|
Denko MALESKI
Law School, Skopje
Macedonia Will Not Be the Same Again
The international and domestic scenes are permanently changing.
Those who are not capable of adjusting to the new situation will
be ruined. This is the message that springs from the historical
depths of political thought. Macedonia adjusted successfully to
the changes in 1991; whether or not it will make the necessary adjustments
now remains to be seen. The fall of the Berlin Wall, approximately
10 years ago, marked the end of a world order founded on a bipolar
power structure. We are aware of great turmoil caused by tectonic
quakes in world politics from reading, for instance, about the disintegration
of the Austro-Hungarian Empire or the Ottoman Empire, whose power
was exercised in our region. In 1989, we witnessed the disintegration
of a world system. One of the super-powers, Russia, was economically
exhausted by the 50-year long armament race. Surprisingly, with
the help of the other super-powers, Russia peacefully withdrew its
power back to its national boundaries. This political withdrawal
of the Russian power created a huge vacuum of power in all of Eastern
Europe; which is being filled by the power of the victorious block
of the western industrial democracies. Democracy, human rights,
market economy and integration have become trademarks of the new
democracies. The political priorities of the complex states in Eastern
Europe, however, were different. Their constituent parts went through
difficult processes of becoming independent. Some, like the Checks
and the Slovaks, did this through a peaceful process of federal
dissolution, while others, such as the Yugoslav nations, provoked
disintegration of the country through a series of bloody ethnic
wars. The Republic of Macedonia, proclaiming its policy of peaceful
self-determination fought for its freedom peacefully. In this, we
were different from the other Yugoslav republics.
The moment Macedonia became a full member of the international
community; one chapter in the country's history came to an end.
As a small country with no influence on the world politics, our
best foreign policy, from that moment onwards, had to be our interior
policy. A successful interior policy of any country is one, which
brings and retains stability. The political process plays the most
significant role in bringing stability. The essence of the political
process in a democratic, pluralist society is political accommodation.
In such a society, government is not considered to be only a machine
for implementing laws on individuals, but also a center where conflicting
interests of various groups are accommodated. Impatient to declare
the constitution of the independent state with which we would promote
our international position, we declared the Constitution without
the approval of the Albanians. The political model of civil society,
which does not differentiate between people on ethnic grounds, but
according to which people enjoy individual rights, sowed the seeds
of the current conflict. This conflict has been brewing for ten
years and has now exploded in convenient domestic and international
circumstances. The Albanians who required certain collective rights
were simply outvoted. The lessons learned in all democratic societies,
which we are learning today as well, are that the requests of the
large social segments in the state must not be ignored, nor could
the leaders of those groups be treated as if they only represented
themselves and nobody else. That kind repression seldom succeeds
against large collective groups determined to defend their interests.
Constant accommodation between different groups with political means
is necessary in order to avoid civil war. When basic conflicts in
a society (and the lack of agreement about the Constitution is one
such basic conflict in Macedonia) excel the power and the capabilities
of the politicians to put an end to them, then the probable outcome
is civil war.
These universal facts are the essence of the present conflict between
the Macedonians and the Albanians. The disapproval of the Albanians
with their social status, according to the Constitution, and the
inability of the political structure to carry out reforms through
a process of peaceful accommodation, have been the main generators
of the present interethnic conflict. This conflict has lasted for
the last decade. The Albanian's fight for greater rights in education
is a good illustration of this. But what was it that brought this
explosion of violence into our country? Again, we must look towards
the co-ordinance of the domestically and internationally altered
circumstances. The dramatic change of the balance of regional power
came about after NATO's intervention in Kosovo, when Serbian's power
was expelled from this part of the Balkans. Albanians from Macedonia
took part in the fight against Milosevic's repressive regime as
part of an all-Albanian armed resistance. Their political platform
also centered on full-blown political coordination between all Albanian
parties including those in Macedonia. The aforementioned have been
strong factors of connection amongst all Albanians in the region,
the war brought about a kind of a territorial connection.
