Last month, the International Crisis Group released a report on Macedonia marking the 10th anniversary of the Ohrid Framework Agreement, which put an end to months of fighting between ethnic Albanians and Macedonians in 2001.
The ICG’s reports are almost always more absorbing than your average policy paper because they often include quotes, in footnotes, that cut to the heart of an issue.
This time, a comment from an unnamed diplomat in Skopje caught my eye. “The government pretends they reform, and the EU pretends to believe them,” he or she said, adding that the EU cannot afford to give up on Macedonia, because “it had invested too much.”
Not that the report argued that any progress in Macedonia had been a sham. On the contrary, it noted that relations between Albanians and Macedonians are generally peaceable, though not without friction; the conduct of the latest elections was generally commendable; and the country has a good framework for ethnic integration, even it it’s not fully implemented.
But the report takes note of some troubling trends, most of which TOL has covered: the rise of nationalism, creeping autocracy, an increasingly hollowed-out media, and economic stagnation (it cites World Bank figures that put the country’s growth rate since 2005 behind that of every other country in the Balkans).
I have long wondered how these trends can be squared with the government’s professed eagerness to join the EU. Apparently, I’m not the only one. Quoting the ICG:
The government consistently says that European integration is its highest priority, points to its rigorous alignment of laws with the EU acquis communitaire, and proposes that the screening of its legislation, the next step in the accession process, start even if full negotiations cannot yet begin. But domestic and international observers are not fully persuaded. In the past two years, Macedonia has slipped back in the implementation of its EU reform agenda, especially with regards to the political criteria for candidacy: independence of the judiciary, reform of public
administration, freedom of expression in the media and inter-party political dialogue.
In the meantime, Skopje spends 250 million to 300 million euros on a project to remake the capital into a neoclassical and baroque theme park, which leaves the quarter of the country’s population that is Albanian feeling more disconnected. It also irritates Greece, which in itself is no reason not to do it, but does complicate Macedonia’s prospects for EU and NATO entry. Which in turn further frustrates some Albanians, who want to be part of the EU and have no dog in the fight over the name Macedonia.
As the ICG puts it:
If it were only a misguided urban renewal project with nationalist overtones, this would be excusable, but it is more than that. It represents for many a nationalist vision of the state that leaves little room for minorities, especially Albanians – and alienates those many Macedonians who do not share it either. The project has nothing to do with an EU future and, by gratuitously provoking Greece, is actively postponing it.
Which is not to say that the report “sides” with Greece on the name issue: it calls on Athens to “recognize the national identity and language of its northern neighbor as ‘Macedonian’ ” but also on Skopje to be, well, less in Greece’s face about it.
I’ve met plenty of smart and generous people on my visits to Macedonia. As a journalist, I tend to meet the type who are trying to make some broken system work better, maybe trying to get a business off the ground, or just trying to survive (sadly, some of them haven’t). They have little time for these sideshows and they all deserve better than this backsliding.
As others have said, sometimes the power of the EU is greatest when a country is not part of the bloc – when a potential candidate has to work hard to raise standards and clean house. So if Skopje doesn’t feel all that motivated now, when will it?
November 22nd, 2012
13 Comments at "Ten Years After Ohrid, A Stalled Macedonia"
Ridiculous and factless…
Dear Ms. Frye,
I am very disappointed by this article. The ICG is in fact extremely biased, self-contradictory and unfair toward Macedonia, and the attempts here to suggest its 2011 report ‘doesn’t take sides’ are very misleading.
In answer to your question of when Macedonia will be ‘motivated’ to enhance reforms: when the extremely hostile Greek government drops its international propaganda campaign against the country, the people, the identity and the heritage of Macedonia, when the domestic Albanian political parties actually commit to the country and commit to peace, and when the European Union reigns in its own horrendous hypocrisy on Macedonia, especially on issues like human rights.
