Still there 25 years later: The dispute about Macedonia’s name

 

By Biljana Vankovska

Interview with Asahi Shimbun, Tokyo
 

• Do you support the idea of having the accord with Greece over the disputes on the country’s name? If yes/no, please tell us the reason.

It is hard to support an irrational dispute, only because one has a nationalistic idea that the name Macedonia implies irredentism. Apart from that, it is highly asymmetric dispute because Greece has nothing to gain or lose in substantial terms, while the Republic of Macedonia may lose not only its right on self-identification, identity but also to open a Pandora’s box of internal political and ethnic strife.

The dispute has never been only over the name of the state (although a state’s name is a part of its international legal identity). All proposals of Matthew Nimetz has been so-called “ a set of ideas”, containing a range of aspects that directly affect the name of the constituent nation, language, international codes, including the internet domain!

I do not support any change of the constitutional name, because the word “Republic” before “Macedonia” makes the whole difference in the world from the Greek administrative provinces as well as from Alexander’s Empire.
 

• What do you think is the main drive of the current Macedonian government to ease the tension with Greece?

All Macedonian governments have been aware that they are unable/incapable of delivering what the citizens need the most (wellbeing, development, progress, good quality of life, education, public health, etc.) – so the only thing that they could eventually achieve was NATO (and EU) membership on a false pretext that this is going to produce economic growth, foreign investments, and wellbeing.

The current government, in my opinion, owes to the international power-centers its gaining power, so they need to be cooperative even if it goes against the country’s national interests. Unfortunately, the name dispute has now grown into a geopolitical issue, and as such it is of high interest for the US to embrace Macedonia in NATO, at any cost, in order to complete its geopolitical map.
 

• If the two countries reached an accord, what should be done with all the monuments built during the Skopje 2014 project, especially the Warrior on Horse at Macedonian Square? Do you think people would support the removal of the monuments?

The removal of some monuments is a matter of legal, political but also financial estimation. In any case it is not a matter to be resolved on the international or bilateral ground. The whole project has been paid by the tax payers’ money, and it is up to them to decide which part of Skopje 2014 should stay or would be removed.

It is a bit naïve to believe that the though Greek foreign policy stand will soften because of the removal of the Warrior. It could be only a symbolical gesture made by the Macedonian government (at high cost, of course) but it won’t make any decisive influence on the dispute. The warrior and the rest of the Skopje 2014 project is a consequence and not a reason of the dispute.

As for the people, strangely enough, but the Warrior/Alexander as well as the monuments of his father and mother are one of the rare things that bring together Macedonian and Albanian people (they do not argue over Alexander because both sides believe that they may share a bit of the history by his father’s or mother’s side – Olympia was from today’s Epirus, a Greek region populated by Albanians).
 

• If the two countries reach an accord, I understand there would eventually be a referendum held. Do you think people of Macedonia will support the idea of changing the country’s name for the sake of a better relation with a neighboring country?

There has been high level of consensus among the Macedonians not to accept indecent proposal and to exchange their identity for money and/or security promised by NATO.

On the Albanian side, in opposite, the name is something that they would easily give up – because it has no real impact on their identity and ethnic/national interests. A possible referendum would not be constitutional, because there is no constitutional/legal ground for such a move.

Personally, I am against referendum on the name issue, because it will polarize the country, and may even destabilize it due to the lack of confidence in the institutions, electoral administration and the media propaganda.
 

• Do you see any alternative measures other than negotiating with the current Greek government to resolve the country name issue?

Paradoxically enough, the economic exchange, tourism, and other relations between the two states are quite good. It is pity that so much time has been wasted with no substantial confidence-building measures, and second-track diplomacy. The civil society, academia, sportsmen, journalists, intellectuals could have done much good if they were more engaged in building bridges.

Unfortunately, the dispute was given to nationalistic governments on both sides, and they mostly have profited from its existence.

 

• Could you describe what Macedonia has lost by having the trouble with Greece in this 25 years?

In addition to its economic losses during the unilateral embargo imposed by Greece, and the frustrating awaiting at NATO’s door, blockade on its way to EU negotiation process, Macedonia’s progress and democratic transition have suffered a lot.

