Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Solution to the Balkan crisis?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 8>
Author
Anton View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 23-Jun-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2888
  Quote Anton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Solution to the Balkan crisis?
    Posted: 13-Feb-2008 at 19:15
Originally posted by Ponce de Leon


Second, ban the use of flags.
 
In the toilet? Smile
.
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813
  Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2008 at 19:33
LOL


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2008 at 20:14
Originally posted by Flipper

Originally posted by es_bih

Besides didn't Greek athetes protest and attempt to boycot events where Phillip wanted to participate in on the account that they deemed him a barbarian? 


Why don't you check out the 16 pages thread containing all the answers to your questions?

1. It was not Philip. It was his ancestor Alexander I.
2. Some people protested, like they always did when they received strong competition. That is why they had the Hellenodikai, a jury examining the right of an athlete to participate in the Olympics, where only Hellenes could participate.
3. There was no doubt about Alexanders I heritage and he participated.

May I ask you to post such questions, on the other thread, if you believe they haven't been answered already there?

http://allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=15134


But see, it is a simple name issue... if you view it as such you would not have this conflict, because as I have posted earlier I agree with some of what you say as well, and I am looking at this from a purely neutral perspective, too. The name is that a name. Bar Russians, Serbs, and half the rest of the world from using Greek names too then... do you see what path we are traveling now when we assume ownership of names or a region that is Macedonia now, there are Greek parts of Macedonia as well are there not, call them that in retaliation. Nevertheless, do not tell me scholarly arguments that have no corelation with politics. They are valid if they are backed up by sources and credible ones at that that is great and well, and that can be used as a medium to bring out a middle ground in historiagraphy. Nevertheless, we have to look at the political scope of things that we are looking at here. Macedonia can call itself that if it chooses too it is a natural right, and it should do so. Greece should accept that and suck it up. That does not make either side right or wrong. Its just a name. The history of the name is and should remain relegated to cultural, and to historical-academic discussions, including sites like this, not this post however since it is about the political aspect.


You keep persisting on pointing out academics when academics and a country's name should not be corelated. Nor have much in common. Academics are one thing where contesting fabolous claims should be done. A country's name however should not be intertwined in this at all from either side.

Yes Macedonians have formulated some rather precarious posts that are not in the realm of authetnic academics, but Greeks do as well. Fact is that that region had been called that, it may be called that again now, its for the people there to decide, as far as who is exclusively owning the rights to that heritage or if it is shared, or anything related to that should be relegated outside of politics.


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2008 at 20:17
I will post in the other thread too when I find some more time. Not ignorant at all, nor do I have a preference for either side's claims. Just hoping common sense becomes more common in the Balkans and the region stops quarreling and progresses.
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813
  Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2008 at 20:24
Es Bin...
You said it yourself. We should ban all the world for names if the case was such. From that you should yourself conclude it is not that much the name actually. It is much more. That is my point from the start.

As for the academic side...I only use international academics for a refference Smile. Not just the brittish and americans, but others as well. Besides, the best thing is to be able to locate the original source, present it as a whole (and not selectively) and find cross references. That's the fun part with history. For me at least.


Edited by Flipper - 13-Feb-2008 at 20:36


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2008 at 20:34
Originally posted by Flipper

Es Bin...
You said it yourself. We should ban all the world for names if the case was such. From that you should yourself conclude it is not that much the name actually. It is much more. That is my point from the start.

As for the academic side...I only use international academics for a refference Smile. Not just the brittish and americans, but others as well.


?
No, we should let people call themselves as they please. I have no right to deem what someone else may either feel like or feel to call themselves.



2nd. Yes my point exactly. The academic world should not bicker about the right or wrong use of a country's name. However, it should bicker about the right or wrong thesis and statements made in case of Macedonian heritage.


Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813
  Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Feb-2008 at 20:41
Originally posted by es_bih


?
No, we should let people call themselves as they please. I have no right to deem what someone else may either feel like or feel to call themselves.


As long as that is being done in a respectfull manner. Your pleasure might be someone elses unpleasure. I have repeated that so many times now. Basic principles of human relations.

Besides, what is more important? A) Mutual respect, b) Free will or c) a combination of both?

I go with C. What about you?

Originally posted by es_bih


2nd. Yes my point exactly. The academic world should not bicker about the right or wrong use of a country's name. However, it should bicker about the right or wrong thesis and statements made in case of Macedonian heritage.


I agree with that fully. Therefore, i collect all descent material on that matter and not parrot things written 70-100 years ago, presenting it as the correct thesis in year 2008.