The most basic human rights of Macedonians who live in the EU (Greece, Bulgaria) are utterly ignored and violated, and yet murderers like Ali Ahmeti become political kingmakers in Macedonia without committing to peace, and they get full support from the EU, NATO, the ICG, and, it seems, some journalists.
Here is some background reading you might find useful:
http://branov.ca/2011/08/umd-calls-on-icg-to-retract-biased-report-on-macedonia/
http://branov.ca/2011/08/jason-miko-recommendation-for-macedonia-ignore-the-icg/
http://branov.ca/2011/08/10-years-after-the-ohrid-framework-agreement-ali-ahmeti-proclaims-i-am-not-keeper-of-the-peace/
http://branov.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/UMDVoiceSpring2011ENG.pdf
Thank you for your kind attention,
Mark Branov
Dear Mr. Branov:
Thanks for your comment. I sincerely appreciate it.
I said the ICG gives Macedonia credit for some progress, but points out some areas of concern, many of which have been well-documented before ICG’s report came out.
Where I said it didn’t “side” with Greece was on the issue of Macedonians’ language and nationality. You also read the report, so you saw the footnote, for instance, about Greek high-handedness in the negotiations.
But this debate, while important to some (not all) Macedonians, is not going to be resolved in the comments section of a blog and it’s a distraction from the conversation that I think is much more urgent to the lives of Macedonians, about genuine plurality, a higher standard of living, a trustworthy government and judiciary, and freedom of the press. The people I know in Macedonia are incredibly frustrated that these issues seem to get drowned out by an angry and defensive tendency to blame the country’s problems on Greece/the EU/ the Western media, etc.
It has also led to a terrible habit – mentioned in the ICG report, but hardly news to anyone with friends or family in Macedonia – to label people patriots or traitors, usually depending on whether they support the government or have a critical word to say about how Skopje is dealing with the name dispute. That’s the perfect environment for leaders who want to tamp down dissent or keep a tight rein on what should be independent institutions in a democracy.
Even if you are right about the EU, Greece, the ICG, the press, Ali Ahmeti, then let Skopje openly abandon its bid for EU membership – or not. I don’t much care. But either way, none of this is reason enough to put criticism of this government off-limits.
I think Macedonians deserve better, and reforms shouldn’t have to wait until “the extremely hostile Greek government drops its international propaganda campaign against the country, the people, the identity and the heritage of Macedonia.”
“As others have said, sometimes the power of the EU is greatest when a country is not part of the bloc – when a potential candidate has to work hard to raise standards and clean house. So if Skopje doesn’t feel all that motivated now, when will it?”
I miss a bit a mention of the responsibility of the EU, or rather its Member States, for the current situation. Macedonia was the first WB country to sign an SAA and get candidate status (with Croatia). Since the EU States have not managed to offer anything else – for the known reason.
Because of a questionable tactics of Greece Macedonia has been blocked for five years now. That this creates disillusion and faning enthusiasm is more than understandable.
It is a shame that almost all Member States continue to stress the bilateral nature of the dispute and refer to the UN dialogue. The EU and its Member States seem unable and unwilling to touch this issue as Greece is one of the party, well knowing that the UN process has been without progress for years.
It still seems preferable to keep a potentially unstable Macedonia blocked in front of its doors than to apply even gentle pressure on the one and only Member State that has issues with the name of its neighbour. This is rather a shamefull piece for Europe – Macedonian politicans are far from mature and are mounting a dangerous, harmful and ridiculous campaign in Macedonia. Nevertheless I see the EU Member States as main culprits for this shameful situation – if the situation escalates they will all be quick to point with the finger at MAcedonia though…
Sad
Mr. Branov, just two things from me:
- as a friend of Macedonia I see this ICG report as hugely positive and necessary as Macedonian media seem reluctant to too openly critisize some aspects of the direction the current Government is taken. It seems however that people take criticism too personally instead of seeing it as a constructive way forward to improve things that definitely need improving.
