Galery

1

As expected and as GRReporter wrote a week ago, the International Court of Justice ruled that Greece had violated the Interim Accord signed on 13 September 1995, when in 2008, it blocked the country's membership in NATO. With this decision, which is final, without appeal and binding for both parties, the Court has ruled that it has the jurisdiction to deliver a judgement on this claim. With fourteen votes "for" and two "against," the judges in the Dutch city stood behind the claims of Macedonia and rejected the Greek objections.

Fifteen of them supported the position that Greece has violated Article 11, paragraph 1 of the Interim Accord by exercising veto on Macedonia's membership in the North Atlantic Alliance and only one had a different opinion. The same ratio of judges disallowed all other claims of Skopje, relating to the imposition of future bans to Greece from the court.

According to the judgement, Greece’s objection to the admission of Macedonia in NATO cannot be accepted as an exception under Article 11 of the Interim Accord, because it does not allow Athens to declare itself against Macedonia's membership in any international organization, arguing that it will participate there with its constitutional name.

In response to the Greek position that the objection regarding the membership of Macedonia in NATO would be based on: violations of the Interim Accord on the part of Macedonia, in response to violations or as a countermeasure under the law on state responsibility, the International Court of justice ruled out that Athens has stated only one case of violation by Skopje. It is the use of national symbols, which is prohibited by Article 2, paragraph 7 of the Accord. The court rejected all other arguments for violations by Macedonia.

Shortly after the announcement of the court judgement, a message was posted on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Greece. It states that Greece would review the decision with full respect for the "International Court of Justice as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations." After analyzing which of the claims of both parties were accepted or rejected, the Ministry stresses, "the judgement of today does not address the issue of the difference over the name of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, confirming that this difference should be resolved within the framework defined by the resolutions of the Security Council and through negotiations under the auspices of the UN."

The message also states that the judgement of the International Court of Justice in The Hague "does not relate or could not relate to the decision making process of NATO, nor to the substantive criteria and requirements set forth by the Alliance for the admission of new members within it."

At the end, the message emphasizes the willingness of Athens to continue to negotiate on the name of Macedonia and the hope that Skopje would sit at the table of negotiations in a spirit of good faith "as the name issue can only be resolved through negotiation under the auspices of the United Nations."

GRReporter contacted the President of the Macedonian Scientific Institute in Sofia, Professor Trendafil Mitev for comment. He said, "The dispute between Greece and Macedonia on the name is the first part of some complex future inter-Balkan relations that are to develop. This dispute concerns Bulgaria objectively due to the fact that one third of the geographical area of ​​Macedonia is within its borders."

According to Professor Mitev, the Bulgarian scientific community "fully understands the fears of the Greek public opinion on the possibility for bringing open territorial claims to Greece in the future. The reasons for our concerns are rooted in decades-old policy of the ruling circles in Skopje for the total falsification of the truth relating to Bulgarian history, language, culture and national name. Among other things, any citizen of Macedonia of Bulgarian self-consciousness has been severely pursued. The media incite everyday hatred regarding the Bulgarians and the Bulgarian state. Given all this, the eventual adoption of the Republic of Macedonia in the European Union and NATO before the authorities in Skopje have formulated a policy of good neighbour relations with surrounding countries, could actually create tension in these important international organizations in the future. Therefore, if Skopje did not stop that non-European policy, it would not be illogical for the Bulgarian public opinion to raise the request for possible veto on the claims of the Republic of Macedonia for membership in European and international organizations in the future too."
 
The Macedonian Scientific Institute believes that "Macedonia has to actually get its relations and approach to its Balkan neighbours, including to Bulgaria, to normal because the current tense relations are abnormal, unnatural and it would not be surprising if there were other problems relating to Macedonia's membership. Such confrontational politics have no place in the European Union. We cannot let it become a source of tension in the EU and NATO in the future due to falsifying the Bulgarian history, name, etc. Naturally, we do not develop the policy of Bulgaria, but as representatives of the Bulgarian science, we cannot accept such a policy. I suppose that the Greek public opinion has also been provoked by some unfair position that Greeks consider is contained in the Macedonian thesis."