31
rli ta U T I UE TEF ,

Background to the Macedonian question · community members, including Greece, had recognised the state of ... Macedonians to em te to Australia, Canada and the United States. Two

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

rli ta

U T I U E TEF

,

ISSN 1321-1560

Copyright Commonwealth of Australia 1994

Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyl-ight Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reprodud or transmitted in any form or by any means including information storage and retrieval system, without the prior written consent of the Department of the Parliamentqy Library, other than by Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official duties.

Published by the Department of the Parliamen

This paper has been prepared for general distribution to Members of the Australian Parliament. Readers outside the Parliament are reminded that this is not an Australian Government document, but a paper prepaxed by the author and published by the Parliamentary Research Service to contribute to consideration of the issues by Senators and Members. The views expressed in this Paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Research Service and are not to be attributed to the Department of the Parliamentary Library.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Oni. i _ l i l t ; . D O . O . . . . . . . . * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

ition on the 's applicat~on for U member§hip

ommis§ion of the adinter Commission)

P

Recognition by the Federal G o v e ~ m e n t of the Republic of Macedonia under the tempor the United Nations of 'Former Yugoslav Republi OM) on 15 February 1994 has

iderable discussion, controversy and criticism from a

The angry reaction of Greek-Australian community leaders was predictable. After all, they had been lobbying the Government not to recognise the government in Skopje ever since the break-up of Yugoslavia. It was subsequently revealed that the Federal Government had been debating its decision for some time.

Macedonian community leaders were pleased with the Government's belated decision to recognise M O M , but equally predictably upset at the conditions imposed by Canberra for the opening of a FYROM consulate and at the insistence that community members be termed 'Slav-Macedonians' for official purposes.

The Australian media was also critical of the Federal Government's handling of the affair,

The firebombings of churches, attacks on business premises and proliferation of graffiti which, interestingly, did not appear to occur in other countries with large Greek and Macedonian populations, were widely deplored. The Victorian Ethnic Affairs Commissioner, Professor Trang Thomas, chaired a meeting of the two sides, following which community leaders blamed the violence on a small minority of hot-heads, which was undoubtedly accurate. However, the two communities themselves cannot escape some responsibility for appearing to have fanned the flames of this dispute for many years in the ethnic press and from the pulpit. State Premiers and Opposition leaders who took sides in the dispute were criticised by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, as well as by the media.

This Current Issues Brief looks at the history of Macedonia and the stances of the two sides on the Macedonian Question as reflected in official statements and press comments. I t also considers official Australian Government views on the subject.

INhile there is a long and complex history to claims and counter-claims in this controversy, this region's history is both a cause and a consequence e oreover, since the nation and the state have often not coincided in determining units of government in i n t e ~ a t i o n a l relations, as in the cases of the actors in this drama, this paper

oncludes with erit or o t h e r ~ i s e of

stinct from the

On 25 January 1991, the F ~ ~ M adopted a declaration of sovereignty. A referendum on the country's future was held on 8 September 1991

, however, boycotted by the Albanian minority, and on 17 ovember 1991 a new Constitution was adopted. The eclared its independence on 19 December 1991. The IF

, like that of some other former Republics of the SF ch as Slovenia and Croatia, was finally r the name 'Former Yugoslav Republic of

15 February 1994 after 58 other countries had already done so .. and only after recognition by the United States. The ~~~~~~~Q~~~~~

rald reported that the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, enator the Won Nick Bolkus, had deter ined that it was 'too hard to

sell (recognition) politically until, and unless, the U position.l2

a statement made in Brussels on ctober 1993, Greek. inister ~apandreou affirmed that

community members, including Greece, had recognised the state of the case from the moment it (F

and there was thus reco formation's political existence and sovereignty.

reece has imposed a blockade of the country, which is ece claims the sole right to u at the ancient territo

1 The majority of countries have recognised the F under the UN's 'temporary' designation of 'Former Yugoslav Republi donia,' although a number, including the othe have extended recognition to the 'Republic o

e all ancient empir . It was a territory, not a people.

plains watered by the Axius war adjoining regions. In the mounta

cedonian principalities, which were separate kingdoms until the reign of Phillip 11, were counted as belonging to Epirus at various periods (see Map B). The acedonians did not regard themselves as Greek, although they were closely related in both language and culture. The name 'Macedonian' is, however, Greek. The original capital was Aigai (Edessa~odena), but from the 4th ~ e ~ t u ~ BC was located at Pella in northern Greece. Ancient Macedonia was noted above all for its timber, which was essential for the Greek shipbuilding industry.

