Ce nouveau vote ne modifiera pas les résultats, qui ont donné à la coalition de centre-droit du Premier ministre Nikola Gruevski une large victoire, avec 48,2% des voix. Mais il déterminera lequel des deux principaux -et rivaux- partis albanophones sera invité à participer à la coalition au pouvoir.

Il y a deux semaines, le jour de l'élection, une personne a été tuée et huit autres blessées dans des fusillades. Ces violences ont été condamnées par la communauté internationale, et cela pourrait nuire à la candidature de Skopje à l'Union européenne et l'OTAN.

M. Gruevski a affirmé qu'il préférait rompre avec la tradition, et ne pas avoir de partenaire albanophone au sein de sa coalition, plutôt que d'avoir un partenaire qui a remporté les élections en fraudant.

Les deux plus importants partis albanophones sont l'Union démocratique pour l'intégration (DUI-BDI), dirigé par Ali Ahmeti, et le Parti démocratique des Albanais, dirigé par Menduh Thaci. Ils s'accusent mutuellement d'être responsables des violences.

Plus de 400 observateurs, dont 100 venus de l'étranger, doivent surveiller le déroulement de ce nouveau scrutin.

Les albanophones représentent environ un quart de la population de ce petit pays des Balkans, qui compte 2,1 million d'habitants. Le scrutin était organisé dans 2.976 bureaux de vote.

(Source: Yahoo!)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Macedonia's fledgling democracy was under renewed scrutiny Sunday as it staged a partial re-run of violence-marred elections that threaten its bid for European integration

Voting is being held at the nearly 200 polling stations where results were cancelled after the parliamentary elections two weeks ago because of violence and irregularities, officials said.

State Electoral Commission spokesman Zoran Tanevski reported an incident-free start to the polling, unlike the June 1 elections which were tainted by a deadly morning shootout.

The re-run will be closely followed by the international community, which sees it another test of the former Yugoslav republic's democratic credentials on the road to integration into the European Union.

The snap elections handed conservative Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski a landslide victory but were marred by violence in areas mainly populated by ethnic Albanians, who comprise about a quarter of the two million population.

In the most serious incident on June 1, one person was killed and several others wounded in a vote-related gun battle at the village of Aracinovo, just north of the capital Skopje.

The unrest was some of the worst in Macedonia since it was on the brink of an all-out war between government and ethnic Albanian forces in 2001.

The fresh balloting will have no bearing on the overall outcome, as it will only involve around nine percent of the electorate at 187 of the nearly 3,000 polling stations.

On June 1, Gruevski's centre-right VMRO-DPMNE won an absolute majority with more than twice the number of parliamentary seats than its nearest rivals, the Social Democratic Union.

Macedonia, which peacefully split from the former Yugoslavia in 1991, has been an EU candidate since 2005 but is still waiting for a date for the adhesion talks to begin.

In addition, the landlocked Balkan state's efforts to join NATO were blocked earlier this year by Greece due to a dispute over the country's name, which is shared by a northern Greek region.

Gruevski's caretaker government this week warned the activists of rival political parties that police would "carry out all measures necessary to ensure the elections were free and peaceful."

His interior minister, Gordana Jankulovska, urged "political parties to disassociate themselves from violence and to condemn those trying to hide their criminal activities behind politics."

The US embassy in Skopje said the poll re-run presented Macedonia with "another opportunity to demonstrate it can conduct elections that meet international standards."

In a scathing report, foreign observers led by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, said the June 1 polls failed to meet international standards because of "organised attempts to disrupt" voting.

The OSCE, Europe's electoral watchdog, pinned the blame on two ethnic Albanian parties -- the Democratic Union for Integration (DUI) and the Democratic Party of Albanians (DPA).

The two parties' fierce rivalry was exacerbated after the last elections of 2006, when Gruevski picked the DPA as his coalition partner despite the fact it garnered fewer votes than DUI.

Calling for "free, fair and democratic" elections, Gruevski warned this week he would "form a government without an Albanian party" if their activists were found to be involved in any more violence on Sunday.

(SOURCE: Yahoo!)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Modern Greeks prefer to think of the ancient Macedonians as Greeks. This was part of their justification for taking a part of Macedonia by conquest earlier in this century, and is still used to justify their present international position. Greek arguments frequently focus on the time of Alexander because of his undoubted influence in spreading Hellenic culture to distant parts of the known world. It is clear, too, that they gain some satisfaction from imagining some family connection with that extraordinary figure. However, the modern Greek ideas would have been rejected by both the ancient Macedonians and the ancient Greeks.

If we start by looking at modern Greek discussions of these ideas we can then consider what historians have to say about their arguments, point by point. We get some of the flavor of Greek attitudes in the Greek publication Macedonia, History and Politics (published by George Christopoulos, John Bastias, printed by Ekdotike Athenon S.A. for the Center for Macedonians Abroad, and the Society for Macedonian Studies, 1991). This is a publication available in Greek embassies and distributed to Greek communities and multi-cultural organizations throughout the English-speaking world. The author of this book considers that the use of the Greek language by Macedonians is proof of their Greekness. In passing we might reflect on the modern use of English by many countries as a convenience for trade or war, and note that this usage proves nothing at all about the ethnicity or culture of the users. However, the author of Macedonia, History and Politics claims that the dissemination of the "Greek language and Greek culture throughout the known world by Alexander the Great and his Macedonians provides the most irrefutable confirmation'' of the unity of the Macedonians with the other Greeks.

To explore thoroughly this issue of the proposed Greekness of the Macedonians, we need to consider evidence from a number of quarters. If the early Macedonians were Greek you would expect that (a) there might be clear evidence that the language of the Macedonians was a dialect of Greek, rather than a separate branch of the Indo-European language group; (b) writers of the time would have recognized Macedonians as Greek rather than as foreigners and would have spoken about Macedonia as though it was a part of Hellenism; and (c) historians today would speak of the ancient Macedonians as though they were Greek in ancient times. As we will see, none of these ideas is unequivocally supported.

Linguistic Evidence

In questioning the significance of the use of Greek by the ancient Macedonians we need to sort out some of the linguistic history of the Macedonians. Firstly, the language of the original Macedonians, whatever it was, existed long before Macedonia became a powerful state. This is before the time of the great kings Philip II and Alexander the Great. The name "Macedones" originated many centuries earlier, and probably came from the "real" Macedonian language. If the Macedonian language was recognized as Greek, and understood by Greeks, you would expect that this was the language used by the great Macedonian kings in a formal or legal context. But it was not.

We know with some certainty that Attic Greek, which came from much farther south (around the Athens area) and was being used in other parts of the world as a trade language, was used more and more as the language of state and used also in Alexander's multi-cultural army. No linguist accepts that this language was the original Macedonian. So we have clear evidence that the Greek used by the Macedonians was a new language. Therefore one cannot argue that the use of this language proves any linguistic associations between the original Macedonians and Greeks.

Many scholars have concluded that the ancient Macedonian language was not a Greek dialect and that it was more or less related to the languages of Macedonia's northern neighbors, the Illyrians and the Thracians. These scholars include Muller and Mayer, writing in the nineteenth century, and Thumb, Thumb-Kieckers, Vasmer, Kacarov, Beshevljev, Budimir, Pisani, Russu, Baric, Poghirc, Chantraine, Katicic, and Nerosnak, writing in the twentieth. Here attention will be given to sources more readily accessible to those who want to inquire further.

The problem for modern-day linguists is that not a single sentence of the original Macedonian language has been retained. All that is left are records of proper names and isolated words -which, as historian E. Badian of Harvard University points out, is hardly sufficient basis for judgments about linguistic affinities.' We do know that the Macedonians increasingly came to use a southern form of Greek in their formal dealings. Traian Stoijanovich tells US3 that in the fifth century B.C., the Macedonian rulers abandoned Macedonian and began using Attic Greek for public administration. This did not change the attitudes of the Greeks, who still regarded the Macedonians as barbarians.

However, Stoijanovich says it is not known whether the ancient Macedonian language was an independent language or a Greek dialect into which a non-Hellenic vocabulary and certain other non-Hellenic traits were introduced. Like other historians, he considers it quite possible that Macedonian was the language of the ruling class and that a considerable proportion of the subjects of the Macedonian chiefs spoke other languages.

Peter Hill, author of the section "Macedonians" in the official Australian bicentennial encyclopedia, The Australian People (perhaps 200,000 Macedonians live in Australia), writes:

What is certain is that Alexander's mother tongue was not Greek. Alexander enjoyed a Greek education and adopted Greek as the language of his empire but to claim that that made him Greek is to suggest that the Irish and the Indians are really British because they have adopted English for administrative purposes.

Like Hill, E. Badian refutes the assumptions that a nation is essentially defined by a language and that a common language implies a common nationhood. He argues that this latter idea is patently untrue for the greater part of human history and to a large extent even today. The formal written language of ancient Macedonians was inevitably Greek, as was the case for various other ancient peoples. There was really no alternative. However, this in no way assures good relations between peoples, nor does it necessarily show any consciousness of a common interest. What is of greater historical interest, Badian says, is the documented evidence that Greeks and Macedonians regarded each other as foreign.

The use of the Macedonian language by Alexander's infantry. The Macedonian kings, Philip and Alexander, favored Hellenization and encouraged the use of Attic Greek in their administrations, but the use of this foreign tongue was not foisted upon ordinary Macedonians. Although at least some of Alexander's Greek companions knew the Macedonian language, having come to Macedonia at an early age, Alexander never tried to impose Greek on his Macedonian infantry or to integrate this infantry with Greek units or Greek "foreign" individuals. Alexander's infantry continued to use the Macedonian tongue even late into his Asian expeditions. Badian describes some convincing cases in which Macedonian troops could not follow commands in Greek. For instance, during his argument with Clitus, which led to his good friend's death, at the end Alexander is said to have called for his guards in Macedonian when he felt his life threatened. Badian rejects the idea that this was a reversion to a more primitive part of his psyche, under stress. He prefers the simpler explanation that Alexander used the only language in which his guards could be addressed.