- this was definitely an own goal: “…and yet murderers like Ali Ahmeti become political kingmakers in Macedonia…” Wasn’t it the VMRO-DPMNE government that recently proposed an amnesty to all war crime suspects of 2001 in order to appease its Albanian coalition partner? Isn’t it VMRO that disregards any political content of its coalition partner and merely uses them as a tool to stay in power? They choose their king maker as it fits them, maybe you should ask Mr. Gruevski about his stance on this…
Sincerely,
M
Dear Ms. Frye,
Thank you for your comments. No one is saying government criticism is off limits. What I’m saying is that criticism must be fair and evenhanded, within the regional context. The ICG report loudly applauds the Ohrid Framework Agreement, which goes far beyond a guarantee of human rights for the Albanian minority. It actually alters the character of the state, with special clauses such as a “double-majority” formula for state decisions, and use of the Albanian flag on public buildings in western territories, while ignoring other minorities whose leaders did not take up arms and kill hundreds of civilians in 2001. The OFA is not a fair peace, and it solves nothing from the Macedonian side of the equation, especially with regards to the separatist ambitions of a Greater Albania.
Meanwhile, those same European organizations and voices treat the Macedonian minority in Greece like they do not exist! Their language is outlawed, their religion is outlawed and they are slowly being ethnically cleansed in the EU. If they Macedonian minority in Greece had the rights of Albanians in MK before the OFA, they would have parties in the streets. But the EU motto is: “Do as I say not as I do”, and this hypocrisy is destabilizing the region, which is Athens’ goal. The MK government’s attempts to compromise with Greece (FYROM reference, constitution change, flag change) have only emboldened them, and with each new appeasement comes new conditions. That is why there is a stalemate now, because compromise bears no fruit. Please do not suggest that if one cannot accept the Euro-hypocrisy, that one who blindly supports the MK government or sees critics as traitors, that is not true.
Unlike you, I give the ICG absolutely no credit for acknowledging that the Macedonian language and identity exist. That is like acknowledging the sun rises in the east.
Furthermore, in the context of the celebrating the OFA, how do we explain Ali Ahmeti’s recent statement to international media, that he cannot be relied upon to defend the peace should Kosovo’s status not get resolved as he likes? Is that a partner in peace, that the MK government should sign an OFA with? Where is the OFA for the Aegean Macedonians?
And, how do you explain the discrepancy between the 2001 ICG report, and the 2011 ICG report, on the name dispute? In 2001, the ICG was recommending a bilateral solution based on the term “Republika Makedonija”, and now it is seeking an erga omnes name change to “North Macedonia”, even though more than 130 countries have recognized Republic of Macedonia as per the will of her people. That is more than 2/3 of the UN General Assembly! In ten years, has Greece’s morally bankgrupt anti-Macedonian argument somehow become more credible to ICG? Or is it just a matter of “might is right”?
You comment on: “genuine plurality, a higher standard of living, a trustworthy government and judiciary, and freedom of the press.” These are all worthy goals, thought I think that the OFA has nothing to do with genuine plurality, and freedom of the press is in much better shape than coverage of the A1 Television case has led foreign observers to believe. Everyone has to pay their taxes, Ms. Frye, including Mr. Ramkovski, so most Macedonians have little sympathy for him, though they may have appreciated the work of the journalists he employed via tax evasion. Also, EU membership does not guarantee a higher standard of living, though, at this point, it would guarantee that Greece is allowed to rename a foreign country!
You also state: “Even if you are right about the EU, Greece, the ICG, the press, Ali Ahmeti, then let Skopje openly abandon its bid for EU membership – or not. I don’t much care.” Ok, well, maybe that’s exactly what it should do, on this point we agree. Macedonians want to join the EU not because they love how the EU treats their Aegean brothers, but largely because they have tasted the punishment/neglect that the EU/NATO hands out to non-EU/NATO members. But, please understand that there is nothing practical or prudent about changing the country’s name to suit the needs of modern Greek mythology. Your friends in Macedonia who advocate compromise are thinking short-term if they advise you on this, and do not understand the wider impact on the region. The fact is that Macedonian people originate from all regions of historical Macedonia, including the regions in Greece, Bulgaria and Albania. The Macedonian people are being asked to abandon their heritage and sovereignty, so this is a morally reprehensible demand, for which Greece and the EU should be ashamed.
