Monday, 12 February 2018

The Greek 'Deep State' Paramilitary Murders and Fake Terrorism




An analysis of the Cold War state and how it used murder to advance its politics. Since the ending of the Cold War hybrid forms of war have continued against the Greek population from fake terrorism, to financial terrorism, to labour displacement, spying, burning, flooding and chemical spraying to wholescale destabilisation by the CIA and its appendages.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1978342780/ref=cm_sw_su_dp









Saturday, 10 February 2018

The Balkans: The 1920s debate in the Comintern and the KKE on the Balkan Question Part Two


Part Two The 1920s debate in the Comintern and the KKE on the Balkan Question

The slogan for a United and Independent Macedonia (and a united and Independent Thrace) entered the Balkans under Stalin. It was pushed by the Bulgarian Communist Party and became Comintern policy. It was the central slogan for the Balkan Communist Parties in the 1920’s.
The slogan originated among Slavo-Macedonians in Pirin (south-west of Bulgaria) and was taken up by Alexandrov, Panitsas and Protogerov, who were separatist leaders in the region. It was seized upon by the Bulgarian capitalist government, which saw it as a means of extending its borders southwards to the Aegean.



In 1923, Protegerov and Alexandrov allied themselves with Tsangov, the Bulgarian leader. But Tsangov imprisoned and murdered thousands of communists and refused to implement the demands of Protegerov and Alexandrov for a United and Independent Macedonia. This is where Stalin entered the picture allying himself with Protogerov and Alexandrov and making the slogan Comintern policy for the Balkans. It was an early example of the Cominterns attempt to build alliances with the peasantry, etc. after the defeat of the workers in Germany – attest case for China.

Stalin made an alliance with Radic in Cratia as well as with the ‘Komitsadides’ the committee set up by Panitsas and Protogerov. It was an attempt to bring the Slavo-Macedonians, among others under the influence of the Comintern rarther than anyone else.

For us the national question isn’t a geographical question, it is one of distinct peoples with a distinct culture, language, etc. It’s impossible to accept that a ‘Macedonian’ nationality which is composed of Greeks, Jews, Pomaks, Vlachs and Albanians – but a united Macedonian nationality just doesn’t exist. Neither is there any Thracian nationality – some people in Thrace are of Mulism descent.

Almost immediately after I entered the labour movement in 1921, the question of a United and Independent Macedonia became a central issue (aroun 1923-24). Initially, the Greek communists were opposed to the slogan, but when representatives of the KKE went to the Fifth Congress of the Comintern in 1924 (the Comintern was now led by Zinoviev) the party changed its views and supported the Troikas position). The three delegates – Pouliopoulos, Maximos, and Mangos – went to the Congress with a position against the slogan and came back supporting it. The third emergency congress of the KKE then took place and accepted the slogan. This was the so-called ‘Bolshevisation’ of the KKE in reality it was the beginning of the partys Stalinisation. Pouliopoulos who had gone to Russia after 1921 and spoken to Trotsky and was in awe of his role in the civil war, was deliberately made to give the main report at the Conference. Meanwhile Kordatos and Apostiliades were expelled for differences on this issue. The Archeiomarxists of which I was a leading member, were also expelled in 1924 – for allying themselves with Trotsky.

What actually happened was that although there were differences over the slogan, the leadership imposed it on the party. Then the ruling class locked up every member of the KKE on the grounds that they were seeking the break up of the Greek state.
If Greek Macedonia had to become independent that would mean the KKE had to be divided into two. If the three Macedonias had to be united, the Bulgarias, Serbian and Greek Communist Parties first had to split into six parties then the three in Macedonia had to fuse. In other words what is happening now Stalinism proposed back in 1924.

After Greece lost the 1921 war with Turkey, there were population transfers in Greek Macedonia. About 10,000 Slavo-Macedonians living there went to Bulgaria and there was a huge influx of Greek refugees from Constantinople and elsewhere in Turkey. In all some one and half million refugees came to Greece following a pogrom in Turkey, 700, 000 of whom stayed in Greek Macedonia whilst the rest settled in Athens. A large and militant refugee movement was set up. In Athens, it demanded housing, food, etc. The KKE was not resepcted among the refugees because implicit in its slogan for a united and Independent Macedonia and a United and Independent Thrace were new population transfers. The KKE secretary KOrdatos (who was allied with Souvarine and Trotsky in this period) wrote that if you continue this, you will turn the refugees into fascists. In western Greek Macedonia, in two districts – Florina and Edessa – there were communities of Slavo Macedonians.

When the Archeiomarxist Vitsoris went to see Trotsky in Prinkipo, Trotsky was using a reference for the discussion his period in the region writing about the Balkan wars. But in 1912-14, the area had been much more mixed. Trotsky was using as a reference for the discussions his period in the region writing about the Balkan wars. But in 1912-14 the area had been much more mixed. Trotsky didn’t accept Vitsoris argument – he said something is brewing, there is a national issue. I think there was an issue in Edessa and Florina, which the Archeiomarxists ignored, but not where Trotsky thought there was one. Later the Arcehiomarxists accepted that there was a SlavoMacedonian issue in the ‘triad’ –Serbian Macedonia, Bulgarian Macedonia and Edessa and Florina –but they were opposed to the inclusion of the whole of Greek Macedonia. (Its important to note that at the Fifth Congress of the Comintern the Serbian CP delegates had not voted for the slogan)

In the 1930’s, the Greek ruling class opposed Macedonian independence because of the territory it would lose. Today the slogan of Macedonian independence is being put forward by imperialism as part of its plan for a New World Order. Gligorov President of Macedonia wants an exit to the south. As Mitsotakis (ND) is in the pocket of the US his position on Macedonia is contradictory (as it is on Thrace, which is claimed by Turkey). Its possible that the Greek ruling class would accept the loss of some territory in exchange for the southern part of Albania which has a majority of Greek speakers. The leaders of the 400k Greek speaking Albanians have indicated that they will organise a plebiscite demanding unity with Greece. My opinion is that these referendums can be manipulated by nationalist demagogues.

In the north of Yugoslavia the dominant influence is Germany, in the south, the US. The overall aim of imperialism is to smash Serbia. We are entering a dark period of imperialist conspiracies in the Balkans.

Lukas Karliaftis

Friday, 9 February 2018

Eyewitness Account: Macedonia is Greek Rally Athens 4th February 2018





Eyewtiness Account Macedonia is Greek Rally Athens 4th February 2018
I was there with the Fascists!!!

It was 11 oc clock in the morning Sunday 4th February and I started to make my way to the rally for Macedonia which was occurring in Sindagma. I will not hide friends that somewhere inside me all these stories about Greek flags with Alexandra the Great and ancient Greek attire had frightened me, I was carrying some guilt inside me in case I ended up getting mixed up with fascist nationalists and mad paganistic 12 god believers and when I come home my father disowns me.

For so many years my father has been on the left and his son is running to rallies for Macedonia with Royalists and Golden Dawn supporters? My dad Kostas could easily have a heart attack. I risked it and went. Half shame mine half shame the company that dragged me there. If I see it being dodgy I said I would make a run for it. The big man himself Mikis Theodorakis would go there, he must know something.

I reach the final stop on the Metro to then go with with the crowd. What do I see? Masses of people, old, young, children, couples, parents with their young ones all with a flag in their hands and a smile with a decisiveness which was felt in the air. In the train there suddenly everyone was talking with each other cracking jokes, swore at the politicians, they felt they were all UNITED in one body, one indignation. This started to confuse me. So many years in the movement, demos and all, such homogeneity in an unknown and multicoloured mass I hadn’t seen again. I stop at Evangelismos station. I light a cigarette and go out on the streets. I stand for a bit in awe of the crowds which is densely packed and I ask myself will I ever get to Sindagma with so many people?

I start slowly pushing and being pushed realising that the mass of people has achieved a stable and sure pace not one of a walk nor one of group of friends which is going to a square or a concert but the decisive mass which is walking quickly decisively and with rhythm. Smiles everywhere, flags which blind you, selfies from mobiles alight. Old people in wheelchairs, mothers, children, priests with their flock, workers, unemployed, loving couples, lonely people all with a smile and with pride… which spoke by itself, first time all together without organisation, without political party flags and party instructors, without theories and little thought.. but a lot of heart and a flag for company… all went to Sindagma, which was bubbling. Even till now I didn’t know why and what, with whom I went and for what, but I went there.

The smile, the hope, the friendlisness in the faces and the decisive steps started to make me feel strange ‘different’ …I must have been turning into a fascist and didn’t realise it.

Getting closer I started to feel the pulse of the people> After one hour of pushing I reached the heart of the rally infront of the Unknown Soldier in Sindagma Square.

I stood among the crowd next to our group and I raised my eyes and saw the crane with the massive flag to be moving slowly and surely covering the sky and almost the whole square.

Next to me were a group of 14 year old and 16 year old youths. The microphones played Macedonia you are bright and other such songs which I had a long time to hear from when I was in school. The slogans were slow but stable about Macedonia and they played !!! Somewhere there suddenly we heard from the loudspeakers that Mikis is going on the stage and somewhere there the Square as a whole started playing Justice Sun and the 16 year old girl singing next to me with her veins exploding from her voice and we all sang felling that this land has common soul, common pain and one heart, one country.

Inside me were the words of Ritsos : That’s what we want. As we don’t sing to be different my brother from the world. We sing to join the world.
Somewhere there during Mikis first words the megaphones stopped to be hear as the people spoke shouting a warning:

-Thieves, traitors, politicians
-We wont back down until we are justified
The banner of the Cretans wrote –Popular Rule – National Independence


The grandfather from the Albanian front next to me in a wheelchair and his oxygen bottle in his hands cried, a little further a granny had caught a conversation to a policeman which guarded Parliament and distracted from the events had lit a fag and had taken his helmet from his head and was bending over to listen to a granny who was explaining why she came from Ipiros and I was asking … my God so many fascists in this country!!!