To establish his case, Badian quotes a surviving papyrus fragment that seems to be the only good source to reveal the facts of the infantry use of Macedonian. This fragment tells of a battle, early in 321 B.C., in which the Greek commander Ambiance faced the Macedonian Neoptolemus with his Macedonian phalanx. Wanting to have the Macedonians join him rather than fight him, Ambiance needed to convince them of his superior position. The story continues:

When Eumenues saw the close-locked formation of the Macedonian phalanx ... he sent Xennias once more, a man whose speech was Macedonian, bidding him declare that he would not fight them frontally but would follow them with his cavalry and units of light troops and bar them from provisions.

Badian tells us that Xennias' name reveals him to be a Macedonian. Since he was with Ambiance he was probably a Macedonian of superior status who spoke both standard Greek and his native language. Ambiance needed this interpreter to transmit his message. This means that the phalanx had to be addressed in Macedonian if they were going to understand. Ambiance did not address them himself, although this was the common way for leaders of the time, nor did he send a Greek. Badian concludes that Greek was a foreign tongue to the Macedonians. Similarly, Alexander used Macedonian to address his guards because it was their normal language, and he had to be sure he would be understood. It also seems clear that educated Greeks did not speak the Macedonian language unless (presumably) they had grown up with Macedonians and learned it from their childhood friends, as some of Alexander's Greek companions must have.

Other facts are consistent with this argument. Philip II seems not to have used any Greek commanders for his Macedonian troops. Presumably, the first generation Greek immigrants into his cities had not learned the language. It is also a fact that Ambiance, the commander in the story above, was notorious for the trouble he repeatedly had in getting Macedonian infantry to fight for him, even though he was an able leader. His problem was probably not simply his troops' antagonism to the fact that he was Greek. His problem was that he could not directly communicate with Macedonian soldiers. In the end this defect cost him his life.

Political reasons for the use of the Greek language. Considering the use of Greek as the language of command in Alexander's armies, R.A. Crossland concludes that this development was a matter of administrative efficiency. Although it was the Macedonians who had to learn Greek at first, the same requirement was made of at least some of his Persian troops after many conquests. For a long while Alexander thought that Greek was the best language to use as the common medium of communication among the peoples of his empire, "and not because Macedonian was similar to it." Nevertheless, as we have already noted, even by the latter part of his Asian campaigns, Alexander's infantry still did not speak a Greek language.

In other words, a very important reason for Hellenization of the Macedonians was their new role of political power-broker. The Greek language was available in written form and was widely used throughout the Macedonian sphere of influence. It was a very convenient vehicle for use in creating an international empire, something that both Philip and Alexander hoped to do. Its use may have also have led to some appeasement of Greek hostility towards the dominating Macedonians. All of these are sound reasons for choosing to use the Greek language as the tongue of administration throughout the expanding empire. However, after a time the value of Greek culture to the Macedonians' cause began to fade. Eventually Alexander began to think in terms of a blending of the diverse cultures of his great empire. Perhaps in order to appease his new Persian subjects, it was now the blending of Macedonian and Persian that mattered, rather than the blending of Macedonian and Greek.

Macedonian attitudes to the Greek language. For the most part we have little information on Macedonian attitudes to the Greeks or their language. Badian reminds us that no Macedonian oratory survives, since the language was never a literary one. However, he concludes that the existence on both sides of a feeling that they were "peoples of non-kindred race" is very probable. The language barrier would keep this awareness alive, even though the literary language of educated Macedonians could only be Greek. That fact was as irrelevant to ordinary people, and perhaps even to those of higher status, as was the Hellenization of the Macedonian upper class. Badian gives a more recent example of a similar phenomenon. In eighteenth-century Europe, French language and culture prevailed amongst people of education. In fact, during the early part of the eighteenth century the language and culture of the German royal courts, including that of Frederick the Great in Prussia, were French. Most of the books published in Germany in the first half of the century were in Latin and French! Thus upper-class German ladies might write only in French, yet this did not mean that they were French or even Francophile. Badian suggests that Clitus' anger toward Alexander was representative of a persisting antagonism to Greeks and their ways seen among all classes of Macedonians. He says that these feelings are most clearly evident where the historical record deals with ordinary people, like the Macedonian infantrymen referred to above.

The linguistic character of ancient Macedonia. Arnold Toynbee asserts that the Macedonians of all ancient historical periods spoke Greek. He argues firstly that "they (the Makedones) were already Greek speaking 150 years to 200 years earlier than Augustus' time." This observation would seem to be of little weight in the present discussion since we have already noted the increasing, and deliberately chosen, use of Attic Greek by the Macedonian nobility. The use of a language from a distant location by a limited number of noble families tells us nothing about the native tongue of the Macedonians of the fourth century B.C., the Anglo-Saxons of thirteenth century England, or the Prussians of early eighteenth century Germany.

Nevertheless it is worth looking at Toynbee's point a little further to uncover its internal inconsistencies. Toynbee describes an occasion in 167 B.C. when L. Aemilius Paulus announced in a public speech at Amphipolis the Roman government's decisions for the settlement of continental European Greece. This speech was delivered in Latin, but there was a Greek translation of the speech "for the benefit of Paulus' audience which was drawn from all parts of Greece." From this Toynbee concludes that at this stage the Macedonians were Greek-speaking, since in the public meeting place at Amphipolis, the majority of the listeners must have been Macedonians. Yet Toynbee himself states that the Greek translation was provided because the audience "was drawn from all parts of Greece." However, if we follow Toynbee's line that we are dealing with a diverse group of native Greek speakers, many of whom were Macedonian and who, according to Toynbee, spoke a dialect of Greek that no other Greeks could understand, it is asking a bit much to expect us to believe that these representatives suddenly all understood the same "Greek"- that is, unless the "Greele' that was used was the koine, the international version of Greek developed from Attic, that was widely spoken in this area of the empire at the time. The audience was made up largely of leaders of one kind or another, people who were most likely to speak such a language. It is likely that virtually any trader, businessman, administrator, or political leader of the time would have spoken this language (or would have been in the company of an interpreter who could), as well as his own vernacular and perhaps other trade or administrative languages as well. Thus the translation of Paulus' speech into Greek tells us absolutely nothing about the native language of the Macedonians or of anyone else.

Toynbee presents other arguments based on linguistic analysis to support his contention that the Macedonians were native Greek speakers. He asserts that Macedonian is Greek based on the "Greekness" of the word "Makedones" and its variant "Makednoi," Macedonian place names, the names of the members of the Argead house, all recorded Macedonian personal names, the names of Macedonian from Upper Macedonia, the names of the Upper Macedonian cantons, the names of the Macedonian months, the majority of which he claims as Greek. Though at first glance this kind of analysis seems weighty, the counter-arguments are at least as powerful.

An issue that we have to deal with here is what constitutes a "Greek name." It is generally accepted that Indo-European Greeks, Illyrians, Thracians and others settled in the Balkan Peninsula in the fourth, third, and second millennium B.C. As we will see later in more detail, it has been argued that only 40 to 50 percent of the vocabulary of Greek is Indo-European in origin and that 80 percent of its proper names cannot be explained as Indo-European.9 At least two possibilities might explain the presence of such linguistic forms in ancient Greek. One is that pre-Hellenic cultures were non-Indo-European and that the Greek newcomers adopted many proper names and other words from those peoples. Alternatively, the words might have been introduced by conquerors and settlers from the Levant and from Egypt in the second millennium B.C. In either case it is quite possible that such words came into Macedonian and other Balkan languages in the very same way. Thus both languages might have borrowed from others. If we favor the modern view that the pre-Hellenic influences in Greek are non-Indo-European, and we take into account the observed fact that place names often tend to last through conquest and assimilation, its would be reasonable to assume that some of the supposed "Greek" place names found in the "Macedonian" language are in fact pre-Hellenic names.

It is easy to find modern examples of the same phenomenon. Both France and Germany have many Celtic place names yet do not speak a Celtic language, or even the same language. The people of England are "British," a name based on a Latin word formerly applied to a Celtic-speaking people and now referring to an Anglo-Saxon people. A study of the word "British" does not help us to determine what language the British speak. It is certainly not Latin, yet there is historical evidence about the use of Latin in Britain, the same kind of evidence that is trotted out to prove that the Macedonians were Greek. For instance, since English coins have Latin on them, we might conclude that the British speak Latin, following the argument that it would not make sense to use a language no one could read on such common items. Similarly, many English parish churches have collections of epitaphs in Latin, dating from the Middle Ages. Classicist Andy Fear points out that most of the population of medieval England could not even read English, let alone Latin. Obviously, the significance of surviving Greek texts from Macedonia must be treated with caution. Fear notes, too, that Greek inscriptions from ancient Macedonia are in a mixture of Greek dialects. It is much easier to believe that this could occur if Greek was alien to Macedonia, instead of the common language. If the latter were the case, we might expect to see a consistent form employed.

If we study the month names used in England and France, we can see that they resemble each other. This is not a basis for concluding that French and English are the same language. All one can reasonably conclude is that there has been similar heavy influence across these two languages. To say, for such superficial reasons, that Greek and Macedonian are the same language is to make far too much of a little thing. We must remember also that much of the history about ancient Macedonians that is passed on to us comes through Greek sources, and names are likely to have been shaped into Greek forms for a myriad of reasons, including the likelihood that Greek writers may not have been able to pronounce other tongues. A modern analogy would be to think that France is a German-speaking country because when reading a German textbook one comes across the name "Frankreich" ruled by, say, Karl rather than Charles. It is easy enough to find English forms of foreign place names that look far removed from their native form; Florence for Firenze, and so on.

