The true background of the Agreement and its consequences

Sunday, 1 July 2018 - 11:12

The true background of the Agreement and its consequences

The notorious "Agreement" undoubtedly constitutes a shameful, despicable and burdensome deal; an agreement between the Hellenic Republic and an heterogeneous state structure, which is ethnologically composed of a mixture of peoples of various undefined ethnicities, and which produces direct legal effects.

This agreement is the political and ideological realization of the diachronic and constant secessionist, anti-national ideas of the defeated in the bandit war communists. Furthermore, it is the fulfillment of the unrequited goals and dreams of the Communists for a "Unified Independent Macedonia" with Thessaloniki as its capital, in accordance with the suggestions of the international lobbies. Besides, the Left has a long tradition in the struggle for the partitioning and fragmentation of Greece.

We cannot forget that the central article of the communist newspaper "Rizospastis" on September 19, 1932, was entitled: "PROCLAMATION TO THE MAKEDONIAN PEOPLE LIVING UNDER HELLENIC OCCUPATION!" The shameful and deplorable title and article naturally echo the “exploits” of the Communists, which they unsuccessfully try to hide and downgrade. Modern history, however, is full of the movements and actions of the communist spectrum, through which they manifested the destruction of the national fabric, the fragmentation of territorial integrity, the undermining of national interests and demands, and the promotion of the interests of other peoples to the detriment of our National Independence.

In the winter of 1920 the iconic… "Balkan Federation" was renamed as Balkan Communist Federation (BCF) and raised the issue of Macedonia's autonomy! The Greek Communist Party voted in favor of the Bulgarians' proposal to Comintern, which referred to the autonomous Macedonia and Thrace! The Congress of 1924 ratified the decision of the 7th conference of the "BALKAN COMMUNIST FEDERATION"!

The Communist Review of 1924 states: "The division of Macedonia between Yugoslavia, Greece and Bulgaria has further strengthened the desire of the Macedonians living in the various parts of their dismembered homeland towards the unification and restoration of a single and independent Macedonia. The same desire for a unified and independent Thrace brings together the Thracian people, who have been divided into three parts, by Greece, Turkey and Bulgaria"!

The 3rd Conference of the Greek Communist Party stated that "The local bourgeoisie is a national tyrant and an oppressor of the Macedonian and Thracian people", it proposed to "crush the national yoke of the local bourgeoisie that burdens Macedonia and Thrace", and ended with the revolutionary: Long live the Labor-Agrarian Revolution of Bulgaria! Long live the labor-agrarian government! Long live the independent Macedonia and Thrace! "These unrepentant people were legalized by the pseudo-prime minister Karamanlis, but they never denied their despicable, inflammatory and anti-hellenic positions.

Naturally, this article does not intend to stir up such issues, but the historic reality needs to be restored, because Greek history is currently taught through the deforming lenses of the left and the myopic and passionate appointed Communists, whose doctrine and obsessions prevailed over the truth during the sinful political transition. The agreement is full of signs that directly point to actions, perceptions, and ideas flowing from the long and inseparable Greek history, the Hellenic National Collective Consciousness and collective Memory.

Nevertheless, it is interesting to see the decision of the Supreme Court in 2009, with Vassiliki Thanou on the case, which cancels the government's approaches to the Skopjian issue:

The Supreme Court of the country has ruled that "there is no Macedonian nation and, therefore, there is no Macedonian civilization or Macedonian language."

The case began in 2003 when an association in Western Macedonia wanted to be recognized (following a court order). The Court of First Instance rejected the application for registration. Then an appeal was filed and the Court of Appeal rejected it because it concluded that the purpose of the Association "is contrary to public order and security, since it jeopardizes the institutions of the Greek State" and "causes confusion both within the country and internationally, to the States and the other associations with whom it will deal, and that the recognition of the Association clashes with the need for peaceful coexistence of the citizens of the region and the peace of the country". Finally, an appeal was brought, which was finally rejected by A.P. in 2009, ratifying the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

The key points of the decision that was approved by A.P., and which deconstruct the government's arguments about Skopje, are the following:

The decision was based on the reasoning that Greece is in conflict with FYROM because of its arbitrary and historically undocumented claim to be internationally recognized as the state of "Macedonia", and then, in order to restore the historic true to the usurpation of the name of Macedonia by the newly established state of Skopje, which seeks to obtain a national identity with a name that is a historical, cultural and national heritage of Greece, briefly noted the following historical data:

– “The term Macedonia, since the ancient times, has been a historical and geographical term, not an ethnological one. The Macedonians are not, nor have they been during the recent or distant past, a particular ethnological group. Simply, the inhabitants of that ancient Greek region were always called Macedonians, just like the inhabitants of Thrace are called Thracians, the inhabitants of Thessaly are called Thessalians, and so on, without there being a corresponding Thracian or Thessalian nationality. Therefore, the Macedonian nationality does not exist and cannot be "created" within the framework of the collective self-determination of the inhabitants of the wider geographic region of Macedonia.

– As Greeks, the ancient Macedonians used the same language as the rest of the Greeks, believed in the same gods and had the same (Greek) culture. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle was the teacher of Alexander the Great, and the findings in Vergina constitute a milestone in the history of the world and elements of the world culture that prove the Greekness of Macedonia. On the contrary, the Slavs, i.e. the various Slavic peoples who appeared in the Balkan region, north of Macedonia, during the 7th century AD., have nothing to do with the ancient Greek Macedonians.

– Due to the free movement of the populations in the time of the Ottoman Empire, some Slav-speaking Bulgarians, who had Slavic national consciousness, had settled in Greece, especially in the region of Western Macedonia. After the borders were finalized, most of them dispersed in the region of Skopje or immigrated to various states.

– The few people that remained in Greece and specifically in the Prefectures of Florina and Edessa, declared that they have Greek nationality and so there has been no question of a Slavic minority since that time. Before 1944, "Macedonia" as a Slavic state and "Macedonian nation" as a separate ethnicity, were completely unknown. Until then, the inhabitants of the area of Skopje had neither Serbian nor Bulgarian national consciousness, despite the Bulgarian preferences of most of its inhabitants. Furthermore, they did not have any "Macedonian" national consciousness. They became convinced of the latter by Tito, in an effort to detach Skopje from the chariot of the Bulgarians, having as his ultimate purpose the establishment of a single Macedonian state under a Slavic mantle and the creation of an exit for his country into the Aegean.

– No civilized people can tolerate the falsification of their history. This effort by Skopje began after the breakup of Yugoslavia, after the Skopjian State acquired an entity in 1991, and this dissemination of ideas was encouraged by various nationalist immigrants who, through organizations and unions operating mainly abroad (Australia, Canada, USA), with speeches, meetings, cultural events, etc. misinformed the public, creating falsehoods about the existence of a "Macedonian" nation and culture, a "Macedonian" language and consciousness. At the same time, they cultivated the idea of ​​"irredentism", as already mentioned, trying to create secessionist tendencies, putting forth the non-existent issue of a so-called "Macedonian minority" living in Greece.

– The decision concludes by stating that, according to all of the above, there is no Macedonian nation and, consequently, no Macedonian culture nor Macedonian language "MAKEDONCKI". Naturally, there is no "Macedonian minority" in Greece. It goes without saying that a mosaic of ethnicities cannot, in a period of sixty years, acquire an ethnical entity based on fabricated historical data."

Also, the article by the Professor of Linguistics and former rector of the University of Athens, G. Babiniotis, on the "Macedonian" language is quite enlightening:

"The reason for invoking 1977 and many other dates came to light: during the negotiations with Skopje, their Bulgarian-Serbian Slavic language was recognized as "Macedonian". They were officially given a name with which this language has nothing to do. So much labor, so many expectations, gave birth to so much bitterness and to such a sense of frustration...

We wrote, explained, substantiated, reasoned, and thought that one of the negotiators or decision-makers of the Skopjian issue would hear us. Nothing! Now the naive writer of these lines understands why the intelligent minister stubbornly referred to 1977. Because ex-post excuses were sought, in order to justify the unjustifiable.

