| Vrban Todoro
The Conflict in Macedonia – Hypotheses for Development
part II
<< part I
The fate of Macedonia should be considered in close relation with
the future status of Kosovo. Here as well, there are the two main
participants in the conflict situation: the still dominant Macedonian
community and the Albanian community that lives in the Republic.
For now, it is difficult to say what the real ratio between them
is because of the firm refusal of part of the Albanians to be counted.
The “fictive” state border between Macedonia and Kosovo, and the
constant flow of people between them, additionally complicate the
census. During the NATO war against Serbia a great number of refugees
started populating Macedonia, and it is not known for certain how
many of them have returned to Kosovo since the end of the war.
It was easy to foresee, even before the Kosovo crisis, that the
legal and illegal Albanian organizations for liberating Kosovo would
continue to act on the territory of Serbia and Macedonia, regardless
of what form and name they had in front of the international community.
During the last decade (after the disintegration of SFRY), the Albanians
showed that “they can wait patiently for their moment to come”.
Thus, they did not rush to present their requests during the war
between the Serbs and the Croats, or during the war in Bosnia, knowing
full well that the attention of the world was directed somewhere
else, and that the world would not look favourably on another hotspot
in the Balkans. Therefore, as soon as the crisis in Bosnia finished,
and as soon as they were certain that they had secured the attention
of the “international community”, the Albanians openly posed the
question for their rights. It became clear from the very beginning
that this was not a case of disagreements based on religion, language
or anything else, but it was a request purely on a national basis
for the appearance of the so-called Albanian nationalism. The success
of the Albanian cause in Kosovo, not without the help of NATO, the
US and the EU, inevitably led to the “export” of extremism to the
Republic of Macedonia, inflamed by ideas and people, with weapons
and paramilitary organizations.
In practice, the Kosovo variant from the beginning of the 80s is
starting to repeat itself – first was the request for the opening
of an Albanian university in Tetovo, and then the requests have
multiplied to include more cultural, citizen and minority rights,
recognition of the Albanian language as an official language; the
issue for changing the Constitution is also raised, even the transformation
of Macedonia into a federative (confederative) state composed of
Albanians and Macedonians. It is only a matter of time when there
will be an official request for the separation of western Macedonia,
populated mainly by Albanians, and its annexation to Kosovo.
We can demonstrate clearly both internal and external reasons for
the escalation of the conflict between the Albanians and the Macedonians.
External factor: geo-political, geo-strategic and geo-economical
interests of the so-called great forces interested in this region,
which not only failed to undertake preventive measures to subdue
the already appearing disagreements between the two communities,
but, on the contrary, they are directly or indirectly responsible
because they closed their eyes before the appearance of Albanian
extremism, and pressured directly the Macedonian leaders into making
concessions to the Albanian requests. For a long time, the “international
community” hesitated as to how to call the military attacks by the
Albanians in Macedonia – whether as instances involving “Albanian
terrorists” or “Albanian rebels”. It was not just after the terrorist
attacks on the USA (11 September, 2001), that the “international
community” and the world media started accepting the term “terrorists”,
but even then some western experts and official mediators made a
difference between “good” and “bad”, bearing in mind that the former
refers to the Albanians.
Internal factor: it is not always directly connected with the external;
nevertheless, the latter plays a direct stimulating role in this
case. The Albanian requests gradually start to cross the line of
a normal striving for cultural and language rights of a minority,
matters that can be reached on the basis of dialogue and mutually
acceptable compromise between the two communities. For almost a
year, the Macedonian state was fighting a war with Albanian paramilitary
groups, who are protected directly by the US, NATO and the EU, and
are presented by them as “fighters for justice and human rights”.
As a state, Macedonia has sufficient strength to deal alone with
the internal problems, but it is not allowed to. It loses the war
on the diplomatic front, and, under strong external pressure, it
is forced to refrain from military actions against the Albanian
terrorists, and to start changing its Constitution.
Thus, we arrive at the Ohrid Agreement of 13 August, 2001, for
political reforms for the stabilization of the country, an agreement
in which 15 constitutional amendments are formulated – for the official
use of the Albanian language, for giving more rights to the Albanian
minority, for nominating Albanians in the state and the municipality
services, in the juridical system and in the police. Of course,
the Albanian paramilitary organization for liberation (ANA) appears,
stating that it does not recognize the Ohrid Agreement and would
fight till the end for separating the western part of Macedonia.
On the one hand, ANA may serve to simply justify the significant
quantity of weapons left in the hands of the Albanian population,
despite NATO’s operation “Essential Harvest”. On the other, such
an organization is a logical necessity so that there can be constant
provocations to the fragile agreement between the two communities,
and that there can be a basis for constant pressure on the internal
and international plan for bigger concessions. The final aim is
hardly a secret to anyone – “national unification with the other
parts of the fatherland, divided 100 years ago by the predecessors
of the European politicians”.