In his essay "Linguistic Problems of the Balkan Area in Late Prehistoric and Early Classical Periods,"o R.A. Crossland directly addresses the issue of the linguistic character of ancient Macedonian. Crossland points out that the principal languages of the Balkan region in question* appear to have been Illyrian or an Illyrian language group; Thracian or Thraco-Dacian; and Macedonian. When it comes to the language of the Macedonians, Crossland takes a position very different from modern Greek writers. He rejects the idea that the Macedonians and their language were of Mycenaean origin. Then he goes on to consider linguistic and archeological evidence about the possible origins of Macedonian and in so doing directly contradicts Toynbee.

Crossland points out that the territory of the Macedones at the beginning of the fifth century B.C. seems to have lain between Tymphaea in the west, Pelagonia in the north and the river Axius in the east, but so far no category of place-names that we can identify as "Macedonian" has been identified in this area, and no inscription in Greek earlier than the late fourth century B.C. has been found in any part of Macedonia. Thus we have no substantial evidence about the nature of the Macedonian language in the time that it was most exclusively used (before the fifth century B.C.), but neither do we have evidence of any Greek language being in use at that point in history. The use of Greek came later.

Crossland says that the names of Macedonians mentioned in fifth- and fourth-century sources are almost all either certainly or possibly Greek, but he argues that this is not significant, since members of one people often borrow names from another whom they regard as culturally superior. Certainly the Macedonian craze for things Greek, including Greek education for the children of the upper classes, suggests such an attitude.

Next, Crossland points out that the ancient writers of the time gave imprecise information about the language of the Macedonians. None of the ancient Greek writers gives a detailed statement about the language that the Macedones spoke. The limited evidence that remains consists of words preserved by Greek lexicographers, especially Hesychius, from about the fifth century A.D. According to Crossland, these words were listed as "used by the Macedonians" or "used in Macedonia" without any indication of the origins of the words. Crossland also cites several other authorities who confirm his conclusions.

Regarding the ancient writers' capacity to recognize significant linguistic features, Crossland agrees with Toynbee in pointing out that when language and speech seemed very different the ancient writers might have had difficulty in making correct classifications. We do not have an understanding of the details of their systems for classifying language. However, we need to remember that only in very recent times have linguists recognized the many languages that make up the Indo-European group. Crossland says that it is difficult to know whether one group of Greek speakers, say the Athenians, would have been able to recognize really different dialects of Greek, or whether they would have been influenced by differences of culture to classify such dialects as barbarian.

Crossland says that the evidence available is too sparse and unsatisfactory to tell us conclusively whether Macedonian was a dialect of Greek or a distinct language. He notes that another authority, N. Hammond, has actually concluded that Macedonian was a dialect of Greek, based on interpretations of information in ancient sources about the status and use of Macedonian under Alexander the Great and his successors. However, Crossland is skeptical of Hammond's reasoning and says that better evidence would come from comparative linguistic study.

Crossland says that two kinds of evidence would help us to conclude that Macedonian was a dialect of Greek. Firstly, we would have to be able to observe or reconstruct its sound system and morphology in a way that would reveal any similarities to recognized ancient Greek dialects, and any contrasts to other Indo-European languages. Secondly, we would have to know whether speakers of most of those Greek dialects could understand and be understood by Macedonians. But none of the necessary evidence is available. The lexical items thought to be Macedonian are too few and uncertain for any useful reconstructions of the language's sound system or morphology, and no Greek writer of the fifth or fourth century B.C. states explicitly whether Greek speakers such as the Athenians could understand the native speech of the Macedonians. Crossland says that these Greeks seemed to have had no difficulty in communicating with the Macedonian court, but this is probably because the royal family of Macedonia, and perhaps most of the nobility, spoke Attic Greek fluently. At home with their families or with their own clansmen they probably used their native tongue, Crossland believes.

We do not know either what form of "international" Greek speech might have been used in Macedonia since there are no substantial inscriptions in Greek from Macedonia earlier than the third century. The Greek speech used might have been Attic or an early form of the koine deriving from it that was already spoken even more widely in the Balkans before Alexander's conquest of the Persian Empire.

The information about supposedly Macedonian words given by ancient lexicographers may not be very reliable. Along with words that were a part of the real Macedonian tongue in the fourth century B.C., they might have listed words and usages typical of the variety of Greek that was used in Macedonia from the third century onwards. They may also have included words that were special to the Macedonian armies. Some Greeks in the early Hellenistic period may even have regarded as Macedonian words that belonged to the koine as a whole, but not to Attic. We have no way of knowing the underlying basis for classifying words as belonging to one language or another.

Crossland is very critical of Kalleris, a Greek writer who tries to make a case from a linguistics standpoint for Macedonian being a Greek dialect. It is worth looking at this material in detail because of its apparent thoroughness, and because of its relevance to Toynbee's arguments.

In an examination of the 153 words that are described as Macedonian in ancient sources, Kalleris considers that well over three-quarters of these words are Greek. Crossland finds this quite unconvincing. First, he says, a third of these words have no satisfactory etymology. Second, he says that a further 44 items should be disregarded as being false forms in the sources from which they came. They are simply adjectives of Greek formation based on place-names. Although these words seem to be Indo-European, they could belong to an Indo-European language other than Greek. Some of them might be military or technical terms which are Attic in form and were borrowed from Attic Greek in the fifth or fourth century.

Third, Crossland argues, if Macedonian was a dialect of Greek it is extremely unlikely that it would have been similar to Attic Greek. The original Macedonians did not come from the area of Athens and share no history with the Athenians. This means that the Attic words are a false lead, just late borrowings from Greek. It would be much more convincing, perhaps crucial, to find Macedonian words that were not specifically Attic but which occurred either in a considerable number of Greek dialects or in some of the dialects that were spoken in areas adjacent to Macedonia. Kalleris gives fifty-one words of this kind. Many of these words occur in Doric or other West Greek dialects or resemble words in these dialects. However, it is quite possible that these words were borrowed from West Greek dialects or from Thessalian, particularly since all except eighteen of them are the sort of words which the Macedonians might well have borrowed from their neighbors. They include titles of gods, names of festivals and months of the year, military terms, and names of objects that they might have learnt from neighbors to make and use. Such words are often borrowed from neighboring groups, so their existence in Macedonia is not convincing evidence that they were originally Macedonian.

Fourth, the remaining eighteen words, none of which corresponds exactly in meaning or form with Greek words, seem insufficient to make a case for classifying Macedonian as Greek. Once again there is the possibility that the words were borrowed from neighbors. At the western and southern borders of Macedonia were tribes speaking different Greek dialects, and we know that the Macedonians were in contact with these peoples. The Thessalians to the south are particularly likely to have been influential since they were culturally and politically more advanced than the Macedonians before the fifth century. They are likely to have influenced the Macedonians particularly strongly until the growth of Athenian influence. Herodotus reports on traditions in the same period of close contact between the Macedonians and the Dorians before the latter were supposed to have migrated southward.

Finally, though again it is hardly sufficient basis for any conclusion, there is one language feature evident in the surviving "Macedonian" words that points to the idea of a separate language. Macedonian seems to have had a phonological feature that marks it as different from Greek dialects. This is the correspondence of a sound written with B, to Ph in Greek. For instance, this would appear as something like Bilippos in Macedonian, and Philippos in Greek. Crossland says that this change puts Macedonian closer in phonology to Illyrian and Thracian than to Greek, but it does not mean that Macedonian was a dialect of either language.

Crossland is not convinced by claims that comments from writers such as Arrian and Plutarch in the first to second centuries A.D. (e.g. Plutarch, Ant. 27) show that Macedonians spoke a dialect of Greek as their native tongue. He says they are inconclusive since the expressions used are vague and might be referring to a "Macedonian style" rather than a "Macedonian language" or "dialect." These descriptions would be just as likely if Macedonian was a distinct language as they would be if it was a dialect of Greek. Crossland points out that it is possible that Macedonian kings and their courts, soldiers and colonists might have continued to speak a second language in their homes and among themselves for some generations even though they spoke Greek for most practical purposes. After all, it is easy to think of examples of this kind of thing in more modern times. Crossland notes that Gaelic was used alongside English for generations by Scots who emigrated to America. It is still used in this way in some small communities in North America. Similarly, although English was used as the language of command and administration in British army regiments recruited predominantly in Wales, the Welsh language was still used privately.

Like historians who have examined this question, Crossland suggests that Alexander may have required Macedonians in his armies to use Greek as the language of command, just as he required many Persians to learn it (Plut. Alex. 43.7), because it was efficient, and because he thought it the language best suited to serve as the common medium of communication among the peoples of his empire. This kind of strategic decision does not require that Macedonian should have been similar to the new "international" language.

In summing up, Crossland says again that the evidence does not indicate convincingly that Macedonian was a dialect of Greek rather than a separate Indo-European language. Even Toynbee, who is persuaded in the opposite direction by the very flimsy evidence we have considered above emphasizes that the evidence is "fragmentary, ... confused and self-contradictory." In practical terms this suggests that modern Greeks may have to look elsewhere for convincing evidence that ancient Macedonians were Greek."

Introduction

Whoops! Who's the real thief now?

Left: The flag used on the ships of the colonial English Honourable East India Company established in 1600; Right: The modern Greek flag initialy adopted in 1822. So, Greece nicked a foreign flag, changed the colors.. and Voila! We have a flag! Before you disagree, count the number of the stripes, both flags have 9. The Greeks claim that they represent the 9 sylables of their Independence War motto: "Elefteria i Thanatos!" ("Freedom or Death!"). Why should a 17 century English flag also have exactly 9 stripes then?  The Greek cross in the canton is evidently stolen from the red English St. George's cross and re-painted in white. Shame...

The East India Company flag changed over time. There has been much debate and discussion regarding the number of stripes on the flag and the order of the stripes. Historical documents and paintings show many variations from nine to thirteen stripes, with some images showing the top stripe being red and others showing the top stripe being white. In any case, its obvious that the whole concept of this flag was stolen by Greece and incorporated in its modern flag.