Apparently, in all that give-and-take of the negotiations it was decided to offer as a present the name "Macedonian" to the Slavic Skopjian language, and they were looking for a supposed "precedent" and a supposedly "historical background". Thus, the Skopjian diplomatic "argument" (explicitly dated to 1991, when FYROM became autonomous) that their language is "Macedonian", i.e. the use by the Skopjans of a pseudonym for a language which is only a Bulgarian Slavic idiom, a Slavic language, which is written in the Slavic Cyrillic alphabet as all Slavic languages, was greatly reproduced by those who knew the truth and others who were not informed about ​​the subject even though they ought to.

I was explaining in public [Protagon, The News, Free Press, radio and television interviews] what was discussed in 1977; a technical question of how to standardize the geographical names of the countries in the Latin alphabet (such as Yugoslavia then, Greece and China, the Arab countries and Israel, the countries of the Soviet Union and many other countries). As a participant, I was explaining that this was the subject of the 3rd UN Conference in Athens ("the standardization of geographical names"), but some officials (Ministers and Deputies of the government) – it was them, not the Skopjians! – kept talking about a supposed recognition of the Skopjian language as “macedonian” by us)!... How could anyone claim that in Athens, under the governance of Konstantinos Karamanlis, with Konstandinos Trypanis, (his close friend and partner) as the Minister of Culture, with a group of linguists and geographers among us, i.e. scientists specializing in the subject, not diplomats (all of us opposed in every way any kind of thought about giving the Skopjian language the pseudonym "Macedonian") some “Macedonian” language was recognized in 1977!

And then, there was light. The reason for invoking 1977 and many other dates came to light: during the negotiation with Skopje, their Bulgarian-Serbian Slavic language was recognized as "Macedonian".  They were officially given a name with which this language has nothing to do.  And the compensation: It will be mentioned somewhere in the agreement that the officially recognized “Macedonian” language of Skopje is not Macedonian but Slavic!... But if both sides explicitly agree that it is (as indeed it is) a Slavic language, why do we agree to call it "Macedonian", a name that explicitly refers to the Greek language of Macedonia (ancient, new and modern)? Is this not an appropriation and usurpation of a national name by a language the speakers of which (I mean the Skopjians), have a different national origin?

Is not this usurpation made for the obvious reason that a national language is also a decisive component of a national identity, a different identity from the true historical one that the citizens of Skopje have? Is it serious or sound to argue that those who will call the language of Skopje “Macedonian” will care to search the agreement that has been signed in order to be informed about the real origin and status of this so-called "Macedonian" language?

Plato says somewhere in the Sophist, "every one of them seems to tell us a story, as if we were children" (μῦθόν τινα ἕκαστος φαίνεταί μοι διηγεῖσθαι παισίν ὡς οὖσιν ἡμῖν). This is also how they deal with all of us, who painfully care about our own, Hellenic, historically well-established Macedonia, and thus, we are forced - even though a little late - to exclaim under these circumstances: "every one of them seems to tell us a story, as if we were children"…

So many negotiations, so much labor, so many expectations, gave birth to so much bitterness and to such a sense of frustration. In the end, at least as far as the language is concerned, it seems there was “much ado about nothing..."

However, let's examine this agreement, focusing on the most important parts:

- Part 1, Article 1, Paragraph 3 case (b) and (c), (e)

"The citizenship of the Second Party will be Macedonian / citizen of the Republic of Northern Macedonia"

"The official language of the Second Party will be Macedonian / citizen of the Republic of Northern Macedonia"

"The country codes for the car plates of the Second Party will be NM and NMK..."

We see here that the Macedonian ethnicity and language is fully recognized! This constitutes national yieldingness. It is usurpation, brutal appropriation and counterfeiting of history, since a national name is attributed to a language (Slavic) that is of different national origin. In Article 7, it is stated that "the Macedonian language belongs to the group of Southern Slavic languages". This is absolute paranoia. It is called "Macedonian" but it is Slavic. This is perhaps the strongest argument for the deconstruction of the agreement.

It also guarantees usurpation due to the "NM" and "NMK" marks on the plates of Skopjian vehicles. Thus, at the institutional level, the name of the particular state structure is established as northern Macedonia etc.