Edited by Flipper - 13-Feb-2008 at 20:42


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613
  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 12:42
Originally posted by es_bih

Originally posted by Spartakus

The problem with FYROM or RM, is not the name really, it's their claim that they are the only inheritors and ancestors of Ancient Macedonians. The fact that they do not want to change their name..for example make it Slavic Macedonia or Slavo-Macedonia etc only shows their wish to claim a past which is not theirs. And we all know the importance of names in the Balkans, because names, that is identities, are the beginning and the object of propaganda.
Slavic Macedonia Ouch, What's next then, Anglic Washington, Germano-Irish-Polish Chicago, Confused
It's a name actually thats at issue, they could just say ok you can use it, however, we will discuss this issue of "sole" or "shared" ownership on an intellectual level, not on a political where it has no place whatsoever.
But by being simply being the 'Macedonia' or the 'Macedonian' with no other reference infers they are solely, uniquely and exclusively that. Greece wants a qualifier included so it is clear to everyone and more importantly to FYROM that they are a "Macedonian' or the country is the  '*** republic of Macedonia', that is 'a republic of Macedonia'. A very important subtlety that will be the minimum Greece demands.

This is a revised and compromised position, quite reasonable, that allows two countries to move along with the same name intact, but with no total or clear claim. However this is also rejected out right by FYROM who has now moved clearly over to the uncompromising stance, much to the frustration of its US sponsor. Hence why i find it frustrating that Greece gets accused of immaturity, its saying that the label must be used in a way that is not exclusive and is clearly inclusive. Diplomatically, Greece has now claimed enough of the moderate ground to stay where it is with out too much pressure, while FYROM is in the very tough corner with (much needed) EU/NATO membership on hold and a population now convinced of this 'birth right' over their neighbors. Excessive and wrong propganda has now come back to roost.

Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613
  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 12:53
Originally posted by Anton

This is completely wrong statement! There are plenty of different minorities living in other European states without any conflicts and territorial claims. Balkan solution will come only when people like you change your point of view. What do you suggest? Population exchange? Plenty of people won't go from places they live for centuries. Changes of borders? Typical reason for conflicts. As an Albanian -- will you agree to get rid of territories inhabited by Greek, Vlach, Slavonic and Roma speaking population?  What are you going to do with the later? Suggest them to create their own state? Where?
i agree, we cant not make clean borders in that part of the world and we cant just keep on splitting up into even weaker and less solvent statelets. Also none of the countries can handle huge populations movements. i think the countries just have to learn to emphasis citizenship, open the borders, respect their minorities and each others turf. I may add that some of the borders could of been drawn better, but it seems that the west does it for us anyway.

...and yes Hero would you hand over parts of your south for parts of FYROM? such logic cuts both ways, though Albania would benefit the most from border revisions based on language... so i guess you wouldn't complain to muchWink


Back to Top
Theodore Felix View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 10-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 769
  Quote Theodore Felix Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 16:42
As an Albanian -- will you agree to get rid of territories inhabited by Greek, Vlach, Slavonic and Roma speaking population? What are you going to do with the later? Suggest them to create their own state? Where?


That wouldnt be feasable since in all cases the minorities in Albania are in entirely mixed areas. So, for instance, you have Himara(I think in time Himara will be re-assimilated into the Albanian sphere, the problem being that Alb administration ignores it) that considers itself Greek, next to it are a vast number of Albanian speaking villages(ex: Lazarati). In the further south you have Greek speaking villages such as Dropulli next to the Muslim dominated Konispol. Also, minorities fail to have any real significance in the urban life, where Albanian(especially Muslim ones) dominate. The area with the most amount of Vlachs(near Korca) is entirely Albanian dominated while the Vlachs themselves are a complete mess in terms of social cohesion(most not being able to speak a word of the language and are fully assimilated into Albanian, while others consider themselves Greek, another set Romanian etc.). The Slavs also do not have any real center. The Bulgarian minority is dispersed around the Ohrid area while the Serb/Montenegrins can barely hold on to the single village they have left while the Muslim Slavs are almost entirely assimilated into the urban sphere.

So in all cases, if the border revisions were made, Albania would lose, at best, a few villages in the complete south. Most other areas could not separate since Albanians hold strategic areas near them.

Nevertheless, destroying FYROM at this time is inconceivable and would not never be allowed by the EU, so my message to the Albs there is just: push for all the rights that you can conceive of, but realize the reality. And to all the Balkans: Get used to the world we are in now, it aint changing.

The only real problem I cant see a solution to is Bosnia, which, considering that its even more divided now, will not be solved anytime soon.

Albanians could practice virtual independence while Serbs could see a map with Kosovo as part of Serbia and make sure that their religious centers in Kosovo are preserved.


I personally dont believe in appeasement and in simply satisfying the national rhetoric of a given nations simply so as to "keep everyone quiet". Your just giving us the Serbian view of it all while failing to account for the fact that the need to "see a map with Kosovo as part of Serbia" was the reason for the bloodshed there since 1912.

