Η ελληνική θέση για το Σκοπιανό, το 1993
Και η μεσοβέζικη λύση που βρήκαν
ΗΠΑ και ΟΗΕ
Ακριβές απόσπασμα
UNITED NATIONS
General Assembly Security Council
Distr. GENERAL
A/471877 5/25158, 25 January 1993
General Assembly Security Council
Distr. GENERAL
A/471877 5/25158, 25 January 1993
Forty-seventh
session Agenda item 19 ADMISSION OF NEW MEMBERS TO THE UNITED NATIONS
Letter dated 25 January 1993 from the permanent
Representative of Greece to the United Nations addressed to the
Secretary-General
With reference to the application for admission to
membership circulated in document A1471875-S/25147 of 22 January 1993, I have
the honour to forward herewith a letter dated 25 January 1993 addressed to
you by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Greece, Mr. Michael Papakonstantinou
(see annex). I should be grateful if the text of the present letter and its
annex could be urgently circulated as a document of the General Assembly, under
agenda item 19, and of the Security Council. (Signed) Antonios EXARCHOS
Ambassador, Permanent Representative
ANNEX Letter dated 25 January 1993 from the Minister
for Foreign Affairs of Greece to the Secretary-General
I refer to the application for membership to the
United Nations of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and I have the
honour to urgently draw your attention to a Memorandum reflecting the views and
position of the Government of Greece on this matter.I would appreciate it if
you could bring this letter and the Memorandum attached hereto (see appendix)
to the attention of the President of the Security Council. (Signed) Michael PAPACONSTANTINOU Minister for
Foreign Affairs of Greece
MEMORANDUM Concerning the application of the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for admission to the United Nations
I. Greece believes that the application of the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for admission to membership in the United
Nations under the denomination mentioned in its application introduces an
element of further destabilization of the southern Balkans both in a short and
a long term perspective. Therefore, strongly objecting to this membership,
Greece feels obliged to forward to the Security Council a number of pertinent
considerations which point to the conclusion that the applicant should not be
admitted to the U.N. prior to a settlement of certain outstanding issue~
necessary for safeguarding peace and stability, as well as good neighbourly
relations in the region. When such a settlement is reached Greece would not
oppose F.Y.R.O.M.’s admission to the United Nations and, indeed it would be
ready to extend recognition and establish co-operation with this neighbouring
country. 2. In its request for admission to the United Nations the F.Y.R.O.M.
includes on the one hand a purported commitment to accept and observe all
obligations deriving from the United Nations Charter and, on the other, a claim
that its admission to U.N. membership would contribute towards a peaceful
solution of the crisis in the territory of former Yugoslavia.
3. Whereas these are welcome declarations.
nevertheless, past experiences and practices. as well as the constituent acts
and policies of the new republic raise serious concerns about its willingness
to fulfill the obligations arising from the U.N. Charter. 4. The new republic
emerged as successor to the former Yugoslav Federative Republic of Macedonia.
The philosophy of its Constitution. adopted on November 17, 1991, is based,
inter alia on the principles and the constituent declarations of that
federative state which were endorsed in August 1944 by the Antifascist Assembly
of the National Liberation of Macedonia (A.S.N.OM). In these declarations,
cited in the preamble of the Constitution. there are direct references to the
annexation of the Macedonian provinces of Greece and Bulgaria, and to the
establishment eventually of a greater Macedonian state within the Yugoslav
Federation (see attachment 1) 5. In the 1940’s. Tito’s Yugoslavia, with the
“People’s Republic of Macedonia” in the vanguard, tried to accomplish
these aims by supporting a communist uprising in Greece (which resulted in a
three-year civil war) as a means of annexing Greek Macedonia. When the annexation
of Greek lands failed in 1948, efforts continued in order to undermine Greek
sovereignty over Greek Macedonia by attempts to monopolize the Macedonian name,
thus staking a lasting claim to Greek territories and. indeed, to Greek
Macedonian heritage. It is worth recalling that this question had been on the
agenda of the Security Council and the General Assembly from 1946 to 1950 under
the heading The Greek Question” (see attachment 2)
6. For forty years, such practices poisoned good
neighbourly relations and stability in the region, particularly since officials
of the republic continued, up to the disintegration of Yugoslavia, to express
expansionist views. After the collapse of former Yugoslavia these extreme
expansionist claims by nationalists in Skopje took afresh stronger impetus. 7.