There's a geographical region in South-Eastern Europe called Macedonia. It was a single geographical entity until the Balkan Wars in 1913 when it was divided between: Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia and Albania. Thats how Greece got its own province of Macedonia (~50% of the whole region), a province especialy rich with Ancient Macedonian history and archaeology. There, the greek government imposed a harsh policy of ethnic cleansing and assimilation against the native ethnic Macedonians, and it also supported a colonisation of Greek refugees from Asia Minor, following the Greek-Turkish War in the 1920's. The part once given to Serbia, later succeded to liberate itself during the antifascist struggle in the WWII and to proclaim itself as the Socialist Republic of Macedonia on August 2nd 1944. However, the other parts of the wider Macedonian region remained under foreign Greek, Bulgarian and Albanian annexation.
That republic became a separate constituent country of the former Tito's Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (a country- in- a- country). As such, within the communist Yugoslav federation, Macedonia had a statehood, its own government, state symbols, police, territorial army (home guard),  Macedonian Academy of sciences and arts, Macedonian Orthodox Church and even a bureau for foreign affairs.
During the breakup of Yugoslavia, it proclaimed independence in September 1991 and it became what is now the independent Republic of Macedonia with capital of Skopje.

The newly independent country was immediatly confronted by Greece. Official Greece denies the existence of a separate Macedonian nation, the existence of a separate ethnic Macedonian minority on its territory, and it perceived its neighbour as a threat to its northern province. Namelly, official Greece claims an exclusive right over the Ancient Macedonian heritage. Important elements of this are: the very name Macedonia and the Ancient Macedonian symbol, the 16-ray Vergina Sun (or Star), found in what is considered the alleged tomb of the king Phillip II, the father of Alexander the Great. Greece doesnt allow the Republic of Macedonia, which also claims relations to the Ancient Macedonia to use them in any way.

Thats why:

• Greece, which has its own province of Macedonia demands that the Republic of Macedonia changes it constitutional name (although the UK which has a part called Northern Ireland doesnt demand from the Republic of Ireland to change its name; the US state New Mexico doesnt demand from the country Mexico to change its name).
• Greece also demanded from the Republic of Macedonia to change its own national flag, which featured the Vergina Sun, claimed by Greece as a Greek symbol (though Ancient Macedonia was not one of  the city-states that comprised the Ancient Greek world, actually it was their worst enemy, just imagine: Jews claiming the nazi swastika as their symbol).

To achieve its goals, official Greece imposed an economic embargo on the Republic of Macedonia in the early 1990's and started a nationalist lobbying campaign both at home and abroad. Then, the Republic of Macedonia followed a policy of peaceful coexistence with its neighbours. During the 1990s, it was the only former Yugoslav country which stayed away from the Yugoslav Wars and was often refered to as The Oasis of Peace.
As a result of the Greek pressure, the Republic of Macedonia was forced to make many concessions to appease its southern neighbour and to prevent a further conflict:

• The Republic of Macedonia accepted to join the UN under a provisional name "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" ( F.Y.R.O.M. )
• Certain changes were made to the Macedonian constitution (to show that the country doesnt have any territorial claims to Greece);
• The national flag of the Republic of Macedonia with the Vergina Sun was replaced with a new different flag
  
• The president Kiro Gligorov had to give a statement that the modern ethnic Macedonians are descendents of the Slavs who arrived in the Balkans in the 6th century, and who have nothing in common with Ancient Macedonia.

However, despite accepting to be named FYROM in the UN, the Republic of Macedonia rejected to change its constitutional name for domestic use, and for billateral use with those countries who do not object it. Thats how the Republic of Macedonia was recognized under its constitutional name by the USA, Canada, Russian Federation, People's Republic of China, Turkey and many other countries.

The Flag dispute

Its claimed that the Ancient Macedonians often used a stylized depiction of a sunburst (or a starburst) as their symbol. It can be seen with 16, 8 or 12 sun rays on many archaeological artefacts. Sometimes it can also include a rosette decoration in the middle. One of the most popular version of this symbol is the 16 rayed Sun of Vergina, found on the larnax (coffin) which allegedly contained the remains of King Phillip II. The Vergina Sun is claimed as a historical symbol by both the Republic of Macedonia and Greece, which both also claim relation to the Ancient Macedonians. However, Greece demands full exclusive right to the Ancient Macedonian heritage and doesnt want to share it with anyone else. As a result, the two countries have a long term unresolved dispute.

In 1992, the newly independent Republic of Macedonia adopted a new flag which included the 16-ray Vergina Sun (on a red backround), which led to protests from official Greece. Under Greek pressure, in 1995 it was replaced with the current flag of the Republic of Macedonia, which includes a different stylized form of a sun.

Flag of the Republic of Macedonia (1992-1995)

Its important to note that the sun symbol was often featured in the old folklore art of the ethnic Macedonians, on their historical flags and other artefacts, and even on the coat of arms of the Socialist Republic of Macedonia, which includes a rising sun with 8 visible rays (the other 8 from the Vergina Sun being hidden behind the mountain).

The main Greek rationale for the flag dispute was that the Sun of Vergina is allegedly a greek symbol, and that its use by the Republic of Macedonia is an act of stealing of the ancient greek heritage. Moreover, the Greek side emphasised the fact that the symbol was discovered on its territory.

King Philip's larnax

However, Greece forgot to mention that her share of the whole Macedonian region was forcibly annexed by her armies in the Balkan Wars in 1913. Prior to that, the territory has never belonged to Greece.

Also, its very important to mention that later, this symbol was also discovered on many archaeological artefacts found in the southern parts of the Republic of Macedonia, which were too part of the Ancient Macedonian Kingdom- a fact deliberately ignored by Greece, which continously repeats that: "There is only ONE Macedonia, and its in Greece".

Another important, but dubious Greek claim is that the symbol was firstly discovered during the excavations of the Ancient Macedonian Royal Tombs of Aigai, in the village of Vergina in Greek Macedonia, by prof. Manolis Andronikos in 1977. Some Greeks may agree that the symbol may have been known prior to that, but just as an artistic ornament without any historical significance. According to them, only after the discovery of the Royal Tombs, the true nature of this symbol was discovered- its an Ancient Macedonian royal emblem.
An entertaining twist in this story is that they dont know (or dont want to know) that the symbol actually appeared publicly all around the globe decades before 1977. It was featured in its 8 ray version on the shields of the Ancient Macedonian warriors in the 1956 epic film Alexander The Great starring Richard Burton. Its an American movie, quite pro-Greek biased, so it cannot be accused of advocating the Republic of Macedonia's point of view.

How come the Greeks are not aware that this symbol was internationaly recognized as an Ancient Macedonian royal or state emblem far before the prof. Andronikos' discovery in 1977? The symbol that he "discovered" has been already used by the ethnic Macedonians for centuries, as we explained above. For the Greeks, until 1977, this symbol was largely (or completely) unknown.

But anyway, Greece continues to claim an exclusive right to it. It even registered it in the World Intellectual Property Organization and finally, in 1993 it placed it on the newly created flag of its own Macedonian province, but on a blue backround.

Flag of the Greek province of Macedonia

However, almost 20 years since the start of this dispute, official Greece fails to explain: how come that many countries use same symbols on their flags, but they dont confront eachother because of that:

• Argentina and Uruguay

• England and Georgia

Both England and Georgia use the red Cross of St. George on a white backround. The difference is that the Georgians have added 4 additonal smaller crosses around it. Otherwise- same. Unrelated nations. The English flag was inspired by the flag of Genoa (Italians, prepare a lawsuit! ;-)).

• The Czech Republic and Philipines
  

Similar design. Unrelated nations.

• USA, Liberia and Malaysia
  

Same stripes, same blue field in the upper left corner and even the star(s) are here. The Afro-American and the Liberian populations are indeed related, but what Malaysia has incommon with them? Should the US now sue Malaysia over stealing its national pride- The Stripes, which symbolize the 13 American colonies that rebeled against the British Crown?

• United Kingdom and the Autonomous Basque community within Spain

• Chile and the US state of Texas

Almost same flags.

And there are milions of other examples...

IMPORTANT NOTE: All those flags (with the exception of the Basque, the Texan and the Hawaiian flags) are flags of internationaly recognized independent countries. Yet, these flags have never been a cause of any international dispute. The flag of the Greek province of Macedonia has a much lower importance than them because it is a flag of a a geographical and historical province and not of an independent country. Moreover, the flag of Greek Macedonia has no historical significance. It was adopted recently just as a retaliation against the Republic of Macedonia.

Contrary to that, all those nations listed above were fighting wars, conquering other countries and achieveing sport successes under those flag symbols for centuries. For them those symbols have a huge historical and national significance. Still, as you can see, they have absolutely no problem to share those symbols with other nations, unlike Greece which is jealously possesive over the Vergina Sun, although the symbol is most probably not Greek at all. Under that symbol King Philip and his son Alexander were killing Athenian soldiers and conquering and burning the greek city-states. What a paradox.

But anyway, Greece continues to make such a great fuss about  it. The hysteria goes so far, that sometimes the Greek nationalists even forget their real national flag: the well-known one with the blue and white stripes and the cross in the upper left angle.
Instead, they give so much importance to a recently adopted flag of a geographical province:
Since the flag dispute with the Republic of Macedonia began, the Vergina Sun suddenly started to appear everyewhere in Northern Greece: on governmental buildings and offices; at celebrations and political meetings; on various documents, military insignia, tourist souvenirs and even everyday products such as hotel soaps, sugar bags and bus tickets (hopefuly not on condoms and toilet paper too, but everything's possible in a country where unfortunatelly,  the extreme nationalism is an everyday fact).