You are giving me the view of a Bosnian who wants to see his fledgling nation survive. I see this talk of "micronations" as simply that, your hope that Bosnia can stay united. My interest is against unified entities and more on divided nation-states. We both have our own interests, playing the "righteous" game simply will not work.

Edited by Theodore Felix - 14-Feb-2008 at 17:01
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:10
Originally posted by Leonidas

Originally posted by es_bih

Originally posted by Spartakus

The problem with FYROM or RM, is not the name really, it's their claim that they are the only inheritors and ancestors of Ancient Macedonians. The fact that they do not want to change their name..for example make it Slavic Macedonia or Slavo-Macedonia etc only shows their wish to claim a past which is not theirs. And we all know the importance of names in the Balkans, because names, that is identities, are the beginning and the object of propaganda.
Slavic Macedonia Ouch, What's next then, Anglic Washington, Germano-Irish-Polish Chicago, Confused
It's a name actually thats at issue, they could just say ok you can use it, however, we will discuss this issue of "sole" or "shared" ownership on an intellectual level, not on a political where it has no place whatsoever.
But by being simply being the 'Macedonia' or the 'Macedonian' with no other reference infers they are solely, uniquely and exclusively that. Greece wants a qualifier included so it is clear to everyone and more importantly to FYROM that they are a "Macedonian' or the country is the  '*** republic of Macedonia', that is 'a republic of Macedonia'. A very important subtlety that will be the minimum Greece demands.

This is a revised and compromised position, quite reasonable, that allows two countries to move along with the same name intact, but with no total or clear claim. However this is also rejected out right by FYROM who has now moved clearly over to the uncompromising stance, much to the frustration of its US sponsor. Hence why i find it frustrating that Greece gets accused of immaturity, its saying that the label must be used in a way that is not exclusive and is clearly inclusive. Diplomatically, Greece has now claimed enough of the moderate ground to stay where it is with out too much pressure, while FYROM is in the very tough corner with (much needed) EU/NATO membership on hold and a population now convinced of this 'birth right' over their neighbors. Excessive and wrong propganda has now come back to roost.



I am sorry but that stance sounds childish to me. Republic of Macedonia, Macedonian Republic neither actually truly denote that they are the sole Macedonia. Just by using simple logic one can note that is not the case.

If it were The Sole Republic of Macedonia, the Sole Macedonian Republic, the True Macedonia, etc... then it would actually logically denote a single Macedonia.

Should we call Istanbul the Former Constantinopolitian city of Istanbul? The former part of the Roman Empire's province of Italia the republic of Italy?

If they do not use a sole, or single, or anything that actually denotes that then it is not the only one. Greece has the right to rename itself Macedonia too by all means if it feels that its rights are being threatened.

or the Macedono-Hellenic republic.


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:15
Originally posted by Flipper



I go with C. What about you?


I got with c too of course. Neither extreme is very productive. However, calling it Macedonia is feasible to me, if they renamed it to the "Single nation of Macedonia" "The True Macedonia" etc... then that creates a problem of authenticity. Simply Macedonia does not contain any logical operator that would make it specifically mean the Sole. Calling it FYROM is silly to me. I know it is the former republic of Yugoslavia, however now in the present tense it is stil Macedonia, without being in Yu anymore. I don't need a quick history lesson when I read a country's name either. Forcing them to call it that too is not feasible as it is not in line with C.




Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2091
  Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:16
Originally posted by es_bih

Ako its being used relatively to other countries and other situations of name changes etc... not about the topic that is blacklisted.


 
Not the case at all, es bih; at least not in the way you were discussing it. The point is now purely academic, however, as the topic has justly been moved to the minefield.
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:26
Originally posted by Theodore Felix



I personally dont believe in appeasement and in simply satisfying the national rhetoric of a given nations simply so as to "keep everyone quiet". Your just giving us the Serbian view of it all while failing to account for the fact that the need to "see a map with Kosovo as part of Serbia" was the reason for the bloodshed there since 1912.

You are giving me the view of a Bosnian who wants to see his fledgling nation survive. I see this talk of "micronations" as simply that, your hope that Bosnia can stay united. My interest is against unified entities and more on divided nation-states. We both have our own interests, playing the "righteous" game simply will not work.


Which one am I giving you now the Serbian view or the Bosnian view, or am I giving you a neutral perspective. I have discussed this issue with others and I have come up with my own view. You can adress Yugoslav who participates in this forum and will get confirmation that I have no higher schemes in saying this.

The fact is that it is not such a easily solvable problem. You can't appease either site fully for it will leave the other empty handed. The Serbs have a viable reason to want to preserve some sort of soverignty even it if is only virtual to make sure that they have access to their religious sites and that they are within some sort of border.

The Albanians have a viable want to seperate, they have been mistreated, and the constitution, which had been drafted by Tito allowed them freedom to maintain their cultural and ethnic reality within the borders of Yugoslavia.

