Patriotism originates from one’s citizenship. One is proud of the country one has pledged allegiance to and is ready to defend the national rights and interests of one’s country.
Nationalism derives from one’s ethnic identity sometimes with positive implications. A revolt or insurgency of people occupied by another nation-state is an act of a noble nationalism, mainly when the uprising or insurrection succeeds, i.e., revolution. Such examples are the American Revolution 1775-83 and the Greek Revolution, 1821-9. After independence, the same people turned to patriots because they defended their country against its enemies. So there is a correlation between virtuous nationalism and patriotism.
This paper focuses on the issue of the incendiary side of nationalism, which considers one’s ethnic or national identity is more significant in destiny than any other ethnicity, or that one race is superior as in Hitler’s National Socialism. To indicate the superiority of one’s race over another, nationalists demean anything or anyone for what other people stand. And to support their views individuals resort to the employment of immoral or illegal means. The difference between being proud of your national origin and believing one’s race is superior to any other is clear enough.
People who underestimate, belittle, derogate, minimize, deflate, disparage, depredate, and so on indicate malicious, wicked nationalism. Here are a few examples of dangerous nationalism:
There are a plethora of other irredentist slogans, photographs, and maps brandished at parades of the ethnic Slavs at home and abroad and also social media manifestly living in a time warp, not in reality of 2018.
Mr. Meto Koloski is an attorney and the President of the United “Macedonian” Diaspora, headquartered in Washington, DC, United States. In supporting his home country’s strategic culture and national goals, his organization exhibits inciteful nationalism. In his infinite wisdom, he tweeted under the photograph of the above T-shirt, “Since when did Greeks become a race?”
Click here to view this incident directly on Twitter.
The poster depicts the swastika coloured in blue with a felt marker, the same middle finger gesture that was featured on the t-shirt above and, as is visible, also contains a few choice phrases towards Greece and Greeks.
As the former Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once stated, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." So, let us see the facts.
1) The UN admitted the FYROM on April 7, 1993, only after the latter amended its Constitution to meet the minimum required qualifications per UN Charter, Chapter II – Membership. The FYROM was found to be in violation of articles Article 2 (7) on noninterference on the domestic affairs of other states. Yes, the FYROM was admitted to the UN on April 7, 1993, but only after Greece had allowed the membership of Mr. Koloski’s home country. Despite popular belief, the UN is a closed club, which requires the consensus of its member states.
The UN Security Council (UNSC), is the most important body within the UN. It is the law enforcement authority. According to the Charter, the UNSC has four purposes:
a) to maintain international peace and security;
b) to develop friendly relations among nations;
c) to cooperate in solving international problems and in promoting respect for human rights; and
d) to be a center for harmonizing the actions of nations.
Membership of a state is granted only at the recommendation of the UNSC (Chapter II, Article 4.2). All members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council. While other organs of the United Nations make recommendations to member states, only the Security Council has the power to make decisions that member states are then obligated to implement under the Charter.
Since the UNSC found sufficient evidence to address Greece’s national security concerns, it mandated the negotiations for the change of the FYROM’s name. The map below tells all. It goes to the intent, not just the letter. Such a map is an indication of expansionism and irredentism.
The irredentist map below was designed by Bulgarian “ethnographer” Vasil Kŭnchov in 1900 to serve the hegemonic interests of the Bulgarian Principality as the basis for its later independence by making almost all the population living within the territory of what he considered to be Macedonia, Bulgarians (green background). The map included Mount Olympus within Macedonian territory. The VMRO modified the map slightly and later, Marxist Yugoslavia added the region of Prohor Pcinski into Macedonia for political reasons, a modification that was relished by the VMRO which added the area surrounding the lakes Ohrid and the Prespas. Below left one sees the original map of Vasil Kŭnchov and to the right the enhanced map by the VMRO making all Bulgarians, Macedonians.