It is on such grounds and on such precedents that the former federative
republic in Skopje proclaimed itself independent in 1991 and is now seeking
admission to the United Nations. 8. Since the declaration of independence, a
series of initiatives taken by the authorities of Skopjc. have shown that there
is a clear link and continuity of aims and actions in particular against
(Greece Reference has already been made to the Constitution of F.Y.R.O.M. which
is based on the principles of A.S.N.O.M., of 1944. In this Constitution there
are also references to the possibility of change~ of borders -while
F.Y.R.O.M.’s territory remains “indivisible and inalienable” (Art. 3)
– and intervening~ in the internal affairs of neighbouring states on the
pretext of issues concerning “the status and (he rights” of alleged
minorities (Aft. 49). There are numerous indications that the expansionist
propaganda aimed at the neighbouring Macedonian province of Greece continues
unabated. This is shown, in particular, through the wide circulation within
F.Y.R.O.M. of maps portraying a greater Macedonia i.e. incorporating parts of
the territory of all its neighbouring states, and of hostile~ literature
usurping Greek symbols and heritage. As recently as August 1992, the
authorities in kop affixed on the new flag of the republic the emblem of the
ancient Macedonian dynasty found in Greece in the tomb of King Philip II (see
attachments 3, 4, 5 and 6).
9. These are just a few examples which show that at
this turning point, when the applicant is seeking membership to the United
Nations, its authorities have not abandoned their long cherished ambitions to
claim neighbouring territories. 10. The name of a state is a symbol. Thus, the
fact that the authorities in Skopje have ad6pted the denomination
“Republic of Macedonia” for their state is of paramount significance.
It is important to note that they have explicitly adopted the name of a wider
geographical region extending over four neighbouring countries, with 9nly 38.5%
to be found in the territory of F.Y.R.O.M. This fact by itself clearly
undermines the sovereignty of neighbouring states to their respective
Macedonian regions. To be precise, 51.5% of the Macedonian geographical region
is in Greece, with a population of over 2.5 million people, while the remaining
10% in other neighbouring states. Moreover, the territory of F.Y.R.O.M., with
the exception of a narrow strip in the south, had never been part of historic
Macedonia. Nevertheless, F.Y.R.O.M. insists on monopolizing the Macedonian name
in the denomination of the state, and thus pretends to be the sole title deed
holder of a much wider geographical region. There is no doubt that the
exclusive use of the Macedonian name in the republic’s official denomination
would be a stimulus for expansionist claims not only by present nationalist
activists in Skopje but by future generations as well. After all, the name
conveys in itself expansionist visions both over the land and the heritage of
Macedonia through the centuries. 11. To prevent such destabilizing situations
from threatening peace and good neighbourly relations in the area, the European
Community, to which F.Y.R.O.M. Applied for recognition, has set prerequisites
for the recognition of the applicant by the Community and its member states.
These prerequisites are cited in the following Security Council documents:
(5/23293(17 December 1991). 5/23880 (5 May 1992), S/24200 (29 June 1992),
~/24960 (14 December 1992). Briefly, they stipulate that F.Y.R.O.M. should
provide the necessary legal and political guarantees that it will harbor no
territorial claims against Greece, that it will abstain from any hostile
propaganda against this country and that it will not use the term Macedonia in
the ~tatC~5 denomination. Unfortunately, F.Y.R.O.M. has failed to comply.12.
