12 troubling and problematic aspects of the Zaev/Tsipras agreement
Here are 12 troubling and problematic aspects of the Zaev/Tsipras agreement. Several of these I’ve written about before, and others have covered some of them as well. All 12 are listed directly below with more information on each below that if you want to dig deeper. You can read the agreement, in English, here. Feel free to share and distribute.
1) Zaev and his SDSM-led government did not reach out to or consult with the opposition or the President. This creates an extremely divided society which is not good for Macedonia or the region.
2) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement restricts the free speech of both individuals and organizations.
3) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement compels state-sponsored speech.
4) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement “recommends” that existing businesses which currently have the word “Macedonia” or “Macedonian” in their names, change their names.
5) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will likely no longer allow business or other organizations to use the stand alone word “Macedonia” in their name.
6) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will remove any depiction of the Star of Vergina on public buildings, projects, infrastructure, etc. despite the fact that this symbol is literally dug up from the ground on the territory of the Republic. It will likely stop private use of it as well.
7) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will change Macedonia’s history and especially school textbooks.
8) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will restrict the rights of people to define who they are by rejecting any claim to the past.
9) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will attempt, once again, to regulate speech and in this case, so-called “hate speech.”
10) Macedonians — reasonable and patriotic Macedonians from all political persuasions, left, right and center — are being labeled as “nationalists.”
11) There are alternatives to this agreement.
12) Zoran Zaev simply lied.
1) Zaev and his SDSM-led government did not reach out to or consult with the opposition or the President. This creates an extremely divided society which is not good for Macedonia or the region.
That’s just fact and bad policy.
2) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement restricts the free speech of both individuals and organizations.
Article 1(3)(f)states that “The adjectival reference to the State, its official organs, and other public entities shall be in line with the official name of the Second Party or its short name, that is, ‘of the Republic of North Macedonia,’ or ‘of North Macedonia.’” In other words, the state and its official organs cannot use the adjective “Macedonian.” For the state and its official organs, the “adjective” will be “of the Republic of North Macedonia” or “of North Macedonia” which is not an adjective in any language, but a phrase consisting of nouns, prepositions, and articles. Here’s the dictionary definition of an adjective, which is “a word.”
Furthermore, Article 1(3)(f) makes an important distinction noting that “private entities and actors, that are not related to the State, and public entities, are not established by law and do not enjoy financial support from the State” may use the adjective “Macedonian” but, reading the above closely, would seem to indicate that any private entity that does “enjoy financial support from the State” would be subject to the prohibition on using the adjective “Macedonian.” So, for example, films produced by the Film Fund, and sports organizations that either receive some state support or play in state-funded arenas would not be able to use the adjective “Macedonian.”
3) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement compels state-sponsored speech.
Article 1(7) states that the stand-alone term “Macedonia” will no longer be used in official contexts to refer to the Republic of Macedonia. In other words this agreement will demand that all government officials and even those groups and organizations that receive any state funding or support abide by the agreement. Individuals and organizations (again, in an official capacity or those groups receiving any state funding) will be compelled to say “North Macedonia” and will not be allowed to say “Macedonia.” At government sponsored or supported events, will speakers be able to utter the word “Macedonia” to refer to the country or have printed material that states “Macedonia” or will they and their materials all have to say or have written “North Macedonia?” In the US, for example, government employees, and others refer to the country in various ways, including “America,” “the US,” “the USA,” “the United States,” “the United States of America,” etc. Under the terms of this agreement, referring to the Republic of Macedonia by anything other than “North Macedonia” will be considered a breach of the agreement. The state will compel its employees and others to say, and only say “North Macedonia.”
4) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement “recommends” that existing businesses which currently have the word “Macedonia” or “Macedonian” in their names, change their names.
Article 1(3)(h) attacks commercial and private usage of “Macedonia” and “Macedonian” in “commercial names, trademarks and brand names.” It states that the Parties “agree to support and encourage their business communities to institutionalize a sincere, structured and in good faith dialogue, in the context of which will seek and reach mutually accepted solutions deriving from the commercial names, the trademarks, and the brand names and all relevant matters at bilateral and international level” [italics mine]. The paragraph goes on to state that the two countries will set up “an international group of experts” that will have three years, beginning in 2019, to come up with recommendations for “implementation of the abovementioned provisions.”
This next is even more revealing and relevant to the above. In an interview with the Greek TV program “Good Morning Greece” on June 19, 2018 (two days after the agreement was signed), Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias told his audience “…pay attention to the formalities that exist in the agreement — that we shall set up a joint Commission, the European Union -we are in the European Union, not them — and the UN, which shall check the names for 3,500 companies first..Those 3,500 companies will seek to resolve their own name issue. How will they resolve it? On the basis of Articles 7 and 8.” There are two main issues here. First, two days after the agreement was signed, the Greek government had a specific list of 3,500 Macedonian businesses and they, the Greeks, want a name change of those businesses. Where did they get this list? It can only be from the Macedonian government. The second problem is blackmail. Kotzias also tells his audience that the agreement is “a type of Law whose violation entails serious consequences for your economy and your society.” In other words, if those companies don’t change their names, there will be “serious consequences.” The “international group of experts” that is set up will conclude with recommendations for Macedonian businesses to change their names. How will this be enforced? Who will pay for this? Isn’t this too, an example of restricted speech?
5) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will likely no longer allow business or other organizations to use the stand alone word “Macedonia” in their name.
