Australian Macedonian Human Rights Committee

Media Release

Letter by the President of the European Commission – Jose Manuel Barroso

2 August 2008

The Prime Minister of the Republic of Macedonia, Mr Nikola Gruevski, recently sent a letter to the European Commission’s president, Mr José Manuel Barroso regarding the human rights problems confronting the Macedonian minority in Greece. In the letter the Prime Minister states:

The Government of the Republic of Macedonia appeals, within your competences, to personally engage for Greece’s strict obeying of the obligations stemming from international instruments regarding human rights, with special emphasis on free expression of ethnic identity and all rights stemming from that. Our expectation is Greece, as a member of the EU and NATO, to start dialogue which will lead to meeting the recommendations of the European Commission.

In response the President of the European Commission, Mr Barroso replied with the following:

…it is important to clarify that the European Union has no general competence to deal with issues such as identities of minorities, their rights, acquisition of citizenship and restitution of properties, arising in its Member States. This is the primary responsibility of the Member States in the light of their constitutional traditions and international obligations.

This is an unfortunate and insensitive response by the President of the European Commission on an issue as fundamental as the protection of human rights within a Member State of the European Union (EU). It seems strange that the representative of the EU would use such indifferent language in addressing the concerns over human rights abuses of ethnic Macedonians in Greece. This is especially the case given that the EU likes to wrap itself around different humanist ideals and announce triumphantly their commitment to human rights. Indeed, the EU is increasingly establishing fundamental rights as part of EU law as a means of legitimizing the EU itself. Clearly there appears to be a gap between EU rhetoric and reality; at the same time that the EU affirms the importance of human rights, it actually does nothing to secure any of them.

What President Barroso could have asserted was that the EU has an unwavering respect for the protection of human rights and has a particular interest to ensure that its Member States, namely Greece, is aware of their obligations. For example, the founding treaties of the EU make references to the “fact” that the EU is “founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law” and that it “shall respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms”. In fact, accession to the Convention is something that has been made a condition for EU membership.

President Barroso could have mentioned that the Charter of Fundamental Rights that was “solemnly proclaimed” by the European Parliament, the Council of the EU and the European Commission deems it “necessary to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights”.

President Barroso could have outlined exactly what the responsibilities of the Member States, namely Greece, are in relation to their “constitutional traditions and international obligations”. In doing so, he would have revealed that whilst Greece’s constitution purports to claim that “all Greeks are equal before the law”, this ambition is immediately diminished by the fact that Greece fuses citizenship with ethnicity, a practice that ensures Greece’s alleged homogeneity, therefore only “Greeks” are equal and relevantly excluding other ethnic groups, such as the Macedonians from this “Greek equality”. What President Barroso should have mentioned was that this Greek practice, which emptied of its substance the authority on which it is supposed to be based, and which is imposed on all organs of the Greek state, cannot be described as a worthy “constitutional tradition” befitting a democratic liberal state within the meaning of the EU.

Perhaps President Barroso could also have outlined how Greece refuses to ratify various instruments concerned with the protection of human rights – something apparently that the EU values, or even how Greece continues to violate the human rights instruments it is a party to. In doing so, President Barroso may have revealed how Greece’s practice on the protection of human rights is the antithesis of an EU Member state.

It is unfortunate that President Barroso chose instead to clarify how the EU does not have competency to deal with human rights violations rather than clarify the importance in which the EU places on the respect for human rights. Unfortunate because for all the oratory and commitments made to human rights, President Barroso seems to view the protection of human rights – or at least the protection of Macedonian human rights in Greece, as a negative value instead of a positive obligation on the EU and its Member state. This would have been a worthwhile clarification.

What is clear from the attitude expressed by President Barroso, is that the protection of human rights for Macedonians in Greece is unlikely to be found in the political institutions of the EU, but through successful human rights activism within Greece and through the European (and other international) legal frameworks established for enforcing various human rights instruments. This is where the value and worth of bodies like the European Free Alliance – Rainbow (Vinozito) prevail. President Barroso has provided a timely reminder of the importance of the support given to Vinozito.

The Australian Macedonian Human Rights Committee encourages everybody to show their support to Vinozito and the human rights of the Macedonians in Greece by subscribing to the Macedonian Minorities Support Fund. There cannot be a more pertinent moment to do so.

--------------------------------------------
Australian Macedonian Human Rights Committee
PO BOX 364
Doncaster VIC 3108
Australia
Tel/Fax: +61 3 9460 2910

Visit our website at http://www.macedonianhr.org.au

Excellent. We need to remind, and keep reminding, these european burocrats, that EU cannot tolerate discrimination in its ranks. It should not, I should say. If they keep on tolerating it, they will undermine their very foundation, and delegitimize themselves.