Pre-Roman periud

Unification began in the entury BC under the founded by Perdikkas I. een about 514-479 B Persian tributary. Un xander I (495-450/4

d elements of G ture as a deliberat the ruling house. Under a later monarch, Amyntas 111 (413-399 BC), Macedonia became influential in the neighbouring It achieved its greatest extent under Philip I1

'states' of Chalcidice and Th a confederatio eek 'states' at Chaeronea in

s stage Macedonia extended der the Great (336-

the empire throughout nor and as far as Afghanistan and the Punjab, defeating the Persians in several battles, Following his death, the empire fell apart, but Antigonus 111 (229-22~ BC) regained control over the Greek 'states.' fter three wars against the Romans, the last

3 Actually, this dates only from the 1987 administrative reforms when the Regions of Macedonia Central, Macedonia East and Thrace, and Macedonia West were created.

4 It should be borne in mind that boundaries change over time. Even China, with its long history, did n

Spain, Luxembourg and Germany (to mention only a few examples) ruled over much greater territories in ~ ~ r o ~ ~ than they now comprise.

each its greatest historical extent until the Dynasty (1644-1911). at various periods, Sweden, Lithuania, England,

acedonian king, Perseus, was defeated by L. Aemilius Paullus in 168 BC at Pydna (near Olympus).

Roman province

After their victory over Perseus, the Romans divided Macedonia into four regions. They also forbade the cutting of timber for shipbuilding and mining for gold and silver. In 148 BC the Romans joined Epirus to the four regions and created the Province of Macedonia which extended from Durres (Dyrrhachium) to Philippi and Skopje (Scupi) to Pharsalus. The Province was administered by a Proconsul with the rank of praetorian. Thessalia was joined to Macedonia under Antonius Pius (138-161 AD) and Salonika became the capital.

Mediaeval period

After the Roman Empire was divided in 395 AD, Macedonia became part of the Byzantine Empire. It was invaded by the Goths and Huns, and later came under Slav domination from the 6th Century AD. The Slavic element in the inhabitants of the region dates from this period. Macedonia was seized by Bulgaria in the 9th Century AD, but regained by the Byzantine Empire in the early 11th Century. After the temporary dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire at the hands of the Seljuq Turks, Normans and the Crusaders (Constantinople itself fell to a Western Crusade in 1204), several rulers fought over Macedonia. In 1261 it again became part of the Byzantine Empire, only to be conquered by Serbia in the 14th Century. From the late 14th-19th Century Macedonia formed part of the Ottoman (Turkish) Empir e.

Later history

Under the Treaty of San Stefan0 (Yesilkoy) ending the last Russian- Turkish War, which was signed on 3 March 1878, most of Macedonia was given to Bulgaria (then protected by Russia). This treaty also created independent Rumania, Montenegro and Serbia and awarded part of Armenia to Russia. Because of fears of domination of the Balkans by 'Greater Bulgaria,' the powers amended these territorial changes at the 1878 Berlin Congress, returning Macedonia to Turkey.'

The main Macedonian nationalist movement, IMRO (Independent Macedonian Revolutionary Organisation), formed in 1893, eventually split between those who wanted to unite with Bulgaria and those who

5 The Conference was convened by Germany at the request of Austrian-Hungarian Foreign Minister Andrassy and British Prime Minister Disraeli. Both Austria- Hungary and Great Britain feared that the new states would provide a pretext for Russian dorniazation of the Balkans.

ere were

purposes. In September 1924 Greece and Bulgaria signed a Protocol (Kalfov-Politis Agreement) placing the Macedonian mino under League of Nations protection. The Kingdom of

d Slovenes (the precursor to Yugoslavia) thereupon abrogated the

n 15 January 1925 Greece withdrew from the Protocol; henceforth all Macedonians were regarded as Greek, all placenames were chan all Slavic schools were closed and even Church Slavonic texts on icons adorning churches were overpainte with Greek texts. During the

etaxas regime (1936-1941) large numbers of Macedonians were nterned because of Greek doubts about their loyalty, particularly

following the outbreak of war with Italy in October 1940. to teach adult Macedonians the Greek language was also introduced.

en Greece was defeated by the is forces in 1941, occupied eastern Greek (Aegean) Macedonia, while the occupied Salonika and part of western Macedonia. The remainder was occupied by Italian troops. The brief period of Bulgarian occupation

as so repressive that the acedonian population was alienated and reeks forced from work. ther, Greeks became more opposed than

ever to the 'United Macedonia' line of the Greek Communist

These are commonly accepted terms for the geographical regions inhabited by ~ a ~ d o n i a ~ in the Balkan states. See, for example, Barbara Jelavich, History of the Balkans, 2 vols. (Cambridge: University Press, 1983).

These terms are used in a geographical, not ethnic, sense.

8 This took place in November 1926; see Eflimeris tis Kiverniseos 322,

Use of Macedonian had been banned by Decree 1938.

r, in which the Gre rnment was sup United States, led acedonians and

ational Liberation

overnment viewed the population with suspicion and attempted to remove them from

donian region was to be ere allowed to be used,

Macedonians from official posts in the region. These policies led many Macedonians to em te to Australia, Canada and the United States. Two Acts of the Pa 1540 (1985) - excluded Macedonians from a right of return to and a right to regain their expropriated property;"

reou Government - No 106841 (1982) and

cedonians are required to deny their nationality to regain their Acts violate pr~visions in the Universal Declaratio

cedonian language

Since Greece equates Greek identity with use of the Greek language, the nature of the Ancient Macedonian language is a not insignificant

tter, Plutarch, in his description of the events after Alexander's death, refers to the soldiers 'shouting in take this to mean that the original Mace from their Greek colonisers. Demosthenes also referred to Alexander as a 'barbarian,' in other words, a non-Greek. he Byzantine ruler

si1 I (867-886 AD), founder of the illustrious ' acedonian Dynasty' hich lasted until 1055, spoke

donian was not a reek dialect, but possess elements eek alongside a n-Greek core. ause of phonetic

older stratum cannot have ac. adle 'sky' as against Gk.

ac. abr'uwes 'eyebrows' as against k. ophr'yes. The an (an Indo-~uropean ther s t r a t u ~ contained

ifferences, it is apparent that much of een borrowed from Greek, for example

relationship of ancient language) is still a matte

0 These rights were reserved to '

onian is, of cou eoples to the re iaeval period.

t

reek ~overnments have the very idea of ationalisrn or

Greece. To the authorities in Athens, ans are 'Slavophone Greeks' (Slavic-speaking Greeks) - while 'Macedonia is Greek and only Greek.' A. number of Macedonians have been tried in the Greek courts for opposing the Government line.

Greece held talks with both Yugoslavia and Bulgaria in September 1991 in efforts to have the OM incorporated into Greece, M e n this was unsuccessful, Greece tried to use its European Community (now European Union) membership to fight not only recognition of the FYROM, but also that country's use of the name 'Macedonia' and the 16-ray sun from the tomb of Philip I1 as the national symbol (adopted at the urging of the Australian Macedonian community). The official Greek view is that the authorities in Skopje have irredentist designs

acedonia, How , the new Macedonian Constitution on 6 January 1

Amendment I

1. The Republic of acedonia has no territorial claims against neighbouring states .

Amendment I1

1, The Republic shall not interfere in the soverei of other states and their internal affairs.

It is, of course, true that elements in t NE (Party of

r a 'Greater Macedonia.' l1 rticularly the nationalist tional Unity), which camp

11 It is, however, considered likely t will lose seats in the next senibly election. See egvvina, Croatia, 9

enegro, Slovenia. Cou 1st ~ u a ~ ~ r 19 telligenee Unit, 1994),

~ u l ~ ~ i a formally reco

Council adopted goslav Republic of

of the United

becarne a me

t a further meeting arch 1994, the vie

1

13

. Count rd. 2n on: Economist I n ~ l l i g e n ~ Unit, 1994), pp. 9-10,

t

It was on the ba 'S constitutional and other legal mework by the Arbitration Commission of the Conference on oslavia (Badinter Commission) that European nations recognised the FYR Appendix €3 for official responses to the Co mission's quest to enact provisions i the ~onst i tut ion enshrining minority rights is currently before the ational Assembly (Sobranje)

factory evaluation of the F

The FYROM is not willing to compromise on its choice of name (i.e., Republic of Macedonia), which has been used for almost half a centu as to do so might then lead to the questioning of its very identity.

fears the prospect Serbian irredentism; there are grade who still regar the country as 'South Serbia,' It

faces a Greek embargo. As a landlocked country, its only alternative supply routes are from Burgas (Bulgaria) and Durres or Vlora (Albania), all of which ports suffer from infrastructure problems. It is obviously not in the FYROM's interest, nor does it have the capabilit to embark on any 'adventure' to incorporate Greek Macedonia. U

ecurity Council Resolution 795, adopted on 11 provides for deployment of 800 UNPROFOR tr

onitor the borders with Albania and the goslavia, has provided a measure of security.

OM'S willingness to strive for an agreement w issues' was again stressed by President K r o

1994 f o l l o ~ i n ~ r e c o ~ i t i o n by the United

e are prepared to address these issues with good will, in a constructive spirit and with due flexibility from b would like, once again, to emphasise that the

on ects the territ lic ece and all n 15

far without success.

4, the issue of t on a number

occasions. The o oreign Affairs an

ed by the Minister stion on Notice on

e Former Yugoslav including the issue

The outst tan din^ issues' had been s enator Evans in an 992, when he said: uestion without

Australia will not proceed to recognition until the following basic, outstanding question are resolved: th name issue - the use of the word 'Macedonia' - being settled in a way which does not cause further tension with Greece; Greece's concern about possible territorial claims or aspirations being fully met; and the international community's concern about the protection of minorities being fully satisfied.

s already noted, the FYROM has written a renunciation of any territorial claims into its Constitution. As far as the Albanian minor is concerned, the Albanian Party for Democratic ~rosperi ty has

0-seat National Assembly and is the second-largest party oalition. This can be contrasted with the situation in

Greece, where the Rainbow Party representing the country's

candidates in the recent European Parliament elections. acedonian minority was banned by the ourt from fieldin

ustralian recognition of the OM was exce ally qualified. In announcing the decision, the ster for Forei ffairs said that

agreement to the opening of a would be subject to the eo a p p r o ~ r i a t ~ l y (as the onsulate of the 'Former

ic news bulletin, 11.

of some State P the issue was a

a reports suggested tates President Bill ennett even offered to help Uni

question. 18

The violence that was manifest in other countries ac~donian population

stralia did not appear to occur in

ly partly reflects communiti~s in

19

on for this is not entirely clear, but that there are large concentrations

owever, this issue also appears to have been kept us for attention for many years by the Greek

acedonian ethnic presses, by some de r in the two communities. 2o Amongst academics supporting one or other side, many containi

and by irredentist elements e articles in the media by

udes of Gree

~~

16 11, 15 Feb 1994.

17

19 T analysis o C n and the of

20

birth or nationality data was required to

only and one which not affect the right of individuals or

some who had difficulty with it. The

in several countries, inclu

13.4. the U

.3.1

nt

ince there are names, of count

stances of neighbo

of Luxembourg in Belgium adjac of Luxembourg.

Also open to question is reliance on history or historical boundaries to determine what territory is or is not a nation and what nationality a people possess. a t least two occ ions in its hist territory of pres -day Greece was art of foreign 'modern' nation state dates largely from the Treaty of Westphalia (1648) - the boundaries of earlier 'nations' were considerably more fluid since citizens owed allegiance to a sovereign (ecclesiastical or temporal) rather than to a territory, and this may or may not have had little association with ethnicity, To look at the example of Luxembourg again, in the late 15th Century it included t from present-day Belgium, Netherlands and Germany,

As Professor Peter Hill (University of Hamburg) has observed, both sides to the dispute can be seen to be attemptin contemporary political claims through assumed historical, ethnic and linguistic continuity, which in each case can be questioned:

The modern-day 'Greeks' are not descended from the ancient k cultural symbols in pened to live in more

or less the same part of the world as the ancient Greeks did. Their justification for this was thus the same as that used by the present-day Mace ians in appropriating the ancient Macedonian heritage. st of the 19th-Century 'Greeks' not only did not call themselves enes (it was the intellectual nationalists that taught the do that), they did no speak Greek, but rather anian, Slavonic or dialect^.'^

propriated ancient simply because the

or, it may be observed, are symbols the proprietary country. Stars shine across national borders. The

Age, 20.41994, 17.

the flag of Uruguay.