My dear Ms. Frye, life is short! So, let’s take a moral and ethical stand, today! Let’s affirm that every nation has the right to self-determination, and that violence is not the method to create political change, as happened in 2001. Let’s abandon the moral relativism which urges Macedonia to negate her own heritage. What the allied front of Greece-DUI/NLA-EU-NATO is an indefensible demand.
Thank you again for your attention,
Sincerely,
Mark Branov
@Mark
That is all very well, but wasn’t Macedonia willing to recognise Kosovo, despite the importance this has for Serb identity and culture? (Not forgetting, Serbia has long since recognised Macedonia under its constitutional name, depite its close ties with Athens.) Perhaps there might be some more sympathy for the Macedonian case if it had held to principles, rather than engage in political expediency. I really think this decision will have terrible consequences for Macedonia. Of course, you could argue that this was done for internal reasons, to appease a certain section of society, but then the same goes for Greece. That’s how politics works.
Dear Martin,
Re: “…as a friend of Macedonia I see this ICG report as hugely positive and necessary as Macedonian media seem reluctant to too openly critisize some aspects of the direction the current Government is taken…”
Unlike the enthusiastic fans of it who wrote the ICG report, I can’t see how the OFA as a positive development either for Macedonia or the region, or for the prospects of a lasting peace. It fundamentally altered the state by institutionalizing ethnic background in a way that benefits only one minority, and it rewards territorial aggression, exactly the wrong message the EU/NATO should be sending to the world. It is difficult to see the ICG report as credible, especially when it contradicts its own 2001 report on key aspects of why these multi-year problems seem to have no “mutually acceptable solutions”.
I find the concept of Macedonia being forced to change its name by a foreign state as anathema to justice and sovereignty. How do you justify it, Martin, as a friend of Macedonia… or do you mean, as a friend of North Macedonia, as the ICG Report suggests? How about South Macedonia, what about the 100s of thousands of non-Greeks who live there under state oppression?
No, Martin, I cannot see the positivity you see in this report, as a friend of Macedonia. I think that any discussion of minority rights in the Balkans must be put in a regional context, and the silence about the Macedonians of northern Greece, Bulgaria and Albania is deafening. In comparison to them, Macedonia is an undisputed champion of minority rights in the Balkans, but not because of the OFA, rather despite the OFA. But a casual observer who reads the ICG report would not see that fact at all. Some of the biggest problems with it are the parts that are sadly missing.
Re: “It seems however that people take criticism too personally instead of seeing it as a constructive way forward to improve things that definitely need improving.”
If it were constructive to hold Macedonia to a special standard while giving her hostile neighbors a pass, I guess I would agree with you. But it isn’t, and I don’t. How can these rules be enforced selectively without losing legitimacy? As for the suggestion that things need to improve, I fully agree on that point. Things need to improve in Skopje, in Tetovo, in Pristina, in Tirana, in Thessalonki, in Athens, in Sofia, and in Brussels.
Re: “this was definitely an own goal… Wasn’t it the VMRO-DPMNE government that recently proposed an amnesty to all war crime suspects of 2001 in order to appease its Albanian coalition partner? Isn’t it VMRO that disregards any political content of its coalition partner and merely uses them as a tool to stay in power? They choose their king maker as it fits them, maybe you should ask Mr. Gruevski about his stance on this…”
How is it an own goal, Martin? I suppose that since I criticize the ICG report, you assume that I am a representative of VMRO-DPMNE? I am highly critical of the amnesty law, and I am highly critical of DUI and their leader, so I wonder why you suggest otherwise.