100 Drachma coins (the former Greek currency later replaced by the euro)

Hellenic Armed Forces arm patch

Greek sugar bags (author: cakesniffer)

So after all this, we have a full right to ask: How come all those countries are allowed to have almost same flag designs only with minor differences, while at the same time, the Republic of Macedonia was not allowed to keep its 16-ray sun symbol?

Even if we decide to beleive in the official Greek claim that the modern ethnic Macedonians are not descendants of the Ancient Macedonians, but Slavs, still, this sun symbol was found in Ohrid in present-day Republic of Macedonia, so this country has every right to use it, in a same way that the modern Arabic Egyptians have nothing incommon with the Ancient pharaos, but still they are proudly promoting their country with the pyramids and the sphynx.

Greece should finally get rid of its blind ultra chauvinism once and for all. We need peace, stability and cooperation in the Balkans.

But, what’s the point?
Greece claims that have an exclusive right of all ancient history, including this ancient Macedonian symbol, which is used as an official flag of the northern greek province of Makedonia.

How can Greece claim rights of entire ancient history? Does the cross can be used only by one state, Vatican, for example? Does only one state can use the tricolor?

I’m not going to debate whose symbol is the Sun, neither were the Macedonians Hellens, or not? Hire, I’m going to talk about our universal right this sun to be our national flag, with clear distinctions of all other national flags.

Does this flag is distinctive by the following:

****************************************************
???????????????????????????????

Someone argue that this Sun if found just in Kutlesh, and because today, the location is in Greece, only Greeks can use it. But, my dear friends, the archeology is saying something else. The Sun can be found on so many locations in Republic of Macedonia.

The Macedonian Sun, ceramics, III BC, Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia

Take attention on the fact that the first flag was used by independent state, and the second one is just a flag of a province.

And does Sweden have dispute with Denmark or Finland, because they all use the same cross?

Is the same with Norway and Iceland?

Does Ireland has dispute with Ivory Coast?

England and the new flag of Georgia?

Holland and Luxembourg?

Romania and Moldova?

Poland and Indonesia?

Russia, Slovenia, Slovakia…?

The examples are frequent for so little space and time. A man should have honour to admit to him self that is in wrong. Greeks, more than 2300 years are practicing their revenge under the Macedonians because of the Heroneya battle. Their unique purpose is to exterminate the real Macedonian identity. This is not a problem about the name or the flag or something else… the plan is bigger, BIIIIIIGGER THAN WE CAN IMAGINE!!!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

На Македонски:

Република Македонија и Република Грција, под формулација "Прва страна" и "Втора страна", на 13 септември 1995 година, потпишаа Привремена спогодба за пријателски односи и градење на доверба и се обврзаа на почитување на взаемниот суверенитет и територијален интегритет, прифаќајки ги меѓународно признаените државни граници.

Со договорот, Македонија се обврза од државното знаме да го симне македонското сонце (шеснаесеткракото сонце не е пронајдено само во Кутлеш, па така да се нарекува), додека Грција, во рок од 30 дена, да ја прекине блокадата кон Македонија, воведена дури во февруари 1994 година. По ратификацијата на Спогодбата од Собранието на Република Македонија, Грција ги отвори државните граници со Македонија, а десет дена претходно, Собранието го смени и државното знаме.

Но, за што стануваше збор?
Грција тврди дека полага целосно право на овој симбол и е единствена која може да го употребува. Провинцијата Makedonia овој симбол го употребува како официјално знаме.

Но се поставува прашањето: Дали грција може да полага права на целата античка историја? Дали крстот може да биде употребуван како симбол за знаме само од една држава. Дали само една држава смее да употребува тробојка како знаме.

Нема да навлегувам чиј симбол било сонцето, ниту во тоа дали Македонците биле или не биле Елини. Тоа ќе го сторам во друг запис, а фактите, кои Грција не се осмелува да ги види, кажуваат се. Овде сакам да прашам за нашето суверено право Сонцето од Кутлеш да биде знаме на суверената македонска држава, со јасни дистинкции од било кое друго знаме.

Дали ова знаме доволно се разликува од ова:

****************************************************
???????????????????????????????

Некој тврди дека ова сонце е пронајдено исклучиво во Кутлеш, а бидејќи тоа е сега грчка територија, само тие полагаат право на него. Но, драги мои, археологијата кажува нешто друго. Сонцето го има толку многу на територијата на Република Македонија, што не сме ни свесни за тоа. Како за пример, пронајдено е на античка керамика и на многу, мноооооогу монети вдолж и попреку Македонија.

Македонското сонце, керамика, III век п.н.е. Охрид

Обрнете внимание и на тоа дека првото знаме беше употребувано од суверена држава, а второто е само знаме на провинција.

А дали Шведска и се противи на Данска или Финска што употребуваат идентичен крст на знамето?

Дали тоа го прави Норвешка во однос на Исланд?

Дали Ирска има спор со Брегот на Слоновата Коска?

Меѓу Англија и новото знаме на Грузија?

Холандија и Луксембург?

Романија и Молдавија?

Полска и Индонезија?

Русија, Словенија, Словачка...?

Примерите се многубројни за мал простор и време. Човек треба само да има срце за да признае дека греши. Грците веќе 2.300 години покажуваат дека одмаздата заради Херонеја- се уште е актуелна! Нивната единствена цел е елиминирање на вистинскиот македонски идентитет. Воопшто не станува збор за прашањето на името, знамето или слично... овде се работи за нешто многу, МНООООООГУ ПОГОЛЕМО!!!

Hélène Despic-Popovic

Des législatives se tiendront le 1er juin en Macédoine après la décision du parlement de se dissoudre samedi. L'Assemblée macédonienne est ainsi la première victime collatérale du refus exprimé lors du dernier sommet de l'Otan, à Bucarest, d'inviter cette ancienne république yougoslave à rejoindre le Traité de l'Atlantique nord.

Pourquoi ce rejet par l'Otan complique-t-il la situation ?

La Macédoine a fait l'objet d'un veto de la Grèce qui lui reproche d'usurper un nom qui n'appartient qu'au patrimoine hellénique. Admise à l'ONU sous le nom d'ancienne République yougoslave de Macédoine (Arym ou, plus utilisé, Fyrom, en anglais), la Macédoine, indépendante depuis 1991, s'était dite prête à un ultime compromis en prenant le nom de République de Macédoine (Skopje). Mais cela n'a pas été suffisant pour calmer Athènes. La Macédoine est un Etat fragile et est sans doute, dans la région, celui qui a le plus besoin de l'Otan pour apaiser ses craintes sécuritaires. Après des troubles entre Macédoniens slaves et Albanais (qui forment 25 % de la population), l'Europe a convaincu les deux parties d'accepter en 2001 un nouvel arrangement constitutionnel, favorable aux Albanais. Le veto grec a relancé les frustrations nationalistes de la majorité macédonienne qui pourrait se détourner de l'Europe et de tout compromis avec la minorité albanaise. Car rien ne dit qu'Athènes ne mettra pas son veto à l'entrée de Skopje dans l'Union européenne.

Quel sera l'enjeu des prochaines législatives ?

Il s'agit de l'avenir européen de la Macédoine. Mais aussi d'un rééquilibrage des relations entre Macédoniens et Albanais après la déclaration d'indépendance du Kosovo. Skopje ne l'a pas reconnu, bien que le Kosovo l'ait déjà été par 38 Etats, dont 17 membres de l'UE. Cette prudence a créé des frictions. Le Parti des Albanais de Macédoine (DPA), membre de la coalition au pouvoir, avait quitté le gouvernement pendant dix jours à la mi-mars pour protester contre cette tiédeur.

L'intégration des Balkans occidentaux est-elle toujours à l'ordre du jour ?

Officiellement, oui. A Bucarest, l'Otan a invité la Croatie et l'Albanie à adhérer au club. Mais elle a aussi convié la Bosnie-Herzégovine, le Monténégro et même la Serbie à passer du Partenariat pour la paix au "dialogue intensifié". Comme l'Otan, l'UE a choisi de négocier avec chacun de ces pays (ex-Yougoslavie plus Albanie) en ordre dispersé. La carotte européenne a donné de bons résultats en Croatie, dont on a oublié les errements passés, et empêché les dérapages en Macédoine. La menace du bâton a poussé la BosnieHerzégovine à adopter, vendredi, une réforme de sa police, une demi-mesure puisque le texte a été amplement amendé. Reste la Serbie. Belgrade demeure le mauvais élève aux yeux de l'UE, qui lui refuse la moindre carotte - la suppression des visas, accordée à la Croatie depuis plus de quinze ans, ne lui a jamais été octroyée. Amputée du Kosovo et frustrée, elle risque de confirmer cette réputation, lors des législatives du 11 mai, en votant pour les nationalistes.