You also have political realities. It has been within Serbia for the last century in one form or another. It has never really been a part of Albania. Albanians have lived there for centures alongside Serbs.

You are not for appeasement? Then the other side can say, well then the talks are over it is ours and you have no other choice, becuase you know that means they can say that they are not for appeasement either.

Bosnia itself has nothing to do with this. I am not even sure what the official stance of the Bosnian government is on this issue. Yes there is political unrest in Bosnia, that is not due to any historical reality, that is due to a Failed Dayton Accord that created makeshift boundaries where they did not exist ever in history. They created a problem by not wanting to implement a strong national government.

Bosnia will not split because it has historically been united in one form or another no matter the outcome of Kosovo, so that is not my issue here. Even if that were the case it would not be within my parameters to actually stop any of it by voicing my opinion. So in any case you can rest assured that my opinion is my opinion not constructed by wishful thinking because that would not be sound nor logical since I cannot change anything myself with my opinion.

I don't like the Electoral College either, saying it should be abandoned won't make it so, if it were in a political specturm I would voice my strong opinion against it. If it is asked in a forum I will. However, if it means that someone I want will get elected because it is abolished will not change the fact that it will not so even if I were in support of it but wanted to abolish it for that reason that would not be sound and I would not be on here spouting some sort of wishful thinking. If you ask me if I think it should exist or not, I will tell you my real opinon, not something based on an ulterior motive.


Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813
  Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:28
Originally posted by es_bih


I got with c too of course. Neither extreme is very productive. However, calling it Macedonia is feasible to me, if they renamed it to the "Single nation of Macedonia" "The True Macedonia" etc... then that creates a problem of authenticity. Simply Macedonia does not contain any logical operator that would make it specifically mean the Sole. Calling it FYROM is silly to me. I know it is the former republic of Yugoslavia, however now in the present tense it is stil Macedonia, without being in Yu anymore. I don't need a quick history lesson when I read a country's name either. Forcing them to call it that too is not feasible as it is not in line with C.


Well, i personaly don't suggest FYROM, but that was never stated here. I don't agree with the plain name either. However, Slavomacedonia, Nova Macedonia or something discribing accompanied by that name is cool by me. As I told you I don't mind the name that much as the motives and behaviour. If there was a clean past over that issue, sure i wouldn't hesitate that much.


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:34
Actually I am against micro states because I believe that they are not the solution to our problems. And we can see how you are for nation states but will not give up Albanian land. Laughable. If you are for that then you will accept the movement of Albanians into newly aquired land and letting those parts with Greek populations, etc go. That stance would only cause more bloodshed not solve it.

A sense of citizen ship and a sense of a general Balkan unity and will to co-operate will solve more things than that.

PS: If I had the choice between a Yugoslavia or 6 independent republics, I would choose the former not the latter Wink.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:35
Originally posted by Flipper

Originally posted by es_bih


I got with c too of course. Neither extreme is very productive. However, calling it Macedonia is feasible to me, if they renamed it to the "Single nation of Macedonia" "The True Macedonia" etc... then that creates a problem of authenticity. Simply Macedonia does not contain any logical operator that would make it specifically mean the Sole. Calling it FYROM is silly to me. I know it is the former republic of Yugoslavia, however now in the present tense it is stil Macedonia, without being in Yu anymore. I don't need a quick history lesson when I read a country's name either. Forcing them to call it that too is not feasible as it is not in line with C.


Well, i personaly don't suggest FYROM, but that was never stated here. I don't agree with the plain name either. However, Slavomacedonia, Nova Macedonia or something discribing accompanied by that name is cool by me. As I told you I don't mind the name that much as the motives and behaviour. If there was a clean past over that issue, sure i wouldn't hesitate that much.


Nova Macedonia could work... Slavo could not, they are not all slavs, nor is Slav the only group in its gene pool, it is the main language group however.


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:36
Originally posted by Akolouthos

Originally posted by es_bih

Ako its being used relatively to other countries and other situations of name changes etc... not about the topic that is blacklisted.


 
Not the case at all, es bih; at least not in the way you were discussing it. The point is now purely academic, however, as the topic has justly been moved to the minefield.
 
-Akolouthos


Then I apologize, my intentions were neither to start a blacklisted discussion nor to instigate one. My intentions are on the use of the name, and what a proper course of action would be that would solve the issue.
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813
  Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 19:37
I know that the Slavo term would be a problem for the Albanians. On the other side, the Albanians don't care much about the name issue, since their problems are different. For them a part of the area is Illyria. You know the story that follows.


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Theodore Felix View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 10-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 769
  Quote Theodore Felix Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Feb-2008 at 22:31

Which one am I giving you now the Serbian view or the Bosnian view, or am I giving you a neutral perspective.


None of us are neutral. You know that as well as I.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 23456 8>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.