As for those like you, who try to defend the ICG report, I do not make the same mistake that you make, and assume that that you are a representative of the SDS or its affiliated organizations. Should I have?
I encourage you to take a step back from partisan politics, Martin, and discuss the issue at hand, rather than make assumptions about me personally. Let’s face reality: the ICG can’t even agree with itself! Compare the ICG 2001 report and the ICG 2011 version, and explain to me what has happened in the last 10 years which would make the authors remove any explanation of why Macedonians resist the OFA, the IA name negotiations, etc., explain to me why, after 132 countries have recognized the state, that Macedonia should renounce that overwhelming recognition, and why Greece should ultimately be given the right to re-baptize a foreign country via blackmail, according to its own worldview and interpretations of history, which are demonstratively at odds with the national interest of Macedonians, and especially at odds with the ethnic Macedonian minority in northern Greece, which is in fact the crux of the name dispute, and which the ICG predictably ignores.
Sincerely,
MB
Dear Mark,
thanks for your comprehensive answer. No, I was not assuming that you are a member of VMRO but I admit that I might have been carried away by the general closeness between UMD and the ruling party on this issue and your web presence suggests that you are at least not a stranger to the UMD.
I guess the main difference between our points of view is the focus of our conerns. I principally look at the economic aspects and freedom of expression as direct developments that benefit the citizens of Macedonia. And I reiterate, I here fully support the openness of the ICG that is rightly critisizing the government for large failures in its job to create a good future for its citizens – also by creating a nationalist climate that is definitely not benefiting anyone in the country but rather aims to divert attention from lacking progress in the domains mentioned before.
From what you write you seem to put much more emphasis on identity and regional recognition issues. I fully agree with the ridiculousness (and harmfulness) of Greece’s game regarding the name (also see my answer to Ms. Frye) and deplore that Greece still maintains until today that it is a country without minorities (where I also see the EU at fault). Equally I might not agree with some details of the OFA.
In my view however it is the obsession with the past which seems to close the path to the future. The OFA is not perfect but it helped prevent a war and it gives some rights to minorities that are (as you say partly yourself) making Macedonia one of the most ‘modern’ countries in the region. I thus still see the OFA as an acceptable basis for a multiethnic Macedonia, its provision should not be written in stone however and adapted to time and situation.
To again come to the main point: I think it is much more important for the people in Macedonia to have a government that doesn’t waste hundreds of millions of statues (that franky are an embarassment to Skopje) for patriotic reasons and instead focus on improving the life of its citizens.
And btw, an EU that sees a modern and progressive Macedonian leadership is much more likely to side with Macedonia. Macedonians should above all focus on their country and fulfill their tasks instead of pointing figures to malevolent neighbours to justify own inaction.
Dear Martin,
You know, my friend, forgive me, but I had to laugh at this: “…I admit that I might have been carried away by the general closeness between UMD and the ruling party on this issue…” Really? On which issue? On the issue of the letting Greece determine our name? UMD is against any name change, against any name negotiations, and against any referendum, other than the one which already occurred in 1991. In that, UMD shares a “general closeness” with the Macedonian people, both inside and outside of the republic, and it shares a general differentiation with any major political party. The people are not sheep, they know what they want, and they want basic respect and human rights. So far, DPMNE has committed to continuing the utterly pointless name “negotiations” and promising a referendum on a new Greek name for our country, instead of forcing it down Macedonia’s throat directly. Meanwhile, the SDS has no need for a referendum because it would most likely take whatever Athens cared to offer at the negotiations table – which is why, despite high unemployment and other social problems that you are well aware of – they are still unable to challenge DPMNE when it matters most: on election day.