On 16 October, 2001, the Macedonian Parliament accepts the new
Constitution of the country which envisages greater rights for the
Albanian minority. According to the amended Preamble and the 15
constitutional amendments, the Macedonian language remains official
in the Republic, whereas in the regions where over 20% of the population
is Albanian the Albanian language also becomes official – parallel
with the Macedonian. Guarantees are given for greater participation
of Albanians in the state administration and the police, and mechanisms
are created for blocking decisions in the Parliament and in the
municipal organs concerning legal projects in the area of culture.
Finally, the changed text of the Preamble of the Constitution is:
“the citizens of the Republic of Macedonia, the Macedonian nation,
as well as the citizens who live within the borders of the state,
and who are part of the Albanian nation, Turkish nation, Vlach nation,
Serbian nation, Roma nation and others, have equal rights”.
We are witnesses of a great, conscious or unconscious mixing up
of the notions, partly as a result of the pressure of western “experts”,
and of the compromises in the discussions and disputes among different
conceptions of Albanians and Macedonians regarding the issue of
what kind of group nations are included in the Macedonian state,
and in what way they represent it. To the Macedonians, it is essential
that the term “Macedonian nation” is retained, but this term is
previously territorially delineated, and refers to the citizens
that live in the Republic. In such a way, all the fears of Macedonia’s
neighbours (Greece and Bulgaria) of possible pretensions on the
Macedonian side over its population in the border regions are abolished.
This is not the case in terms of the representatives of the minority
(apart from the Albanian) groups in Macedonia. They are determined
as parts of their corresponding nations that live in the Republic
of Macedonia, and who obviously do not live only on the territory
of the Republic of Macedonia. I will only briefly mention here that
it is uncertain what kind of criteria has been used to include representatives
of some ethnic minorities, and leave out others. When we leave aside
the fact that it is very strange to talk about a “Vlach nation”,
which it is, and who else it includes apart from the Vlachs (Aromani,
Cincars) in Macedonia, the term “part of the Roma nation” is also
doubtful, because it is questionable whether we can talk at all
about one Roma nation in the world, Europe or the Balkans, so that
the Roma from Macedonia can be part of it.
If these two examples beg questions from a theoretical-scientific
aspect, and which do not have practical consequences, the part of
the formulation in the Preamble, which refers to the other minority
groups in Macedonia, can be interpreted in a different way. If today
we accept it is justifiable to say that those minority groups are
part of the corresponding nations (Albania, Serbia, Turkey), tomorrow
we may also find justifiable the desire of those parts to unite
fully with their mother-nations. The text in the Preamble of the
Macedonian Constitution will be a pretext to the advantage of such
a development.
Although the new Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia can
be accepted as a significant concession or a significant success
(depending on one’s viewpoint) to the advantage of the ethnic minorities,
it can hardly be accepted as something that will help overcome the
ethnic conflicts and return the country to a period of peaceful
coexistence among different citizens, regardless of their language,
religion or ethnic background.
The development of the present conflict situation in Macedonia
can be followed depending on what a direction the relations between
the two most numerous groups in the Republic – those of the Macedonians
and of the Albanians – are going to take.
In a peaceful development of that state (regardless of the form)
and with a marked demographic increase in the Albanian population
in it, the tendency is to have the Albanian ethnic and religious
minority turn into a majority in Macedonia. That means that sooner
or later the Albanians – Muslims, in a peaceful and democratic way,
through elections, and independently, would take over the rule of
the Republic. If there is a development and other favourable circumstances,
such a course of events is just a matter of time – when the Albanian
population in Macedonia reaches the number 50+1%. It is not by accident
that since 1991, the Albanians have refused to be counted in a census
– the lack of clarity of this issue gives constant food for different
political speculations. Thus, in the 1994 census, it was officially
announced that 443,000 Albanians were then living in Macedonia,
while according to unofficial Albanian data, their number was 800,000.
Regardless of the time, there is one perspective – the practical
appearance of another (third) Albanian and Muslim state on the Balkans,
and it is not beyond the imagination that in favourable circumstances
it may request to be separated from Albania, or more surely from
Kosovo, to represent an independent Albanian area or state.
Will the Christians in Macedonia (regardless of who recognises
them and how), who until recently ruled the country, and who in
such a situation would turn into a minority, come to terms with
this perspective, and how will they react?
Will we again be witnesses of what is happening in Kosovo and in
Macedonia today, only with the opposite sign – a new wave of ethnic
and religious conflicts, bloodshed, ethnic cleansing and expulsions?
