What I’m thinking about Macedonia
With former Prime Minister Gruevski in DC and I gather a photo published of the dinner a few colleagues and I had with him last night, I’m finding people interested in my views on Macedonia. For what they are worth, here they are.
Gruevski came to power in 2006 as an economic reformer and has a very good record in that department. Macedonia has dramatically improved its business climate, generating small and medium enterprise and attracting foreign investment. Only the European recession has clouded the picture. I’ll leave it to Gruevski’s minions to provide the facts and figures.
He has two problems in Washington:
1) a wire tapping scandal that has revealed what reasonable people believe to be wide-ranging abuse of power during his last mandate as prime minister;
2) his failure to make significant progress with Greece in resolving the “name” issue (Athens objects to the name Macedonia, claiming it should be exclusively Greek).
Gruevski has a long way to go to convince people here that the abuses of power we’ve seen revealed in the last couple of years are finished and that a new era of transparency and accountability is starting. That will have to begin with an impeccable election in December, one that provides both Macedonian citizens and the internationals who count (that’s the US and EU) with an outcome that is widely recognized as legitimate.
Transparency and accountability will require big changes in the way the Macedonian government operates and in its relationship to the press. In a way, that has already started: the local media covered the wire tapping scandal in detail and at length. Future Macedonian governments need to learn to live with the kind of sharp and constant criticism that characterizes democratic societies. They will also need to operate far more cleanly than in the past.
On the “name” issue, some in Washington still think a compromise solution can be found. They urge Skopje and Athens to come up with something that Washington, Berlin and Brussels will find worthy enough to push as part of a broader package of reviving Balkans ambitions to become part of Europe.
My own view is skeptical of that approach. I wouldn’t put all my eggs in that basket. It is certainly difficult for Gruevski to compromise because his political constituency may not accept it, which could lead to a defeat of the necessary referendum. It is difficult for Athens to compromise because it is already feeling humiliated. Berlin and Brussels don’t really want to ask Athens to do anything more than meet the requirements of its various financial bail outs. In weakness there is strength.
Linking Macedonia’s problems with Bosnia’s and Kosovo’s risks compounding the difficulty and making a solution less likely. Nothing will be agreed until everything is agreed, which may be never.
The alternative is NATO membership as The FYROM (The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the term used in the United Nations). Both an interim agreement and an International Court of Justice decision weigh in favor of that ugly solution. But it requires getting the issue back up to the President of the United States (in the next administration, not this one). That is extraordinarily difficult. President Bush tried hard at the NATO Bucharest Summit in 2008 to force a solution. The Greeks balked. He failed. Who in the US government wants to tell a new president to put her prestige on the line for something that has a good probability of failure? You can forget about the issue completely if Trump is elected.
Macedonians detest the appellation “The FYROM,” but most tell me they are willing to swallow it, sometimes adding that it also needs to lead to EU membership. That in my view is a bridge too far. Greece will insist on a real solution before Skopje accedes to the EU. I don’t think there is any way out of that vise, in which Athens has a great deal of leverage.
Even getting NATO membership as “The FYROM” will require a significant reduction in Greece’s resistance. The next Macedonian prime minister needs to think about what he can do to reduce the impression among Greeks that calling Macedonia Macedonia threatens their identity. I don’t know what that is, though I can think of a lot of options. How to find out which one the Greeks will value? Ask them, in private, what they would appreciate.
The notion that Macedonia’s problems merit high priority in a Washington consumed with an election campaign, the war against the Islamic State, the roguish challenge from Russia, the economic and military rise of China and dozens of other issues is not convincing. Macedonians need to look for a solution they and the Greeks can bring to Washington for a blessing, without much heavy lifting from the Americans. I hope they do that, early in Hillary Clinton’s presidency.
PS: So here is what I get in response to this post:
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
6 thoughts on “What I’m thinking about Macedonia”
Comments are closed.
RSS - Posts
The abuses of power and criminal activities revealed in the wiretapped conversations are ones that should be adjudicated in free and fair courts, not in elections (although ideally they should be punished there too). So “the long way to go to convince people here that the abuses of power we’ve seen revealed in the last couple of years are finished and that a new era of transparency and accountability is starting,” actually starts by ensuring that the Special Public Prosecutor can do her job.
As the US Embassy stated in its press release 2 days ago, “establishing accountability for the unauthorized wiretaps and allegations of government abuse is essential to bring Macedonia out of its prolonged crisis.” This press release was in response to Gruevski’s party rejecting the requests by the SPO, requests the U.S. Embassy classified as “reasonable requests by the SPO to support a thorough, independent investigation into the facts.” Therefore, while I agree that impeccable elections are crucial, I respectfully disagree that it will have to *begin* with that.