Après quelques jours de forte chaleur, la pluie est venue, un bel orage, bien rafraîchissant,bien apaisant.
J'ai trouvé une chambre très correcte à tout petit prix dans un petit hotel guinguette de la péripherie de la ville, sans doute le meilleur rapport qualité/prix depuis mon départ. Mais l'herbergement touristique mériterai à lui seul un long billet d'humour et d'humeur, sans doute les seuls endroits ou j'ai ressenti très fort le côté arnaque. Sinon,mis à part mon Europe soit disant très developpée ou tout se paie même l'attention que l'on veut bien te porter, je dois dire que depuis la Slovénie, j'ai pu juger de ce que nous avons presque perdu et de ce qui subsiste encore dans une région que l'on dit en retard.( part rapport à quoi ? c'est là tout le problème! )
Partout, j'ai reçu bon accueil,mais particulièrement de la part de la jeunesse. Je fréquente assidûment les terrasses de café et les club internet, lieux tenus ou fréquentés par les jeunes et ouverts tard, là c'est du nanan : toujours serviables , toujours souriants, toujours curieux de tout, lieux idéaux pour assembler quantité de renseignements sur une ville ,un itinéraire et toutes sortes de choses utiles au voyageur .Ils parlent presque tous un peu d'anglais. Dans les campagnes , c'est moins facile, pas d'anglais et encore moins de français mais toujours le soucis de rendre service, d'accueillir au mieux. Presque toujours ,quand vous cherchez quelque chose, on se propose de vous accompagner ou on prend le temps de vous faire un plan. Je suis arrivé tard à Stumica,vers 11h, un supermarché était en train de fermer ,je demande si l'on peut m'indiquer un hotel pas cher dans le quartier, immédiatement une jeune fille se propose de me piloter, je décline , "juste quelques indications de direction merci " et bien sûr je m'égare, rebelote, une jeune femme m'accompagne jusqu'à la reception pour être sûre que j'aurai une chambre sinon elle connaît un autre hôtel . Ca c'est en permanence depuis la Bosnie, c'est très rassurant pour le marcheur errant. Même sans carte, jamais perdu, toujours quelqu'un pour te remettre sur la bonne route.Je vais d'ailleurs poster ce billet dans un club internet ou j'ai passé l'après midi d'hier à écrire avec café offert et assistance permanente pour utiliser l'ordi et transferer mes fichiers ou pour recharger mes batteries J'étale en permanence le matériel (c'est qu'il en faut des petites choses pour que ça marche , les cables d'alimentation, ceux de connexion, les batteries, le mp3, le dictaphone, la photo et j'en passe jamais eu le moindre problème de fauche, je laisse mon sac régulièrement à la garde d'un barman ou dans un club, jamais non , pourvu que ça dure ! C'est bien pratique !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Les mots et les désirs se percutent :
Sur un site ami, je lis la complainte de Mag sur ces chemins de campagne que l'on bétonne là bas en Suisse ( complainte que je partage ) et je pense à l'ami Mourad qui s'excuse pour les chemins de pierres qui mène à son village là bas au Kosovo . ( Il doit faire un long détours pour accéder à sa maison, son chemin habituel est trop abimé pour la voiture.). Voila ce que je voulais dire Mag, quand je parlais de partage, mais j'avais tort, le mot n'est pas très juste, j'aurai dû dire 'engagement' ( il ne s'agit pas de tout donner aux pauvres pour ne plus rien avoir à soi .) Le béton et le goudron qui blesse tellement dans les montagnes suisses, ils seraient bien plus pertinents là bas, dans ce pays qui se construit si laborieusement.
Mais il y faut de l'engagement personnel et collectif, de la volonté citoyenne et politique, il y faut le sens de l'autre.
C'est quand l'autre va bien que l'on va bien.
Problèmes de riches qui ne savent plus comment dépenser leur argent d'un côté et tant de besoins basiques de l'autre, tout ça dans la même Europe? Ca me rend morose, ça me met la rage au coeur !
La Suisse a refusé un nouveau contingent de 500 réfugiés irakiens sur son sol, mais elle enverra un peu d'argent là bas c'est promis .....................
Vrai , très utile l'argent quand pleuvent les bombes! ( Je pense à Xhafer, réfugié en Suisse, dans cette entreprise ou ses compétances étaient utiles, mais ou certains avaient le regard fuyant et refusaient de lui serrer la main , lui le kosovar musulman qui squattait momentanémment un poste qui aurait pu être occupé par un suisse bien conforme en tous points et surtout en identité.Un serveur réfugié en France m'a dit à peu près la même chose.)Dommage tout ça, dommage !

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oui ce billet est très polémique, c'est un billet d'humeur,et que ceux que cela ennuie et bien ils peuvent passer outre en repérant les catégories en haut du blog,
Billet qualifié d'HUMEUR, ça veut dire que je me lache un peu.( un peu beaucoup!)
Pèleriner ce n'est pas cheminer seul à travers le monde avec seulement ses questions existentielles, son sac et ses ampoules aux pieds. C'est entrer dans le monde, ce n'est pas aller vers, c'est aller dedans. ( D'ailleurs, à ce propos, il faut arrêter de me gonfler avec ma santé, avec les bobos, avec ceci et avec cela, il faut arrêter de me demander si je vais bien parce que ça me les brise menues menues comme disait Lino. Une fois pour toute:Je ne vais pas bien. Pas bien du tout. Le pèlerin qui va à travers le monde, il va comme le monde et le monde il va pas très bien .
Stumica : encore 500 kilomètres et c'est la Turquie, la Turquie qui fait si peur à l'identité européenne, alors c'est décidé, elle n'est pas géographiquement dans l'Europe donc on ne l'intrègrera pas dans l'Union, la pauvreté de l'argument m'afflige, et dire qu'il faut se baisser jusque là pour répondre à de telles conneries. La Géorgie , L'Azerbaïdjan,l'Arménie sont géologiquement et géographiquement en Europe. Sont il plus proches de nous en identité que les turcs? qui va décider de cela, qui va peser le poid exact de chaque contrée, comment pèse t'on ? Avec quelle balance? Pour ceux qui utilise ce genre d'arguments, c'est se tirer une balle dans le pied comme dirait l'autre, il ne pourront même plus l'utiliser quand les 'indigènes' du Caucase revendiqueront leur juste place dans l'Europe.
Y a t'il plus d'identité commune entre un portugais et un letton qu'entre un islandais et un kosovar ? Je sais pas et je veux pas savoir .............pour savoir il me faudrait la juste balance, cette balance là n'existe pas.
Alors L'Union, ça doit être autre chose, ça doit être une certaine idée de l'Homme (et de la femme) , du citoyen, de la liberté individuelle,du respecrt des autres,une idée commune sur les chemins à suivre pour le bien être de tous et de chacun, de la valeur que l'on accorde à une vie humaine et ça c'est pas de la géographie ou de l'économie.
L'Union ça ne peut qu'être des idées , rien que des convictions partagées et des idées c'est tout .
Le problème se corse. (Corse! tient, quand on parle d'identité!) en Turquie, il y a un peuple qui revendique son identité, le peuple kurde, éclaté sur plusieurs pays, divisé par des frontières arbitraires héritées de l'histoire, les kurdes irakiens ont obtenu une large autonomie grâce, si je puis dire à la guerre en Irak, alors ailleurs ça bouge, en Turquie les kurdes demande avec encore plus de force que par le passé, le même traitement, la même juste mesure. Si l'on ajoute à cela que le chef de file des kurdes : Ocalan est emprisonné quelque part sur une île dans le Bosphore et qu'il serait très malade alors on peut craindre l'embrasement ,un martyr, rien de tel pour faire sortir les fusils et exploser les bombes.
Peut être pousserai je mon cheminement un peu plus à l'est en Turquie, vers le pays kurde, simplement pour sentir, pour tenter d'y trouver les mêmes racines du ressentiment que chez les bosniaques, les albanais. Ce ressentiment face à l'injustice de l'Histoire pour ces peuples qui se sentent humiliés, écrasés, oubliés.
TV5 monde ( Oui dans ma chambre si confortable , il y a même la télé par cable !) Elections en Algérie : Interview d'une jeune femme / les kabyles n'iront pas voter, on se sent humilié, oublié ici alors on boycott les élections. ( Je vous jure je le fais pas exprès!) Encore un peuple ou le ressentiment est vif, encore un peuple qui ne se sent pas reconnu. partout, ça craque, les frontières arbitraires, les gouvernements centraux brutaux et centrifuges exacerbent les revendications identitaires.
Ce matin: Annonce du nouveau gouvernement en France, original et surprenant, il faut lui laisser le temps de s'installer avant de taper dessus allègrement en bon français râleur .
Original/ avec ses tranfuges ( Morin,Kouchner)
Surprenant / avec Hisch : le croisé des 'laisser pour compte'
Décevant / avec ses mêmes têtes qu'avant pour une soit disant rupture rabachée à longueur de campagne ( Alliot Marie, Borloo,Boutin!!!!!!!!!, Bachelot!!!!!!!!!et Juppé!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Je choisirai les meilleurs avait il dit le candidat !!! Ils étaient déjà là les meilleurs et on le savait pas, c'est bête ça ce qu'on peut être tête en l'air les français. )
Ecoeurant / avec la nomination d'un homme qui a acheté son maroquin de la façon la plus vilaine, la plus basse ( Besson ) Le denier de Judas en quelque sorte!

Et puis un ministère de l'identité nationale, faut il en rire ou en pleurer !!!
L'identité ça ne se décrète pas, ça se construit jour après jour, individuellement et collectivement, ça s'enrichit sans cesse sans que cela soit maîtrisable par quiconque. C'est une éponge, ça s'impregne en permanence de choses venues d'ailleurs ( quand l'éponge est trop pleine, c'est vrai ça coule un peu autour, ça déborde, ça fait désordre quoi! mais si tu lui fout la paix à l'éponge et bien ça s'évapore un peu avec le temps, ça part aussi un peu l'identité, ailleurs ,un peu partout , alors ce qui avait coulé autour et bien ça rentre, ça loge enfin dans l'éponge et tout est bien! ) . C'est aussi un millefeuille, des strates d'histoire et d'histoires, c'est de la vie, de la mémoire. Quelque chose de bien trop grand et diffus pour être enfermer dans des mots et des décrets ministériels.
( Premières démissions d'universitaires, quand les élites intellectuelles prennent leurs distances avec une philosophie politique, ce n'est pas bon signe.)

L'identité : C'est un pacs entre le millefeuille et l'éponge.

Bref ce machin risque d'être au mieux un moulin à vent (beaucoup d'air brassé et rien de concret) et au pire une 'usine à gaz' ( un truc très bien sur plan, très compliqué et inaplicable dans les faits, dans la vraie vie et avec tout ce que ça comporte comme dégâts collatéraux )
Pourvu que ça se résume pas à / blanc,catholique et hétérosexuel !!!
Bon, OK, ça c'est du mauvais esprit ! ( Quoique, l'identité ça passe et voyage par la Culture et quand je regarde le staff culturel du candidat Sarko : Mireille Mathieu, Halliday, et Clavier , j'ai quelques bonnes raisons de m'interroger. ( Halliday , c'est bien identitaire ça? ) Bon j'arrête là parce que je sens bien que je vous gave grave.
C'est qui déjà le ministre du mille feuilles et de l'éponge qui déborde?