The UNSC through S 817/1993 unanimously approved the accession of the new state to the UN under the provisional name ‘Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’ (the FYROM) but without flag hoisting rights, since the flag was one of the issues of the dispute. The UNSC further considered the name dispute capable of influencing the good neighborly relations and peace in the region and invited the co-chairmen of the International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia (ICFY) to offer their good services towards the settlement of the dispute. The intended agreement transpired in the interest of world peace, regional stability and good neighborly relations which is one of the fundamental obligations for membership in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), another UN organization. The same is true for accession into NATO and the EU.
The above is not a concession, but an obligation, a requirement that applies to all member states. If the FYROM does not agree with the obligations of membership, it is free to leave the UN. Member states must demonstrate a commitment to and respect for the norms and principles of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), including the resolution of ethnic disputes, external territorial conflicts including irredentist claims or internal jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means.
2) As the result of the FYROM’s UN membership and acceptance of the rules of the UN, on May 14, 1993, the Council of Europe granted the FYROM the special guest status, with no voting rights. Having completed a round of separate talks with the Foreign Ministers of Greece and the FYROM, the ICFY co-chairmen Cyrus Vance and Lord Owen handed the two parties a draft agreement on ‘Friendly Relations and Confidence Building Measures.’
On June 18, 1993, the UN Security Council, through it resolution S 845/1993, recommended the Vance-Owen proposals as a ‘sound basis’ for the settlement of the Athens-Skopje dispute and urge the two parties to resume negotiations. Both countries agreed to continue talks bound by their signature.
As a result, both countries entered into the Interim Accord (Sep 13, 1995). It is remarkable that nationals of the FYROM engaged in an assassination attempt against Mr. Kiro Gligorov, the republic’s first president. It indicates the level of the lack of respect for law and order in the FYROM and its diaspora.
Regarding the final name of the FYROM, why don’t they follow the advice of the “father of Macedonism,” Misirkov? What Misirkov states in his book is, “An ethnic group can be without an ethnic name for a long time if there is no other ethnic group nearby and if there is no need for that ethnic group to make a distinction using a specific ethnic name. Hence an ethnic group does not choose a name for itself, but the neighboring ethnic groups make up a name for it, and the ethnic group adopts it. It is the most common and very natural thing that one’s ethnic name first occurs in one of its neighboring ethnic groups. So, the neighboring ethnic group is related like a godfather and a godchild”.[i]
As for the ratification of the Accord, since both parties had expressed their intention to the UNSC to implement the Accord and proceeded to it, further sanction by the competent authority of both countries was not necessary. The intent to negotiate for a peaceful solution of the issue sufficed. The New Democracy Party, the official opposition of the Greek Parliament, did not object to the implementation. An accord or agreement is not a treaty. In International Law, as Mr. Koloski is aware of, the implementation of the Accord equals ratification. After all, all documents about the Accord had been duly registered with the Office of the Secretary-General of the UN.
3) The two amendments that the FYROM was directed by the UNSC to incorporate into its Constitution resulted from the legal language used in the official text under cover of which the FYROM implied,
a) The eventual implementation of its national goal by its strategic culture, i.e., the annexations of territories from each of its neighbors.
(Click pictures to read description)
Излези момче право на тераса
и поздрави ја Гоцевата раса
кренете раце високо горе
наше ќе биде и солунско поле
Get out young man
Young man Get out to the balcony
and greet the countrymen of Gotse [Delchev]
raise your hands up high [Macedonian O-greeting]
The region of Thessaloniki [Greek Macedonia] will be ours.
What they do not understand is that the negotiations were imposed by the UNSC, because the Constitution of the FYROM and the behavior of its governing mentality do not meet the minimum standards for membership in the UN.
The Interim Accord was MANDATED by the UNSC. If the FYROM does not comply with the UNSC mandate, then it will be out of the UN (UN Charter, Chapter II, Articles 3 to 6).
All the above bear witness to the aggressive ultra-nationalism that the UNSC was aware of and sided with Greece. Greece is right.
b) Although Skopje alleges that it only seeks equal rights for its Slavophone minority, essentially it seeks privileges. The Slavophone minority with Skopje national conscience in Greece per census and elections under free EU sponsorship is only about 6,000, i.e., 0.000521739 of the total population of Greece. They all already enjoy the benefits of equal rights as citizens of the EU. Only the Sultan guaranteed ethnic privileges to his loyal subjects. Skopje has no right to demand privileges for its people when it simultaneously refuses to grant equal rights to its 40-45% Albanian minority soon to become the majority in the country.