In a June 21 interview, Zaev stated that “organizations, associations, companies,” will still be able to use the adjective “Macedonian” though as I point out in points #2 and #3 above, that is not necessarily the case. But what about the stand alone word “Macedonia?” Will a new company be able to register, for instance, a name such as “Macedonia Craft Beer House?” Probably not according to Article 1(3)(h). It would be useful to run a test case — now — and try to register a business with the stand alone word in it. Per current Macedonian law, the state actually regulates the use of the word “Macedonia” and its various forms, for businesses, associations, and groups. One cannot simply register a business with the word “Macedonia” in it, without getting state approval first. This is very different from, say, the Secretary of State of Arizona, for example, which merely confirms new business registrations to ensure that two businesses do not have the same name. The word “Arizona” is for free use by all.
6) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will remove any depiction of the Star of Vergina on public buildings, projects, infrastructure, etc. despite the fact that this symbol is literally dug up from the ground on the territory of the Republic. It will likely stop private use of it as well.
Article 8(3) demands its removal within six months of the entry into force of the agreement. While this relates to objects and things built or maintained by the government, there will, in all likelihood, be a backlash and private citizens and institutions and businesses will be using this symbol more than ever before. Again, this symbol is found on the territory of the Republic of Macedonia. Article 8(1) can be construed to mean that private use among individuals (especially artists), organizations, businesses, etc. will be stopped. Article 8(1) states “If either Party believes one or more symbols constituting part of its historic or cultural patrimony is being used by the other Party, it shall bring such alleged use to the attention of the other Party, and the other Party shall take appropriate corrective action to effectively address the issue and enforce respect for said patrimony.”
7) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will change Macedonia’s history and especially school textbooks.
Article 8(5) states that within one month of the signing of the agreement, a “Joint Inter-Disciplinary Committee of Experts on historic, archeological and educational matters,” will be established “to consider the objective, scientific interpretation of historical events based on authentic, evidence-based and scientifically sound historical sources and archeological findings.” Furthermore, “It shall consider and, if it deems appropriate, revise any school textbooks and school auxiliary material such as maps, historical atlases, teaching guides,” and that, within one year of the signing, this committee will ensure that “no school textbooks or school auxiliary materials” are in use if they contain “irredentist/revisionist references.” This entire Article is simply Orwellian and fraught with trouble. When one compares this with Macedonia’s agreement with Bulgaria which essentially requires Macedonia to do the same thing with respect to Bulgaria’s version of history and events, the possibilities for problems explode exponentially.
8) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will restrict the rights of people to define who they are by rejecting any claim to the past.
Article 7 which attempts to tell individuals what they can, and cannot call themselves, their children, their ancestors, and generations yet to be born. Article 7(2) states, regarding the terms, “Macedonia” and “Macedonian” and as related to Greece, “these terms denote not only the area and people of the northern region of the First Party [Greece], but also their attributes, as well as the Hellenic civilization, history, culture, and heritage of that region from antiquity to present day.” With regard to Macedonia, Article 7(3) states “When reference is made to the Second Party, these terms denote its territory, language, people and their attributes, with their own history, culture, and heritage, distinctly different from those referred to under Article 7(2).” I’m not sure how Greece will enforce that, though I’m sure they’ll find a way and I’m sure the Macedonian government will work hand-in-glove with them on this.
In fact, we can already see evidence of the more troubling aspects of this agreement. To take just one example, Eurobasket, a website which covers basketball, globally, started labeling Macedonians as “North Macedonians,” as recently as June 24. Thanks to a concerted mini-lobbying campaign, they changed that identification back to “Macedonian” on June 25, but others too, have begun referring to the country as “North Macedonia” and the people as “North Macedonians.”
9) The Zaev/Tsipras agreement will attempt, once again, to regulate speech and in this case, so-called “hate speech.”
Article 6 basically binds each party (Greece, the first party, and Macedonia, the second party) to work at discouraging acts of or which could lead to or incite (very important) “hatred,” “hostility,” “chauvinism,” “irredentism,” or “revisionism,” and “acts of propaganda” against either party, and “will promptly take all necessary measures provided by law,” against such acts. One thing I left out: these would be acts by “private entities.” That means you and me. How do you define these things? How do you enforce these things? Is a Facebook post by a Macedonian in Macedonia that says that the Greeks today are in no way related to the ancient Greeks — is that “hatred” or “hostility?” It will be defined by the Greeks as such. What about the same Facebook post by a Macedonian in Canada? Or an American in Arizona? You see where this is going. Article 3(4) basically says the same thing stating “The Parties commit not to undertake, instigate, support and/or tolerate any actions or activities of a non-friendly character directed against the other Party,” and that neither party will allow any organization, group or individual on its territory to carry out “actions or activities which threaten in any manner, the peace, stability or security” of the other party. And, per Article 1(3), paragraph h, is a private firm that continues to use “Product of Macedonia” engaging in acts of “hatred” or “hostility?”
10) Macedonians — reasonable and patriotic Macedonians from all political persuasions, left, right and center — are being labeled as “nationalists.” Labeling people who have honest disagreements with their government and the international community over this entire agreement and the way it was brought about as ‘nationalists’ is both intellectually lazy and dishonest.
11) There are alternatives to this agreement. There are always alternatives. But it takes real leaders with wisdom, courage, and vision to pursue those alternatives. Those who say “there is no alternative” are either lazy, intellectually and morally, or authoritarian.
12) Zoran Zaev simply lied. So did many in his government. Zoran Zaev said, on numerous occasions, that he would not change the constitution and would not accept the Greek demand of “erga omnes.” He did both. There are dozens of examples of his reversal, but one will suffice: “There is no need to change the Constitution” Zaev told Euronews in February. If he is willing to lie on an issue of monumental importance to the existence of the Macedonian state and people, what else is he willing to lie about?