Et Dieu dans tout ça ? Me direz vous .

Ca fera l'objet d'un autre billet mais j'ai besoin de temps parce que Dieu, c'est pas simple, c'est pas simple du tout !

En attendant, je prépare un itinéraire aproximatif de Strumica à Edirne en Turquie (environ 400km) par le sud de la Bulgarie, j'essaie de régler les bugs de l'ordi avec l'aide des jeunes du club ( j'ai retrouvé mes cartes numériques grâce a un gamin débrouillard qui a fouiné dans la mémoire de la machine et a résolu le problème en quelques clics. ) Les vêtements ont besoin d'un bon passage en machine, les chaussures aussi, suite au prochain billet en Bulgarie sûrement .

Aujourd'hui / connexion video avec la famille , ça fait du bien !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Zut alors ! Je croyais avoir une quinzaine de jours tranquilles en Bulgarie avec des bulgares bien sous tous rapports et du yogourt , des bulgares biens bulgares en identité quoi! Et bien non, je vais traverser le pays des ponats: vieux peuple installé dans les Rhodopes depuis très longtemps avec sa religion et son identité propre et ensuite la région limitrophe de la Turquie avec sa forte minorité turque , là aussi il y a eu des 'frottements' rugueux dans le passé et tout n'est pas vraiment réglé, je passe sur la Maçédoine qui a ses problèmes a gérer avec la minorité albanaise mais qui a été bulgare jadis et certains ici s'en souviennent avec nostalgie.

Ordinateur clean mais plus de connexion directe, trop risqué avec la floppée de virus qui se promènent sur la toile , je vais devenir un pro du tranfert de fichier .
Je passe encore une nuit ici, je vais profiter de la soirée tranquille pour vous raconter l'histoire du tunnel de Sarajevo.

2 avril 2008, Bucarest

La Grèce a douché mercredi les espoirs d'un compromis sur le nom de la Macédoine qui permettrait à cette ex-république yougoslave d'adhérer à l'Otan, malgré les pressions des autres alliés, dont les Etats-Unis.

Les dirigeants de l'Alliance atlantique doivent décider jeudi à Bucarest de l'opportunité d'inviter la Macédoine à entamer des négociations d'adhésion en même temps que la Croatie et l'Albanie, ce qui impliquerait une intégration rapide.

Pour George Bush, c'est comme si la décision était prise.

"Demain, en reconnaissance de leurs progrès, l'Otan prendra une décision historique sur l'adhésion de trois nations des Balkans, la Croatie, l'Albanie et la Macédoine", a-t-il déclaré mercredi lors d'une conférence préalable au sommet.

"Les Etats-Unis soutiennent fortement l'invitation à ces nations à rejoindre l'Otan", a-t-il ajouté.

Mais c'est sans compter sur l'opposition de la Grèce, qui est membre de l'Otan et dispose donc d'un droit de veto, à l'adhésion de la Macédoine tant que ce pays n'aura pas changé de nom, qui est aussi celui d'une de ses provinces.

La Macédoine, devenue indépendante de la Yougoslavie en 1991, est actuellement reconnue par la communauté internationale sous l'appellation d'"ancienne république yougoslave de Macédoine" (ARYM) sous la pression d'Athènes.

D'intenses négociations ont lieu pour vider la querelle et le médiateur de l'Onu a proposé de la renommer "République de Macédoine (Skopje)" pour démontrer qu'elle n'a aucune revendication irrédentiste sur le Nord de la Grèce.

Un problème pour la région

Mais la Grèce refuse cette appellation et prône une appellation tel que "République de nouvelle Macédoine".

Avant son départ pour Bucarest, la ministre grecque des Affaires étrangères, Dora Bakoyanni, a estimé qu'il restait trop peu de temps pour trouver une solution dès cette semaine.

"Je ne pense pas qu'il reste du temps pour quelque chose de ce genre", a-t-elle déclaré. "Les positions de la Grèce sont claires. Peut-être ne coïncident-elles pas avec les positions des autres pays. Mais notre position est une position nationale, soutenue, comme vous le savez, par tous les partis politiques."

Le secrétaire général de l'Otan, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, a estimé qu'un compromis restait possible à Bucarest.

"Même 72 heures, c'est beaucoup de temps en politique", a-t-il dit lors d'une conférence en ajoutant qu'à titre personnel il était en faveur de l'adhésion de la Macédoine.

Mais, a-t-il reconnu, la Grèce a la main grâce au pouvoir de blocage que lui donne son appartenance à l'Alliance: "Un pays est dedans, l'autre n'est pas encore dedans", a-t-il expliqué.

La Macédoine, qui a été au bord de la guerre civile entre albanophones et Macédoniens de souche en 2001 avant qu'un accord pour le partage du pouvoir intervienne, a mis en garde l'Otan contre les conséquences géopolitiques d'un rejet.

Elle espère aussi obtenir dès cette année une date pour débuter ses négociations d'adhésion à l'Union européenne mais, là également, la Grèce dispose d'un droit de veto.

"En une seule journée, nous perdrions la perspective de l'Union européenne et de l'Otan", a déclaré Saso Ordanoski, représentant du Forum, un centre de réflexion macédonien. "Alors le problème devient la perspective pour toute la région."

D'autres experts craignent que le fragile compromis entre les groupes ethniques vivant en Macédoine ne vole en éclats, provoquant des troubles en Albanie et au Kosovo.

3 avril 2008

La présidence slovène invite Athènes à se montrer aussi souple que Skopje dans le dossier du nom de l'ARYM, l'ancienne république yougoslave de Macédoine. Lors d'une audition en commission des affaires étrangères du Parlement européen, le 1er avril, le ministre slovène des Affaires étrangères Dimitrij Rupel a déclaré que la Macédoine avait récemment fait preuve d'une souplesse inédite jusque là. Skopje a approuvé, la semaine passée, une proposition de l'ONU en faveur de l'adoption du nom « République de Macédoine (Skopje) ». « La balle est dans le camp de la Grèce », a-t-il ajouté, soulignant que si, la Slovénie en tant que présidence n'avait rien à dire concernant l'adhésion de l'ARYM à l'OTAN, elle continuerait d'oeuvrer pour une solution.

Cette déclaration a précédé de quelques heures l'ouverture du Sommet de l'OTAN à Bucarest (2-4 avril). L'Alliance devrait y entériner une décision invitant la Macédoine, la Croatie et l'Albanie à adhérer à l'OTAN. Il est toutefois probable que Skopje doive patienter plus longtemps que ses voisins des Balkans pour entrer dans l'Organisation. Car malgré les efforts des Nations unies, qu'appuient fermement les Etats-Unis et l'Union européenne, Athènes et Skopje n'ont pas résolu leur différend sur l'appellation du pays. Si un accord n'intervenait pas à Bucarest, il est probable que la Grèce s'opposerait à l'entrée de la Macédoine dans l'OTAN. Un haut responsable de l'OTAN cité par le journal Balkan Insight indique que la déclaration a été rédigée en deux versions. Selon la première, « les alliés de l'OTAN saluent les invitations faites à l'Albanie et à la Croatie ( ) », la seconde version ajoutant la Macédoine.

par Kole Casule, Skopje

Le gouvernement de Macédoine est prêt à soumettre au parlement une proposition de nouveau nom pour le pays afin de surmonter le conflit avec la Grèce qui retarde son accession à l'Otan, a déclaré vendredi le ministre des Affaires étrangères Antonio Milososki.

Athènes menace d'opposer son veto à l'entrée de la Macédoine dans l'Alliance atlantique si elle ne change pas de nom officiel, qui est le même que celui de la province la plus septentrionale de Grèce.

Evoquant la proposition du médiateur de l'Onu de renommer l'ancienne république yougoslave "République de Macédoine (Skopje)", le ministre a déclaré : "Après 15 années de discussions, nous pensons que cette proposition est la dernière dans le cadre de ce processus".

Milososki a refusé de dire si le gouvernement était d'accord avec ce nom de compromis mais il a précisé que le parlement pourrait débattre de cette proposition dès lundi.

Ce serait la première fois qu'une proposition de compromis parviendrait devant les parlementaires macédoniens mais on ne sait pas encore si le gouvernement grec se satisfait de cette solution.

Le commissaire européen à l'Elargissement, Olli Rehn, a formulé le voeux vendredi que le contentieux soit réglé rapidement.

"J'espère vraiment que ce problème quasiment éternel du nom sera réglé rapidement", a-t-il lors d'une conférence de presse à l'occasion d'une réunion des ministres européens des Affaires étrangères en Slovénie.

L'UE espère un accord rapide

Il a déclaré que le litige entre Skopje et Athènes sur "Macédoine" était un contentieux bilatéral tout en soulignant qu'il pouvait avoir des répercussions sur les ambitions européennes de Skopje.

"La Macédoine est en position de démontrer bientôt sa disposition à ouvrir des négociations d'adhésion. J'espère que je serai en position en novembre de proposer cela dans le rapport d'étape", a-t-il dit.

"Mais il est clair que toute décision clef sur un élargissement de l'Union est prise à l'unanimité des Etats membres", a-t-il toutefois souligné.

La Macédoine espère que la question sera résolue à temps pour le sommet de l'Otan du 2 au 4 avril à Bucarest, afin qu'elle soit invitée à y adhérer de même que la Croatie et l'Albanie dont les invitations ont déjà fait l'objet d'un accord de principe en mars entre les 23 membres de l'Alliance atlantique.

