| |
BIAS AGAINST THE TRUTH IN AN ACADEMIC COMMUNITY
(By Nina Gatzoulis –
Secretary of Pan-Macedonian Association)
In the following article the events take place in two different symposia
of the same academic community in two different dates. The Executive Council,
as well as members of Pan-Macedonian Association were present during both
occasions.
The
first symposium, titled The Importance of
Ilinden in the Awakening of Macedonian National Consciousness with Mr. Kiro
Gligorov, the former President of the FYROM, as the main speaker, took
place in the School of Journalism, Columbia University. It presented
falsifications, distortions of historical facts, and omissions of documented
events, as well as deliberate unresponsiveness to the Pan-Macedonian delegation
who were present during the presentations.
The
Harriman Institute of Columbia University, the East Central European Center and
the Macedonian Arts Council sponsored this event on September 20, 2003. It had
as its main theme the anniversary of the Ilinten revolution against the Turkish
rule in the Balkans.
The
participants in this presentation were Dr. Nadine Akhund, from Columbia
University, addressing 1903 Seen Through the Eyes of Europe, Dr. Duncan
Perry, 1903-The Ilinden Uprising and its Legacy. Mr. Blaze Ristovski
from the Macedonian Academy of Science and Arts (MANU) introduced Macedonia
in 1903 and Dr. Andrew Rossos from the University of Toronto spoke on Macedonian
National Consciousness in 1903. Mr. Gligorov's speech was Macedonia from
Ilinten until Now.
Dr.
Nantine Akhurd, who received her doctorate at the University of Sorbone,
France, spoke first. During her presentation, Dr.
Akhund mainly referred to the events of 1903 in Macedonia through the
diplomatic correspondence of that era.
Subsequently to reading certain letters of diplomats of that period, she
concluded that the Turks did not keep correct records therefore it is difficult to calculate the
exact number of the ethnicities that existed in the Turkish-occupied
Macedonia. However from the
correspondence of the diplomats that she researched, she assured us that the
most prevailing nationalities were Slavic, Bulgarian and Serbian. In addition there were French, German and
Italian companies in Salonik. However the predominant Greek element in the area
was
left out, even though the credentials of Dr. Akhund
would indicate that without a doubt she would be aware very much of this
fact.
A
translator read Mr. Blaze Ristovski's lecture.
King Philip, Alexander the Great, as well as Cyril and Methodius were
depicted as "Macedonian" personas with no connection made to the fact
that all four were Greek.
As the
rest of the academicians spoke, all of them praised and glorified the Ilinten
uprising, which even though was not successful, "Macedonia" emerged
as an international issue, which resulted in the awakening of the
"Macedonian" national consciousness”. Dr. Duncan Perry in his book The
Politics of Terror: The MacEdonian Liberation Movement, 1893-1904, identified
this uprising as an act of terror. It
is not known under which circumstances he changed his opinion and why during
this presentation he concluded that the Ilinten revolution "awakened the
"Macedonian" national consciousness".
The
former American Ambassador to UN, Mr. Herbert S. Okun, introduced the keynote
speaker, the former President of the FYROM, Mr. Kiro Gligorov. The Ambassador
named Mr. Gligorov as the "peace-maker" of the Balkans and "the
George Washington" of "Macedonia", since under his direction
"Macedonia" was able to face various problems such as the problems
with the Serbian Church, problems with the Albanians and issues with Greece
about the name". A copy of Mr. Gligorov’s address translated in English
was distributed to the audience and the former President spoke in
"Macedonian". This surprised
us because later the Vice-President of Pan-Macedonian Association conversed
with Mr. Gligorov and he noted that Mr. Gligorov was an excellent speaker of
the English language. Mr. Gligorov’s translated speech however, was just a few
pages long, while his oral delivery lasted about two and half hours!!! Thus at
the end of the lectures there was no time for the academically established
etiquette of "questions and answer period" between panelists and
audience, especially in such an institution of higher learning as the Columbia
University. Consequently the plethora of questions that others and we had
remained unanswered, an unacceptable incident for the caliber of such an
institution. There is no doubt that the machination of the Skopjan propaganda
cannot face a situation that is not ready for, or have answers to questions
that it is unable to answer.
Pan-Macedonian
Association sent a letter to the Director of Harriman Institute, Dr. Gordon
Bardos, and complained about the un-academic treatment and falsification of
history that took place during the paper presentation by ALL scholars.
Consequently, the Association received a message from Dr. Bardos urging it to
submit an application for scholars expressing their views in the ASN (Association
for Study of Nationalities):
If you would like an opportunity to present your
views or those of some of your
colleagues on these issues, we host a convention every April co-sponsored
by the Association for the Study of Nationalities (ASN), which would be an
ideal forum to discuss these issues. I suggest you consult the ASN website
(www.nationalities.org) to find out
how to submit a paper proposal, or a
panel proposal, for the convention.