The speakers sand ‘When they tighten their hands the sun is sure for the world’
The worst of all? We all spoke ther as if we were for years friends and many asked where the KKE was and the Left and the lefties? They didn’t understand the word dogmatism and ideology but they shouted it. Others swore and spat “then in Varkiza and now once in Sindagma” Fascists those who want to struggle for a Free country, my God what am I living?

I learnt today that from the 1.5m ‘fascists’ that a county without territorial independence, without a flag with sold out politicians is no longer a country, its not longer a peoples nor a Nation.

Continue to believe comrades that from the 1.5 to 2m people are fascistic as they dared to raise the Greek flag, that which was raised by Karaiskakis as raising it Mikis Theodorakis started to sing and demand National Independence and Popular Rule

Mikis had no need to shout for Macedonia as he knows well that Macedonia is non-negotiable and Greek. It is a necessity to scream to the rotten political system that the people are HERE and are RULERS and they will defend their country in every way possible.

Whilst this nation is in a rage, for those of you who sit on Facebook and call him a fascist judging from the SKAI tv images the 10 dressed soldiers of Megas Alexandros as a bunch of Easter clowns.

Is that how you are directing this nation and its peoples towards Golden Dawn?
Goodnight comrades.
Goodnight Left

The people decide and you are absent from history. Unjustified absences once more

Ilias Giannotis

Thursday, 8 February 2018

1993 The Balkans: Revolution or Counterrevolution? Part One


The Balkans
Revolution or Counterrevolution Part One
An Interview with Loukas Karliaftis


On April 6th 1993 a veteran Greek Trotskyist Loukas Karliaftis was interviewd about the current crisis in the Balkans. Loukas was personally involved in organising the Archeiomarxists in northern Greece in the 1930’s when the question of Macedonian independence was debated with Trotsky. With the possibility of a wider Balkan conflagaration, the issue is once again the subject of international attention. It should be of particular interest to Trotskyists around the world to read the views of a leading participant in the struggles against capitalism and Stalinism in the Balkans
VN Gelis


Following on from the Gulf war, imperialism has wider aims. It is attempting to impose Bushs ‘new World Order’ on the Balkans and the ex-USSR. The demagogic call for the liberation of Kuwait was a subsidiary issue – similar to the call for the liberation of the oppressed peoples that was made prior to the Second World War. I have already written an article linking the Gulf War (during which incidentally, I didn’t support the slogan ‘Victory to Iraq’ with the situation in the Balkans and the USSR.

The imperialists decided to enter the Gulf arena because of the collapse of the regimes in eastern Europe. They were encouraged by the fact that the demonstrations in the West against the intervention were not as strong as they might have been and were essentially pacifist. The slogan ‘Imperialism out of the Gulf’ wasn’t enough – it should have been ‘Defeat Imperialism’. Bush wouldn’t have embarked on a new military operation if the class struggle in the United States hadn’t been at such a low ebb.
Before they intervened in the Balkans, the imperialists attacked the USSR with a so-called coup so that Yeltsin could take power. It wasn’t a real coup – it was like the Reichstag fire. Of course, the Yeltsin/Gorbachev bureaucracy allied itself with the West in the Gulf war. From this it is clear that imperialism is intervening in the Balkans with the clear aim of smashing Serbia.

The perspective ont eh Balkans must be farsighted: the US will move into the region with the USSR as the final target. Their military adventures against the Serbians are part and parcel of the New World Order. Many people isolate the developments in the Gulf from those in the Balkans and therefore incapable of drawing the correct conclusions. My view is that imperialism intends to smash any remnants of Tito’s regime. Under Tito there were representatives from each republic on the ruling executive – the US always wanted to dissolve this.

The first move of the US was to support the Croatian representative on this ruling council so that he could take over the presidency of the Federation. This was successful. Then the significant issue of Slovenian and Croatian independence came to the fore. Just as before they had used the issue of the national liberation of Kuwait (and of the colonies in the Second World War) so the US used the national liberation of Croatia and Slovenia to break up Yugoslavia. The West supported democratic restorationist forces inside Croatia initially in their attack on the Serb population in Croatia and then on Serbia itself. Serbia resisted these pressures and this led to war.

Of course under the previous Yugoslavian regime (before Milosevic) the various national minorities were attacked. But the declarations of Slovenian and Croatian independence was done in the name of the counterrevolution and we would not support this.

The US sent an aircraft carrier to the Adriatic in the defence of Slovenian and Croatian independence and all the countries that intervened in the Gulf now entered this new conflict to attack Serbia. Even Greece has sent a little ship, just as it did in the Gulf war when the government of Mitsotakis grovelled 100% infront of the US. Its clear that Greece has entered the war against Serbia, not just the economic embargo but also the military preparations. Our slogan should be defeatist. In the Gulf War they were: ‘Down with the War – For the defeat of Greece’ now it is ‘Hands off Serbia – for the defeat of Greece’
We must emphasise that the leaders of the USSR and Serbia have become counterrevolutionary and bourgeoisified , the leaders that is not the people. There are remnants of the old the old workers states, but the aim of the NWO is to smash the workers movement internationally and in any independent manifestation it may take. The Stalinist bureaucracy has collapsed and degenerated its top layers becoming bourgeoisified. It contains as Trotsky said, ‘Reiss and Butenko’ factions from top to bottom. There are also differences between the political and military leaders. The lower ranks of the military wanted an even stiffer resistance to Croatia.

We still defend the remnants of the degenerated workers states, without giving anything to the new leaderships. We combine the call for political revolution with demands against the new bourgeois elements. We defend Serbia against US intervention without defending its leaders in the same way that we defended the Vietnamese against intervention. We are distinct from other groups in that we say ‘Hands of Serbia’ rather than ‘Imperialism out of the Balkans’ – because the other Balkan governments are with Imperialism.

There are differences over imperialism among the imperialist over who is going to take a cut out of Yugoslavia. Mitterrand sent in ships first, Germany has Slovenia, Croatia and the Bosnian Muslims in its pocket and aims to use them to crush Serbia; Italy and Austria entered the arena, sending tanks to the border with Slovenia and laying mines- they all want a piece of the cake. The Italians also aim to take over Albania and via Albania, Kosovo as well. Austria and Hungary take their places alongside Germany in seeking control of northern parts of Yugoslavia. Germany is growing in military strength through the unification process through the conquest of central Europe and through the conquest of central Europe and through its influence in the Ukraine (where of all the imperialist powers it has the most contacts). It is also getting nuclear weapons from Ukraine and and Kazakhstan. The new division and conflict within imperialism is between Germany and the US over who gets the most out of Yugoslavia. This gives rise to a perspective for a third world war. We cant predict when this will occur, but we have entered the period when the dangers of the third world war are becoming greater.

Due to the rhythms of development the ex USSR and Yugoslavia are in particular danger – the conflict between Germany and the US will play a major role in deciding the future course of events. Of course the decisive factor will be what course the proletariat takes and whether proletarian revolution can stop the descent into war.. If you really want to understand the Serbian issue, you can only do it from the international perspective. You mustn’t isolate Serbian developments from the world arena.

After Slovenia and Croatia passed over to the West, the issue for imperialism became Bosnia and the Yugoslav minorities – Skopje (Macedonia), Kosovo, etc. The issue of the self-determination is theoretically and practically posed for the minorities. According to Lenin, there are generally speaking, two types of secession and national self-determination movements. There are those led by bourgeois nationalists (today these are ex-stalinists and turned restorationists) and those with other kinds of leaders who if led by the proletariat can go towards socialism. Lenin said we must distinguish between the progressive national liberation movements of the period of the collapse of feudalism and the birth of capitalism when nation states were being created and those of the imperialist epoch where the issues are different. In the era of the decay and the decline of capitalism, it is not national liberation per se which is the issue, but social liberation – ie the permanent revolution.

When the October Revolutoin occurred the national movement in Russia entered a new phase. After the Revolution, the issue became the extension of the proletarian revolution, through which the national question will be solved. On the red flag of the workers, democratic demands are secondary to proletarian demands. The issue of socialist revolution is far higher than national self determination which is a democratic issue. Under capitalism in Russia, centralising forces were at work. This process was accelerated by the socialist revolution and led to the planned economy. After the revolution, we do not support demands to leave the planned economy and split and divide the post capitalist society, although we do support the rights of minorities if they are oppressed in any other way. This is the way Trotsky viewed the call for Ukrainian independence. For precisely this reason we cannot support the independence of the bourgeoisified Yugoslav republics which are directly in the pay of imperialism.

The dissolution of the Yugoslav Federation is a step back in history, not a step forward. The right of self-determination of nations, if its used to split up Yugoslavia is a reactionary right. For this reason our central slogan is for a United Socialist Balkans and for a United Socialist Planet. From the birth of communism the call for a Balkan Socialist Federation has been the centre of our programme.
Lenin called for self-determination up to and including secession for the minorities in the capitalist Balkans. Roza Luxemborg replied that there were countless nationalities why didn’t they all become one? Both Lenin and Luxemburg were correct but which one of them is more correct?