Actually - this reply only reiterates why we needn't seek association with the EU. It's not what we think it is, nor should we follow the mindset, "EU or nothing."

If, as Mr. Barroso has stated, the European Union is not competent to deal with the persecution of minorities in its member states, then it certainly has no place criticising rights abuses in other jurisdictions. EU leaders, like Mr. Sarkozy and Ms Merkel, should shut their hypocritical mouths. You can't criticise China for its minority abuses then turn around and give Greece political cover for doing the same thing.

Great response by the AMHRC to Barrosso's basically pathetic reply to Macedonian PM Gruevski. The standard of these EU people is pathetic, surely they could have produced a much better diplomatic response then that.

However, we must not forget the last paragraph and in particularly the last line of Barrosso's response;

"Maintaining good neighbourly relations remains essential for the progress of your country towards the European Union".

The message is loud and clear here, raising issues of human rights abuses is not good neighbourly conduct, how dare you, if you want to be in the EU close your eyes and shut your mouth.

Dear Committee Members

The committee should be congratulated on the excellent and sober analysis in its media release (2 August)concerning the disgraceful response by the EC President to PM Nikola Gruevski's letter. It is a morally callous and cynical reply by Jose Manuel Barosso. (By the way is a copy of the complete letter by the EC President available?)

The Macedonians could perhaps reflect and take appropriate action (through diplomatic channels) on the implications of the idea asserted by the EC President that: human rights of minorities etc are "the primary responsibility of the Member States in the light of their constitutional traditions and international obligations." Can he be serious? Does this mean that the Greek nationalist agenda with its genocidal ideology toward all ethnic groups put in place especially since 1913, is acceptable to the EU because it is a "constitutional tradition"? And that if an EU Member Nation ignores and violates its "international obligations", the European Commission has not the power or competence to intervene and bring it to heel or take it to task? These and other issues would be interesting to raise and explore with the EC. They are questions which are legitimate on the basis of the above quote from Barroso - and he should be called to account.

Let us consider some very important and big facts in the existing situation: Vinozhito's very palpable presence in Greece and its just demands and the on-going maltreatment of its members; the testimony of groups within Greece (published in Risto Stefov's Digest this week) as well as Greek Helsinki Watch; and of course, the all-important on-going witnesses of violations and discriminations against Macedonians eg Detsa Begaltsi, visitors/humanitarian aid workers turned away at the border etc. Can Europe be indifferent to all these facts?

But then again, we are dealing with politicians in Europe who don't seem to find morally repugnant the national insult of "FYROM" that was slapped on the Republic of Macedonia back in the early ninetees .

Nevertheless, I really find it bizarre that an EC President can reply the way he did to the head of state of any nation. The patent absurdity of the Greek position has been noted by the world- namely, its demand of a name change from the neighbouring sovereign state, and its strenuous official denial of the existence of ethnic minorites within Greece . So what does the EC President think he is doing? Perhaps intenational opinion has (considerable) limitations, and that is surely a very serious problem.

I agree with the committee that the role of Vinozhito is pivotal in the struggle. And not just for the Macedonians in the human rights movement in the country they live in but for all the Macedonians abroad. But above all, in the existing mess Greece had created, the existence and voice of Vinozhito is (or can be) a very strong card in the appalling diplomatic game between the Republic of Macedonia and Greece. That is why every attempt at publicising and supporting the activities of Vinozhito should be made.

If the human resources are available perhaps an all-out campaign to support Vinozhito should be made by mobilising all Macedonian organisations in Australia for a start. It should be conducted with the strong message that Vinozhito is not just one organisation among others but one of the keys to the global strategy of the Macedonians in their emancipatory and human rights goals.

All Macedonians will support lucid, persuasive and no-nonsense approaches like the one demonstrated in your press release.

Best regards
Jim

It seems that Macedonians are becoming more coordinated to fix these injustices. It's great to see! Nice work AMHRC!

Has anybody thought that using equivalent arguments, Greece could lay claim to Mecedonian territory and people?

There is a lot of chatter among Greeks overseas about raising equivalent demands on Macedonia, making jokes about the "Mouse That Roared" (remember the film?), and escalating "the risk to the peace and good neighbourhood from Macedonia" through world wide organisations like the UN and to the US itself. Any thoughts please?

can you explain this thought further?

There are claims that Macedonian territories used to belong to the magna Grecia, based on historical scripts. Also that under the Byzantine/Easter Rome rule, Macedonia was ruled as part of northern Greece and that indigenous Macedonian Greeks were persecuted and fled under the Ottomans, etc.

