Transition Macedonia

Résumé du document

Throughout the centuries, the South-eastern corner of Europe has been the scene of many invasions and transcending civilizations. This left the trace of different cultures, religions and empires. One of the most evident cleavages in the region is religious cleavage between the Catholic Church, the Orthodox Church and Islam. This mix is mainly concentrated in Bosnia-Herzegovina, where we have seen massive conflicts recently, but there are also other parts of former Yugoslavia where there are clear cultural differences. Macedonia is a good example. There the majority of the population is orthodox, with minority of Muslims. But there are also differences within the Orthodox Church and among the Muslims. Apart from this, the claims to Macedonia from surrounding nations have caused war and internal turmoil. Up until the break-down of Yugoslavia, this situation did not escalate because of the pressure from Bel-grade, but since Macedonia gained independence, this heterogenic country has witnessed massive problems, partly thanks to the multiethnic situation, as Albanians make up 25% of the population.Nevertheless, Macedonia is on the path towards becoming a functional democracy. There have been many problems along the way, and it is a highly heterogenic country without a single national identity. This paper will examine the democratic transition in Macedonia. We will try to explain if the transition towards democracy is finalised, and if not, we will attempt to explain why. The democratic transition theory of Linz and Stephan will be used as a tool in describing the situation.
In order to perform this task, the paper is divided into four distinctive parts. First we explain the theory of Linz and Stephan, and make a short evaluation of the situation in Macedonia compared with the theory. Secondly, we analyse Macedonia's historical relations with its neighbours, in an attempt to explain the complexity of the nation. Thirdly, we briefly summarize the nationalism in Macedonia and describe the state formation in the first Yugoslavia. The fourth part describes the reign of Tito, and Macedonia's position towards the dissolution of Yugoslavia. The fifth chapter deals with Macedonia's international position and developments from the independence up until the 2001 conflict. The sixth part explains Macedonia's second transition, and deals with its present problems. The paper is then summarized and analyzed in a conclusion.

Extraits

[...] Greece refused to acknowledge the republic until it changed its name, claiming that “Macedonia” was already the name of a Greek province, and that articles of the republic's constitution implied territorial claims to northern Greece. Greece also objected to the republic's use on its flag of the 16-pointed star that was the symbol of Alexander the Great. As a result of international pressure, the republic's assembly amended the constitution to state that it had no territorial aspirations in Greece or any other country. [...]

[...] This also includes Macedonia. The reason for this settlement was mainly that the Ottomans encouraged the Albanians to settle new areas since they were mostly Muslims; this meant that the input of Albanian Muslims in Slavic areas reduced the likelihood of uprisings and so on.[21] When the Albanian state was formed in 1913, this meant that the country could claim more land since there were large Albanian minorities in the surrounding areas. But Albania was quickly locked into conflicts with larger neighbouring states, and was also conquered by Italy in 1939. [...]

[...] The talks took place in Ohrid in the south-west of Macedonia. The Macedonian side was represented by the VMRO-DPMNE and the SDSM, while the Albanian side was represented by the DPA and the PDP. Although actively participating in armed conflict, the National Liberation Army did not participate directly in the talks. The position of the Albanians was that as a significant minority in the country their rights should be on a level with the rights of the Macedonians, the majority ethnic group. [...]

[...] Without this state cannot exist. They distinguish the factors of a civil society, a political society, the rule of law, a state apparatus and an economic society. “Civil society” is not a very clear concept, difficult to describe and hardly possible to ‘measure'. It refers to sphere in society in which individuals freely associate in relationships, actions and organizations”.[3] In this sphere, people organize parts of their life independently from the state, for instance in trade unions, churches and leisure time associations, or without any state involvement. [...]

[...] This meant that the Ottomans were interested in keeping the area peaceful. One way to assure the dominance was by using blood taxation. This meant taking young children to Ottoman camps and training them to become soldiers or government officials. This also meant that they were Islamized. This happened all over the Balkans though. Another important way of avoiding revolts was the method of moving large groups of people from different areas of the Ottoman Empire. This is part of the reason for Macedonia's mixed ethnicity of today. [...]