La ministre grecque des Affaires étrangères, Dora Bakoyanni, doit rencontrer samedi son homologue macédonien à l'occasion d'une réunion des ministres des Affaires étrangères de l'Union européenne et des Balkans en Slovénie.

Priée de dire si faute d'un accord, la Grèce permettrait que la Macédoine soit tout de même invitée à intégrer l'Otan à la condition que son adhésion officielle n'intervienne qu'une fois un accord conclu, Bakoyanni a répondu : "Non. Une invitation est une invitation. Nous ne pouvons consentir à une invitation que si une solution mutuellement acceptable est trouvée et une résolution du Conseil de sécurité prête".

Des discussions cette semaine à New York n'ont pas permis d'aboutir à un compromis entre les deux parties.

Utrinski Vesnik

Peur, drapeaux et provocations en Macédoine : bagarres interethniques dans les lycées de Struga

Traduit par Ivana Magdenoska

Publié dans la presse : 17 mars 2008

Mise en ligne : jeudi 27 mars 2008

Sur la Toile

Plusieurs rixes ont récemment éclaté entre des élèves macédoniens et albanais de deux lycées de Struga se partageant les mêmes bâtiments. Les établissements ont pris des mesures draconiennes : policiers et vigile patrouillent dans les couloirs et dans la cour. Certains demandent l’introduction d’une rotation horaire sur base ethnique. La peur va-t-elle gagner les esprits ?

Par Žaklina Hadži-Zafirova

Depuis plusieurs semaines, un conflit oppose à Struga les élèves macédoniens du lycée Niko Nestor et les élèves albanais du lycée Ibrahim Temo, qui partagent les mêmes locaux. Les confrontations physiques se sont transformées en affrontements sur Internet, via les cybercafés de cette ville du Sud-ouest macédonien. Dans les jours qui viennent, les responsables des deux lycées doivent trancher : introduiront-ils une rotation horaire sur base ethnique, comme certains élèves l’ont demandé ?

En février, plusieurs élèves ont été blessés dans des bagarres entre Macédoniens et Albanais. Depuis, les habitants de Struga craignent de voir se développer une division ethnique. Beaucoup se demandent comment restaurer la confiance entre les communautés dans la ville, et comment apaiser des étudiants qui semblent s’êtres laissé prendre au jeu de la provocation politique.

La cour commune des lycées
Niko Nestor et Ibrahim Temo
à Struga.
(Photo : Utrinski Vesnik)

Les bâtiments communs des lycées Niko Nestor et Ibrahim Temo sont actuellement surveillés de près. Des policiers et des vigiles engagés par la municipalité patrouillent à l’intérieur et à l’extérieur du bâtiment. La cour de l’établissement est vide. Quand la cloche sonne, les étudiants se rendent immédiatement chez eux, sans se regarder. Afin de prévenir les conflits, une seconde entrée a été ouverte pour les élèves du lycée Ibrahim Temo. Des caméras seront prochainement installées dans la cour, ainsi qu’une barrière qui séparera les entrées des deux lycées.

« Les bagarres ne cesseront que si l’on nous sépare en deux groupes ethniques distincts. Dans le cas contraire, nous nous mettrons en grève », souffle une étudiante macédonienne, visiblement mal à l’aise.

Si les élèves albanais rejettent la responsabilité des affrontements sur macédoniens, la plupart d’entre eux s’opposent à une séparation ethnique. « Nous pouvons apprendre les uns des autres. Si les Américains peuvent tirer profit de toutes les nations et de tous les peuples, nous le pouvons aussi », affirme un élève albanais.

Découvrez notre cahier « Éducation : le grand défi pour les Balkans »

Personne n’accepte d’expliquer exactement comment a commencé le conflit, dans cette cour de lycée fréquentée par trois mille étudiants. Les étudiants albanais disent s’être révoltés à cause d’un clip vidéo dans lequel ils ont reconnu un étudiant macédonien en train de brûler le drapeau albanais. De leur côté, les Macédoniens affirment avoir réagi aux provocations des étudiants albanais qui ont célébré la déclaration d’indépendance du Kosovo en déployant des drapeaux dans la cour.

Glissement

« On assiste à des provocations qui peuvent facilement verser dans l’intolérance et se transformer en comportements agressifs entre les étudiants - individuellement et en groupe », observe Mirjana Dokoska, la directrice du lycée Niko Nestor. Elle n’en dira pas plus.

Le lycée Ibrahim Temo rejette l’hypothèse d’une rotation horaire sur base ethnique. « Nous n’avons pas les moyens techniques de séparer les étudiants. Si nous les avions, nous le ferions immédiatement », lâche Musa Musai, le directeur du lycée. Selon lui, c’est aux parents et aux enseignants qu’il revient d’empêcher les rixes.

Demirqan Rexhepi, le président du comité étudiant du lycée Ibrahim Temo, affirme que les parents et les enseignants s’opposent dans leur majorité à une séparation des étudiants, parce que cela mènerait à un apartheid. A ses yeux, la meilleure solution serait que l’un des lycées puisse s’installer dans de nouveaux bâtiments.

« On en vient toujours à la violence quand la politique prend les rênes », poursuit-il. Il affirme également que les élèves appartenant à des partis politiques sont impliqués dans les bagarres.

Selon le maire de Struga, Ramiz Merko, la municipalité a déposé une requête auprès du gouvernement pour que cinq nouveaux complexes scolaires soient construits. Cela permettrait selon lui de séparer les élèves. A ses yeux, les rixes entres élèves reflètent la tension présente dans le pays. Il ajoute néanmoins que la mairie fera tout ce qu’elle pourra pour empêcher l’intolérance ethnique.

Du côté des parents d’élèves, la tendance semble être au refus d’une division. Comme certains le soulignent, Struga est connue comme un lieu paisible où les différentes communautés vivent ensemble depuis des siècles. D’autres soulignent qu’il faudrait de toute façon améliorer l’état des locaux, actuellement sous les normes. Cela pourrait conduire à une séparation délibérée des élèves.

Motif récurrent chez les habitants de Struga : les bagarres s’expliqueraient par la disparition du sport dans la ville. En cause, le manque de volonté de la part de l’Etat d’investir dans des infrastructures sportives que tous les jeunes pourraient fréquenter ensemble.

Hier, Erol Rizaov, le directeur du quotidien macédonien Utrinski Vesnik, publie une lettre ouverte au Président de la République française intitulé : «Monsieur Sarkozy, venez en Macédoine ! Les intérêts politiques peuvent-ils l’emporter sur le droit des peuples à l’autodétermination ?»

Cette lettre relance une nouvelle fois la polémique étrange, mais complexe qui oppose la Grèce à la Macédoine depuis la chute du bloc communiste, déjà abordé dans un post précédent L'héritage d'Alexandre.

En effet en 1991, lors de l’éclatement de la Yougoslavie, cette petite région des Balkan sur la frontière Nord de la Grèce, s’autoproclame République de Macédoine et adopte le drapeau portant l’étoile de Vergina, symbole associé à Alexandre le Grand.
La Grèce est alors sous le choc et s’oppose violemment à cette décision ! Non pour l’indépendance de ce pays, mais simplement pour son nom et son drapeau.

Pourquoi cette réaction ? Et bien, tout simplement parce que la Grèce possède une région au nord de son territoire qui se nomme également la macédoine, mais surtout parce que, les grecs, très attachés a leur immense patrimoine historique, ont le sentiment que ce nouveau pays, tente de leur arraché une partie de leur histoire.
La région grecque de la macédoine avec sa ville de Pella est le lieu de naissance de leur plus grand héros, Alexandre le Grand.

Depuis, la Grèce tente de faire pression politiquement pour contraindre la république de macédoine à changer son nom et son drapeau. Mais la jeune république refuse, prétextant que la macédoine et Alexandre font également partie de leur héritage culturel.

Un Imbroglio politique qui divise la communauté internationale.

Le Président Sarkozy, a confirmé le soutient sans appel que porte la France à sa vielle ami la Grèce. Ce qui bien évidemment déplait à la Macédoine et explique cette lettre.
Le journaliste macédonien, invoque le droit des peuples à leur « autodétermination ». Il rappelle que la république de Macédoine s’est constituée démocratiquement et légalement, et que le nom et le drapeau ont été choisis librement par la volonté du peuple.

Pour éclaircir cette affaire, nous devons remonter en -334 av. J.-C.., Alexandre le Grand a unifié la plus part des pays de la Grèce et a étendu son royaume sur les tribus barbares du nord jusqu’a la frontière du Danube. Il tourne alors son regard vers l’Est et le Sud. Ses conquêtes le conduiront à soumettre d’immenses royaumes au-delà du monde connu.

De ce fait, les territoires de la république de macédoine actuelle ont été annexés à la macédoine antique en grande partie par Alexandre. Mais au même titre que le Monténégro, la Serbie, la Bulgarie, la Turquie, la Syrie, le Liban, Israël, l’Égypte, l’Arménie, l’Iran, l’Afghanistan, le Pakistan, etc.
Aucun de ces pays ne pense être cependant les légitimes héritiers de la Macédoine et d’Alexandre.
Les Grecs évoquent de plus, le fait que l’ancienne République yougoslave de Macédoine - seul nom reconnu par l’État grec - n’est pas un pays hellénique, mais bien slave !

Au premier abord, cela semble être un problème de second ordre, mais la Grèce ne compte pas en rester là, surtout depuis qu’ils se sont rendu compte que dans les manuels scolaires, l’État Macédonnien enseigne à ses enfants que la région macédonienne de la Grèce est un territoire légitime de la république de Macédoine !

La Grèce compte bien tout faire pour que l’ancienne République yougoslave de Macédoine cesse d’extorquer leur patrimoine, y compris en utilisant son droit de veto à l’entrée de son voisin dans l’OTAN et L’UE.

Entre droit à l’autodétermination et respect du patrimoine, le débat reste entier.

-