From 1902 Lenins position on the national question dominated the RSDLP. The leader of the Greek socialists at the time, Benarogias, put forward the view in the Second International that the national question in the Balkans would be solved under the Ottomans. This was accepted by Rakovsky and became the position of the 2nd International. During this period (ie prior to the First WW) there was bourgeois development taking place in the Balkan peninsula. This bourgeois development taking place in the Balkan peninsula. This bourgeois development which occurred under the separate Balkan states, proved Luxembourg wrong. It was possible for bourgeois states to develop – Lenin had been proven right.
After the Russian revolution, Luxembourg said it was a mistake to create a Federation rather than have a single entity. She also said that land shouldn’t have been distributed to the peasants, which was totally wrong. If land hadn’t been given to the peasants, the Bolsheviks wouldn’t have had any impact on them and therefore wouldn’t have been able to influence the minorities. Luxemburgs position was that nationalities should only have autonomy, not the ability to break things up. Under conditions in the Balkans now, the slogan for Self-determination has become 100% reactionary

Tuesday, 6 February 2018

Mikis Theodorakis Macedonia Will Always Be Greek Speech Part Two


The so-called Zaev concessions, taking us for fools.
The famous concessions of Mr Zaev and others regarding the name is just drinking the Kool Aid. They are smartalecks which could only be directed to a nation of idiots and on their knees. For us it is a shame to still even be talking about this as the name of the airport and the highway is their own exclusive benefit to change it again immediately they achieve their aims. Truly does the Skopjian PM believe we are such idiots? Or so ready to drop our pants? I ask sorry for using this phrase. But it is the only one which can become understandable by all the foreigners and our own lot who believe that they have led us with all the economic measures to the last step of evil, that we have forgotten our history who we are our fundamental characteristics.



We will stand on our feet and not recognise them
Its not the first time that everyone around us believes that Greeks have been transformed into slaves but he is rising again. We are always a peacefule nation who wants peaceful and friendly coexistence with our neighbouring peoples. Parallely we must understand there is a deep state which conspires with other international forces against the independence of our country. For this reason we must not have illusions and take all the necessary measures which will guarantee the defence of our country. Here I must add that the situation of maintaining the status quo and peaceful coexistence should be considered the last concessions we do in confronting hard reality. But in essence we have nothing to lose.

Without Greece’s approval, Skopje will never become Macedonia.The fact that there are countries that recognise Skopje with the name Macedonia ignoring the fact that they become jokers with respect to history doesn’t really bother us as it is only our decision and our decision alone that can historically legalize and judge irrevocable this issue. As only us Greeks can give or not give the right to Skopje to own the future via the name Macedonia, an undisputed from any viewpoint, historical, cultural ownership of hellnism. To explain it more simply they require Greeces agreement so as to be thought of as real Macedonians and not fake ones, paper ones which they are today. As we are refusing to take our eyes out to be loved by America NATO and the EU, we can continue our lives as we did so many years. But that implies that we must refuse every other retreat. For whoever long the people of Skopje threaten us with their territorial propaganda claims, their unacceptable Constitution, the alleged Macedonian symbols and the Macedonies full of Alexander the Great, we as a responsible nation who are hereditary owners of a great history will continue the policy of peaceful coexistence but whatever we can do we will not give in any case our agreement for them to become members of the EU and NATO.

Only with a Referendum can we legalize any signature.
In this crucial moment infront of the possibility to be led even in situation of a national tragedy, I consider that responsibility of the decisions its not correct to give over whatever government. Not only a minority government as is todays but even a government that had popular backing. Not even Parliament itself. What is the solution? A Referendum. For us the position of the Greek people on the concrete issue is quite clear stable and self-explanatory which doesn’t require a Referendum. If a government ever considers placing a signature of our country to whatever name simple or double which will include the word Macedonia there is no doubt that it is obliged to ask the Greek people. We Greek citizens who do not seek to be passive observers at the time when our country is found confronting such crucial problems able to influence us for many decades. In this instance that the government dares to place a signature I make a call to all the MPs who have the right to call for a Referendum for such a national issue, to provoke the relative discussion in Parliament and to fully support this demand.



FYROMs Ambassadors wife in Athens standing in front of maps demanding half of northern Greece

Epilogue
Dear Friends Patriots,
In all my life I fought for the unity of the Greek people. I believe fully that this great issue we should confront united with one fist. I also believe we are united. As independent from all our disagreements we are all patriots. As when someong supports the rights of a country and its people this isn’t nationalism but patriotism. Greece today has more need than any other period before it the need for patrtiots. Greeks united are giving their reply from Syndagma sq. Macedonia is won and will always be Greek. Long live the Greek people.


Monday, 5 February 2018

Macedonia will always Be Greek Theodorakis Rally Speech Part One


Macedonia will always Be Greek
Mikis Theodorakis 4th Feb 2018 Part One

My dear Greeks…brothers… fascists, Nazis, terrorists, anarchists, thugs. You have learned of course that the patriots that govern us alongside their sidekicks, the leftists were collecting signatures and yesterday threw paint on my house. So as to not allow me to speak here to the dominant peoples. So as to not speak to you with straight words, patriotic ones, fiery ones as I learnt all my life and as you taught me dominant Greek nation. To speak and act in all my life with every sacrifice and thankness for this. Anyway listen. This morning I received a poetic collection from Thessaloniki and one section asserts that spirit, the brain develops with Thales, Thycidydes, Protagoras, the tragic artists, the daring of Themistoklis and Kolokotronis.



I dedicate my speech to Theodoros Kolokotronis.
Friends and followers I register my speech to the Greek who liberated us from the Ottoman dynasty and who died like today 4th February 1843, Theodoros Kolokotronis. I am not ashamed like the nation genociders who rule us, I will remain loyal to the holy values of our forefathers who taught us love and sacrifice for our country. A country which respects and loves all the countries on earth. Yes I am a patriot and an internationalist and at the same time I reject and fight fascism in all its forms and in particular in its most deceitful and dangerous form, its left orientation like the small grouplets of extremists who are just pure coward terrorists.

We are governed and were governed by minority governments
Like those who govern us and destroyed the country, hidden behind the electoral alchemies of politicians which are the by products of a system that is biting us and hurting us as it is dying and it knows is and that is why it is even more dangerous. In a difficult time for our country, where dark clouds are gathering around us, we are being called to confront them united as never before these new threats.

The Forgerers of Skopje
Skopje using the name Macedonia and transforming historical events to a point of being ridiculous, are attempting in reality to extend their borders against us for the creation of the so-called Aegean Macedonia. This aim functions for decades now as a basic national aim of the neighbouring country and a generation of Skopjes citizens have been brought up with the idea that they are the direct descendants and relatives of Phillip and Great Alexander.

With a colossal propaganda they achieved to lead astray in this historical ridiculousness a number of states aided by the stance of Greece and those responsible who didn’t make a simple attempt in the eyes of foreigners to criticise this monstrous falsification of history.

We must recognize that it is also our responsibility the fact that we allowed so many decades to pass of Skopjes citizens with the ideas I just referred to so that it appears futile or even unjust to ask from them to change their name which has become one with themselves. Having reached the sorry position where it affects us as a peoples and we are forced to apologize for our patriotism

Our conscience does not allow us to agree
We cannot agree with this falsification of history, as we then become co accomplices with the powers that openly aim against our territorial integrity. What can occur? We must recognize our mistakes and our responsibilities in front of the people’s dominance. The only solution is for us to allow the Skopje citizens to believe in their national myth and us parallel to remain loyal and irreconcilable to the Greekness of Macedonia. Never to agree that there exists another fake Macedonia. For if we do that its as if we want to take out our own eyes with our own hands.

1992
The council of political leaders in 1992 decided a national line in a name where in no way the word Macedonia would exist with geographic or other directions ie no upper or down and in no way with ‘new macedonia’ as it erases the historic Greek Macedonia and announced a successor with another peoples in the area.

Next aim the dissolution of Greece

If we give in from this line we will have disastrous results for the future of our country. If we retreat this time from our position for the name its as if we open up fully our borders to those who threaten us in such an open and vulgar way from their own constitution. We are obliged to be vigilant for the defence of our national inviolability, taking into account there are strong foreign forces which have the aim to balkanise even more the Balkans. The case of Yugoslavia is still fresh. The next victim will be our country. Dark clouds threaten us and every day that passes they become more evident. If we give in to the open provocation of Skopje without them having resigned from the main aim of their national and political line to become members of NATO and the EU without own vote so as to threaten us from an even stronger position we will then be worthy of our fate. If we retreat we open the doors wide open to impose once and for all a tragic historical lie with unknown consequences for our country

Sunday, 4 February 2018

Federation or Autonomy on Yugoslavian Breakup 1992


Comments on Balkan History
It is fundamental to the materialist understanding of history to start from the analysis of the actual events and their interrelationships from the events which otherwise constitute the motive of the problem and the cause of historical research.

Despite all of this, in the name of the Marxist method, the opposite occurs: From ideas to events. Most of the so-called revolutionary groups analyse the crisis and war in Yugoslavia as a platform of applying their own ideas which they have on the national question or the Balkan one from what they believe was or wasn’t Lenin and Trotskys and the Bolsheviks position.

In relation to the Balkans Lenin and Trotskys positions is falsified as they are presented as followers of the division of the Balkan peninsula so as to apparently fulfil the national desires of the peoples that live there. There cannot be an even more false argument than this.
Above all we should not forget that we are living through the adventure of the New World Order in the Balkans. The USA and the EEC are seeking supports at whatever nationalist excuses so as break up Yugoslavia and the whole of the Balkans into small and defenceless statelets allied to the Western European Union and NATO

This event cannot be ignored in the name of some supra historical principles regarding national self determination. These principles must be supported in the struggle against the New World Order and in no case can they become its excuse for its imposition.

The Balkan peninsula is occupied by a mosaic of nationalities in such a way that in no area can a national problem be solved without another one being created. The independence of Croatia created a national question for the Serbs in Kraijna. The same as the independence of Bosnia on a muslim basis creates a problem for the Serb and Croat occupants of this Yugoslav Republic. The independence of Yugoslav ‘Macedonia’ will surely create problems for the large Albanian minority. It is not special circumstance but the form of the national question as a whole in the Balkan regions.

