M E M O R A N D U M of the Bulgarian Cultural Club – Skopie concerning the name issue between Macedonia and Greece The President, Prime Minister and Minister of the Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Macedonia; The Presidents, Prime Ministers and Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, USA through the embassies of the corresponding countries in the Republic of Macedonia; The President of the European Commission through Mr. Erwan Fouere, EU Special Representative in the Republic of Macedonia; The United Nations President and the Special Mediator Mr. Matthew Nimitz through Ms. Maria Luisa Silva Mejias, Office of the United Nations Resident Coordinator in the Republic of Macedonia; The General Secretary of NATO through Brigadier General Stoyan Genkov, NATO Coordination Liason Office in the Republic of Macedonia; The Chairman of OSCE through Ambassador Giorgio Radiciati, OSCE Spillover Monitor Mission in the Republic of Macedonia; Media. I. Introduction At the last NATO summit held in Bucharest, Romania, the Republic of Macedonia was not invited to become a NATO member as a result of the name issue that was imposed by Greece on an international level. The Bulgarian Cultural Club - Skopie is of the opinion that with this, Greece aims to obtain international verification for its years long policy of denationalization, terror and cultural assimilation against the Macedonian Bulgarians. This memorandum is based on the document “The Cyprus Problem and Macedonia - An expose of Greece's oppression of her ethnic minorities”, prepared by the delegates of the 35th MPO convention held in 1956 in Pitsburg, USA, as well as the book “Bulgarian policies on the Republic of Macedonia” by professor Lyubomir Ivanov, Chairman of the Atlantic Club of Bulgaria and President of the Manfred Worner Foundation. The aim of the memorandum is to acquaint the international community with the truth for Macedonia and to suggest recommendations for stability in the Balkan region. II. Historical background The Macedonian question was brought to the international scene after the Treaty of Berlin revised the Treaty of San-Stefano. The formation of the Macedonian Liberation Movement was the necessary consequence of the Treaty of Berlin, aiming for the freedom of all the people of Macedonia, who remained under the Ottoman Turkish yoke after the Treaty of Berlin. The slogan of the Macedonian Liberation Movement was “Macedonia for the Macedonians”, an ideal that was based on democratic principles, where freedom and human rights would have been guaranteed for all its ethnic and religious groups - Bulgarians, Greeks, Albanians, Turks, Vlakhs, Jews, etc. This wide multi-ethnic concept for the geographic region of Macedonia as Switzerland on the Balkans was sincerely offered to the Macedonian Greeks. Unfortunately, Athens did not accept this peaceful concept, but preferred the “Megali Idea” for the establishment of a greater Greece. After the Treaty of Bucharest, 51% of the Macedonian territory was annexed by Greece. Starting from 1913, the policy of continual ethnic cleansing, expulsion and forced assimilation was adopted towards the Bulgarians who were the dominant ethnic group in this annexed part. In the appendix of this memorandum some facts are given regarding the policy of Greece and Serbia towards the Macedonian Bulgarians. Since 1912 and up to 1922 in the Southern Macedonia, the Greeks were about 220,000 in number compared to 350,000 Bulgarians and several tens of thousands of Vlakhs. We shall not go into detail by quoting statistics compiled by competent and authoritative scholars of all cultured nations. We shall only say that even the Turkish statistics confirm our statements. After 1922, the Greek government transferred forcibly into Macedonia the Greek refugees from Asia Minor. The expulsion of the Bulgarians and Vlakhs from their century-old settlements and homes does not constitute an act of justice and still less a moral act; they still have the most eager desire to return to their fatherland, provided that liberty and a democratic way of life is guaranteed for them. Evidences showing that Bulgarians have lived and are now living in the Southern Macedonia are innumerable. Many of these evidences come from Greek sources. Herewith, we shall call attention only to some of them which are of international political character, dealing with the problems of the Bulgarian inhabitants of Macedonia. Some of these testimonials are as follows:
III. Republic of Macedonia The Macedonian nation and the Macedonian state were created in the process of implementation and evolution of a well known Serbian political construction originally proposed in 1889, later supported by a decision of the Communist International in Moscow in 1934, and eventually put into effect after 1944 in one particular part of the geographical and historical region of Macedonia (about 36 percent of its territory) known as Vardar Macedonia, included in the territory of Yugoslavia, and governed by the Yugoslav Communist Party. This idea proclaimed that the ethnic Bulgarians in Macedonia, who had lived there since the 7th century, had nothing to do with the Bulgarian state and the Bulgarian nation – a statement that contradicts the historical interpretation predominantly accepted by historians around the world. The Macedonist doctrine was enforced in Vardar Macedonia by methods and means typical of a totalitarian communist regime: by terror and repression against those who considered themselves Bulgarian (30,000 executed, and another 120,000 sent to concentration camps and prisons); by rewriting history through education and the media; falsifying authentic historical evidence and artefacts; and by counterfeiting historical monuments (inscriptions in churches and monasteries, burial grounds, etc.). Since its independence in 1990, the Republic of Macedonia still lives with Tito’s concept for a unique Macedonian ethnicity that was constantly applied by force during the Serbian domination of