This problem has become an apple of discord internally, and has served as a fertile ground for nationalism and inter-ethnic divisions. That is, the Albanians get impatient and blame the Macedonians that because of their stubbornness they are unable to join their Albanian brethren in NATO; and also this denial of Macedonian identity not only by Greece but also by Bulgaria gives ‘ammunition’ for Albanian nationalists’ claims that “you, Macedonians are artificial nation, invented by Tito, while we have deep historical roots from the antique Illyrians.”
 

• Considering the country’s path towards the NATO and EU membership, how do you see the U.S. involvement on the issue? How do you analyze on the intention of the regional players, including Russia?

The Republic of Macedonia’s path towards the NATO and EU is a paradoxical one. It reminds one of the plot in the famous Fitzgerald’s novel “The curious case of Benjamin Button”: the closer it gets, the more pressure it suffers on this painful issue!

Instead of bringing stability and progress, the NATO and EU integration process has transformed this issue into a European security problem. The Second Cold War is now about to turn it into a geopolitical issue, while the Republic of Macedonia and its people may become a collateral damage of greater powers’ games.

 

Related Posts

It’s produced by The China Academy in Shanghai and speaks for itself with no need for an introduction.
The issue of state sovereignty under international law and its inconsistencies and duplicities has become more complex than ever, especially after the outbreak of the Ukraine war and the “Ukrainization” of the Taiwan issue (even though Taiwan is not a sovereign state like Ukraine). However, the focus of this analysis is relatively modest: we examine a region of the Western Balkans in which the countries have already (more or less voluntarily) lost or given up their statehood and sovereignty. The concept of the so-called “Western Balkans” (WB) – comprising Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, Kosovo, North Macedonia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina – was concocted in the corridors of power in Brussels and Washington. This artificial sub-region, with its flexible geography and borders, lacks logical coherence. It effectively creates a buffer zone of weak states that are unlikely to ever meet the criteria for EU integration despite being offered European perspectives and hopes. However, these...
1. Israel: The policy’s background As a small country with a tiny population surrounded by large and hostile countries, Israel’s policy ever since its establishment has been to rely on some external forces, the British Empire at the beginning of its creation and later on the American superpower to protect herself. It has also involved the creation of a nuclear arsenal in contravention of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (the NPT) and by means of lies and deception, while being the most vociferous opponent of any other country in the Middle East to even have a peaceful nuclear programme for producing energy. Another aspect of this policy of self-preservation has been to divide and partition the neighbouring countries so that they would lose their advantage of larger size and greater population vis-à-vis Israel. As early as 1982, the Israeli scholar Oded Yinon authored an essay called “A Strategy for Israel in the...