This reality obliged the socialists and the later the communists and before them Rigas Ferraios and the bourgeois revolutionaries to support the idea of a Balkan Federation, under the framework of which all the national minorities would gain their autonomy.

Initially the idea of a Balkan Federation was in the interest of the ruling classes in the peninsula which had a reason for a ‘common national front’ against the Ottoman Empire. But the Balkan wars of 1912-13 put an end to the same cros Balkan bourgeois coalition and showed that the Balkan Federation was a utopia on the basis of conflicting bourgeois interests. Only the working class could unite the Balkans and create a common Balkan market for economic development and cultural progress of all the peoples.


Death to the Bulgarian invaders EAM poster during WW2


Lenin and Trotsky never supported the idea of the national dissolution of the Balkans. Their position was that the solution of all the national problems in the Balkans was only possible under the framework of a Federation. With this perspective in mind, the CI in the 1920’s founded the Union of Balkan Communist Parties so as to fight for the unity of the peninsula.

It was foreign to Lenin and Trotsky’s idea to have the dissolution of Yugoslavia into ten independent statelets the same for Greece, Rumania and Bulgaria. The national question is not always solved with the secession of national minorities but commonly with multinational unification. A common example is the USA as will all the countries of the US peninsula.

The question of a national secession without a Federation for the Balkans was not made by Lenin and Trotsky but a rising Stalinism inside the Communist International. Practically it limited itself to the demand for an independent Macedonia and Thrace. The idea of a Thracian state was so openly false and technical that soon it was abandoned and forgotten by its architects. As for the Macedonian national independence it led to an alliance of Stalinism with the Bulgarian komitsadides (fascists). It expressed the old views of tsarism and pan-slavism for an exit of Russia in the Meditterranean. The old Russian diplomacy appeared with the new Stalinist attire. Slowly but surely the slogan for a Balkan Federation took its place and later a ‘de nuclearised’ Balkans and peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems.

Already from the 1920’s onwards the ideology of socialism in one country dominated the Communist International. The Union of Balkan Communist Parties in essence expressed the politics of the Bulgarian Communist Party. Its leadership was also the leadership of the CI and was decisively influenced by Zinoviev and Manuilsky.

It is characteristic that its founding document in May 1920 aimed at the crushing of the forthcoming proletarian revolution in Bulgaria and the Balkans.
“The Balkans – wrote this document – is divided today into a great number of small states subjects to the economic and military rule of the Entente and are competing in a more intense level than the pre war one. A victorious revolution in one and only state would not only be threatened from Entente but mainly by the armies of the neighbouring countries”

The opportunism of the leaders of the Bulgarian Party and the CI found a revolutionary formula so as to be camouflaged. The conclusion was that:
“A revolution in Bulgaria was impossible without a parallel Balkan insurrection. If it occurs and is victorious it will be smashed”
Trotsky from then noted that the Bulgarian party which led the Balkan Federation expounded a Marxism which,
“despite all its phenomenal indifference was a Marxism o propaganda, of wating a pathetic and quite immobile Marxism”

The Greek communist movement deeply influenced by the October Revolution and quite young so as to have its own development accepted the instructions of the CI. Later though the conflict between the left opposition – Stalinism, led to P Pouliopoulos initially expressing the position of the international factions with clear diplomatic aims which were based on Balkan, especially Bulgarian opportunism.

Pandelis Pouliopoulos finally supported the old Bolshevik position that the national question in the Balkans could be solved only under the framework of a Balkan Federation. This was Trotskys position and his aim throughout his whole literary work during his writing of the Balkan Wars 1912-13.

Today in Yugoslavia the touchstone of revolutionary politics is not simply the demand to respect the rights of the minorities but above all to restore the Yugoslav Federation, under the framework of which all the nationalities must have full respects and autonomy.

In opposition to this, autonomy and national secession without a Federation is a totally reactionary position which objectively serves the attempts of the New Order and further on from this lays the groundwork of turning Yugoslavia into a permanent theatre of bloody conflicts, without a possibility of an exit from the crisis.

The Yugoslav Federation is a stage towards the Balkan Federation which encompasses the foundation of a new Union of Bolshevik States in the Balkans as a necessary tool for the actualisation of this strategy…

L Sklavos 1992

Friday, 2 February 2018

On Macedonia Conflict over a Name Part of a Larger Struggle for the Future of Greece



Thousands of protesters take part in a rally against the use of the term "Macedonia" for the northern neighboring country's name, at the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Jan. 21, 2018. Over 100,000 Greeks gathered in the northern city of Thessaloniki to demand that the term "Macedonia," the name of the Greek province of which Thessaloniki is the capital, not be used by Greece's northern neighbor known by the same name. (AP/Giannis Papanikos)
WHAT'S IN A NAME?

Conflict Over the Name “Macedonia” Part of Larger Struggle for the Future of Greece
Greek authorities and the media may choose to brand the protesters “fascists,” “nationalists,” “xenophobes” or any number of other epithets, in an attempt to delegitimize them and their concerns. But what is fascist about being leery of U.S. and NATO intentions in the Balkans or opposing the nationalist, expansionist ambitions of a neighboring state?

by Michael Nevradakis


January 29th, 2018

By Michael Nevradakis
THESSALONIKI, GREECE (Analysis) – While international media outlets focused on the women’s rallies of this past weekend, in Greece a population that for several years has not participated in any large-scale protests came out in force on Sunday. Greeks gathered to oppose a deal between Greece and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) — the country’s official name as per the United Nations — that would allow Greece’s northern neighbor to officially include Macedonia in its name. The demonstration flooded the streets of downtown Thessaloniki — the capital of the Greek province of Macedonia, and Greece’s second largest city.

Official estimates for the turnout ranged from 90,000 according to the police to over 500,000 according to rally organizers. What is indeed evident is that turnout was likely far closer to the organizers’ estimates than to those of the police. Photos from the rally show the crowd of demonstrators stretching from the White Tower, Thessaloniki’s main landmark, all the way to the Thessaloniki Music Hall in one direction and to Aristotelous Square in the other, spanning almost two miles along the city’s coastline. Busloads of protesters traveled from all corners of Greece, with over 500 coach buses reportedly delivering participants to Thessaloniki just from Athens alone.

Sunday’s rally signified Greece’s biggest demonstration, by far, since the period leading up to the country’s July 2015 austerity referendum, following a long period of relative dormancy. Joining the Thessaloniki protesters in spirit, members of the overseas Greek communities — in cities such as London (outside the British Parliament), Stuttgart, and Melbourne — came out in significant numbers and participated in rallies organized locally.

For many, Sunday’s rally — and the opposition of many Greeks to the use of the name “Macedonia” by the country’s northern neighbor — reeks of nationalism and ethnocentrism. And indeed, many right-wing and even far-right elements were behind the official organization of Sunday’s rally. This nationalist and ethnocentric view, however, does not represent the ordinary public that participated in the protest, many of whom also represented those with a more left-wing political outlook (including dozens of people I personally am acquainted with). Although left-wing, however, that outlook is opposed to the government led by the neoliberal, pro-EU, pro-austerity “leftist” SYRIZA party, as well as to the Communist Party of Greece — which denounced Sunday’s rally and which, on and off, has recognized Greece’s northern neighbor as “Macedonia.”

Furthermore, this view glosses over numerous historical realities and, even more significantly, geopolitical realities in the region — and the role and ambitions of the United States and NATO in the wider Balkan region. This piece will briefly examine the historical development of the Macedonia dispute, the current negotiations and geopolitical forces at work, and the stance of the Greek government and establishment at the present time. Moreover, the efforts to downplay Sunday’s rally and to characterize an entire mass of protesters as “fascist,” will be analyzed.



Redrawing the Balkans: the birth of a “Macedonian” state
Contrary to what is often reported, the area now known as FYROM was not always officially named “Macedonia.” Indeed, it was not called Macedonia until after World War II, when it was a province of Yugoslavia and was renamed “Macedonia” by Yugoslav leader Tito, with the approval of Stalin and the Soviet Union. Previous to that, in the early 20th century, the region was successively known as South Serbia, then absorbed within Bulgaria, then known as “Vardarska,” named after the main river running through the region.

As pointed out by analyst Vasilis Viliardos, while this name change may have initially seemed to be an internal Yugoslav matter, it was anything but. Tito’s grand plan for the region was for a greater Yugoslav nation, one that would include “Macedonia” and stretch all the way to the shores of the Aegean and the city of Thessaloniki. In order to achieve these aims though, a Macedonian “nationhood” first had to be invented, one that would co-opt the ancient history of Macedonia.

The historical record provides evidence for these early efforts at revisionism. While, for instance, a 1937 map of Yugoslavia and a 1939 Yugoslav stamp illustrate modern-day FYROM as “Vardarska,” by the 1940s the Yugoslav authorities were actively promoting the region as “Macedonia.” A July 10, 1946 article appearing in The New York Times states “a ‘Federal Macedonia’ has been projected as an integral part of Tito’s plan for a federated Balkans…taking Greek Macedonia for an outlet to the Aegean Sea through Salonica.”

A Yugoslav stamp circa 1939 showing ancient Paionia labeled 'Vardarska'. A map depicting Yugoslavia circa 1937 is pictured on the right.
A Yugoslav stamp circa 1939 showing ancient Paionia labeled ‘Vardarska’. A map depicting Yugoslavia circa 1937 is pictured on the right.

Two weeks later, a July 26, 1946 article in the Times by C.L. Sulzberger stated: “The possible creation of a Macedonian free state within Greece to amalgamate with Marshal Tito’s Federated Macedonia State, with is capital in Skopje…would fulfill the Slavic objectives of re-uniting the…province of Macedonia under Slavic rule, giving access of the sea to Bulgaria and Yugoslavia.”

