedonia was Greek in antiquity, by the early 20th century a multiple of people were considered geographically “Macedonians”. They were inhabitants of Macedonia, in the same way people who lived in Bosnia Herzegovina were all Bosnians Herzegovinans while some were Catholic, others Orthodox and others Muslim. Macedonia was even more complex as it was composed of people with various linguistic, ethnic and religious affiliations. Everyone was a Macedonian, but no one was an ethnic “Macedonian”. It was not until 1943, when the Communist Party of Yugoslavia established a Communist Party of “Makedonija” and became determined to turn its Serbian, Bulgarian and other Slavic inhabitants into full-bloodied “Makedonci”.
It was not Greece that started this whole mess, it was the ultra-nationalists in Skopje that adopted for themselves the name “Macedonian”, even though a province of Macedonia exists in Greece. since 1913. Since the 2.6 million Greeks of Macedonia have a cultural Macedonian identity, they cannot forgo their own identity just because half as many Slavs north of their land decided to assume the name Macedonian and try to make it an “ethnic” name. This is a crucial point! When there is a shared name and a shared geographic identity, you cannot have one of them claim that they are the real ones, and that the others now have to change into something else. And the comparison is very well drawn above with Baja California. The Bulgarian and Serbian speaking Slavic population decide to change the name of their land and call it Makedonija and then they decide to rename their Bulgarian dialect “Makedonski” and now they demand that the Greeks of Macedonia forgo their cultural and geographic identity as Macedonians.
And while the Fyrom officials are thinking of more ways to carry out their propaganda and start big projects like the 72ft tall statue, hundreds of thousands of Skopjan citizens to, suffering from the unemployment line up at the Bulgarian embassy in Skopje and declare themselves “ethnic Bulgarians”. How many of them in reality feel Bulgarian is hard to say, what is certain though is that every one of them greatly appreciates the brand new EU passport that allows them to find a job anywhere in Europe. The ex prime minister of the country, Ljupco Georgievski himself abandoned Pseudomakedonism and went to Bulgaria and got a Bulgarian passport, remembering that his grandparents were all Bulgarian, after all.
What is occurring at the moment in FYROM is not only criticized from within but also by outsiders, an example of which is this article. Another great example is Steven Miller’s(Professor Emeritus, University of California, Berkeley) website (http://macedonia-evidence.org/) calling scholars worldwide to say no to the historical revisionism of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
FYROM claims that pressure from Greece threatens their society and that Greek pressure is destabilizing the region. Well, who told you to base your ethnic identity on a lie? If you have been lying to your own people for two generations about their true identity, why is this now our problem? Who is truly destabilizing the region by ongoing propaganda about “United Makedonija”, who is contesting the true Slavic identity of its people and publishing state-sanctioned history books declaring that Makedonci are not Slavs? And above all, who is not showing respect to human rights when arresting activists like Vasko Gligorijevic who do not buy into this propaganda and dare to challenge this hardcore dogma? Now you go ahead tell me who is being truly irredentist…

By the same token US should change the name of all its political institutions because obviously they are part of the Italian heritage. The second step should be to change its name, because again, there are several other countries that could rightly pretend to be America. Ah, and what about the English. I think Her Majesty the Queen must have some grudge against those rebels using the language of her subjects.

As for the argument about the Macedonian text books, please, give me a brake. If you open any of the textbooks of the Balkan countries you will see similar claims. Greeks are particularly aggressive asserting the Megali Idea.

It is the Greeks who still dream of the past and create most of problems – if it is not Cyprus, it will be Macedonia.

I haven’t seen such an incompetent article for a long time. Especially in FP.

Allow me to make a small but important correction. Greece did not exercise its veto rights in this issue. As a matter of fact, several countries expressed concerns about the prudence of including fYRoM in the alliance. As a result of this, NATO members unanimously agreed not to extend an invitation to fYRoM.

Also, with regards to irredentist claims, let us not forget the renaming of Skopje's international airport and fYRoM's main highway to Greece to "Alexander the Great". These acts are in direct violation of the 1995 interim accord between the two countries and do not go along with the close ties, consistency and cooperation that NATO represents amongst its allies.