Through
the ASN website Pan-Macedonian Association was informed “that the Association
for the Study of Nationalities (ASN) is the only scholarly association devoted
to the study of ethnicity and nationalism from Europe to Eurasia. With hundreds
of members in more than fifty countries, ASN brings together the world's
leading scholars, policy analysts, and policymakers interested in the politics,
economics, social relations, and history of central and southeast Europe,
Russia, Central Asia, and adjacent regions”.
Within
a short time the Pan-Macedonian Association was privileged to bring together a
panel of world-renowned scholars to present the true historical facts,
countering the “Macedonian” ethnicity claimed by The FYROM as a rebuttal to
what has been accustomed by previous sessions of the ASN. The main topic of the
panel was: State-sponsored Ethnogenesis and the Macedonian Question.
Coordinator of the panel was Dr. Van Coufoudakis, Rector of Intercollege, in Nicosia, Cyprus. He is also Dean Emeritus and
Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Indiana University-Purdue
University, Fort Wayne. The rest of the scholars were the following: Dr. Tom Papademetriou from The Richard
Stockton College of New Jersey, would speak on Heritage and
History: Sts. Cyril and Methodios as a contested symbol of identity.
Dr. Nikolaos
Zahariadis, Professor of Political Science and
Director of Undergraduate Studies at the Department of Government, University
of Alabama at Birmingham would speak on: External
Interventions and Domestic Nation-Building in the Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia. The
topic of Dr. Alexandros Kyrou, Professor of Byzantine,
Ottoman, and Balkan History and Director of the Program in East European and
Russian Studies at Salem State College in Salem, Massachusetts, was The Policy Objectives of State-Sponsored
Ethnogenesis in Socialist Yugoslavia: The Case of Tito's Macedonia, while Dr. Papavizas would speak on Defining
Macedonian Hellenism.
However, the
efforts of our scholars as well as the efforts of the Executive Council of
Pan-Macedonian Association remained only efforts, as the panel and their
scholarly presentations were REJECTED by ASN.
The second symposium that was organized by the ASN
and sponsored by the Herriman Institute of Columbia University, took place from
the 15th through 17th of April 2004. The
Executive Council of the Association found the title of a certain panel
interesting, because it referred to Southern Balkans and on April 16, 2004
attended the paper presentation of the aforementioned conference, in the
International Affairs Building of Columbia University. The general title of
this panel was: Formation of National Identity in the Southern Balkans (Late
19th-Early 20th Century).
Dr. Angelo Georgakis from
Westmont College US spoke first. His
topic was The Young-Turks, Salonika, and Greek Identity, 1880-1912. Dr.
Georgakis a presentable Greek-American historian and an eloquent communicator,
presented his paper with an aura of cogency and ease. He explained that in the
beginning the Young-Turk movement was peaceful and its intend was to Westernize
the young Moslems of the Ottoman Empire and at the same time to include the
youth of the then multi-ethnic Thessaloniki. Dr. Georgakis described in a
painfully detailed manner the multi-ethnic picture of Thessaloniki at the
beginning of the 20th century, with primarily dominant Greek,
Jewish, and Turkish nationalities and very few Bulgarians were there. Regarding
the Young-Turks, Dr. Georgakis mentioned that “it is very difficult to explain
the cause as to what went wrong and such a peaceful and serene effort turned
into violence resulting in the genocide of Christians in Asia Minor”.
Dr. Stefan Detchev from the
University of Blayoegrad in Bulgaria presented his paper: Between “Slavic,”
“Bulgarian,” “Balkan,” and “European”-Russophile and Russophobe Ideologies
about Bulgarian National Identity, 1886-1894. Dr. Detchev very vividly and
with great enthusiasm presented his topic, but at the conclusion, he said, he
couldn’t decide if the Bulgarians consider themselves Slavs, Tatars, or even
Europeans.
Dr. Nadine Akhund from
Columbia University attentively listened while the academicians were speaking.
She subsequently critiqued their papers so that their arguments would be more
dynamic and she also expressed her own theories on the aforementioned topics of
the academicians. As it was mentioned previously it is not the first time that
Dr. Akhund expressed her views, especially about Thessaloniki.
When one of the attendees of the ASN conference posed
the question regarding what the prevailing nationalities were in the area, Dr.
Angelo Georgakis said that the most overwhelming nationalities of the era (1880-1912) that was covered by his research
were the Greek and Jewish nationalities in Thessaloniki (50% and 50%). There
were a few Bulgarians but most of the Slavic groups that existed were
unorganized and dwelled in the countryside and not in the city of Thessaloniki.
When the question was posed to Dr. Akhund of her
research about the nationalities through the diplomatic correspondence and the
results of Dr. Georgakis’ research, she claimed, that she “meant all three
Vilayets of Macedonia”. We are still puzzled by Dr. Akhund’s response because
even if she meant all three Vilayets of the Turkish occupied Macedonia, why
wasn’t the Greek element that was so prevalent in Thessaloniki, worth
mentioning? Dr. Akhund should know that the Vilayet of Thessaloniki was split
into two (Vilayet of Thessaloniki and Vilayet of Manastir), so that the heavily
Bulgarian area in the present FYROM could offset the heavily Greek populated
Vilayet of Thessaloniki. Dr. Akhund’s claim that the Turks did not keep correct
records is also questionable. The Turks
had very good statistics based on religion. Anyone who followed the Bulgarian
Exarchate was categorized as Bulgarian while whoever followed the Patriarchate
was categorized as Greek. Slavs during
that time identified with Bulgarians and Macedonia was only a geographical
term.