ew Zealand, Papua everal A u s t r a l ~ a ~ a

hlEDITE R RAN EAN SEA

1 Olbia 2 Tyrus 3 Chersonesos 4 Ca l la t i s 5 Roma 6 Neapolis 7 Beneventurn 8 Ausculum

9 Brundisiurn 10 Heraclea 11 Tarenturn 12 Apolloaia 13 Pelia 14 Thessalonica 15 Philippi 16 Lysimscheia

17 Byzantiurn 18 Chalcedon 19 Amasrris 20 Heraclea 21 Panormus 22 Agrigentum 23 Gela 24 Rhegiurn

25 Syracusae 33 Cyzikos 26 Delphi 34 Pergamum 27 Athens 35 Magnesia 28 Corinthos 36 Sardes 29 Sparta 37 Ephesus 30 lilion 31 Abydos 32 Ankyra

Concerning the application of the former Yugoslav Republic acedonia for admission to the United Nations

1. Greece believes that the application of the forner Yugosiav Republic of biacedonia for admission to membership in the United Nations u n d e r the denomination mentioned in its application introduces an element of further destabilization of the southern Balkans both in a short and a long term perspective. Therefore, strongly objecting io this membership, Greece feels obliged to forward to the Security Council a number of pertinent considerations which point to the conclusion that the applicant should not be admitted to the U . Y . prior [ o a settlement of certain outstanding issues, necessary €or safeguarding peac and stabilirv, as well as good neighbourly relations in the repon. When such a settlement is reached Greece would not oppose F.Y.R.O.M.'s admission to the United Yations and, indeed i t would be ready to extend recognition and establish co-operation wi th this

2. In its request for admission to the United Nations the F.Y.R.O. . includes on the one hand

a purported commitment to accept and observe dli obligations deriving from the United Nanons

Charter and, on the other, a claim that its admission to U.N. membership wouid contribute towards

a peaceful'solution of the crisis in the territorv of former Yugoslavia.

3. as the constituen fulfi l the obligati

e declarations. n r v e r I heless, past experiences and practices, ds well

of the new republic raise serious concerns about its willingneu 10

he U . N . C h a r t e r .

4. The new republic e erged as s u c s e w r [ o the former Yugoslav Federative Republic k d

e phi losoph~ of its Constitution, adoprcd on 3ovember 17, 1991, is based, i n t e r dli

on the principles and the constituent declararions of that federative state which were endorsed in August 1944 by the "Antifascist Assembly of [ h c 5a t iona l Liberation of ~ ~ ~ c e d Q n i a " (A.S.Y.0 31 In these deciarations, sited in the preamble of the C'k)nst i [ut ion. there are direct references 10 the

1.. ,

7

annexation of the ~ a c e d o n i a n prcvinces of Greece a n Bulgaria, and to the establishment e v i n t u a l i y

of a greater Lfacedoni n state w t h i n the Yugoslav deration ( t 1).

5 . epublic of ~ a c e d o n i a " in the vanguard, tried to a c c o ~ p i i s h these aims bv ~ u p p o r ~ i n a communist uprising in Greece (which resulted in a three-year civil war) as a means of annexing reek Macedonia. When th a n n e ~ t i o ~ of Greek lands failed in 1948, efforts continued in order to undermine Greek sovereignty over Greek Macedonia by attempts to monopolize the Macedonian name, thus staking a lasting claim to Greek territories and, indeed, to Greek Macedonian heritage. I t is worth recalling tha t this question had been on the agenda of the Security Council and the General Assembly from 194-6 to 1950 under the heading "The Greek

In the 19110's. Tito's Yugoslavia, wi th the *People's

t 2 ) .

6. , such practices poisoned good neighbourly relations and stability in the regon, particularly since officials of the republic continued, u p to the disintegration of Yugoslavia, to expresl expansionist views. After the collapse of former Yugoslavia these extreme expansionist claims by ~ a t ~ o n ~ ~ s ~ s in S afresh stronger i

7. proclaimed itself independent in 1991 and is now seeking admission to the United Nations.