Such expansionist plans on the part of Tito’s Yugoslavia were also recorded in U.S. diplomatic cables of that era, including a December 26, 1944 cable that stated:

The [State] Department has noted with considerable apprehension increasing propaganda rumors and semi-official statements in favor of an autonomous Macedonia, emanating principally from Bulgaria, but also from Yugoslav Partisan and other sources, with the implication that Greek territory would be included in the projected state. This Government considers talk of Macedonian ‘nation,’ Macedonian ‘Fatherland,’ or Macedonia ‘national consciousness’ to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece. …

The approved policy of this government is to oppose any revival of the Macedonian issue as related to Greece. The Greek section of Macedonia is largely inhabited by Greeks, and the Greek people are almost unanimously opposed to the creation of a Macedonian state. Allegations of serious Greek participation in any such agitation can be assumed to be false. This Government would regard as responsible any Government or group of Governments tolerating or encouraging menacing or aggressive acts of ‘Macedonian Forces’ against Greece.”

Tito’s grand plan for “Macedonia” indeed began to be implemented following World War II. Starting in the 1950s, theories began to develop about the ancient origins of the “Macedonian people” as direct descendants of the likes of Alexander the Great and Philip II of Macedonia — even though, anthropologically, the inhabitants of what is today FYROM are descended from peoples that settled in the area in the sixth to seventh century A.D., a near millennium after the era of Alexander the Great. This is not meant to be an ethnocentrist argument in either direction, merely a statement of fact supported by the historical record.

The discontinuity between the ancient Macedonians and those who today refer to themselves as “Macedonian” (and are attempting to co-opt this ancient history as their own) was admitted to by none other than former president of FYROM Kiro Gligorov, who stated in an interview with the Toronto Star in 1992:

We are Macedonians but we are Slav Macedonians. That’s who we are! We have no connection to Alexander the Great and his Macedonia. The ancient Macedonians no longer exist, they had disappeared from history long time ago. Our ancestors came here in the 5th and 6th century (A.D.).”

In a similar vein, the former prime minister of FYROM, Ljubco Georgievski, has stated, in a televised interview, that the ancient Macedonian people were Greek.

Nevertheless, landmarks in what is today FYROM began to be renamed after ancient figures and symbols. Statues of Alexander the Great were constructed, and the country’s main international airport now bears his name. FYROM’s original map, following independence, bore the Vergina Sun — a popular ancient Greek symbol inscribed on ancient tombs in the Greek region of Vergina, said to be the burial site of King Philip II and possibly Alexander the Great or his brother. This symbol was later changed on FYROM’s flag to a nonspecific sun with rays emanating from it, as part of an agreement between the two countries in 1995 that also set the constitutional, temporary name of Greece’s northern neighbor as FYROM.

Read more by Michael Nevradakis

Google, Facebook, Twitter Clamor for an “Open Net” While Gearing Up Their Censorship Divisions
“Sellouts in the Room:” Éric Toussaint on the Greek Debt Crisis and SYRIZA Betrayals
The Trials of Andreas Georgiou and the Fraud That Drove Greece into Austerity
An Insider’s View of SYRIZA-Led Greek Capitulation to EU Blackmail
Nationalist zeal was fostered amongst the population of this region, based on this ancient “heritage.” And as part of this nationalist zeal, expansionist propaganda also began to appear, including maps displaying a “greater Macedonia” in place of FYROM, extending into Greek territory and up to the Aegean shoreline.

In August 2015, for instance, the then-parliamentary vice president and former foreign minister of FYROM, Antonio Milososki, appeared at an event in Ontario organized by members of FYROM’s diaspora, speaking in front of a map displaying “greater Macedonia,” which included a significant chunk of Greek territory, including Thessaloniki. FYROM’s ambassador to Canada appeared in front of this same map at an event in Toronto in 2016. Elementary school classrooms in FYROM have been painted with the map of “greater Macedonia,” while the map of “greater Macedonia” has also been used in advertisements by FYROM diaspora organizations, such as in an advertisement appearing in the Toronto Star on July 31, 2014.

But how did FYROM, as an independent state, come about and adopt the name “Macedonia”? Following the collapse of the Soviet Bloc and the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, “Macedonia” declared independence in 1991, claiming both the name “Macedonia” and the Vergina Sun as its national symbol, in the new country’s flag. And it is here where geopolitics really comes into the picture.



Another NATO-U.S. client state in the Balkans?
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, second from left, accompanied by Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev, left, inspects an honor guard squad upon his arrival at the Government building in Skopje, Macedonia, Jan. 18, 2018. NATO's secretary-general urged Macedonia to solve its name dispute with Greece and proceed with wide-ranging reforms if it wants its membership bid to succeed. (AP/Boris Grdanoski)
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, second from left, accompanied by Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev, left, inspects an honor guard squad upon his arrival at the Government building in Skopje, Macedonia, Jan. 18, 2018. NATO’s secretary-general urged Macedonia to solve its name dispute with Greece and proceed with wide-ranging reforms if it wants its membership bid to succeed. (AP/Boris Grdanoski)

The breakup of the former Yugoslavia — initially achieved in the early to mid-1990s and since progressing with the formation of Montenegro and Kosovo as independent states — has been closely tied in with U.S., NATO, and European Union foreign policy and geopolitical ambitions in the area. Following the fall of the “iron curtain,” a main objective of strategists in Washington and Brussels was to wrest control of the Balkans away from Russian influence, bringing the entire region into the Western sphere.

Taking advantage of a disemboweled Russia in the aftermath of the USSR’s collapse, nationalist tensions were stoked, civil wars were fomented, and Yugoslavia dissolved into war, crisis and, eventually, a number of small, weak states. Decimated following the collapse of communism and the sufferings of civil war, states such as Croatia, Bosnia, and FYROM were the perfect clients for the West’s imperial ambitions in the Balkan region. Illustrating the region’s significance, it has been noted, for instance, that the new U.S. embassy in Skopje, the capital of FYROM, is the largest U.S. embassy in the world.

As part of such efforts, imperial powers stoked and then harnessed nationalist tendencies that had been fomented in FYROM, essentially trading diplomatic support of such ambitions for geopolitical and military cooperation. One of President George W. Bush’s first acts upon commencing his second term in office, for instance, was formal recognition of FYROM as the “Republic of Macedonia.” In all, 130 countries have recognized FYROM by this name, even as its official United Nations name remains “Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.” China is one such country, as well as traditional Greek allies — deriving from cultural proximity if nothing else — Russia and Serbia.

“Macedonia’s” declaration of independence led to developments in Greece as well, and arguably contributed to the downfall of the government led by the center-right New Democracy party, which was hanging on to a flimsy one-seat parliamentary majority and which was seen by many in Greece as not putting up enough diplomatic resistance to the naming issue. A rally held in Thessaloniki, on February 14, 1992 drew up to a million protesters and is arguably the largest such demonstration held in the history of post-war Greece. The government collapsed a year later, as members of New Democracy’s parliamentary faction, angered over Prime Minister Constantine Mitsotakis’ willingness to compromise regarding the name dispute, broke off and formed a splinter party, Political Spring, which eliminated New Democracy’s parliamentary majority and eroded its support in the snap parliamentary elections of October 1993.

The now-deceased Mitsotakis’ government may have collapsed, but one of his quotations lives on in infamy today. In February 1993, in a stunning display of arrogance, Mitsotakis, in reference to the Macedonia name dispute, predicted that the Greek people “will have forgotten about it in 10 years.” And just as Mitsotakis evidently held the Greek populace that elected him in such low esteem, today’s current “leftist” SYRIZA-led government apparently harbors similar feelings, as will be demonstrated.



Matthew Nimetz: The hardly neutral mediator
Matthew Nimetz, the UN mediator in the name dispute between Macedonia and Greece, answers journalists' questions following his talks with Macedonian officials in Skopje, Macedonia, Sept. 11, 2013. (AP/Boris Grdanoski)
Matthew Nimetz, the UN mediator in the name dispute between Macedonia and Greece, answers journalists’ questions following his talks with Macedonian officials in Skopje, Macedonia, Sept. 11, 2013. (AP/Boris Grdanoski)

Despite the collapse of the New Democracy-led government in Greece, a diplomatic stalemate ensued, and the Clinton administration, which was actively involved in the ongoing developments in the Balkans during this period, appointed Matthew Nimetz as its Special Envoy for the Macedonia name dispute in March 1994. The negotiations that followed resulted in a temporary compromise agreement in September 1995, where the name “FYROM” was established, the country’s flag was changed, and diplomatic relations between FYROM and Greece were restored while a final resolution regarding the name dispute was left for a later date. Former U.S. Secretary of State Cyrus Vance chaired continued talks regarding the dispute, with Nimetz serving as Vance’s deputy, before being appointed as the UN secretary-general’s Personal Envoy for the Macedonia dispute in December 1999 — a position that Nimetz still holds today.

Who is Matthew Nimetz? An examination of his background reveals a long and fascinating history of serving what can be described as globalist and imperialist aims. Fresh out of Harvard Law School, where he served as editor of the Harvard Law Review, Nimetz clerked for Supreme Court Justice John Marshall Harlan II from 1965 to 1967. Harlan was, quite notably, in 1937 one of the five founders of the Pioneer Fund, an organization that promoted the practice of eugenics, of which the Nazi regime in Germany was a strong proponent. Indeed, at least two of the group’s five founders are said to have held close ties to Nazi Germany, while Harlan served on the organization’s board for several years.