- Part 1, Article 3

"None of the parties will express or support any demands..."

"Each Party undertakes to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the other Party..."

"The Parties undertake not to attempt, incite, or support ...any non-friendly acts or activities against the other Party."

"Each Party shall immediately reveal any information it possesses in relation to any acts or intentions".

This article constitutes the epitome of national yieldingness. Consequently, any national event, assembly or national rally, which will have the Greekness of Macedonia as its central slogan, can be perceived as a demand, as undermining the sovereignty of Skopje, and as a separatist effort against its territorial integrity!

In addition, any national action, rally, etc., establishes an undertaking to "instigate non-friendly actions". At this point the national struggle is bluntly eliminated and we are forbidden to have any national objections that aim at demonstrating the existing usurpation of Greek history and the name of Macedonia, and the need to overthrow the historical counterfeiting.

Furthermore, according to paragraph 4, the Greek State has the obligation to give Skopje any information the authorities have in relation to acts relating to all of the above! The state will act as a watchman and policeman of the Skopjians.

- Part 1, Article 4, paragraph 2

According to this, Greece, as a Party, "undertakes not to make or allow any irredentist statements..."

Therefore, the Greek side forsakes the right to defend the Greekness of Macedonia, because any kind of national event aimed at restoring the historical truth against the historical counterfeiting, can be perceived as an "irredentist" position and action. Every manifestation of our national pride against the usurpers is forbidden.

- Part 1, Article 4, par. 3

At this point, Greece as a Party essentially undertakes not to interfere in the other Party’s internal affairs. Sure, but what about the dubious organizations that act as "cultural associations", groups, or even political party structures? What has the role of the notorious "Rainbow" been so far; a structure made up of people who identify themselves as "Macedonians"? Don’t all of these factors constitute interference in Greece's internal affairs? Therefore, the agreement is a priori against the Greek side, undermining our national rights, because it forms the ideological-political sub-layer on which future objections and claims against our territorial integrity will be based.

- Article 6 par. 1, 2

"Aiming to enhance the friendly bilateral relations, each Party shall immediately take effective measures to prohibit hostile activities, acts or propaganda by government agencies .... to prevent activities likely to incite chauvinism, hostility, irredentism ... "

Here we find the description of absolute intervention in the internal affairs of Greece; a paragraph that deconstructs the content of par. 3, article 4, part 1. According to this, parades, slogans, and marches are forbidden because they come under this provision. Military marches, songs and slogans sang by our army battalions for Macedonia, Pavlos Melas and his struggle for Macedonia, stemming from our own Collective National Memory and echoing the fights of our Nation, are being persecuted and banned...!

Same is the framework for paragraphs 2, 3, which give the power to prevent private operators from "instigating violence, hatred or hostility", or in other words patriotic associations, Pan-Macedonian associations and, of course, nationalist associations fighting against this abomination that infringes and undermines the national interests.

- Article 8 par. 5

An "Interdisciplinary Committee" is openly set up here, in order to revise (!) school books. This promotes brutal counterfeiting and distortion of history because the historical truth will be prosecuted for "promoting irredentist / revisionist references"!

-         Article 13

"Taking into account the fact that the second Contracting Party is a landlocked state, the Contracting Parties shall be guided by the relevant provisions of the United Nations regarding the Law of the Sea, which shall also have practical application, but shall also apply when agreements are concluded as referred to in Article 18 of this Agreement".

According to this, Skopje seeks through the Agreement to gain access to the Aegean, thus bringing to life Tito's vision for an "exit to the Aegean". In other words, Greece is obliged to conclude and accept a special article on the issue of the Law of the Sea. The agreement, therefore, enshrines the right of Skopje, as a "landlocked" state, to free access to the Aegean Sea, exploitation of the Greek EEZ, fishing in the Greek seas, use of the Greek naval ports for ships with their (Macedonian) flag in the Aegean, under Article 69 of the International Convention on the Law of the Sea and the UN Convention (1982).

In conclusion, this "Agreement" constitutes an unhistorical, anti-national and groundless text that promotes foreign interests and aspirations to the detriment of the Greek State and Nation.

George Syros