I t is on such grounds and on such precedents that the former federative republic in Skopje

8. have shown that there is a clear link and continuitv of aims and actions in particular against G r e c

Reference has already been made to the Constitution of F.Y.R.O. of A.S.N.O.M., of 19 II In this Constitution there are also references to the possibiiity of chmg

of borders - while F.Y.R.O. rritory remains *indivisible and ~nai ienab~e" (Art. 3) - and in te rven in the internal affairs of n ring states on the pretext of issues concern in^ "the status and t

rights' of alleged m ~ o r i t. 49). There are ~ u m e r o u s indications that the expansion

ring Macedonian province of Greece continues unabated. Thu a shown, in particular, thro de circulation within F.Y.R.O.M. of maps portraying a y rea t c r

Macedonia Le. incorporating Iiterarure usurpin affixed on the ne Greece in rhe tomb of

Since the declaration of independence, a series of initiatives taken by [he authorities of Skopje.

parts of the territorv of all its neighbouring states, and of h a t 1

bols and heritage. As recently as ~ u g u s r 1992, the authorities in hkop

donian d y n a t v fou

/ . f 0

.J

ow t h a t ar this urni in^ point, when the a ities have not abandon^

me of a state is a symbol. T-hus, the fact thar the authorities in Skopje have adopted the lic of ~ a c e d o n ~ a ~ for their state is of paramount

the name of a wider geographi

clearly u n ~ g r m i ~ e s the s o ~ ~ r e i ~ n ~ y of n e i ~ h b ctive ~ ~ a c e d o n i a n regions. To be p r ~ c i s ~ , 51.5% of the ~ ~ a c e d o n i a n geo with a popu~at ion of over 2.5 million people, while the r e ~ a j n i n IOTO in other n e i ~ h ~ u r i n g states. Moreover, the territory of F.Y.R.O.P\.I., with the exception o a narrow srrip in the south, had never been part of historic

evertheless, F.Y.R.O.M. insists on monopoiizing the bjacedonian name in the denomination of the state, and thus pretends to

geographical region. There is no doubt that rhe exclusive use of the official denomination would be a stimulus for expansionist claims not only by

ts in Skopje but by future generations as w I I . After all, the name conveys i through the centuries.

the sole titledeed holder of acedonian name in the republic's

visions both over the land and the heritage of

11. To prevent such d e s t a ~ ~ ~ i ~ n situations from threat eace and good neighbourly relations in the area, the European Corn uni ty , lo which F.Y. . applied for recognition, has set

prerequisites for the recognition of the appl icant bv the Community and its member states, The= prerequisites are cited in the following Securitv Counal documents: (S/23293( 17 December 199 I L S/23880 ( 5 May 1992), S/24200 (29 June 1992). (14 December 1992). Briefly, they stipulatt: that F.Y.R.O.M. should provide the necessarv political guarantees that i t will harbor no I e r r i torial claims any hostile propaganda against this count? and that it Will not u c \late's de nomination. Unfortunate lv, F.Y. R.O.%cf has failed to CQ

12. During the past year, Greece has convc d to Skopje. on a number of occasions, its ~ ~ n c ~ r c d e t e r ~ i n a t i o n to proceed with the development of all round economic and political co-operation wth

the neighbouring republic, as soon as F.Y. d b p r c d the foregoing EX. prerequisites for

recoyi t ion. Moreover, Greece has taken rhr make public declarations recognizing and _e as inviolable their respective f ronwrs Furthermore, Greece has supported E.C. iniuativcx in prov ide humanitarian and economic aid to t h l J

republic. while the Greek Prime Minister publrclv ~ . r ~ n c f e d d hand of co-operation to Skopje. In

A / 4 7 / 8 7 7 S / 2 5 1 5 8 Englis Page 6

addition, Greece has supported a recen: effort by the European Community and individual members of the Community in seeking a peaceful way to settle [he problem.

13. Unfortunately. the authorities of Skopje have p rsisted in pursuing an inflexible and

uncooperative attitude by rejecting all proposals aiming at a peaceful settlement of the ou [standing issues.

14. I t is in the competence of the Security Council not only to resolve disputes but also to take necessary actions to prevent them as well. This is a clear case where preventive diplomacy is urgently needed. A11 efforts and ail proposals in this direction should be explored. I t should be noted that there have been cases in which application to membership has been subjected to prior fulfillment of certain conditions in the interest of peace and security.

15.

meeting the necessary prerequisites, and in particular abandoning the use of the denominati "Republic of Macedonia", would perpetuate and increase friction and tension and would not

regretfully would not be able to recognize this republic.