As for the nationalistic revival taking place in the country that you are so concerned about, let’s remember that it doesn’t exist in a vaccuum, nor is it a well-designed plot with PM Gruevski pulling the strings, far from that! It is in fact a grassroots revolt, and a rather natural reaction of a nation that his been abused and degraded by its so-called friends in the international community, who promise prosperity and solidarity, but do not deliver. Patience with this treatment is running thin in Macedonia, as is frustration with the hypocrisy related to issue of Macedonian minority rights in Greece vs. Albanian minority rights in Macedonia. Nothing unites a nation like an existential threat, Martin, and the Macedonians have endured many of these humiliations, continue to endure them, and they are starting to push back, now. This is what is lost on the ICG, other Soros-funded organizations, and media pundits.
We agree on something, though Martin, and that is the importance of the economy. Unfortunately, the ICG report spent precious little effort discussing economic performance of the country, and more importantly, how to improve it. It would seem the whole world is in the same boat on that, these days, including our vocal Greek friends. Instead, the ICG report demanded that Macedonia change its name/negate its identity based on the argument that European Union membership will solve those economic problems. I think that is very dangerous assumption, which needs to critically examined and is far from certain.
In any case, changing the countries name is a gift to Greek jingoism and aggression, the same way that the OFA is a gift to UCK terrorism. “Be practical, FYROM” say the Euro-advisors, “Be flexible, FYROM, Be responsible, FYROM, trust us, FYROM.” But trust is the key point; Europe itself is having a legitimacy crisis right now, despite its enormous wealth and various advantages over a small, poor and unloved state in the Western Balkans, which is stubborn in refusing to give in to blackmail.
Dear “Double Standards’,
These are valid points. There was a time when Macedonians and Serbs were unified on such topics, but that working relationship was shattered long ago, and for a multitude of reasons, not the least of which is the historical axis between Belgrade and Athens you allude to.
Nevertheless, my heart goes out to the Serbs of Kosovo, who have so much in common with the Aegean Macedonians, as well as the Macedonians in places like Tetovo and Gostivar. These people are under siege, foreigners in their own country, because Europe has decided to sacrifice them at the altar of “peace in our time”, without considering the principle of the matter. Recognition of Kosovo is one of many Macedonian concessions to the the “benevolent” European powers, which have produced little direct benefit, and which have opened other long-term questions and fears.
Just a month ago, UCK-darling Ali Ahmeti stated that, as the leader of the DUI party, which now controls Macedonians Ministry of Defense, that he can not be expected to “keep the peace” in Macedonia, should Kosovo be partitioned. This speaks volumes about how recognizing Kosovo and giving in to the Framework Agreement have done very little to guarantee long term stability in the region.
Dear Ms. Frye,
I have a suggestion for a future news story:
http://branov.ca/2011/08/24/video-metropolit-anthimos-hate-sermon-with-full-english-and-macedonian-subtitles/373
Please see what it means to be a minority in the EU country that is known as the Hellenic Democracy, and what the Greek state spends its German money on. Please imagine for a moment what would happen if a Macedonian priest were to say such a thing about an Albanian-language radio station! But how much media coverage has this received?
Thank you for your kind attention,
MB
You know, my friend, forgive me, but I had to laugh at this: “…I admit that I might have been carried away by the general closeness between UMD and the ruling party on this issue…” Really? On which issue? On the issue of the letting Greece determine our name? UMD is against any name change, against any name negotiations, and against any referendum, other than the one which already occurred in 1991. In that, UMD shares a “general closeness” with the Macedonian people, both inside and outside of the republic, and it shares a general differentiation with any major political party. The people are not sheep, they know what they want, and they want basic respect and human rights. So far, DPMNE has committed to continuing the utterly pointless name “negotiations” and promising a referendum on a new Greek name for our country, instead of forcing it down Macedonia’s throat directly. Meanwhile, the SDS has no need for a referendum because it would most likely take whatever Athens cared to offer at the negotiations table – which is why, despite high unemployment and other social problems that you are well aware of – they are still unable to challenge DPMNE when it matters most: on election day.
+1
Comment Now!