Nimetz then joined the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967. While Nimetz was tasked with domestic policy, it was the Johnson administration that, in 1967, supported a coup in Greece that established a dictatorial military regime that reigned until 1973. President Johnson himself, in 1965, had been quoted as stating the following to Greece’s ambassador, when the latter rejected Johnson’s plan to divide Cyprus into Greek and Turkish parts, as a solution to the ongoing disputes between the two countries:

Fuck your Parliament and your constitution. America is an elephant. Cyprus is a flea. Greece is a flea. If those two fleas continue itching the elephant, they may just get whacked… We pay a lot of good American dollars to the Greeks, Mr. Ambassador. If your prime minister gives me talk about democracy, parliaments, and constitutions, he, his parliament, and his constitution may not last very long… Don’t forget to tell old papa-what’s his name what I told you [referring to Greek Prime Minister Giorgos Papandreou].”

From 1975 to 1977, having returned to the private sector, Nimetz was appointed as a Commissioner of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the entity that controls the New York metro area’s three international airports, its seaports, and its main bus terminal — and that owned the World Trade Center (and owns 1WTC today). Nimetz was again appointed as a Commissioner of the Port Authority in 2007 by then-Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York, but Spitzer’s sex scandal and subsequent resignation prevented Nimetz’s nomination from proceeding.

Upon his return to government service in 1977, Nimetz worked under Cyrus Vance at the State Department and was tasked with the Greek-Turkish disputes, including the Turkish invasion and occupation of almost 40 percent of Cyprus (which continues to this day), the Micronesian status negotiations (which are said to have stymied any hopes for Micronesian independence, while essentially creating pro-U.S. dependencies in the Pacific), and, interestingly enough, Mexico-United States border issues. In 1979, Nimetz was then promoted to the position of Under Secretary for Security Assistance, Science and Technology, which included in its purview the U.S. government’s international communications activities. He also continued to supervise U.S. policy in the Eastern Mediterranean region.

Notably, during Nimetz’ tenure at the State Department, the United States’ arms embargo against Turkey — which had been imposed in February 1975, not long after Turkey’s invasion and subsequent occupation of a significant portion of Cyprus — was overturned.

Nimetz is also a member of the board of advisers of the National Committee on American Foreign Policy (NCAFP). In the past, the committee has seen fit to present awards to the likes of Henry Kissinger, Margaret Thatcher, the aforementioned Cyrus Vance, former New York governor Hugh Carey (on whose campaign staff Nimetz served), and Richard Holbrooke, who was intimately involved in the Yugoslav conflict in the 1990s.

Interestingly, Nimetz, as of 2017, serves as a trustee of the George Soros-founded Central European University (CEU) in Budapest, an institution founded following the collapse of the Iron Curtain as part of Soros’ “open society” initiatives in Central and Eastern Europe. Kati Marton, wife of the late Richard Holbrooke, serves as a trustee of the CEU. Soros chaired the CEU until 2009 -– his replacement, Leon Botstein, had served as president of Bard College in New York.

It should be noted that Bard College is the home of the Levy Economics Institute, founded in 1986 by economist Dimitris B. Papadimitriou, who also served as the Institute’s longtime president and who is presently Greece’s minister of economy and development. Papadimitriou’s wife, Ourania (Rania) Antonopoulos, Greece’s alternate minister for combating unemployment, also served as a senior economist at the Levy Institute and taught at Bard College. She has also been closely affiliated with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

The UNDP and the CEU are, in turn, both listed as donors for an outfit known as the Centre for Democracy and Reconciliation in Southeastern Europe (CDRSEE), based in Thessaloniki. Nimetz has served as a director and founding chair of this organization, which, among other initiatives, has promoted a “Joint History Project” with the support of the EU. This project is described as an effort to “change the way history is taught in schools in the Balkans,” and one might be tempted to wonder whether such a “joint history” includes, for instance, a “joint history” of Greece and “Macedonia.”

Notably, the CDRSEE counts as its donors, aside from the UNDP and CEU, entities such as the U.S. State Department, USAid, the National Endowment for Democracy, the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the “Foundation Open Society Macedonia,” the European Union, the European Commission, and the municipality of Thessaloniki, under the auspices of its mayor, Yiannis Boutaris.

A darling of neoliberals worldwide, Boutaris has received glowing coverage from The Guardian, The New York Times, The Telegraph, Der Spiegel, Die Zeit, NPR, and Global Risk Insights, while he was shortlisted for World Mayor 2014. He has characterized Greece as a “Soviet-type society;” stated that he is ashamed to be Greek; called himself a “star mayor;” and repeatedly referred to FYROM as “Macedonia.”

Referencing Sunday’s rally in Thessaloniki, Boutaris has stated that “in Skopje no rallies are being organized, we [Greeks] will never learn,” while describing the rally as “devoid of substance” and “harmful for negotiations” between the two countries.

Nimetz, as demonstrated above, clearly maintains strong and direct ties to a number of different organizations and figures who, it could be argued, undermine Greece’s position in its dispute with FYROM over the name “Macedonia.” And it is Nimetz who is the UN’s mediator for the dispute between the two countries.

This is not an unfounded concern for many Greeks. Nimetz, in an interview broadcast last week on Greece’s Antenna TV, essentially used the aforementioned interim agreement of 1995 — which he himself chaired as President Clinton’s Special Envoy and where the name “Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia” was adopted — as a negotiating position against Greece, stating:

One has to be realistic. Right now the name of the country in the United Nations is Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. So the name Macedonia is in the name now in the United Nations and recognized by Greece with that name. Over 100 countries recognize the name as Republic as Macedonia, so it has Macedonia in the name, for most countries.”



Redrawing the Balkan map once more?
A group of people hold banners reading "We are Macedonia" during anti NATO protest in front of the Parliament in Skopje, Macedonia, while NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg addressed lawmakers in Parliament, Jan. 19, 2018. (AP/Boris Grdanoski)
A group of people hold banners reading “We are Macedonia” during anti NATO protest in front of the Parliament in Skopje, Macedonia, while NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg addressed lawmakers in Parliament, Jan. 19, 2018. (AP/Boris Grdanoski)

Some actors are no longer sharing Nimetz’s enthusiasm over the recognition of FYROM as “Macedonia” by “most countries.” Earlier this month, Serbian foreign minister Iviva Dacic stated in an interview that “[w]e’ve been fools to recognize Macedonia under that name” and that Serbia “made a mistake when it recognized that country under its constitutional name (‘Republic of Macedonia’),” due to FYROM’s subsequent recognition of Kosovo’s independence. Dacic added:

Serbia made a big mistake there. All of Europe and the world are using the name ‘Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’ (FYROM), whereas we slapped our brothers the Greek, and now expect the Greek not to recognize Kosovo, while we recognized Macedonia by insulting the Greek, and they (Macedonians) are always voting in favor of Kosovo. I must say, we’ve been the fools. There, I’ll use an undiplomatic term.”

Dacic’s comments may be more than just undiplomatic. They may reflect broader changes that may be afoot in the Balkans, which are intimately tied to the future fate of FYROM, regardless of name.

In 2015, a protracted political crisis commenced in FYROM, resulting from a corruption and wiretapping scandal that impacted the ruling nationalist, center-right VMRO-DPMNE government. Large-scale protests were organized in FYROM in both 2015 and 2016, which have been likened to “color revolutions” seen in other countries in Eastern Union and Central Asia. Snap parliamentary elections were called in 2016, but were postponed twice before being held on December 11, 2016.

The protracted political crisis continued, however, as no clear winner emerged from the polls. After months of political stalemate, the second-place “social democratic” SDSM party was given a mandate to form a government, immediately after the visit of U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Hoyt Yee. Ironically, this regime change has prompted the development of a new “stop Soros” movement in FYROM, as there are some who consider the country’s new government as subservient to or controlled by the financial and geopolitical interests of George Soros.

Geopolitical analyst Andrew Korybko has, since 2016, repeatedly predicted that FYROM would fall victim to Western-induced “hybrid warfare,” of which the snap elections and formation of a SDSM government are allegedly a part. This “hybrid warfare” would have, as its end result, the split of FYROM into two, with one half joining a new Albanian federation (which Kosovo may also join, and which will surely provoke a response from Serbia), and the other half joining Bulgaria. A possible step towards the latter outcome is a treaty signed between FYROM and Bulgaria, which Korybko has argued opens the door for FYROM to be subsumed by its Eastern neighbor in the event of a “crisis.”

In the meantime, the parliament of FYROM recently passed legislation making Albanian the country’s second official language, though this legislation was later vetoed by FYROM’s president, Gjorge Ivanov. It should not be overlooked that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated in 2015 that Bulgaria and Albania want to divide FYROM between themselves.

Another possible indicator of looming instability is reflected in the actions of both Russia and China, which previously eyed FYROM for strategic projects in the region. The Russia-backed Balkan Stream natural gas pipeline and the China-backed Balkan Silk Road high-speed railway were both slated to traverse FYROM on their way to central Europe.

Korybko argues, however, that both Russia and China seem to be entertaining second thoughts about these projects, with Russia eying an alternate pipeline route through Bulgaria, while China is considering an alternate route for its railroad, which would still begin from the Chinese-owned port of Piraeus in Greece (privatized in 2016 by the “anti-privatization” SYRIZA-led government) but would be rerouted through Bulgaria. These changes, according to Korybko, are as a result of the risk of crisis or instability in FYROM, which both Russia and China are increasingly wary of.

Perhaps further reflecting this new geopolitical posture towards FYROM, Lavrov stated recently his belief that Greece should not make any concessions regarding the Macedonia name.