Greece wishes to point out that the admission of F.Y.R.O.M. to U.N. membership prior to

eace and stability in an already troubled region. Under these circumst

16. neighbours while attaching primary importance to the peaceful solution of disputes arising be them. I t is cmfident thar the Security Council, as the custodian of world peace and stability wi all appropriate steps and measures for the settlement of the issue on hand, in a way to prcycnt developments which might impede a constructive solution through peaceful means. Finallv. 11

expresses its readiness to offer its full supporr to the Security Council in its efforts towards [ha objective.

Greece strongly believes in maintaining good relations and enhancing co-operation w i t h all its t,

S e w York, 25 January 1993

ON

tion af S e w Sta tes t h e S o v i e t Union zldopted. the rules of proceciur

Or ses of i t s e r a t i o n s t h e ssioza t o3k noke of t h e 011 by the soc ia l& peblic cf &xxxlo=lizz

.

2.

3.

7.

ecPmher 1951 by t h e to t h e E?bovernentio

Letter of 20 Dec i ~ t ~ ~ of F o r e i p A f f E t L r s of the lic of Llac

ent to t h e Re?

ov r. d

i s t e r of F a r e i g n

inio~:

i t s i n t e r n a t i o n a l i t i o n and its r e l a t i o n s w i t h other ~ n t ~ r n a t i o n a l or

The ~ ~ ~ ~ t i t u t i o n ~ l c t f o r t h e Fm l ~ m e ~ t a t i o n of the Constitution lic of Macedonia d e f i n e s t h a t t h

qual Isgal succe~sor of th Yugo~lavia t o g e t h e r with the o t h e r republics, t a k e s

right^ and Q b l i g a t i o ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ i n a t ~ n g f rom the c r e a t i o n of

nse to the q u e s t i o n w h a t measures Mac d o n i a had already r i n t e n d e d t o take , t o guarantee t h e i g h t s of the e t h n i c

nd r n i n o r i t i e

"The C o n s t i t u t i ~ ~ of t h e R e p u b l i c of Macedonia ~ ~ o v i ~ e ~ for the Council f o r Inter-Ethnic Relatisns, which s h a l l i n t e r e t h n i c r e l a t i o n s i n t h e Republic. The

Council, composed Qf all the n a t i o n a l i t i e s o n p a r i t y b a s i s , a p a r t Prsgidsnt of th of t w o member

t h e Turks, t h nd the Xoms, a6 well as r a n k s of 0th

ass d e c i s i o n s regarding t h

s t i o n whether would u n d e r t by means of

ub l i c of ~ a c e d o n i a t h e i n v i ~ l a b i ~ ~ t y o f t h e aceful

c l a r a t io~ of

t i o n w h e ~ h ~ n on

wea

t h e obligation an referr~ng to the succ

tes, and in c

( f ) In response to on what measures Macedonia had already t a k e n , or int nour t h i s und

~ p l e m e n t a t i o n of the Gon~titution of gulates t h e question of succession Macedonia as a n qua l 6uccessor w i t h F I i Y s h a l l regulate the rights and

greement w i t h the other legal succession of the SFRY and the mutual

ropoaal by the Declaration on

19 December the Conference

epublic of

h u m a ~ h t

0

which

.

mentioned:

i c l e 48(1), which states

free e x p r e 8 ~ i ~ n , c u l t id~ntity; the 5ane a

t the ethnic, cultural, era1 nationalities w i l l

tionalities the right and education xpreaa, culti

4 8 ( 4 ) they also have the right to

~ o v i ~ ~ o n s are to be given e f ~ ~ c t by statute. In schoole ctfon is to be l anguage of o n e af t h e

o the r n a ~ i o n a l ~ t i e ~ , the Macedonian language must also be t a u g h t .

(e) In this connecti ant since it provides that any c i t i z e n may ducational level

ligious communities n b o t h these ca

question has

a amended t h e

of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n of t h e Republic of Macedonia adopt i o n .

hall be impliemented on the day of their

Amendment I

1. The R~public o Macedonia has no territor~~l claims against ~ ~ i g h b o u r i n g s t a t e s .

2 . he borders of the Repu acedonia could be changed ccordance w i t h of v o l u n t a r i n

~ n t e r n a t i o n a l noms.

3 . of the C o n s t i t u t i o n o

1. epublic shall not i n t of o t h e r s ta tes and their i n t

8 icle 49 of t h e