However, if in the opinion of the UMD, neither the EU nor NATO guarantees equal rights to all citizens in their member states, one wonders why the FYROM wants to join such “untrustworthy” organizations?
Furthermore, such demands are reciprocal. What is the reason that subsequent governments of the FYROM follow the norms of the Marxist government of the SFRJ not allowing competent agencies of the EU to conduct a free census of the population including, of course, minorities? Perhaps someone is willing to explain what happened to the 2011 census.
As claimed by the Serbian State Board of Statistics, in the region of the present day FYROM, the 1921 census numbered Greeks to be 41,597. In 1931 the Greeks were 44,608. The Germans conducted their count in the same area in 1941. They found that 100,000 out of a population of 800,000 people 12% were Greeks. In 1949 the capital alone had 30,000 Greeks. The census of 1951 counted the Greeks be 158.000;, 25,000 were native Greeks (Bitola area), 100,000 Vlach speaking Greeks, 3,000 Greek Saracatsans and 32,000 Greek political refugees. Because of these numbers, the authorities of Skopje forced about 100,000 to declare themselves “Macedonians” or Vlachs who, according to the authorities, were not Greeks (Stojković, 1952, 29).
It is remarkable that Marxist Yugoslavia published in a separate official census of 1981, a modification of the 1921 census above from 41,597 to 2,000 Greeks, while simultaneously the 1931 figures shrank the Greek community to 1,000 from the factual 44,608. Thus in line with the fake census, instead of the population increasing between 1921 and 1931, the Greek community decreased by 1,000. There was no explanation for such a loss (Beograd: Savenzni zavod za statistiku, 1982).
Mr. Kiro Gligorov, former President of the FYROM, stated that the Greeks in his country amounted to 100,000 people in 1990, but somehow the present bureau of statistics in the FYROM wants only 442 Greeks in the country. Where do the Greeks stand in the factual demographics?
In his book On Macedonian Matters, Krste Petkov Misirkov describes his fellow ethnic Slavs as Macedonian in a regional sense, not descendants of the ancient Macedonians.[ii] Besides, Misirkov states, “official recognition must be won for the Macedonian people; in all official documents and certificates the designation “Macedonian” must be introduced for all persons of Slav origin in Macedonia.” [iii]
Because of Misirkov’s clear explanation, the emblem of the purely ancient Macedonian Greek dynasty (Herodotus, Book I, p. 56) and the name “Macedonian” do not belong to the Slav population of the FYROM, which, by the way, does not live within ancient Macedonian territory. They are ethnic SLAVS residing in the regions of ancient Paionia and Dardania. Perhaps the Edicts of the Ashoka or Asoka the Great, an Indian emperor of the Maurya Dynasty could shed some light on the matter of the ancient Macedonian ethnicity. Asoka had recorded the facts as he saw them.
“Now it is conquest by Dhamma that Beloved-of-the-Gods considers being the best conquest. And it (conquest by Dhamma) has been won here, on the borders, even six hundred yojanas away, where the Greek king Antiochos rules, beyond there where the four kings named Ptolemy, Antigonos, Magas and Alexander rule, likewise in the south among the Cholas, the Pandyas, and as far as Tamraparni”. (Trans. Ven. S. Dhammika, Edicts of the King Asoka, Kandy Sri Lanka: Buddhist Publication Society, 1994) https://www.cs.colostate.edu/~malaiya/ashoka.html
Even Dr. Eugene Borza, a historian of Classics in his academic paper "Macedonia Redux," in The Eye Expanded: life and the arts in Greco-Roman Antiquity, ed. Frances B. Titchener & Richard F. Moorton, University of California Press, 1999, 255, has stated,
“If the claim is based on ethnicity, it is an issue of different order. Modern Slavs, both Bulgarians and Macedonians[sic], cannot establish a link with antiquity, as the Slavs entered the Balkans centuries after the demise of the ancient Macedonian kingdom. Only the most radical Slavic factions – mostly in the United States, Canada, and Australia – even attempt to establish a connection to antiquity… Politics in the Balkans transcends historical and biological truths”.