Yugoslavia. After the fall of Yugoslavia, this concept continues to held the politicians and most of the citizens of Republic of Macedonia as hostages of artificial historical interpretations about their heritage. The Republic of Macedonia and especially the Macedonian Bulgarians are victims of the historical falsifications imposed by Serbia and Greece that can always destabilize the Balkan region. In other words, the consolidation of a distinct Macedonian nation proceeded in conditions of independence not on the basis of recognition and appreciation of objective historical evidence, but rather, the authorities persisted in falsifying the past, and projecting processes confined to a particular territory and period of time (Vardar Macedonia in Yugoslavia, 1944 -1991) into other territories and other times. Given that the history of the population of the Republic of Macedonia and that of its neighbouring countries are interrelated, this exercise in rewriting history (extending back to the Balkan Revival of the 19th century, the Middle Ages and even to Antiquity), while aimed at adjusting the historic ethnic identity of the population of the Republic of Macedonia to its present one, effectively attempts to redefine the historic – and hence the modern – identity of neighbouring nations, especially the Bulgarians. This attempt is perceived as outrageous by the latter. On the other hand Greece, not by chance and not without interests, opened the name issue, thus throwing a glove not only to the Republic of Macedonia, but at the same time to NATO, to the European Union, the United Nations, the USA and Russia. The problem is that neither NATO and the European Union nor the United Nations managed to understand this Byzantine maneuver by Greece. With the name dispute, arranged in such manner, Greece will end up strengthening the position of the government of the Republic of Macedonia around the Macedonian identity (but strictly on anti-Bulgarian basis and, of course, with the help of the theory for the origin of Alexander the Great) which at the same time implies keeping the Serbian control over the politics, history, and spirituality of our young state and averting the eventual rapproachment between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Bulgaria. This means that the Republic of Macedonia will join the Euro-Atlantic structures together with Serbia at the time when Greece will decide that it is in its own interest. Many indications show that Greece has plan B, too: disintegration of Macedonia on ethnical level with the Macedonian Albanians and its separation in such a manner that Greece and Serbia will be neighboring countries again and will have a common border. The paradox is that Greece, contrary to its statements for solving the dispute, in fact, prefers the firm and unyielding stance of the government of the Republic of Macedonia! IV. Conclusion There is no valid legal justification for Greece, based on the possession of a part of the geographic area of Macedonia, to demand rights to dictate the name of the rest of Macedonia, where citizens live who have chosen the political destiny to be independent. From a legal point of view, the name of an independent country stands higher than the name of a province in another country. A case in point: Bulgaria has a province named “Pirin Macedonia”, but Bulgaria recognized Republic of Macedonia by its constitutional name. Also, there is no valid historical justification for Greece to force the use of the name “Slavo-Macedonians” besides the fact that the Greek history knows very well what kind of people it is in question. That is another proof for the policy of denationalization used by Greece, that usually goes in hand with the “antique theory” that the origin and heritage of the citizens of Macedonia is connected to Alexander the Great. This theory has its deep roots into the Greek policy on Macedonia, which may be noticed in the address (addressing) of Archbishop Karavangelis to Kote of Rulya, the murderår of the freedom fighter Lazar Pop Traykoff. In his memories entitled as “Macedonian Struggle”, Archbishop Karavangelis, wrote: “ You have been Greeks since the time of Alexander the Great, but the Slavs came and Slavicized you. Your appearance is Greek and the land we step on is Greek. This is witnessed by the monuments that are hidden in it, they are Greek, too, and the coins that we found are also Greek, and the inscriptions are Greek.” Today, the Greek policy wisely uses this theory: on one hand, giving it as a “Greek gift” to the post-communist Macedonia and, on other hand, using it among the international lobby groups on the pretext that the Republic of Macedonia steals the Greek history; and that it has territorial demands against Greece. According to this, if we take into account that Greece was the biggest importer of arms globally for 2007 (Financial Times, April 16, 2007), it is logical to ask the question if this is not a preparation for political aggression (a demand for the name is a demand for the land – Nomen est Omen), for “legitimate” armed threat. From these reasons, we recommend to the Macedonian government:
At the same time, we recommend to the Republic of Bulgaria:
Greece must understand that the stability of the Balkan region and the prompt NATO membership of the Republic of Macedonia are very crucial at this moment. If Macedonia was as petty as Greece, we would insist that their part of Macedonia be named "Southern Macedonia". Our sincere conviction is that the name Republic of Macedonia is the only possible solution to the name issue, provided that the rights and opportunities of the Macedonian Bulgarians and all the citizens living there are guaranteed. In presenting this Memorandum, we sincerely hope that the high places to whom this statement is presented will do in the name of Balkan stability, human decency and Christian principles all that is possible to preserve the name Republic of Macedonia and the historical truth about its peoples. Sincerely yours, Lazar Mladenov |