During the past year, Greece has conveyed to ~kopje on a number of occasions,
its sincere determination to proceed with the development t~ all round economic
and political co-operation with the neighbouring republic, as soon as F.Y.R.()
M. ~adopted the foregoing E.C. prerequisites for recognition. Moreover, Greece
has taken the Initiative that all neighbouring states of F.Y.R.O.M make public
declarations recognizing and guaranteeing as inviolable their respective
frontier~. Furthermore, Greece has supported E.C. initiatives to provide
humanitarian and economic aid to this republic, while the Greek Prime Minister
publicly extended a hand of co-operation to Skopje. In addition, Greece has
supported a recent effort by the European Community and individual members of
the Community in seeking a peaceful way to settle the problem. 13.
Unfortunately, the authorities of Skopje have persisted in pursuing an
inflexible and uncooperative attitude by rejecting all proposals aiming at a
peaceful settlement of the outstanding issues.
14. it is in the competence of the Security Council not only to resolve
disputes but also to take necessary actions to prevent them as well. This is a
clear case where preventive diplomacy is urgently needed. All efforts and all
proposals in this direction should be explored. It should be noted that there
have been cases in which application to membership has been subjected to prior
fulfillment of certain conditions in the interest of peace and security.
15. Greece wishes to point out that the admission of F.Y.R.O.M. to U.N.
membership prior to meeting the necessary prerequisites, and in particular
abandoning the use of the denomination “Republic of Macedonia”, would
perpetuate and increase friction and tension and would not be conducive to
peace and stability in an already troubled region. Under these circumstances,
Greece regretfully would not be able to recognize this republic.
16. Greece strongly believes in maintaining good relations and enhancing
co-operation with all its neighbours while attaching primary importance to the
peaceful solution of disputes arising between them. It is confident that the
Security Council, as the custodian of world peace and stability will take all
appropriate steps and measures for the settlement of the issue on hand, in a
way to prevent developments which might impede a constructive solution through
peaceful means. Finally it expresses its readiness to offer its full support to
the Security Council in its efforts towards this objective.
United Nations of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and I have the
honour to urgently draw your attention to a Memorandum reflecting the views and
position of the Government of Greece on this matter.I would appreciate it if
you could bring this letter and the Memorandum attached hereto (see appendix)
to the attention of the President of the Security Council. (Signed) Michael PAPACONSTANTINOU Minister for
Foreign Affairs of Greece
MEMORANDUM Concerning the application of the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for admission to the United Nations
I. Greece believes that the application of the former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for admission to membership in the United
Nations under the denomination mentioned in its application introduces an
element of further destabilization of the southern Balkans both in a short and
a long term perspective. Therefore, strongly objecting to this membership,
Greece feels obliged to forward to the Security Council a number of pertinent
considerations which point to the conclusion that the applicant should not be
admitted to the U.N. prior to a settlement of certain outstanding issue~
necessary for safeguarding peace and stability, as well as good neighbourly
relations in the region. When such a settlement is reached Greece would not
oppose F.Y.R.O.M.’s admission to the United Nations and, indeed it would be
ready to extend recognition and establish co-operation with this neighbouring
country. 2. In its request for admission to the United Nations the F.Y.R.O.M.
includes on the one hand a purported commitment to accept and observe all
obligations deriving from the United Nations Charter and, on the other, a claim
that its admission to U.N. membership would contribute towards a peaceful
solution of the crisis in the territory of former Yugoslavia.
3. Whereas these are welcome declarations.
nevertheless, past experiences and practices. as well as the constituent acts
and policies of the new republic raise serious concerns about its willingness
to fulfill the obligations arising from the U.N. Charter. 4. The new republic
emerged as successor to the former Yugoslav Federative Republic of Macedonia.