Those who believe that the judges of the Olympics accepted the king of Macedonia for political reasons, they might try to explain the participation and twice victorious Macedonian named Theagenes from Thassos, Macedonia, who competed at the 75th (480 BC) and 76th (476 BC) Olympiads and won in boxing and Pankration, a sort of modern kickboxing/wrestling (Pausanias VI, 6; 11,15; Plutarch 811D). The reader must have in mind that Theagenes’ victories occurred before Alexander I was allowed to participate. The mere fact that Macedonians were allowed to compete in the Greeks-only Olympic Games makes the Macedonians Greeks. Was Alexander the Great a Macedonian? Of course, he was, as Pericles was an Attican and Leonidas was a Laconian, and George Washington was Virginian American.
In the ancient times, the lower part of the FYROM was Paionia inhabited by Paionians, a Thraco-Illyrian tribe, whereas the region of Skopje was part of Dardania, Illyria populated by Dardanians. Only the area of the Greek region of Macedonia was inhabited by Macedonians, a bona fide Greek tribe. But even if one theorizes that the ancient Macedonians were not of Greek stock, it does not make the Slav inhabitants of the FYROM Macedonians. As for the absurdity that the Macedonians did not speak Greek, not one of the Greek tribes spoke Greek in the sense of present-day Greek language. Greek tribes numbered more than 230 speaking more than 200 dialects including the Macedonian, which was one of the Aeolic dialects. Macedonians of Upper Macedonia spoke a Molossian dialect, which fell into the Northwestern Doric group of dialects. So when the Slavs of the FYROM argue that Macedonians did not speak Greek, their argument begs for the definition of Greek language before 285 BC. It was the year Aristeas the Athenian grammarian was commissioned by Ptolemy II, the Greek King of Egypt, to formulate the Koine or Common Greek by the Attic dialect.
4) The renaming of the Skopje International Airport and Friendship Highway was forced on the Skopje government by their membership’s obligations toward the OSCE requirements, which are the foundations of both EU and NATO. The previous government, by raising new issues that did not exist before, tried to upgrade its negotiating leverage by adding bogus matters to be resolved. It is an old trick, but it does not work anymore. Too many organizations and too much is at stake on the outcome, so nobody eats it.
Since Macedonism was created to unite the Slavic citizens of the FYROM under a common, but false banner, what is going to happen when the catalyst does not exist anymore?
The historical forgeries in the form of naming highways, buildings, institutions followed by relentless disinformation were an apparent provocation, and an attempt to establish the Slav inhabitants of the FYROM as Macedonians by birthright is evident. The renaming of anything the Gruevski government had rechristened to ancient Greek personalities by far it is not a concession, but a return to historical reality.
What is important here is the fact that inflammatory nationalism in the FYROM comes from its diaspora, which parenthetically has the right to elect and be elected in their home country. This point should alarm a few people because the overcharged members of the ultra-nationalistic FYROM diaspora could conceivably hold the highest offices in Skopje influencing their views and thus creating an unwanted instability in the region or even undesirable calamity even in the world. The world is aware that most of such disasters started with local or regional conflicts.
For the sake of humanity, the cancer of Macedonism needs much more than a couple of aspirins to heal; it requires an excision. Competent authorities of the EU need to re-visit the contents of school books of the FYROM and ascertain that all maps and any irredentist materials are taken out of classrooms and public libraries. Children are too young to judge unproven theories and hypothetical situations. Also, the final treaty on the name of the FYROM forces the latter to do the same in schools sponsored by its diaspora and churches sponsored by its Church. Enough toxicity harbors in the hearts of the Slav citizens of the FYROM.
The differences in cultural and historical backgrounds between Greece and the FYROM complicate the process of a civilized, peaceful settlement of disputes and the identification of the interests of each country following the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Twenty-seven years after independence, the FYROM chose the path to intransigence on issues that evolved after 1878 and developed with the establishment of communism in the USSR.