Recent Articles

Photo above: Carl Fredrik Reuterswärd’s Non-Violence outside UN Headquarters in New York. Kirill Levin, CC BY-NC-SA 2. Jan Oberg November 3, 2026 I am happy to be published in Horizons which is produced by the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development, CIRSD, in Belgrade. My contribution brings out a radical re-thinking of what concepts such as defence, security, deterrence – and peace – may mean if we want to create a more peaceful world. It also summarises a few things I have been working with the last few decades. Please read it here Og her er den på dansk, takket være Johnny Baltzersens lynhurtige oversættelse
UNITE-tillid, DREAM-velstand og andre konstruktive komponenter Normally we publish articles in English here. But this is a translation of a very important TFF document that should reach as many as possible in Denmark since this country’s government has been one of the most hardline in Europe and, up till now at least, has refused to use diplomacy and, instead, spent tremendous sums on arming Ukraine with the express goal of defeating Russia. Thus this – unique – article is in Danish. Vi er Johnny Baltzersen og hans Fælles Sikkerhed – Fælles Fremtid på Substack overmåde taknemmelige for at have oversat og publiceret TFF’s 2025-portfølje for fredsidéer med henblik på Ukraines fremtid. Vi håber den nu kan nå mange flere danskere – som også vil sprede den og skabe debat – nu den danske regerings og folketingspartiernes politik på dette område siden 2022 står nu – forudsigeligt – ved vejs ende....
Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Photo above: Carl Fredrik Reuterswärd’s Non-Violence outside UN Headquarters in New York. Kirill Levin, CC BY-NC-SA 2. Jan Oberg November 3, 2026 I am happy to be published in Horizons which is produced by the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development, CIRSD, in Belgrade. My contribution brings out a radical re-thinking of what concepts such as defence, security, deterrence – and peace – may mean if we want to create a more peaceful world. It also summarises a few things I have been working with the last few decades. Please read it here Og her er den på dansk, takket være Johnny Baltzersens lynhurtige oversættelse
UNITE-tillid, DREAM-velstand og andre konstruktive komponenter Normally we publish articles in English here. But this is a translation of a very important TFF document that should reach as many as possible in Denmark since this country’s government has been one of the most hardline in Europe and, up till now at least, has refused to use diplomacy and, instead, spent tremendous sums on arming Ukraine with the express goal of defeating Russia. Thus this – unique – article is in Danish. Vi er Johnny Baltzersen og hans Fælles Sikkerhed – Fælles Fremtid på Substack overmåde taknemmelige for at have oversat og publiceret TFF’s 2025-portfølje for fredsidéer med henblik på Ukraines fremtid. Vi håber den nu kan nå mange flere danskere – som også vil sprede den og skabe debat – nu den danske regerings og folketingspartiernes politik på dette område siden 2022 står nu – forudsigeligt – ved vejs ende....
Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....
Read More
knotted gun
Photo above: Carl Fredrik Reuterswärd’s Non-Violence outside UN Headquarters in New York. Kirill Levin, CC BY-NC-SA 2. Jan Oberg November 3, 2026 I am happy to be published in Horizons which is produced by the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development, CIRSD, in Belgrade. My contribution brings out a radical re-thinking of what concepts such as defence, security, deterrence – and peace – may mean if we want to create a more peaceful world. It also summarises a few things I have been working with the last few decades. Please read it here Og her er den på dansk, takket være Johnny Baltzersens lynhurtige oversættelse
TFFPortfolioVign
UNITE-tillid, DREAM-velstand og andre konstruktive komponenter Normally we publish articles in English here. But this is a translation of a very important TFF document that should reach as many as possible in Denmark since this country’s government has been one of the most hardline in Europe and, up till now at least, has refused to use diplomacy and, instead, spent tremendous sums on arming Ukraine with the express goal of defeating Russia. Thus this – unique – article is in Danish. Vi er Johnny Baltzersen og hans Fælles Sikkerhed – Fælles Fremtid på Substack overmåde taknemmelige for at have oversat og publiceret TFF’s 2025-portfølje for fredsidéer med henblik på Ukraines fremtid. Vi håber den nu kan nå mange flere danskere – som også vil sprede den og skabe debat – nu den danske regerings og folketingspartiernes politik på dette område siden 2022 står nu – forudsigeligt – ved vejs ende....
JoGSS-Silent
Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....
Screenshot 2026-10-26 115647
An aspect of Iran’s culture and civilisation you’ve probably never heard about. Don’t be surprised if the US and Israel also try to bomb them. Jan ObergTFF director October 26, 2026 Today – under the “USraeli” threat of new “annihilating” bombings – opens the 7th International Conference on Peace and Conflict Resolution at Tehran’s University. As far as I can tell, this is the only permanent, advanced peace research institution in West Asia/the Middle East. Perhaps more countries in that region could be inspired? I mean, how many military “security” institutes and military academies do they have? Many peace research institutes and university departments have been established since the 1950s in the West. They are now all under attack; some have closed down, some have gone mainstream, yet others kept the name but do nothing to research peace and disseminate results or advice; instead, they cooperate with militarism’s platforms such...
Screenshot 2026-10-15 141837
Let’s discuss using AI to create peace – in contrast to boring geopolitics devoid of creative healing and visions. Jan Oberg TFF director October 15, 2026 I asked VEED to create a short video exemplifying how peace is preferable to war, then chose the lady as a template. Simple as that. In less than a minute, it produced this video, which any peace-loving person would appreciate. The only problem is that human intelligence (HI), at least the one that exists among Western decision-makers, isn’t half as moral or smart as AI. I have used AI to dialogue about peace and peace plans, creative conflict resolution and visions of a better future for humankind. It so happens that I am having more stimulating, intelligent, creative and moral discussions with AI than I could possibly have with any EU or NATO leader today. Yes, AI has very problematic and dangerous aspects; used...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...