The philosophy of its Constitution. adopted on November 17, 1991, is based,
inter alia on the principles and the constituent declarations of that
federative state which were endorsed in August 1944 by the Antifascist Assembly
of the National Liberation of Macedonia (A.S.N.OM). In these declarations,
cited in the preamble of the Constitution. there are direct references to the
annexation of the Macedonian provinces of Greece and Bulgaria, and to the
establishment eventually of a greater Macedonian state within the Yugoslav
Federation (see attachment 1) 5. In the 1940’s. Tito’s Yugoslavia, with the
“People’s Republic of Macedonia” in the vanguard, tried to accomplish
these aims by supporting a communist uprising in Greece (which resulted in a
three-year civil war) as a means of annexing Greek Macedonia. When the annexation
of Greek lands failed in 1948, efforts continued in order to undermine Greek
sovereignty over Greek Macedonia by attempts to monopolize the Macedonian name,
thus staking a lasting claim to Greek territories and. indeed, to Greek
Macedonian heritage. It is worth recalling that this question had been on the
agenda of the Security Council and the General Assembly from 1946 to 1950 under
the heading The Greek Question” (see attachment 2)
6. For forty years, such practices poisoned good
neighbourly relations and stability in the region, particularly since officials
of the republic continued, up to the disintegration of Yugoslavia, to express
expansionist views. After the collapse of former Yugoslavia these extreme
expansionist claims by nationalists in Skopje took afresh stronger impetus. 7.
It is on such grounds and on such precedents that the former federative
republic in Skopje proclaimed itself independent in 1991 and is now seeking
admission to the United Nations. 8. Since the declaration of independence, a
series of initiatives taken by the authorities of Skopjc. have shown that there
is a clear link and continuity of aims and actions in particular against
(Greece Reference has already been made to the Constitution of F.Y.R.O.M. which
is based on the principles of A.S.N.O.M., of 1944. In this Constitution there
are also references to the possibility of change~ of borders -while
F.Y.R.O.M.’s territory remains “indivisible and inalienable” (Art. 3)
– and intervening~ in the internal affairs of neighbouring states on the
pretext of issues concerning “the status and (he rights” of alleged
minorities (Aft. 49). There are numerous indications that the expansionist
propaganda aimed at the neighbouring Macedonian province of Greece continues
unabated. This is shown, in particular, through the wide circulation within
F.Y.R.O.M. of maps portraying a greater Macedonia i.e. incorporating parts of
the territory of all its neighbouring states, and of hostile~ literature
usurping Greek symbols and heritage. As recently as August 1992, the
authorities in kop affixed on the new flag of the republic the emblem of the
ancient Macedonian dynasty found in Greece in the tomb of King Philip II (see
attachments 3, 4, 5 and 6).
9. These are just a few examples which show that at
this turning point, when the applicant is seeking membership to the United
Nations, its authorities have not abandoned their long cherished ambitions to
claim neighbouring territories. 10. The name of a state is a symbol. Thus, the
fact that the authorities in Skopje have ad6pted the denomination
“Republic of Macedonia” for their state is of paramount significance.
It is important to note that they have explicitly adopted the name of a wider
geographical region extending over four neighbouring countries, with 9nly 38.5%
to be found in the territory of F.Y.R.O.M. This fact by itself clearly
undermines the sovereignty of neighbouring states to their respective
Macedonian regions. To be precise, 51.5% of the Macedonian geographical region
is in Greece, with a population of over 2.5 million people, while the remaining
10% in other neighbouring states. Moreover, the territory of F.Y.R.O.M., with
the exception of a narrow strip in the south, had never been part of historic
Macedonia. Nevertheless, F.Y.R.O.M. insists on monopolizing the Macedonian name
in the denomination of the state, and thus pretends to be the sole title deed
holder of a much wider geographical region. There is no doubt that the
exclusive use of the Macedonian name in the republic’s official denomination
would be a stimulus for expansionist claims not only by present nationalist
activists in Skopje but by future generations as well. After all, the name
conveys in itself expansionist visions both over the land and the heritage of
Macedonia through the centuries. 11. To prevent such destabilizing situations
from threatening peace and good neighbourly relations in the area, the European
Community, to which F.Y.R.O.M. Applied for recognition, has set prerequisites
for the recognition of the applicant by the Community and its member states.