During the largest military intervention in Europe since the Second
World War, armed Albanian groups used the territory of Macedonia
for attacks in Kosovo and Southern Serbia. After its end, the absence
of Serb soldiers on the border with Macedonia brought a practical
unification of the territories and the power of all Albanians in
the Balkans. When the Macedonian government decided to deal militarily
with the armed Albanian groups in the territory of Macedonia, it
had to take all these factors into consideration, as well as, the
change in the balance of regional power and the sentiment of its
own Albanian population towards the armed fighters. In conditions
of such aggression coming from outside, it was very significant
that the authorities gave exact and truthful assessments of the
situation. The means employed in resolving the problem would depend
on those assessments. Thus, an assessment stating that there were
no serious problems in the interethnic relations in Macedonia would
allow for military force to be used in dealing with the insurgents
coming across the border because the government leans on the strong
pillar of interethnic solidarity. However, if an assessment states
otherwise, than one must count on the possible symbiosis between
the armed groups and the local population. This was the case in
Macedonia, and in such cases power does not help, but, on the contrary,
it creates convenient circumstances for an armed rebellion. In Macedonia,
as a result of the wrong assessment, or, what seems more probable,
as a result in the faith of the power of repression, force was used
where all possible instruments of diplomacy should have been used.
For, although there are a lot of examples of successful military
dealing with infiltrated groups, there are not examples in the world
where bad interethnic relations have been improved by the use of
military force. Hence, the assertions of the politicians and analysts
that all the forces on disposal should be used to fight the insurgents
or that general mobilization was a solution to the crisis were wrong
and the right moment was missed. Another component that is also
necessary, in such situations of infiltration from abroad, is the
support of the actions by the central government by the moderates.
Macedonian politics faced a paradox - the Albanian representatives
of the government and the armed groups had identical political requests.
That was a sign that the gap between the ethnic groups was enormous
and that it could not be bridged with military means. At that moment,
the military solution was dropped, and a political solution was
urgently searched for. However, the politicians, following their
political instinct for survival, wanted victory first and negotiations
second. The victory was not attained. Among other things, this was
so because there are no winners in ethnic wars inside one country.
Even in situations when a group would manage to become dominant
over the other, it is only a temporary situation, which explodes
at the first convenient occasion. Only political accommodation is
the way to permanent peace in ethnically divided societies.
How did the international community react towards the conflict
in Macedonia? Their first reaction was to support Macedonia in the
fight against the infiltrated terrorists. NATO owed Macedonia support
because of its behavior during the Kosovo crisis. The problem appeared
when, instead of quick victory, there was a symbiosis between the
armed groups and the Albanian population. The absence of support
from the Albanian parties for a military solution faced the international
community with two Macedonias - a Macedonian and an Albanian one.
Further support of the Macedonian government in the fight against
the armed groups would have meant support for the Macedonians and
not for the Albanians. For, when the international community speaks
of supporting the Macedonian government, they include the Albanians
as well. Hence, their insistence on a compromise that would unite,
in a common policy, these two significant segments of the Macedonian
society. By exercising their influence, they made the armed Albanian
guerilla groups withdraw and created conditions for the two sides
to find a peaceful way out of the crisis. It was only after the
politicians in Macedonia could not or would not bring about a political
solution, and with the experience of the regular late interventions
in such Balkan crisis, that the EU and US sent their representatives
to bring about such an agreement. That caused a certain "deytonization"
of Macedonia. After insisting that all the main participants in
the Macedonian politics create a common government, the sides were
coerced to an agreement. The politicians were faced with unpopular
solutions that would serve as a form of redemption. For, they could
always transfer the guilt on the international community, with the
pretext that this solution was forced upon them.
What will Macedonia, with the new political arrangement, achieved
under strong international pressure, be like? Macedonia will certainly
not be the same any more. The price for avoiding civil war through
this agreement, with the help of US and EU, will open a new chapter
in our political history full of uncertainties. New institutional
ways for greater influence in creating the state policy of Macedonia
are opened to the Albanian ethnic group, whose members fall as second-rate
citizens. Their task will be to prove that the aim of their political
fight is for the Albanian people to stand in dignity with the Macedonians,
or even more, that the ethnic Albanian will become a political Macedonian.
In the years to come, we will need a lot of creativity to discover
the best formula for stability and peace in society in which everyone
will feel comfortable. The Framework Agreement cannot provide this
for us just by itself. The political solutions that it contains
can become a source of stability but it can also become a source
of instability in Macedonia. The key factor will be the moderate
and tolerant behavior of people, especially those who lead the country
and the intellectual elite. These facts foretell difficult days
for Macedonia.
|