Dr. Akhund did such a comprehensive research on the
diplomatic correspondence of the 1903 era, but she must also be aware of the
letter of the American Consul, Pericles Lazzaro, dated on September 10th
1903 to the Consulate General and the Embassy of Constantinople. In that letter
the Consul referred to the events of Krushevo and he described what really
happened during that “famous” Ilinden uprising which was nothing else than a
Bulgarian revolt. The Bulgarians were calling all nationalities, even the
peasant Turks to rebel against the Sultan. The Manifesto of Krushevo that was
calling all nations to rebel against the Sultan was written in BULGARIAN.
The epicenter of the revolution was Krushevo where
the Greek population and the Hellenized Vlachs were slaughtered and their
properties destroyed. The American Consul, Pericles Lazzaro states: “…One
hour before sunset on the 12th Hahtiar Pasha entered the town and
his troops began a systematic looting of the place under the eyes of their
officers confining themselves to the Greco-Wallachian quarters which contains
fine houses with riches accumulated throughout generations… Many wives
and daughters were treated in the most shameful manner. Details which are not
fit for reproduction… Four days the soldiers remained in the town, thoroughly
looting and then burning each house separately (the houses are isolated, lying
in gardens), 368 residences and 290 shops were burned. The case of Krushevo is
typical, because it shows the tactics of the B[ulgarians] consist of
compromising Greek towns…” (The Events of 1903 in Macedonia-as Presented in
European Diplomatic Correspondence, Museum of the Macedonian Struggle, pg.
100).
Douglas Dakin in his book The Greek Struggle in
Macedonia 1897-1913, referring to the Ilinden uprising, writes: “…But
what is generally known of the Macedonian Slavs, it must be assumed that the
thousands who fled did so chiefly in terror and were apathetic to the
revolutionary movement. The story that the rising was a popular movement is
entirely a MYTH” (pg. 101).
When we mentioned all these to Dr. Akhund last
September she did not want to hear of it and she walked away. After the paper presentation we approached
Dr. Akhund again and showed her the passages of Dakin’s book about the Ilinden
uprising and she admitted that she knows the story of the Ilinden uprising and
Dakin’s book.
One
of the questions that were posed during the discussion period after the paper
presentation was what constitutes a nation and what comprises a nationality.
The scholars concluded that in addition to borders and the peoples that exist
in a self-governing and independent State, where language and common culture
binds them together (nation), there are also individuals from the same group
that share the same culture and language but they are settled in States outside
the borders of their fatherland (nationality). At this point one of the
observers added that there is also the case of creating a nation using
fictitious elements, such as the case of The FYROM, which is trying to falsify,
steal and usurp the Hellenic history and the Hellenic Macedonia name from its
Hellenic neighbor country and has created a “Macedonian” language which is
mainly Bulgarian.
Dr.
Glen Camp seized the opportunity to reveal to the audience that during some
discussions with his father-in-law who is Greek, he found out that his
father-in-law does not believe that there are minorities in Greece. He also
mentioned that Dr. Anastasia Karakasidou has written a book defending the
“Macedonian” minority in Greece and “because of the stance that she took on the
subject she received death threats,” concluded Dr. Camp. We think Dr. Camp’ father-in-law is
right. Marcus Templar, a well-known
historian and Balkan expert, in his Answers to MPO (Macedonian Patriotic
Organization), states: “There
are approximately 50,000 Slavophones [Slavic-speaking people] living in Greece.
Approximately 5,000 of them declare themselves ethnic Slavs; however two points
have to be made: 1. Greece belongs to NATO and is a European Union country,
fully democratic and entirely abiding to all membership requirements in both
organizations. 2. Greece has offered to the 5,000 Slavophones full rights to
its constitution and enacted laws that guarantee equal rights to ALL citizens
of the country. Greece cannot recognize the 5,000 Slavophones as “Macedonians”
since the majority, approximately 2.5 million inhabitants of the same area,
call themselves Macedonians for four thousand years.” If the Slavs are THE
MACEDONIANS of Greek Macedonia, then what are the people who have been there
for thousands of years?
These
remarks are made in response to and to clarify some of the comments and
misstatements that we noted while attending presentations at Columbia
University sponsored through the Harriman Institute and the Association of the
Study of Nationality. In particular,
from the presentations that we observed, we noted prevalent selective omissions
of pertinent facts and interjections that shift the bias of the presentations
in the wrong and false direction. These seem to be deliberate attempts directly
in support of justifying the false “Macedonian” nationality in The FYROM.
The
leadership of Pan-Macedonian Association who was present during the
presentations does not harbor any ill feelings toward the populace of The
FYROM, or its Diaspora and those feelings are very well expressed in the resolutions of the conventions that
the Organizations holds every year.
Read Article In Greek
|
|
