WHO IS SOWING DISCONTENT IN MACEDONIA

AIM, BELGRADE, JUNE 22, 1994

Summary: Is bickering about the Macedonian border with the FR of Yugoslavia only testing of the opponent or an introduction into another frenzy, like the Bosnian? Serbian soldiers occupied an elevation point at the border which FRY considers to be disputable, and administrative. Due to the "Serbian aggression", Macedonian press sharply criticized the patient and restrained Skopje administration of Kiro Gligorov. Yugoslavia reacted by a statement, which does not deny that the disputable borderpoints changed "owners", but which does not destroy the possibility to solve the issue peacefully either, because it stresses that it wishes normalization of relations with the FYROM.

An antiwar, antinationalistic, democratic solution implies acceptance of the reality supported by the United Nations, with special engagement of the USA: international recognition of the sovereignty of the independent Macedonian state. And this, by definition,excludes all nationalistic ambitions and projects, from "Southern Serbia" which Serbian ultranationalism still refuses to abandon, to the separatist illusion about "Greater Albania", which is unfeasible without a violent dissolution of the independent Macedonia.

AIM. BELGRADE, June 24, 1994

Just like in the Scriptures, in former Yugoslavia, in the beginning (to be more precise, before its dissolution), there was word. Sharp at first, then frantic, like a war cry. And then, as we all know, war broke out, which, according to its results, reminds of the biblical Flood. The end of the war is still not even in sight. Now, in another part of the same, former joint state, the same forces and intentions seem to be appearing. Who is stirring them up and to what end? Despite the exorbitant experience, shall we seek who is guilty for it around the world?

We can, of course, still hope that the latest verbal explosives, this time "closer to home", i.e. to Serbia (FR of Yugoslavia) are just a bad dream. That the worst will not happen. But how can we, after everything that has brought us to humilitation and hopelessness, be sure that the "movie" we have already seen just before the disastrous armed violence in Croatia and Bosnia is not being repeated? The issue here is, of course, the "bickering" about the still unofficial, for official Belgrade, the "administrative" and, therefrom, disputable borderline with Macedonia. Especially, about the "Guards" near Kriva Palanka.

All the events would have been less significant or less dangerous, had the snowball not started to roll at the time the southern former Yugoslav Republic was preparing for the too many times postponed and policically extremely delicate census, aimed to force interethnic issues abused by petty politicians in Macedonia into the open. Namely, the objective of the census controlled by international observers is actually to give the lie to all the leaders who are complaining that each and every of their respective "people" is more numerous than the state where they live claims and that they must be given additional rights and possibilities accordingly.

In the meantime, several days before the beginning of the census, if one should trust journalists' reports, "a close contact" occurred in the village of Molotin, which a "Serbian patrol" was allegedly thrown out of. During this "risky operation", as the correspondent of "Borba" daily reported from Skopje, soldiers of both parties had their weapons ready to fire. There could have been shooting. Fortunately, there was not any. But, who knows what might happen if this sort of "testing" of the military continues? Demagogically stirred up passions, especially the nationalistic ones may slip out of control even of those who wish to use them for limited interests.

These were, in any case, signals for alarm which were later greatly built up by a part of Skopje media qualifying unilateral displacement of the borderline as "aggression of the Serbian army". This time, state administration in Skopje gathered around the experienced and skilfull Kiro Gligorov which was on similar occasions usually very patient and considerate, was subject to sharp criticism. It suffered a severe political blow from the commentator of the leading daily "Nova Makedonija" which listed "ignoring" military pressure exerted by the northern neighbouring state among its sins.

As could be expected, a corresponding rhetoric dramatization on the Serbian side followed. Even the daily "Politika" (in its June 20 issue) felt the urge to anathematize the "monstrous and frenzied anti-Yugoslav campaign" shifting responsibility to the media in Skopje. A day later, on June 21, federal diplomacy in Belgrade also made a statement "establishing with concern escalation of accusations made by the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYRM) against the Army of Yugoslavia" assessing them as "completely unfounded and unacceptable".

Is that all? Well, not exactly. Belgrade does not deny, at least not explicitly, that some disputable border points changed "owners"; in other words, that what Macedonian authorities interpret as forceful occupation of parts of its territory actually happened. Foreign Ministry of the FRY calmly concludes instead that the Army of Yugoslavia, "as far back as June 1992 occupied, and guards ever since, the territory of the FRY towards the FRYOM to the borderline of municipalities which, according to land registers, belong to the FR of Yugoslavia".

And what now?

Although border provocations evoke worst presentiments, it might still not be too late to prevent uncontrolled plunging into new adventures, with just a muinimum of good will on both sides. Such a retreat seems to be recommended in the second part of the Belgrade diplomatic statement, which says that the "policy of the FRY is based on mutual respect of territorial integrity and sovereignty, and in respect to the FYROM, on the interest in normalization of relations and renewal of cut links and interrupted cooperation..."

It sounds obliging. Will it really be like that, remains to be seen, probably, quite soon. That it is is sincerely meant could, for instance, be confirmed by giving up unrealistic conditions for normalization of inter-state relations. It would be the right step towards gradual, lasting pacifying of relations and neighbourly coexistance, vitally important for both Belgrade and Skopje. If nothing else, then because both parties, if one may say so, are subject to the logic of a related historical and geopolitical destiny.

As matters stand now, both Serbia and Macedonia could survive the shipwreck of former Yugoslavia and prepare for European and world development integration solely as multiethnic communities. All forms of "national homogenization" suited to the taste of nationalistic extremism only, would lead both to destruction. And vice versa: consistent respect of rights of all citizens in each of them would alleviate mutual coordination and would make them resistant to external pressures.

Uncertainty will, most probably, last, at least until illusion is differentiated from reality. Once dust settles down, it will at least become clear what has actually changed for the worse at the disputable borderpoint and around it, and what is the result of tactics on the part of one or the other party (or perhaps both?) which need not oblige neither Belgrade nor Skopje.

And, finally, the most important thing. Antiwar, i.e. anti-nationalistic, democratic solution implies irrevocable acceptance of the reality supported by the United Nations with special engagement of the US: international recognition of sovereignty of the independent Macedonian state. And this, by definition excludes all nationalistic ambitions and projects: from the idea of Macedonia being "Southern Serbia" which the Serbian nationalistic ultra-nationalists still refuse to give up, to separatist visions of "Great Albania" unfeasible without forceful destruction of independent Macedonia under pressure of chauvinist ideologists and megalomaniacs around it.

ALEKSANDAR NENADOVIC