These prerequisites are cited in the following Security Council documents:
(5/23293(17 December 1991). 5/23880 (5 May 1992), S/24200 (29 June 1992),
~/24960 (14 December 1992). Briefly, they stipulate that F.Y.R.O.M. should
provide the necessary legal and political guarantees that it will harbor no
territorial claims against Greece, that it will abstain from any hostile
propaganda against this country and that it will not use the term Macedonia in
the ~tatC~5 denomination. Unfortunately, F.Y.R.O.M. has failed to comply.12.
During the past year, Greece has conveyed to ~kopje on a number of occasions,
its sincere determination to proceed with the development t~ all round economic
and political co-operation with the neighbouring republic, as soon as F.Y.R.()
M. ~adopted the foregoing E.C. prerequisites for recognition. Moreover, Greece
has taken the Initiative that all neighbouring states of F.Y.R.O.M make public
declarations recognizing and guaranteeing as inviolable their respective
frontier~. Furthermore, Greece has supported E.C. initiatives to provide
humanitarian and economic aid to this republic, while the Greek Prime Minister
publicly extended a hand of co-operation to Skopje. In addition, Greece has
supported a recent effort by the European Community and individual members of
the Community in seeking a peaceful way to settle the problem. 13.
Unfortunately, the authorities of Skopje have persisted in pursuing an
inflexible and uncooperative attitude by rejecting all proposals aiming at a
peaceful settlement of the outstanding issues.
14. it is in the competence of the Security Council not only to resolve
disputes but also to take necessary actions to prevent them as well. This is a
clear case where preventive diplomacy is urgently needed. All efforts and all
proposals in this direction should be explored. It should be noted that there
have been cases in which application to membership has been subjected to prior
fulfillment of certain conditions in the interest of peace and security.
15. Greece wishes to point out that the admission of F.Y.R.O.M. to U.N.
membership prior to meeting the necessary prerequisites, and in particular
abandoning the use of the denomination “Republic of Macedonia”, would
perpetuate and increase friction and tension and would not be conducive to
peace and stability in an already troubled region. Under these circumstances,
Greece regretfully would not be able to recognize this republic.
16. Greece strongly believes in maintaining good relations and enhancing
co-operation with all its neighbours while attaching primary importance to the
peaceful solution of disputes arising between them. It is confident that the
Security Council, as the custodian of world peace and stability will take all
appropriate steps and measures for the settlement of the issue on hand, in a
way to prevent developments which might impede a constructive solution through
peaceful means. Finally it expresses its readiness to offer its full support to
the Security Council in its efforts towards this objective.
New York, 25 January 1993.
HON. OLYMPIA J. SNOWE
in the House of Representatives
in the House of Representatives
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. Speaker, like all Americans of Greek ancestry, I was extremely
disappointed by the administration’s recent decision to recognize the Skopje
regime as an independent nation while it continues to insist on calling itself
Macedonia . This decision was an insult to a loyal and trusted ally, and the
only true democracy in the region–Greece. This misguided decision could
further inflame tensions in a region already plagued by terrible violence and
instability.
Today, I have introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the Congress that
the President should not have granted diplomatic recognition to the former Yugoslav
republic of Macedonia . The resolution also calls on the President to
reconsider his decision and withdraw diplomatic recognition until such time as
the Skopje regime renounces its use of the name Macedonia .
The name `Macedonia’ is Hellenic in origin, and for thousands of years it has
been the traditional name of the northern Greek province whose capital is
Salonika. Archaeological evidence clearly demonstrates that the ancient
Macedonians were Greek. The Macedonia of Alexander the Great was Greek, and
Alexander himself was tutored by Aristotle. The Slavic people of the Skopje
regime have no links to classical Greece and are not entitled to use a name
that is a fundamental part of Greek history and culture.
It is also an accepted historical fact that, in 1945, Marshall Tito gave the
region surrounding Skopje the name `Macedonia’ in order to frustrate Bulgarian
claims to that territory. It was part of a campaign to usurp Greek history and
claim it for Tito’s communist system. Tito’s Macedonia was an artificial
creation meant to serve only one purpose–giving communist Yugoslavia
territorial access to the Aegean Sea through the port of Salonika.
