|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Three Years On – the Ohrid Framework Agreement |
|
|
|
2004-08-19 12:12:36 |
|
|
 |
|
The 13th of August, 2001 is a day that will live in infamy – in Macedonia at least. And here we are, almost three years to the date of the signing of the Ohrid Framework Agreement. As is typical with the media, political pundits and writers, anniversaries are a fine time for reflection – unless, of course, everything is going wrong.
You didn’t see too much fanfare – on any side – this past June at the five year anniversary of the end of the NATO war against Yugoslavia and the "liberation" of the Albanian Muslims of Kosovo did you? That’s because no side thinks it a success.
But with the Framework Agreement, its success or failure remains to be seen. Right now, most in the international community continue to tell us that it is the most important document for Macedonia and that its full and quick implementation will solve all of Macedonia’s ills, setting aside, of course, the fact that many people are jobless.
This, unfortunately, is a case of mistaken priorities. And its success or failure depends, to a large extent, on how it is implemented and accepted (or not) by the public.
So let’s review. The first point is this: Macedonia could not defeat the NLA, hence a political solution, brokered by the Great Powers, was necessary.
If Macedonia had, like Croatia in Operation Storm, been able to defeat the NLA (similar situation but in Croatia’s case they expelled 200,000 Serbs in three days), then the Great Powers would not have said much. Oh, they would have complained and grumbled but after the fact. After all, the Great Powers respect strength first.
The second point is this: what we have today in the on-going and changing interpretation of the agreement is not what President Trajkovski wanted. I knew Boris Trajkovski. Boris Trajkovski was my friend. And this agreement as it is being implemented today ain’t what Boris wanted.
President Trajkovski often said that the agreement wasn’t perfect, no agreement is. He also said he wanted to create a Macedonia "based on individuals, not ethnic groups, on citizens, not minority groups." That was his mantra and it is a damned shame that it is being brushed aside today – both by the Macedonian Albanian leadership and the West.
The idea that the recently brokered plan on territorial division is based on "individuals and citizens" instead of "ethnic and minority groups" is crap. And yet that is exactly what certain so-called leaders are telling us.
President Trajkovski also talked often about the need for responsibilities – in response to the increasing loud cries for more "rights" from certain groups. In an interview with The Los Angeles Times on May 13, 2001, he said "But let’s also ask [Albanians] how many are paying taxes to the state."
He knew what was going on in Western Macedonia and he knew that the cry for ever-increasing "rights" had to be coupled with responsibilities. Sadly, the Framework Agreement being implemented today shows signs only of increasing "rights" without a proportionate share of responsibilities.
Who believes it best to give a child everything he wants without requiring responsibilities and discipline in return?
And looking over my past files, I see that Ambassador James Pardew, one of the facilitators from the US during the talks made this statement to The Washington Post on August 14th 2001: "This agreement should settle for once and for all the political issues that were at the heart of this conflict."
Setting aside the strong belief by many, including President Trajkovski, that the 2001 conflict was about territory and not about rights, we can see from Ambassador Pardew’s statement that indeed, the agreement did not settle the political issues because it was not about political issues in the first place. It was, and is, about territory.
Fast forwarding to today, the latest report by the International Crisis Group states "Decentralization is the last step in settling the legacy of 2001. If this can be dealt with properly, the state will have consolidated itself…"
Unfortunately, this is not correct and as we have seen in the past, the Macedonian Albanian leadership will continue to ask for more and in this case, the next stop is the flag, anthem and coat of arms. Frankly, they will never be satisfied because how much is enough? Just one more right.
Ali Ahmeti recently said that he was offered territorial division of Macedonia in 2001 and that he rejected it saying that Macedonia is his home. However, that contradicts – with extreme prejudice, to borrow a phrase from the US Army – his very statements of that year. It is worth repeating here his statement to David Binder in Newsweek on March 22, 2001.
In "A Troubled Dream," Ahmeti is quoted as stating "Our aim is solely to remove Slav forces from territory which is historically Albanian." That just doesn’t jive with his recent statements.
Frankly, I believe there is a special place reserved in Hell for Mr. Ahmeti and his ilk.
He is a liar, a phony, a fraud, a thief and of course a murderer, albeit one with a silver tongue. But that doesn’t stop the movers and shakers of the West – those who control the Great Game – from kissing his rear end every time they have a chance to.
Look at how times have changed! Daniel Simpson, in a Reuters article on July 30th 2001, wrote this: "NATO is finding it tough to crack down on the NLA, an offshoot of the guerillas it once backed in neighboring Kosovo when they were fighting the Serbs under Slobodan Milosevic.
Plans to arrest NLA political leader Ali Ahmeti, described by one of the envoys who met him as a "melancholically withdrawn fugitive," were never implemented.
It now seems to be too late. "He wants power," the diplomat said. "He’s very dangerous." (I might point out that the above quoted diplomat made that statement 14 days before Ohrid was signed). And of course Lord Robertson, then the NATO Secretary-General, was quoted as calling the NLA "murderous thugs and criminals" in March of 2001.
The bottom line is this and history will prove me correct: The Ohrid Framework Agreement, as it is being implemented with its changing interpretations and continued pressure from the Macedonian Albanian leadership, will prove bad for Macedonia and the region. It is not true to the original intent and it will, in time, divide Macedonia, not bring the country together, and it will ultimately prove that real political power comes only from the barrel of a gun.
By Jason Miko
Jason Miko is a free thinker and an independent advisor and has lived and worked in and around the Balkans for over eight years and with them for almost twelve years. The views expressed herein are wholly his own.
Source: realitymacedonia.org.mk
|
|
seeurope.net |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
The Event: SEEF 2004