Outdated and somewhat superficial view on the situation in Macedonia, based on experiences from late 90s and post 2001 conflict. While noting the wire-taping scandal and the name issue as the key issues of concern for Washington D.C., Mr. Serwer focuses solely on the role of Mr Gruevski without as much as mentioning his partner in crime (literally) Mr Ahmeti. Which is certainly in line with the double standards employed by both US and EU diplomats in covering the crimes of the ethnic Albanian junior party in the Government.
Further on the issue of name-dispute, Mr Serwer regrettably persist in his belief that the dispute with Greece and the name of FYROM / Macedonia is still the main identity topic of concern. As much one cannot and must not disregard the gravity of the name dispute, it is only fair to say that the real problem of today is the internal identity of the country, i.e. what is Macedonia? Has Mr Serwer forgotten that Macedonia (except for Somalia) is the only country in the world that has not held a Census for the last 20 years? May Mr Serwer care to explain who are the culprits for this phenomenon, and what’s more, what are the reasons for such situation (that seems acceptable for both US and the EU)?
Mr Serwer may prefer to take the road more traveled in simplifying the situation in Macedonia, although – I’m strongly believe – he is very well informed about the many aspects of recent developments that pout a rather negative spotlight on both the Government of Mr Gruevski an Mr Ahmeti, as well as the role of US diplomacy in covering some very negative dimensions. Such as the destructive and humiliating decline of the Ohrid Agreement (guaranteed by US) and the open and appalling discrimination against the non-Macedonian population. That is, unless Mr Serwer does not consider as a success that for 25 years of independence and support by the US, there is still (and has never been) not one non-Macedonian at the seat of Head of State, Prime Minister, Speaker of the Parliament, Minister of Interior, Minister of Finance, Head of Security Service, Head of Army and – as a curiosity – Ambassador to Washington.
Therefore, while we welcome the interest of Mr Serwer for Macedonia, it is surely obvious that he ought to either update his knowledge of the topic he wants to elaborate on, or find the courage and speak truth to the power that his administration has helped in building a openly authoritarian regime.
P.S.
Somewhat surprised that recent provocative action by Mr Gruevski’s state police against the US Embassy in Skopje is not considered as a relevant topic of concern by Washington D.C.
The writer effectively makes an implicit argument that Macedonia should abandon the farcical “name negotiations” with Greece, because he concedes that there may never be a solution. And he’s exactly right.
As time goes on, the notion that Macedonia should or ought to change its name in order to appease Greece becomes more ludicrous. And for Washington to call on a compromise when the United States already recognizes Macedonia by its constitutional name is clearly a contradiction. Besides, most of the world already recognizes Macedonia’s name, and the country is almost universally referred to as “Macedonia” in the media and by individuals alike.
As for the EU, the enlargement process is pretty much on hold for several years for any candidate country. There are already calls for the EU’s “all-or-nothing” criteria for membership to be re-examined. And there’s no doubt that the EU has lost a lot of its appeal now that the British have voted for Brexit.
In the end, there is no alternative permutation to Macedonia’s name that would not be seen as deforming, perverting or debasing the Macedonian identity, ethnicity and language. This should be obvious to anyone after over twenty years of trying to seek a “solution” or “compromise”. It’s the Republic of Macedonia, period.
And it’s time for Greece to finally show that it is an adult by making a bold and historic rapprochement with Macedonia and accepting its neighbor.
The “abuses of power and criminal” activities are not clearly shown in the wiretapped conversations that were illegally generated by a foreign entity. They don’t hold water in a court of law.
It is interesting that out of so many conversations none were shown from the opposition party. Anyone with ears to listen and understanding of the Macedonian language can clearly come to the conclusion that the independent prosecutor is anything BUT independent.
Ridiculous and without essential need to learn about real state of affairs in Macedonia.
Dear Mr. Serwer, before I go further with my comment I would like to ask you something, please don’t give a chance together anymore to politicians like Gruevski to seat with you. They will again and again misuse you for their purpose. And if you go and read some newspapers this night you will find he already did it. Milosevic had done it so many times using meetings with west politicians on TV to show the people that ‘he is in line with the western politicians’ and that he was the one they like to speak with. After you I expect Gruevski to have next meeting with Noam Chomsky who is going to confirm that everyone is wrong and he is the most transparent, most progressive prime minister if not in the world than on the Barkans. It is always the same pattern that these kind of rogue politicians follow and I cannot explain you our frustration because of that. You who have been our hope that it can be better future for our people back home. At least please do not do that ahead of so significant elections that may happen in Macedonia. Just figure out how many people will read what you wrote and how many people will see the picture of you and Gruevski on how many TV all under the cup of the corrupted government.Yet it is up to us aways not to you to bring him down, out of power. I admit I may ask to much from you. It was 1996 when Djindjic asked if we are getting real help from the west he answered to us ‘no, it is all up to us and even we get a kind of real support please expect he (Milosevic) will get much more, aren’t you see some of them trade and do business with him . . . ‘.