One would expect that the FYROM’s revanchist behavior on territorial claims over lands that were never theirs as a result of a euphoric recall on a theoretical national, ethnic, and historical basis would give way to reason and reality. On the contrary; in the last 27 years the FYROM slowly but resolutely keep instilling violence and unjustifiably revanchist inspirations to its posterity poisoning their offspring in a row of absolute nationalism while simultaneously advocating an ethnicity that does not belong to the Slavic population. One must consider that in the last century their alleged ethnic identity changed four times.
Such differences interfere with the political dialogue contingent on logic and reason. One must consider the fact that about 250 Greek-owned businesses operate in the FYROM providing employment and income to a country that hates them. However, these relations must be rebuilt on the original foundations of equality and a free-market economy away from exclusive nationalism that promotes hatred, especially when such a hatred depends on the miserable racial and historical criteria of a past that never was.
The Balkans need new meaningful forms of cooperation that adhere to the principles of the OSCE. In the interest of Greece and the FYROM, each country must explore possible opportunities of trade and economic cooperation. Just imagine the potential of a Thessaloniki-Skopje-Belgrade (Danube) canal (Templar, June 30, 2014). All the countries of the Black Sea, without exception, could benefit from such a canal. The technology exists, and the tangible and intangible benefits of such a project outweigh the costs over a forward period with great potential financial return to the countries involved. Think of the impact that such a canal would have to commerce, business, and finances in the region, especially if one adds the sea thoroughfare. To utilize these opportunities, both countries should seriously try to restore a high-level political dialogue with substantive topics that could include the FYROM’s ascension to NATO and the EU. Only frank conversations on outstanding issues can influence official discourse.
The Balkans require seriousness and responsibility; Mr. Koloski and his kind are a thing of the past and they must be repulsed. This form of nationalism must become obsolete, and the deleterious education on all levels at the FYROM must end. The mentality of 1893 (VMRO) and 1943 (Jajce) must stop.
Исто така, iеден народ долго можит да бидит без народно име, ако на близу од него немат друг народ, от коi шчо ке требит тоi да се разликуат со оддел'но народно име. Но тоа народно име, не си измисл'уат народот сам за себе, ами со него го велит саседниiот народ и тоi од него си го земат. Значит наi природно iет народното име за iеден народ да се поiаит у iеден саседен со него народ. Саседните народи iеден кон друг, значит, се iауваат во вид на нунко и кум. (Misirkov, Skopje, 1974, p.166).
Misirkov uses the word narod, which means an ethic group, a people, a nation in a sense of community of descent, λαός.
[ii] The text in the original language and alphabet states,
Името македонец прво се употребуаше од македонцките словени, како географцки термин за покажуаiн'е на своiот происход. Тоа име iет обшчо известно на македонците словени и сите со него се именуваат (Misirkov, Skopje, 1974, p.159).
[iii] The text in the original language and alphabet states,
“во официiално признааiн'е на македонцката народност и во внесуаiн'е во нофузите и друзите официiални документи на лица от словенцки произлез од Македониiа името „македонец" (Misirkov, Skopje, 1974, p. 58).
About Marcus A. Templar
Professor Marcus A. Templar is a former U.S. Army Cryptologic Linguist (Language Analyst), Certified U.S. Army Instructor of Intelligence Courses, Certified Foreign Disclosures Officer, Certified Translator Interpreter of Serbo-Croatian, SIGINT / All-Source Intelligence Analyst. He is the Macedonian League's National Security Advisor.
To read all his papers, please click here.
About the Macedonian League
We are an international professional Hellenic advocacy group. Our primary purpose is to advance our interests to informed and responsive governments on issues concerning Greece's national security and territorial integrity.
The Macedonian League's main focus is on the “Macedonian name dispute”, as this dispute is a serious national security issue that threatens the territorial integrity of Greece.
The Macedonian League also focuses on exposing and combating anti-Hellenism and analyzing political developments in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
For more information, follow us on: Website, Facebook, Twitter
Department of Communications