It may also be the case that the new Rex Tillerson-led State Department, along with NATO, are seeking to put their own stamps on pending matters in the Balkans, and may consider the ongoing dispute and political uncertainty involving FYROM to increasingly be a liability for Western interests in the region. In 2008, Greece, a member of both the EU and NATO, vetoed FYROM’s bid for NATO membership, citing the unresolved name dispute. It is surmised that a similar action could be undertaken by Greece to block FYROM’s EU aspirations if the Macedonia dispute remains unsolved. This may be considered by the State Department and NATO to be more trouble than it’s worth, resulting in further developments and a possible redrawing of boundaries in the region.

Interestingly — echoing both the fall of the Mitsotakis government in 1993 following the Macedonia name crisis, and the fall of the previous center-right government in FYROM following a wiretapping and corruption scandal — the center-right government of Prime Minister Konstantinos Karamanlis, which vetoed FYROM’s NATO candidacy and which pursued a foreign policy that was more open towards Russian interests, itself was beset by a wiretapping scandal and by what seemed like a constant stream of political and even sexual scandals, followed by the violent December 2008 riots in Athens, before collapsing in 2009.

The newly-elected government of George Papandreou, grandson of the aforementioned “Papa-what’s his name” of Lyndon B. Johnson fame, delivered Greece’s first austerity agreement and brought the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to Greece. He further has been accused of falsifying Greece’s debt and deficit figures — specifically, inflating them — in order to provide the political and economic impetus to place Greece under international financial oversight.



Protesting more than just a name
People walk between Greek flags ahead of a rally against the use of the term "Macedonia" for the northern neighbouring country's name, at the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Jan. 21, 2018.(AP/Giannis Papanikos)
People walk between Greek flags ahead of a rally against the use of the term “Macedonia” for the northern neighbouring country’s name, at the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Jan. 21, 2018.(AP/Giannis Papanikos)

This brings us to present-day Greece, mired in its ninth year of the economic crisis — with no real end in sight, despite the cheery claims of the SYRIZA-led coalition government that Greece will exit the memorandum agreements later this year and return to a period of economic stability. Such optimism is not reflected on the ground, however, and it was perhaps a matter of time before ordinary Greeks, after a period of dormancy, started to lash out.

Sunday’s rally may have been such a moment. Despite rampant accusations that the rally represented runaway nationalism and fascism, at its heart it could actually be considered as an anti-imperialist rally, at least from the perspective of many attendees — the response of a populace that is finally tired of what it considers to be a political system that is soft on issues of national interest, and of the indignity of being a pawn in the regional chess match of great imperialist and Western powers.

More than this though, the rally also represents an expression of increasing frustration with the economic realities and struggles in Greece today. Speakers at the rally on Sunday did not restrict themselves to the Macedonia name dispute. They also addressed the privatization of national assets, of airports and harbors, by a government that had once promised to put an end to this sell-off. They addressed the economically dubious and environmentally destructive gold mining operations in Skouries (not far from Thessaloniki). And they addressed the home foreclosures and auctions — which are set to increase this year with the seizure even of households’ primary residences and with the introduction of electronic auctions, replacing courthouse auctions that have often been stymied by a well-organized movement that has sought to prevent them.

In short, speakers at Sunday’s rally addressed many of the major concerns on the minds of most Greek citizens today.

It is perhaps for this very reason that the Macedonia name dispute has suddenly returned to the forefront again, after years of being a diplomatic afterthought. As evidenced above, both Greece and FYROM are facing, each in its own way, a great deal of domestic turbulence. Returning a somewhat forgotten, culturally symbolic national issue to the fore can be seen as a great distraction from other, everyday troubles and concerns of ordinary citizens. Not surprisingly, numerous arguments against organizing the mass rally in Thessaloniki have centered on the “need for unity” at a time when the Greek government is “engaged in sensitive negotiations” on “an issue of national importance.”

Just as the Greek parliament is comprised of parties whose positions are, in fact, unrepresentative of Greeks’ attitudes towards the economic crisis and Greece’s continued membership in the Eurozone and the European Union, the same is evident with respect to Greek citizens’ views regarding the Macedonia issue. Though most public opinion polls in Greece should be taken with many grains of salt, as they are conducted by state-funded polling firms and on behalf of oligarch-owned, pro-austerity, pro-EU, and pro-NATO media outlets, several recent polls nevertheless showed wide majorities opposing any Greek compromise on the Macedonia name.

In a survey conducted by polling firm Marc, 68 percent of respondents (including, interestingly, 64 percent of SYRIZA voters) opposed a compromise. A poll conducted by online portal zougla.gr found 79 percent of respondents not in favor of a compromise. And a Metron Analysis poll found that between 77 and 82 percent of respondents opposed various proposed “composite names” for FYROM, such as “North Macedonia” or “New Macedonia,” while 61 percent of respondents favor a national referendum on any deal concerning the naming issue.

Of course, what major Greek and foreign media outlets instead chose to focus on was one single survey, conducted by polling firm Alco on behalf of radio station “Radiofono 24/7,” which found that 63 percent of respondents were in favor of a compromise solution on the Macedonia name dispute. It bears noting here that “Radiofono 24/7” is owned by up-and-coming oligarch Dimitris Maris, who maintains extremely close ties with SYRIZA. His media outlets — which also include online portal news247, the Greek edition of the Huffington Post, the newspaper Dimokratia, and the management of national newspapers Ethnos and Imerisia on behalf of their new owner, Russian-born oligarch Ivan Savvidis, himself close to SYRIZA — are unabashedly favorable towards the current Greek government.

Indeed, Maris’ outlets participated in the political and media blitz against the forthcoming rally in Thessaloniki in other ways as well, with Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras providing a softball interview to Ethnos and Radiofono 24/7 a few days prior to the rally. In this interview, Tsipras warned of the dangers of not reaching an agreement swiftly, justifying this stance by claiming he is “half [Greek] Macedonian.”

In turn, main opposition party New Democracy, currently ahead of SYRIZA in all published public opinion surveys, is said to have “suggested” to members of the party not to appear at Sunday’s rally. Nevertheless, numerous members of New Democracy are said to have been present at the demonstration.

Greek Orthodox Archbishop Ieronimos joined the chorus. After meetings with Tsipras and with the president of the Hellenic Republic, Prokopis Pavlopoulos, Ieronimos stated publicly that “now is the time for national cooperation, not rallies,” while discouraging clerics from participating in Sunday’s rally. Nevertheless, this call went unheeded by many within the church: one local diocese is reported to have sent 60 busloads of parishioners to the rally.

The leader of the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), Dimitris Koutsoumbas, in a radio interview prior to the rally, stated that “there is no need for nationalist rallies” at this time, while longtime member of parliament with the KKE, Liana Kanelli, warned those thinking of attending the rally that if a solution is not reached that is to NATO’s satisfaction, war will follow in the Balkans.

Even smaller, non-parliamentary and purportedly anti-imperialist and anti-austerity parties could not help revealing what may perhaps be their true sympathies. The far-left ANTARSYA, in a statement that carefully avoided any specific reference to Greece’s northern neighbor by any name, denounced the “nationalist” rallies while calling for NATO’s ouster from the Balkans. The president of the United People’s Front (EPAM), Dimitris Kazakis, in a radio interview prior to the rally, announced his position in favor of abstention from the rally — on the grounds that it did not call into question NATO and the EU, even though as it turned out, speakers at the rally did speak against and question austerity, privatizations, and other EU-imposed “measures.”



Rally-goers faced concerted campaign of obstacles and discouragement
Thousands of protesters take part in a rally against the use of the term "Macedonia" for the northern neighboring country's name, at the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Jan. 21, 2018. Over 100,000 Greeks gathered in the northern city of Thessaloniki to demand that the term "Macedonia," the name of the Greek province of which Thessaloniki is the capital, not be used by Greece's northern neighbor known by the same name. (AP/Giannis Papanikos)
Thousands of protesters take part in a rally against the use of the term “Macedonia” for the northern neighboring country’s name, at the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Jan. 21, 2018. Over 100,000 Greeks gathered in the northern city of Thessaloniki to demand that the term “Macedonia,” the name of the Greek province of which Thessaloniki is the capital, not be used by Greece’s northern neighbor known by the same name. (AP/Giannis Papanikos)

It could, in fact, be argued that there was a concerted effort amongst the political and media establishment to prevent the rally or to discourage people from attending. Indeed, leading up to the rally, estimates of its turnout heard on the Greek media were rather low, ranging from 10,000 to 20,000, while potential attendees were also warned of poor, rainy weather, which was forecast for Thessaloniki on Sunday (the rain never materialized).

The obstacles continued even on the day of the rally. Numerous reports on social media from ordinary attendees reported that toll booths on the main highway leading to Thessaloniki that were closest to the city — the state-owned tolls in the Malgara region — were closed early Sunday, leading to tremendous delays. Many buses reportedly reached Thessaloniki later than planned as a result, and many of these buses are said to have been stopped by authorities in Kalohori, a suburb of Thessaloniki five miles from downtown, forcing many participants, including the elderly and disabled, to walk the rest of the way. There were also several reports of cell phone networks being unavailable in downtown Thessaloniki for the duration of the protest. Notably, each of Greece’s three cellular carriers is foreign-owned.

Media coverage of the rallies was also limited. Live coverage was not provided by public broadcaster ERT — which, just a few years earlier in 2013, had organized rallies of its own when it was shuttered by the previous New Democracy-Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) government, with its Thessaloniki studios acting as a hub for such protests for two years until ERT was reopened. Private stations did not provide live coverage either — save for a local, Thessaloniki-based station, Vergina TV, and a very small number of other such local stations throughout Greece, which rebroadcast an internet stream of the rally.



