The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia name issue

FYROM

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia name issue is not simply a dispute over historical facts and symbols. It is a problem with regional and international dimensions, given that former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is exercising a policy of irredentism and territorial claims fuelled by the falsification of history and the usurpation of Greece’s historical and national heritage.
In its current form, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia name issue arose in 1991, when former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia declared its independence under the name “Republic of Macedonia”.

Historically, the Greek name Macedonia refers to the state and civilisation of the ancient Macedonians, which beyond doubt is part of Greece’s national and historical heritage and bears no relation whatsoever with the residents of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, who are Slavs by descent and arrived in the region of the ancient Kingdom of Macedonia at a much later stage.

Geographically, the term Macedonia refers to a broader region that includes portions of the territories of various Balkan countries (mainly Greece, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Bulgaria). However, the greater part of geographical Macedonia coincides with the area covered by the ancient Greek Macedonia, which lies within the boundaries of modern Greece (55% in Greece, 35% in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, 9% in Bulgaria and 1% in Albania). Some 2.5 million Greek citizens currently live in the Greek part of Macedonia, whose inhabitants have called and considered themselves Macedonians since time immemorial.
The name issue originated in the aftermath of the Second World War, when Josip Broz Tito separated the area then known as Vardar Banovina (now the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) from Serbia, granting it the status of a Republic within the new federal Yugoslavia, under the name Socialist Republic of Macedonia, concurrently promoting the doctrine of a separate “Macedonian Nation”. Obviously, the most important reason for opting to promote the doctrine of Macedonianism at clear variance with the geographical reality and history of the broader region of Macedonia, was his desire to gain access to the Aegean Sea by cultivating the notion of reunification of all Macedonian territories.
This is the context of the irredentist efforts that have been mounted by the political leadership of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to nurture in the country’s citizens via school books and propaganda the notion that they are the descendents of the ancient Macedonians, thus cultivating the concept of a United Macedonia, a portion of which is the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, with other parts under Greek, Bulgarian and Albanian “occupation”. It is clear that the irredentist doctrine of a United Macedonia opens the way to claims on “occupied” territories.
Against this historical background, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was admitted to the UN in 1993 under a provisional name, as the Security Council (Resolution 817) noted that a difference has arisen over the name of that state which needs to be resolved in the interest of the maintenance of peaceful and good-neighbourly relations in the region (Security Council Resolution 817 of 1993). The Security Council further called on Greece and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Security Council Resolution 845 of 1993) to enter into negotiations on a definitive solution to the problem. The obligation undertaken by both parties to negotiate an agreement on the name issue was set down in the Interim Accord signed by Greece and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in 1995, establishing, at the same time, diplomatic relations and a code of conduct between the parties.

With these texts, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has acknowledged that the name issue is under negotiations. Negotiations are conducted within the framework of the United Nations, under the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General, Mr. Matthew Nimetz.
Ever since, Greece approaches the UN-led negotiations in a constructive way, and makes every effort to reach to a mutually acceptable solution on the name issue. Unfortunately, 15 years later, no significant progress has been achieved, due to the intransigence of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, bad faith, and provocative attitude, as it holds to the maximalist position of rejecting any name other than the constitutional Republic of Macedonia, thus rendering the negotiations under the UN aegis an interminable exchange of views.

At the same time, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is systematically violating the bulk of the provisions of the Interim Accord, (a) pursuing the imposition of its constitutional name, bypassing the obligation to work for a negotiated settlement, and (b) proceeding to a number of irredentist and provocative actions and statements directed against Greece. The most recent examples of this conduct include the renaming of the airport of Skopje to Alexander the Great and the European corridor X to Alexander the Macedonian, the launch of the “Macedonian Encyclopaedia” full of inaccuracies for region’s history, as well as the programmed construction, in 2010, for a statue of Alexander the Great, placed at Skopje’ s central square.
FYROM’ s political conduct constitutes a severe injury to good neighbourly relations and a destabilizing factor in the wider Balkan region, as the country’s leadership has chosen the treacherous path of extreme nationalism, in violation of the principles of international law.



At the April 2008 NATO Summit in Bucharest, the member states of the Alliance agreed with Greece’s position on the need for FYROM to comply with the principle of good neighbourly relations and unanimously decided (paragraph 20, Bucharest Summit Declaration) that an agreement on the name issue is a necessary prerequisite for the accession of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia to NATO. The Summit Declaration states that “an invitation to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia will be extended as soon as a mutually acceptable solution to the name issue has been reached”.

In a follow-up to NATO’s Bucharest decision, the European Council stated in its Conclusions of 20 June 2008 and for the first time explicitly that the resolution of the name issue is essential for the opening of accession negotiations with FYROM.
The government of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, persisting on its hostile policy, instituted proceedings against Greece before the International Court of Justice, alleging violation by Greece of article 11 of the Interim Accord of 1995, due to Greece’s supposed objection to the invitation to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for accession to NATO. The procedure is still in development and FYROM and Greece have filed their memorials to the ICJ.
During the recent General Affairs Council of the European Union, and after the recommendation of the European Commission for the beginning of the accession negotiations between EU- FYROM, the Member States, at the Conclusions (8.12.2010), note that they will return to the issue of the opening of the accession negotiations during the next (Spanish) Presidency. They also repeat that maintaining good neighbourly relations, including a negotiated and mutually acceptable solution on the name issue, under the auspices of the UN, remains essential.

For Greece, the definitive settlement of the matter and the finding of a mutually acceptable solution remain the sole objective. Greece’ s shift from its initial negotiating position accepting the idea of a compound name that includes the term Macedonia on the condition that there is also a geographical qualifier, is proof of the constructive spirit and good faith in which Greece has approached the negotiations under the UN to date. Furthermore, several bilateral meetings of the Greek PM and Alternate Minister of Foreign Affairs with their counterparts from Skopje, confirm Greece’s will for an approach, on the basis of establishing a friendly climate of mutual understanding.

The Greek side calls for:
1. the adoption of a definitive composite name with geographical qualification of the term Macedonia, for all purposes (erga omnes) and for all uses, so as to avoid confusion with Greek Macedonia and to put an end to the irredentist policy and territorial aspirations of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,

2. that the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia genuinely renounces the usurpation of historical and national heritage of the Greek people,

3. endorsement of the definitive solution by the UN Security Council, in order to ensure full respect for its implementation.
Last modified: February 2010
© Copyright 2010 Ministry of Foreign Affairs