Macedonians on both sides of the argument have made a mess of their debate over the country’s name change. Prime Minister Zoran Zaev held a nonbinding referendum at the weekend in which the question was whether or not the country should alter its name to “North Macedonia”. More than 90 percent of those who voted backed the idea. However, only a third of eligible voters took part in the referendum, which, it is being said, renders the result invalid.
The reason for the low turnout appeared to be a call for a boycott from opposition parties. However, if those against that name change have now done their math, even allowing for the indifference of a section of the electorate, they may be concluding that had they campaigned for a “No” vote, the abstentions and the minority of those who actually voted “No”, could have produced a firm rejection of the proposition.
As it is, Zaev is now taking the issue to his parliament where he hopes legislators will endorse the referendum result. At that point, thanks to a deal he signed in June with Greek premier Alexis Tsipras, it will require a vote in the Greek parliament in Athens before the name can be adopted officially.
All this of course has come about because of Greek nationalist protests, since Macedonia achieved its independence from the former Yugoslavia, that it could not share the name “Macedonia” with the eponymous northern Greek province. The arguments were that this posed an effective claim to Greek territory and besides usurped the proud Hellenic historical heritage of Philip II of Macedon and his all conquering son, Alexander the Great. The first seems absurd and the second is arguably bunkum since, thanks to Slav conquest and occupation, there is little pure Hellenic blood running in the veins of modern Greeks.
The lever that Athens has used to force the Macedonian government in Skopje to consider renaming their country has been the former Yugoslav republic’s desire to join the European Union and possibly also NATO, to both of which Greece belongs. There can be little doubt that Moscow would not want another country to become part of what it sees as the threatening NATO alliance. Russian interference in the weekend referendum is widely suspected. However, if true, it must be said that it has not thus far been particularly effective.
And while Zaev and the Macedonian political establishment may be dreaming of joining the supranational EU, throughout the continent there is a rise of nationalism. Of itself, pride in a country, its history, culture and achievements is entirely understandable. Unfortunately, those sentiments are currently being exploited by racists and Islamophobic bigots. The moot point is the extent to which ordinary, decent Europeans are becoming increasingly disenchanted with largely unaccountable rule from Brussels. Their response is to look to their patriotism and urge greater freedom from EU rule with its vision of a single European state that subsumes the all national identities. The Balkans, more than any other part of the continent, is a minefield of ethnic and national animosities. Zaev may be hoping that safely within the EU establishment, Macedonia can be spared the impact of these rivalries. Recent evidence suggests the complete reverse may be true. Indeed, it seems very likely that he will find himself swimming against a rising tide of nationalism.