Writing off the rally with simplistic, pejorative labels
Protesters at a rally against the use of the term "Macedonia" for the northern neighboring country's name, at the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Jan. 21, 2018. (AP/Giannis Papanikos)
Protesters at a rally against the use of the term “Macedonia” for the northern neighboring country’s name, at the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Jan. 21, 2018. (AP/Giannis Papanikos)

When all of that did not have a tangible negative impact on the rally, the political and media spin began. SYRIZA condemned the rally, characterizing it in an official statement as “a triumph of fanaticism, nationalism, and intolerance.” Government spokesman Dimitris Tzanakopoulos, in reference to the rally, said that “ethnic paternalism and exceptionalism” harm Greece’s position. Deputy Foreign Minister Yiannis Amanatidis, whose ministry is supposedly negotiating on Greece’s behalf, argued in a Skai TV interview that “140 countries recognize FYROM as ‘Macedonia,’ why not us?”

In turn, Alternate Foreign Minister George Katrougalos, a “constitutional scholar” who in 2011 was an active participant in the major protests against austerity in Greece, stated that those who disagree with a compromise that includes usage of the name “Macedonia” are “extremists and nationalists,” and that it would be a “patriotic solution” to include “Macedonia” in a compromise agreement.

Continuing the chorus, Deputy Defense Minister Dimitris Vitsas deemed the rally “an expression of nationalism,” Transport Minister Christos Spirtzis described the participants in the rally as “crazy far-right wingers,” while Health Minister Pavlos Polakis called the demonstrators “junta nostalgists.” Deputy Minister of Agricultural Development Yiannis Tsironis characterized the rally as “relatively small” and with “no impact” on ongoing negotiations.

Such statements should not come as a surprise. In its pre-government days, numerous members of SYRIZA openly referred to Greece’s northern neighbor as “Macedonia.”

ERT journalist Stelios Nikitopoulos, one of the most prominent figures of the ERT protests, tweeted an invitation to a counter-rally against “nationalism.” Ironically, alongside his many postings decrying the protests as “fascism,” he also tweeted, unquestioningly, the police’s official figure of 90,000 attendees, comparing that figure to the one million said to have attended the 1992 demonstration. In reality, though, aerial photographs of the two rallies show a crowd that is similar to or perhaps even bigger in size this year.

Going one step further, ERT and national privately-owned broadcaster Alpha TV, in their reports on the rally, claimed that it was attended by merely “dozens” of protesters. ERT later claimed this was a “mistake.”

Foreign media aso got into the act. The Washington Post, quick to accuse others (including MintPress News) of serving up “fake news,” vaguely reported that “tens of thousands” attended Sunday’s rally, claiming it did not reach the magnitude of the 1992 rally. The French wire service Agence France Presse (AFP) also largely downplayed the scale of Sunday’s rally, especially compared to 1992, estimating turnout at “over 50,000,” while referring to the aforementioned Alco poll showing a majority in Greece favoring a “compromise,” but excluding other surveys contradicting this result.

AFP also tweeted a map of what it claimed to be the Greek province of Macedonia, which excluded the entire western section of the province but did include the separate province of Thrace, itself the occasional target of expansionist claims from Turkey. Despite corrections being sent or tweeted to AFP from numerous members of the public, the incorrect map remains online.


While, in all, the rally was peaceful and did not get broken up by provocateurs — as is often the case with rallies held in Athens, and particularly outside the Greek parliament — unfortunate incidents did occur. Provocateurs said to be representing far-right groups torched an anarchist squat in Thessaloniki prior to the rally, with no injuries reported. Another group, reportedly anarchists, attacked a bus delivering attendees to the rally, injuring one woman, while another similar group is said to have attacked a bus in Athens that was headed to the rally. A cyclist with Greek flags is also said to have been targeted by alleged anarchists in Thessaloniki prior to the rally. Leading up to the rally, graffiti was sprayed on Thessaloniki’s historic White Tower stating “You are not born Greek, you devolve into one.”



Momentum going forward — looking to February 4 in Athens
Despite all such challenges, turnout at Sunday’s rally was healthy and likely exceeded everyone’s expectations, and particularly those of the government, which now finds itself in a difficult position vis-à-vis the public. Despite its positive economic rhetoric, SYRIZA remains behind in the polls, while the Macedonia rally could be seen to have acted as an informal referendum against the government’s handling of the issue and its apparent willingness to accept what would be viewed as a soft compromise.

Adding to the government’s troubles, the rally’s organizers are now planning a follow-up demonstration, this time to be held in Athens, on February 4. At Sunday’s demonstration, it has been reported that speakers called for the Athens rally to be about more than just the name dispute, but other issues as well, including the government’s recently-passed omnibus bill which projects still further cuts and a new round of privatizations.

Furthermore, SYRIZA’s governing coalition partner, the populist-right Independent Greeks, perhaps seeking to salvage their own tarnished image, have proposed a referendum on the Macedonia issue, a position which is not shared by SYRIZA. This could potentially fracture the fragile coalition, perhaps leading to its collapse and the loss of the government’s parliamentary majority.

Many Greeks are also tired of their country being continuously threatened by its neighbors. At times, Turkish President Tayyip Erdoğan has made expansionist claims on the Greek region of Western Thrace, while Turkish Air Force jets routinely violate Greek airspace, including 141 such flyovers in one day last year. These are not victimless incidents. In 2006, Konstantinos Iliakis, a Greek air force pilot who was attempting to intercept Turkish fighter jets, died in an accident in the Southern Aegean Sea.

Problems also exist with northwestern neighbor Albania, which in 2016 dredged up a decades-old minority-rights issue of the Cham people in Greece, an issue unrecognized by both the UN and the OSCE. Last year, Albanian authorities in the city of Himara expropriated and demolished homes belonging to the city’s Greek minority.

There is also the unresolved Turkish occupation of almost 40 percent of Cyprus, which includes the division of the island’s capital, Nicosia. It’s ironic to hear Erdoğan lashing out at the U.S. decision to relocate its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem when his own military continues to divide the capital city of a sovereign country and EU member-state.

Also ironic are the recent words of Cypriot President Nikos Anastasiades, currently facing a battle for re-election, stating “the name doesn’t matter… [FYROM] can call itself ‘Northern Greece’ if it wishes.” Notably, the occupied northern territory of Cyprus is known as “North Cyprus,” and presently recognized only by Turkey. Anastasiades, in 2004, was a supporter of the United Nations’ “Annan Plan” for “reunification” of the island, which among other things would have maintained a Turkish military presence on the island, and which was rejected by Greek Cypriots in a referendum.

Many Greeks are therefore highly suspicious of the country’s neighbors, and even more so of the intentions of the United States, EU, and NATO and their ambitions in the region. It is feared by many that any compromise allowing FYROM to officially use the term “Macedonia” will simply fuel the expansionist claims of hard-line nationalists and politicians in FYROM, who might seek to “unify” Macedonia as one territory under one flag. Such concerns are not without merit. In June 2017 for instance, chants at a nationalist rally in Skopje claimed that “Thessaloniki is ours.” Such frustrations were channeled in Sunday’s rally in Thessaloniki. Similar claims are made by nationalist Bulgarians, some of whom, in a recent demonstration, accused Greece of “usurping” the name of Macedonia.

Greek authorities and the domestic and international media may choose to brand the protesters, or at least a significant percentage of them, as “fascists,” “nationalists,” “xenophobes” or any number of other epithets, in an attempt to delegitimize them and their concerns. But what is fascist about being leery of U.S. and NATO intentions in the Balkans or opposing the nationalist, expansionist ambitions of a neighboring state?

Symbolically, and in an indication that this is much more than a “far-right” issue, famed composer and cultural icon Mikis Theodorakis — who, despite a checkered political past, is viewed as an icon of the Greek left more broadly, and who is not noted for his fascist tendencies — issued an open letter addressed to the Greek prime minister. In this letter, Theodorakis warned that allowing the usage of the name Macedonia in any form by Greece’s northern neighbor would be “disastrous.”

Following up on this, Theodorakis stated after Sunday’s rally that “we have reached the unfortunate state where we have to apologize for our patriotism.” In previous open letters, Theodorakis has spoken out against the harshness of economic austerity and SYRIZA’s betrayal of its pre-election pledges.

Further illustrating that Sunday’s demonstration — and the belief that Greece should not compromise regarding the Macedonia name — is not an exclusively right-wing issue, is its endorsement by the left-wing Popular Unity political party. Popular Unity, which has positioned itself as an anti-austerity movement and which has also been active in the protests against home foreclosures and seizures, came out in support of the rally from an “alternative and radical perspective,” via its affiliated iskra.gr online portal. Popular Unity leader Panagiotis Lafazanis, in turn, described the rally as “expressing broader concerns” of society.

Theodorakis reflected the sentiment of many ordinary Greeks — who are neither fascists nor supporters of far-right parties, but who are fed up with a decade of economic crisis; with the loss of Greece’s sovereignty and control over the country’s own affairs; and with governments that have rescinded their promises and implemented endless reductions to salaries and pensions, increased taxes, slashed social services, sold off the country’s valuable public assets and utilities to foreign buyers at absurdly low prices, and who are seen as being both soft in negotiations on national issues and arrogantly indifferent towards the popular will. This disregard was evidenced when the SYRIZA-led government overturned the result of the July 2015 referendum that had rejected more EU- and IMF-proposed austerity, and was evident again both before and after Sunday’s rally.

Will the rally serve as a catalyst for broader developments in Greece? February 4, the day of the planned large-scale demonstration in Athens, may provide some answers.

Top Photo | Thousands of protesters take part in a rally against the use of the term “Macedonia” for the northern neighboring country’s name, at the northern Greek city of Thessaloniki, Jan. 21, 2018. Over 100,000 Greeks gathered in the northern city of Thessaloniki to demand that the term “Macedonia,” the name of the Greek province of which Thessaloniki is the capital, not be used by Greece’s northern neighbor known by the same name. (AP/Giannis Papanikos)