Another perspective is if the non-Albanian political forces that
rule the Republic today don’t in some way allow for the above-mentioned
developments. The least they can do is to try and use all methods
and means (not necessarily only democratic) to prevent this. In
this direction, they will, of course, have Serbia as an ally. It
would be little wonder if the Republic of Macedonia is oriented
in the future towards a closer economic and political connection
with new Yugoslavia, which can some day lead to their unification
under some form of an alliance or confederation on an equal basis.
In such a situation, it would be more difficult for the Albanian
population in Macedonia to present claims for greater and greater
rights. In such way, the situation that existed 50 years previously
would be renewed, one which was accepted as such by the neighbouring
Balkan states and by the world. For such a variant, there is, of
course, need for consent by the “international community”, which
would hardly tolerate it at this stage because of the strengthening
of Serbia. Although today it seems incredible, the perspective for
unifying Macedonia (or a part of it) with the new Yugoslavia could,
in certain circumstances, prove the most realistic variant for the
future.
The third variant for the development of Macedonia is seen in the
situation where the still ruling Slave majority in Macedonia is
directed towards some closer relation with a certain Balkan state,
at the same time displaying a determined attitude towards “more
and greater” rights for the Albanian population. After the change
of the Constitution of the state, the Albanian extremists will not
get so much support from the international community. And if they
continue with their terrorist acts, it is possible that they will
encounter resolute resistance by the Macedonian authorities. The
problem is that these sorts of developments can lead to deepening
the interethnic conflict.
The exhaustion of political dialogue, of political means and of
mutual concessions will lead to the radicalisation of the Albanian
requests – to presenting officially the issue of the territorial
separation of Macedonia into two parts – western (Albanian and Muslim)
and eastern (Macedonian, Slave and Christian).
Even if the fate of the Albanian part is more than clear – unification
with the Albanians from Kosovo in one state (and some day there
could happen the unification of Albanians in one country), the question
is whether the eastern part of the present Macedonia has the chance
of being retained and remaining as an independent state – a buffer
zone between Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria?
It remains uncertain how the three Balkan states will react in
such a situation, and whether the old contradictions between them
will or will not again become current? (The old, proven and more
certain variant may be preferable: unification, even of a part of
Vardar Macedonia with New Yugoslavia, certainly as a fully equal
federative unit.)
The fourth perspective for the development of Macedonia is for
the present leadership of the Republic to continue to look for a
way toward reasonable compromise with the requests of the Albanians,
trying in such a way to prolong or postpone the disagreements, and
counting on the time factor.
The acceptance of greater cultural and political rights for the
Albanian minority in Macedonia, which became fact with the change
of the Constitution, should lead to limiting Albanian strife and
to a temporary solution to the conflict situation that appeared
between the two main groups of the Republic’s population. If the
requests of the Albanians continue according to the principle “you
give them an inch, they swim all over”, then the variants of development
are twofold: either the position of the Macedonian leadership towards
the Albanians should become stronger and, as a final option, result
in a complete separation between the two communities, and the dissolution
of the country (that mostly depends on international conjuncture)
or the path of compromise should continue, and it would not be surprising
if it led, at a certain moment, to the forming of a confederation
between the two communities – the Albanian and the Macedonian –
within the present Republic.
Whether such a type of federative system has any chance of survival
will depend on both the internal development of the Republic, and
on the intentions of the international community for the development
of that part of the Balkans. In the present situation, we can notice
the prominent tendency of the “international community” to try and
turn Macedonia into an “international protectorate”, and even link
it to Kosovo. The politicians in Macedonia reacted fiercely to such
a development of the situation, which puts them in the role of simple
monitors of their own fate, while it puts the state in the role
of a hostage of someone else’s geo-political interests.
It is interesting to follow the position of Macedonia in the process
of Euro-integration. Can we talk about Macedonia entering the European
Union in a situation where the country is torn apart by internal
disagreements, which won’t stop at any time in the foreseeable future?
Seen from a European perspective, there is no doubt that, one day,
all Balkan states will become EU members. There is one road to the
European Union and all countries in the region have directed themselves
towards it. The criteria that the EU poses are political and economical.
If we judge according to economical signals, Macedonia could hardly
fulfil them even after 15 years. The same could be said for Bulgaria
as well, although it is not burdened by ethnic-minority conflict.
If, because of some situation, the political criterion is preferred
(or regional, for example), then both have chances to enter the
EU earlier as equal members.
In the case of Macedonia, the main supposition for its future Euro-integration
is establishing peace and reaching political stability in the country.
Regardless of who is going to be dominant in the short term or long
term – the Albanian or the Macedonian community – and regardless
of whether Macedonia will become a federation or will remain a unitary
state, the extension of the Euro-integration process will be possible
only after peaceful developments are established. If different circumstances
lead to the disintegration of Macedonia as a state, or if it turns
into an official “international protectorate”, that would mean that
the process of Euro-integration would be stopped for a certain period
of time, which would have negative effects on the whole Balkan region
and its path towards a unified Europe.
<< part I
|