The Skopje regime has refused to remove from its constitution a reference to
the 1944 declaration by the then Communist regime calling for the unification
of neighboring territories in Greece and Bulgaria with this false Macedonian
Republic. Despite other amendments to that constitution adopted over the last
few years, this clause reflecting an expansionist philosophy remains intact.
In addition to its flagrant and illegal use of the name Macedonia in its
constitution, the Skopje regime persists in using the 16-pointed Star of
Vergina, an ancient Greek emblem, in its flag and state symbols. These are just
part of that regime’s blatant attempt to manipulate history for its own
purposes and to monopolize the Macedonian name to further its territorial
claims on sovereign Greek territory. Greece, on the other hand, has repeatedly
stated that it has no territorial claims on the Skopje regime. I urge my
colleagues to support this resolution. By doing so we will send an unequivocal
message that the United States should support stabilizing policies that promote
peaceful coexistence in the Balkans.
disappointed by the administration’s recent decision to recognize the Skopje
regime as an independent nation while it continues to insist on calling itself
Macedonia . This decision was an insult to a loyal and trusted ally, and the
only true democracy in the region–Greece. This misguided decision could
further inflame tensions in a region already plagued by terrible violence and
instability.
Today, I have introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the Congress that
the President should not have granted diplomatic recognition to the former Yugoslav
republic of Macedonia . The resolution also calls on the President to
reconsider his decision and withdraw diplomatic recognition until such time as
the Skopje regime renounces its use of the name Macedonia .
The name `Macedonia’ is Hellenic in origin, and for thousands of years it has
been the traditional name of the northern Greek province whose capital is
Salonika. Archaeological evidence clearly demonstrates that the ancient
Macedonians were Greek. The Macedonia of Alexander the Great was Greek, and
Alexander himself was tutored by Aristotle. The Slavic people of the Skopje
regime have no links to classical Greece and are not entitled to use a name
that is a fundamental part of Greek history and culture.
It is also an accepted historical fact that, in 1945, Marshall Tito gave the
region surrounding Skopje the name `Macedonia’ in order to frustrate Bulgarian
claims to that territory. It was part of a campaign to usurp Greek history and
claim it for Tito’s communist system. Tito’s Macedonia was an artificial
creation meant to serve only one purpose–giving communist Yugoslavia
territorial access to the Aegean Sea through the port of Salonika.
The Skopje regime has refused to remove from its constitution a reference to
the 1944 declaration by the then Communist regime calling for the unification
of neighboring territories in Greece and Bulgaria with this false Macedonian
Republic. Despite other amendments to that constitution adopted over the last
few years, this clause reflecting an expansionist philosophy remains intact.
In addition to its flagrant and illegal use of the name Macedonia in its
constitution, the Skopje regime persists in using the 16-pointed Star of
Vergina, an ancient Greek emblem, in its flag and state symbols. These are just
part of that regime’s blatant attempt to manipulate history for its own
purposes and to monopolize the Macedonian name to further its territorial
claims on sovereign Greek territory. Greece, on the other hand, has repeatedly
stated that it has no territorial claims on the Skopje regime. I urge my
colleagues to support this resolution. By doing so we will send an unequivocal
message that the United States should support stabilizing policies that promote
peaceful coexistence in the Balkans.
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1994.
ΛΕΞΕΙΣ-ΚΛΕΙΔΙΑ: ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΑ, ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΚΟ, ΣΚΟΠΙΑ, ΣΚΟΠΙΑΝΟ, ΗΠΑ, ΟΗΕ, ΠΑΠΑΚΩΝΣΤΑΝΤΙΝΟΥ, ΣΝΟΟΥ, ΓΙΟΥΓΚΟΣΛΑΒΙΑ, ΦΥΡΟΜ, FYROM, ΕΞΑΡΧΟΣ, ΤΙΤΟ, ΜΑΡΣΑΛ, ΒΑΛΚΑΝΙΑ, ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΗ
