LOL at the dutch minister , he hasnt got a fucking clue that this is balkans not the luxembourg borders with belgium etc lololol

[doHTML]
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SP71ZTHGtlc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SP71ZTHGtlc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
[/doHTML]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQ-ngF3S1NM part2 cant embed.

Btw, how many people knew FYROM took out two page ads in some western newspapers?

Do these bulgars have a fucking ministry of propaganda?!

I saw this article which provides a rather different angle on this whole issue


Greece and Macedonia: the name game
Undermined by economic woes and a restive Albanian minority, the government of Macedonia is telling the truth when it argues that calling itself "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" would forfeit its legitimacy. Damage can also ensue for Greece.
Friday, March 14, 2008By John Brady Kiesling
Article Tools
Print
Discuss

President Nixon's amoral National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger stole many excellent insights, including the following: "University politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so small." Political scientist Wallace Sayre had put it more scientifically: "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the stakes at issue."

With all its sound and fury, the "Macedonian name crisis" obeys Sayre's Law. One easy proof: genuine secrets seldom leak, in Greece or anywhere else. Newspapers hardly ever print the names of Greece's secret agents abroad or its plans for defending Thrace against armoured attack.

However, the full text of Ambassador Nimetz's proposals for renaming the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, a document allegedly safeguarded by Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis as a single copy she personally hand-carried to party leaders, appeared on the front page of To Vima within hours of its delivery.

Prime Minister Karamanlis and Foreign Minister Bakoyannis are intelligent, patriotic politicians surrounded by loyal advisors. None of them would deliberately undercut their country's negotiating position on a vital national issue. So clearly, at least to these experienced Greek politicians, the problem of what to call Greece's northern neighbour does not fall in that category.

Around 1900, Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia shared Macedonia as a relatively neutral term for the multiethnic Ottoman territories they planned to carve up between them. But the borders of 1912-13, an accident of where their armies stalled out, left all three states feeling cheated. History and geography were unhelpful. Not all the people redeemed from the Ottoman yoke were grateful to their liberators. Greek was not the language most villagers spoke among themselves.

Had the United Nations existed when the Ottoman Empire lost its Balkan possessions, a "decolonisation" process based on modern criteria would have resulted in an independent state called Macedonia, with Thessaloniki its capital and a hastily standardised Macedonian as one of its three or four official languages. (Bulgarians say Macedonian is merely a rustic dialect of Bulgarian. Serbs soon abandoned efforts to call it South Serbian. In Greece, the local idiom has no name.)



sponsored by

Related Articles
Africa
Chad and Sudan sign non-aggression pact
Feuding Chad and Sudan signed a deal in Senegal to "prohibit all activity by armed groups" and stop destabilizing each other. Libya, among other nations, will serve as overseer of the pact.
Middle East
Israel and Hamas inch towards truce
An unofficial deal seems to be in the works for Israel and Hamas due to Egyptian mediation. The Palestinian movement would stop rocket attacks while Israel would end counter-attacks.Geography partly corrected itself through an exchange of populations with Bulgaria in 1919, another with Turkey in 1923 and mass refugee flows during the 1946-49 Greek civil war. Temporary ceasefire lines gradually became sacred, eternal national borders. Strong social and political pressure, sweetened by the joys of city life, turned many of Greece's Slavs into fanatical Greek patriots.

Nation-building is a cruel process protected by a bodyguard of lies, but it works. Three generations of homogenisation, the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the marginalisation of Russia as Bulgaria's big brother, have made the Greek state safely and irreversibly Greek.

Because the stakes for Greece are negligible, Greek university professors now openly teach Greek students about the Slav-speaking villages around Florina and the tens of thousands of Greeks who still speak "local" on intimate occasions. A few hundred activists freely proclaim themselves Greece's Macedonian minority and campaign as the Rainbow party. But although protected by Brussels and funded by donations from an active diaspora, they have no hope of ever polling more than a few thousand votes.

Greeks lived peacefully next door to Tito's Socialist Republic of Macedonia. The SRM's independent successor poses even less a threat to Greek lands and dignity. Pretending otherwise is simply a theatrical work mounted by politicians and journalists to entertain the public and perhaps embarrass Karamanlis, Bakoyannis, or both. In a low-stakes game such as this, politicians obey Oscar Wilde's dictum: "A secret kept is a secret wasted".

Across the border the stakes are much higher. Undermined by economic woes and a restive Albanian minority, the government in Skopje is telling the truth when it argues that a composite name would forfeit its legitimacy in the eyes of its citizens. The Macedonian state is fragile enough that it can borrow from Herodotos the ringing defiance launched by the impoverished islanders of Andros: "The power of Athens can never be stronger than our inability." Simply by going limp and allowing chaos to prevail on Greece's northern border, Fyrom can do unacceptable damage to Greek interests.

Local demagogues urge preemptive creation of a new Darfur on Greece's doorstep, but ordinary Greeks know better. Their security and prosperity are increased by locking the peoples of "Upper Macedonia" firmly into the rules of Nato and the European Union. Karamanlis is perfectly aware that, by vetoing Nato's invitation for Macedonia to join, Greece is slashing its wrists to bleed on its neighbours' shoes. But what choice does he have?

A dictator could trade Greek acceptance of "Republic of Macedonia" for something valuable, such as a strict Macedonian compliance with the terms for Nato entry. This is something neither Brussels nor Washington can be trusted to impose. Even a less languid implementation of Andreas Papandreou's 1995 "interim agreement" with Skopje (which promised more and cleaner river water and upgraded transport infrastructure) would be a net gain for Greeks.

Karamanlis, however, is a democratic leader with an unstratospheric approval rating and a parliamentary majority of one seat. Accepting Skopje's bottom-line position - to add an adjective to Macedonian name tags at international meetings as a courtesy to any Greeks in the room - would not automatically lose him a confidence vote. MPs like being in power and will brutally punish the traitor who brings them down.

But Karamanlis would lose enough seats in the next elections to force him into an ugly, expensive coalition with Laos. Because selfish interest and national interest somewhat coincide, Karamanlis will veto Macedonia's Nato entry without hesitation.

This is Nimetz's last hurrah. Once a new US president is elected, a new diplomatic endurance con-*test*-('") will begin. Because the stakes of that con-*test*-('") are so asymmetrical, Greece will ultimately accept defeat. The Hellenic Republic, known to the rest of the world as Greece, and the Republika Makedonija, known to the rest of the world as Macedonia, will soberly establish full diplomatic relations in the wake of some tragedy. By then, alas, no one anywhere will care whether they do or not.

John Brady Kiesling, a former US diplomat, writes for Athens News and is the author of Diplomacy Lessons: Realism for an Unloved Superpower (Potomac Books).

FYROM ready to bend on name dispute

By Neil MacDonald in Skopje

Published: March 16 2008 16:22 | Last updated: March 16 2008 16:22

The FYR of Macedonia says it will bend as far as necessary in its protracted “name dispute” with Greece in return for a Nato membership invitation at the alliance’s Bucharest summit at the beginning of next month.

Matthew Nimitz, the United Nations mediator, holds last-ditch talks with the two sides in Vienna on Monday in search of a name for the former Yugoslav republic, whose current name the Greeks say implies territorial aspirations on their own northern province, also called Macedonia.

The Balkan identity battle has gained fresh urgency because Greece, a long-time alliance member, threatens to veto Nato entry for the weaker, ethnically volatile neighbouring country. Greek stubbornness - rather than FYROM's la-*test*-('") inter-ethnic internal crisis - could throw off the whole western strategy for stabilising the shaky region in the wake of Kosovo’s February 17 declaration of independence from Serbia, officials in Skopje warn. -

Nikola Dimitrov, FYROM's coordinator for Nato accession and chief negotiator in the name dispute, told the Financial Times: “On one side we have our identity - a line we can’t cross. And on the other side, we have Nato membership. Within those lines, we’re going to do whatever we can to resolve this last remaining issue with Greece.”

Mr Nimitz last month proposed five different name modifications without achieving a breakthrough. Amid intensified shuttling by Nato and EU diplomats in the past week, Skopje appeared amenable to “Democratic Republic of Macedonia”, while ruling out the only suggestion Athens would accept, “Republic of Upper Macedonia”.

The difference boils down to free use of the adjective “Macedonian” - especially as Skopje’s dignitaries mount the stage at the Nato summit on April 2. But if the dispute drags on, Athens could endanger Skopje’s eventual accession to the European Union.

The Greek government elected last year has made a U-turn from a previous deal whereby Skopje could apply to international organisations under the temporary name Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, or FYROM, Mr Dimitrov said.

”The veto policy is new. It goes against the accord signed between the two countries in 2005, and in that context it’s not legal. It’s also against the interest of the Nato alliance and the alliance’s values,” he said. Yeah because your propaganda and lies are really legal, and in the interest of NATO and its values. Douchebag.

