I SAW IT COMING--IT WAS EASY TO SEE IT

Yup. The screaming over Greece defending its position on the name "Macedonia" has begun, led (sadly) by my venerable New York Times. Contrary to popular Greek opinion, the Times is usually fair: its has supported Greece on many issues and criticized her (sometimes rightly, sometimes not) on others. Its the same with Turkey: sometimes the Times smacks Ankara in one cheek and sometimes it kisses another one.

Here is my response. Do you think they'll publish it? I don't care. I'M GOING TO GREECE TODAY! (So why am I sending this to them at 2 AM?) YIASAS!!!


Greetings. The issue of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) is complex. It’s the kind of issue that makes me pay $1.25 to the Times for enlightenment. How disappointing to read your shrill and shallow editorial: Shame On Greece: Messing With Macedonia

Few non-Greeks seem to understand what Greece is upset about (that’s the fault of successive Greek governments). In a nutshell, it is about IDENTITY, as vital an issue for a group or a nation as it is or an individual. Identity is who we are: our past, present and future. When Tito hijacked the name of the ancient Macedonians for part of his state it was an affront that Greece was forced to endure due to Cold War politics.
The Macedonians were a Greek tribe speaking a Greek dialect according to virtually all literary and archaeological evidence. They produced Aristotle (perhaps the second greatest Greek mind) and Alexander --arguably the greatest Greek.

The main Greek point is that since the peaceful settlement of disputes is a core principle of the NATO alliance, NATO and the EU should give heightened scrutiny to the application of a state that is not willing to compromise to resolve a dispute with its closest neighbor. Greece does not deserve censure for threatening to veto FYROM’s NATO application. Athens has for years worked hard to negotiate a compromise name –Upper or New Macedonia might be the solution. Even tiny states must display the common ethical and practical sense that one cannot have 100% of what one wants.