Can they really lay claim to our lands as belonging to the Hellenic and Byzanbtine geography? My old dad is concerned that we may end up being the new Palestinians in disputed lands.

I would appreciate your views.

If any of those claims were valid, they would have been presented long ago.
The reality is they have done everything to wipe out any trace of (ethnic) Macedonians whatsoever over the last 100 years. And still have failed.
Tell your Father to sleep easy Al.
The Greeks were very chummy with the Ottoman rulers and had quite a racket going. The church was their best ploy and they worked it well. So well that the Bulgarians had a go at copying the strategy soon after.

Your point about Hellenic & Byzantine property makes a ridiculous assumption about modern Greeks having anything to do with Hellenic & Byzantine times. Even the most pig headed Greek will tell you the Byzantine era was unequivocally unable to be identified as a Greek one. The Hellenic era, well ... that is best left for admirers of Mussolini.

Let me know if I can help your Dad any further.

Your dad should know better that your the old israelis in disputed lands.

What a disgraceful response from Barossa and the E.U !

I am astounded that Barossa had been informed that the right of self determination does not apply in this case.

Instead, he has chosen to support the deceptive campaign of Modern Greece in its efforts to steal the name, and more.


A few things to note about how Modern Greece has been deceiving the E.U and robbing the native Macedonians of their identity.

1. The descendants of 600,000 Orthodox Turks settled in Macedonia in the 1920's were NEVER Macedonians.

2. Renaming native Macedonians villages is also intereting. The village name 'Melas' for example, was never Macedonian, because it has NO HISTORY in the region before the 1920's.

3. Officially putting the name 'Macedonia' into its northern prefectures in 1989 is an act of aggression against the native Macedonian people, who have been collectively self declaring their identity, if various treaties, manifesto's and organizations, for centuries.

4. The Modern Greek state has been trying to muscle its way into traditional Macedonian lands, rename everything, and deceive the E.U and the world that it has always been that way.

5. Only with the dying out of the native Macedonian culture in a signficant way has Modern Greece been able to move in, and take its place.

6. There is no history or event of a single collective calling themselves both Greeks 'and' Macedonians.

7. For a reality check, I like to quote the late King George of Greece in his discussion with his Austrian counterpart "there are very few Greeks in Macedonia !!". Something to remember, and a reminder of how things have changed.
.

Al,

The difference is many ethnic Macedonians 'forced' out from their ancestral homes have documentary or circumstantial proof of ownership. The lunatic fringes within the Greek community have mythology to rely on.

You don't need me to tell you what the courts use in making their decisions.

Justice

Not only this, but the culprit of the latest atrocities against ethnic Macedonians are still alive and still operating, making the case for the ethnic Macedonians quite strong.

What is 'Magna Grecia' ? An idea ? A reality ? How did people self identity before they were told they were 'Greeks' before a Greek national consciounce barely emerged in the 1830's ? Who told them, and if they had not been told, who would they be now ? How can Macedonia be ruled as part of 'Northern Greece' when 'Northern Greece' in the 1830's was a border just north of the Peloponese ? What a gross mistatement. Just another attempt to manipulate information and rob and cheat the Macedonians of their history and heritage. Typical colonial discourse, regarding Macedonia and the Macedonians. Go to the Other colonizers of traditional Macedonian land, i.e., the Bulgarians. They will tell you the same thing. That Macedonia is part of the 'greater Bulgarian geopolitical tradition'. The Serbians will say the same. But, we know that Modern Greeks, you and I, had no sense of identity, national feeling or even a common ancestry, just a few short centuries ago, so all this talk about 'Macedonia being Greek' is missing the point. Behind the 'Macedonia is Greek' lie is the idea that Modern Greeks all have the same common ancestry, history and heritage, which is of course a complete lie. Because the term 'Greek' is so loosely applied to just about anyone, and then so narrowly defined, it can capture just about anyone in its net, and give them a brand new heritage, nicely packaged. This is what socialogists and spin doctors do. And why empirically minded historians have had such a tough time with modern Greek history. It's a history of identity fraud, manipulation, anachronisms, a history of bizarre myth making and, various other forms of 'social' construction. Before the 'catastrophe' the better part of Turkey was also 'Greek' but 'who knows' what they meant by that at that time ? Russian Orthodox Pontians, Kartvelian speaking Greek Orthodox, Turkish speaking Armenian Orthodox, Turkish speaking Chrisitan (Greek) Orthodox ? There has never been a clear idea of what it means to have a 'Greek heritage' let alone a people declaring they are Greeks 'and' Macedonians ! What a load of garbage from you.