Nato and EU membership are vital security goals for the ex-Yugoslav country of 2m people, desperate for economic growth and wracked by tensions between ethnic Skopjians and a sizable ethnic Albanian minority of roughly 25 per cent closely tied to Kosovo and Albania.

While “Euro-Atlantic” aspirations unite the two ethnic groups, the government of Nikola Gruevski, the centre-right prime minister, must overcome qualms about any name change among the overwhelming bulk of ethnic Skopjians.



Even when they seem to be ready to compromise, they still play with fire.

Is the end to this dispute approaching?

Greece and Macedonia Confirm Commitment to Solving Name Dispute


22 March 2008, Saturday


A large province in northern Greece is called Macedonia, and this is the main cause over the decade-long conflict over the constitutional name of FYROM. Map by travelinfo.gr
The Foreign Ministers of Greece and Macedonia confirmed on Saturday their intention to solve the dispute over the name of the former Yugoslavian Republic.

The announcement was made by the Greek Foreign Ministry after a meeting between the Greek Minister of Foreign Affairs Dora Bakoyannis and her Macedonian counterpart Antonio Milososki that took place in Brussels in the presence of the US Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried.

A meeting of the negotiators of the two sides Adamandios Vasilakis and Nikola Dimitrov with the UN mediator Matthew Nimitz has been scheduled for next week. It will be the last round of negotiations before the NATO Bucharest Summit on April 2-4, and Athens still threatens it may block Macedonia's invitation to join NATO unless the name dispute is settled.

Greece disputes Macedonia's name because one of its northern region has the same name. It has already blocked Macedonia's recognition by the UN under its constitutional name, and that is why the latter is recognized by the world organizations as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM).

The Greek newspaper Vima wrote Saturday that the two sides would most likely agree on the name "Nova (New) Macedonia", because it was relatively neutral.

The negotiations are taking place under the auspices of the USA, which is eager to get the issue done with before the forthcoming NATO summit.

And since we are often called Neohellenes (modern Greeks), they will be calledNeomakedones (modern/new Macedonians). Maybe we should save some ink and let them be called Macedonians plain. Then the Greek Macedonians will adopt the name Straight Macedonians and the whole world will refer to the Slavs as Gay Macedonians.

Sorry for being silly but I could not resist the title

Gruevski can keep on dreaming of his Greater Makedonskia because his Albanians have other plans:

The name dispute is already solved, their new name will be 'New Macedonia',they

dont want to tell us right now because are national holiday is coming up.We will

probably here the shocking news around {March 27 to April 1}

"New Macedonia" in my opinion will be the second worst solution (after the "Republic of Macedonia")

Noone will call them "New Macedonians" or NeoMacedonians" ofcourse. Very bad situation. I hope we continue the pressure for a name such as SlavoMacedonia although i think that it isnt even in the list of possible names. Its a pity. The best think we can do -if we accept this name- is to put some other subjects in the agenda (school textbooks, ethnicity, historical issues, nationalistic propaganda, etc).

well I'm going to call them "new Macedonians"

I will follow the letter of the law on this one

Well, it doesnt matter my friend Mickey. Our brilliant diplomatic and political leadership did it again..

New Macedonia?

Not the best solution, best solution would obviously be no use of the name Macedonia(not going to happen now anyway), or SlavMacedonia or something like that.
But this one, if it is the solution as Angelo says, can still be used to our advantage in the fight over our history.

If they are "New" Macedonia, then the OLD Macedonia is Greek. To put it simply. Of course it can only work to our advantage if the fat fucks running the country do more then sit on their hands.

During the last years, all that greek politicians want to achieve in the "Macedonian" issue is not to be accused by their political opponents as "traitors" and therefore lose votes.

So whether "new","upper" or whatever Macedonia will simply be welcome as a non defeat and therefore no loss of face.

The "macedonian" issue has been lost when Greece didnt resist at all Titos move to name the Skopje province as Republic of Macedonia. Then, circulars in all american embassies denounced Tito´s move as an attempt to destabilize Greece and raise border issues and nobody would have accused us of nationalism if measures against Yougoslavia were taken. But because of our fucking civil war nothing happened, and on top of that in a "friendly"move to Tito later on, the greeks allowed the yougoslavs the free use of the port of Thessaloniki for their imports/exports and introduced the name of the Republic of Macedonia in the school geography books.