Greek paper publishes Nimetz ‘set of ideas’ over name dispute

The new name to be used internally and internationally after the country integrates in the EU, no mandatory constitutional change, non-exclusivity clause on terms “Macedonia” and “Macedonian” for commercial uses, the new name to be used not translated or translated at the discretion of each party, read the proposals from the ‘set of ideas’ of United Nations envoy Matthew Nimetz, released by Greek daily “To Vima” on Monday, MIA reports from Athens.

“To Vima” reads that the set of ideas that Nimetz presented to the countries’ negotiators on January 17 does not include a mandatory change of the FYROM constitution regarding the name or other points that some consider to have irredentist content. The Macedonian government has the authority to decide what “binding, credible and irreversible national procedures” will be for the implementation of the solution. Nimetz suggests that the two countries should reaffirm that they do not have territorial aspirations or claims (this proposal is on the basis of reciprocity), and that they both respect the cultural heritage of the other.

The adoption of a new and permanent name, which will apply erga omnes both internationally and internally, is linked directly with the accession to the European Union. This means that the current constitutional name will remain in force in the country until that time.

“Regarding the invitation and accession to NATO, Nimetz notes that by the date on which Skopje formally joins the North Atlantic Alliance, the country should have taken all necessary steps to conduct bilateral relations with the remaining member states on the basis of the new official name to be listed alphabetically under the English letter ‘M’, reads “To Vima”.

Citing the envoy’s document, the newspaper lists the names (in Slavic script) that have already been seen, namely the “Republic of Upper Macedonia” (Republika Gorna Makedonija), “Republic of Northern Macedonia” (Republika Severna Makedonija), “Republic of Vardar Macedonia” (Republika Vardarska Makedonija), “Republic of New Macedonia” (Republika Nova Makedonija) and “Republic of Macedonia (Skopje)” (Republika Makedonija (Skopje), adding that Nimetz remains open to other proposals. In his text he uses “Republika Gorna Makedonija” as an example to present his ideas”, hence the confusion that has recently been caused that the two sides have already agreed on this name.

“On the issues of nationality and language (which are the two pillars of identity and caused tension during the recent visit of Mr Nimetz to Skopje and what he said along with the Macedonian Foreign Minister Nikola Dimitrov), the special envoy proposes the choice between either the Slavic version of ‘makedonski’ or the description based on its official name or its short version (eg. citizen of the “Republic of Upper Macedonia”),” reads the paper.

Regarding commercial use, Nimetz reverts to the term “non-exclusive use” of the terms “Macedonia” and “Macedonian”. It calls on both sides to come to an agreement that will be applicable in all languages for the use of these terms.

“Also with regard to the translation of the new name from both parties involved, as well as from UN member states and third parties, they will be able to translate it or choose to keep it not translated – a preference already expressed by Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias,” notes “To Vima”.

According to the paper, chapters on the implementation of the solution and range of use, as stated in the set of Ideas, should be seen in combination.

“The implementation of the solution, according to Mr Nimetz, will result from the combination of the deposit of a report by the UN Secretary-General to the UN Security Council, a resolution to be agreed upon by the Security Council, the ratification of the solution by the United Nations General Assembly, the bilateral agreement between Athens and Skopje, but also ‘binding, credible and irreversible national procedures’ by FYROM, including the adoption of legislation by parliament and executive and, to the extent deemed necessary, including legal measures necessary,” reads “To Vima”.

It adds that Nimetz also proposes a process in several stages with regard to the range of use. The initial stage envisages that after the adoption of the relevant resolution on the new official name by the Security Council, it will be used ‘in all formal multilateral international frameworks, including meetings, treaties, agreements and official documents’. In addition, the country will have to ‘make its best efforts’ so that the new name ‘is used in the United Nations system and other multinational organizations’. At the same time, however, Mr. Nimetz makes three notes.

“First, Makedonija, in its untranslated or translated form, will not be used by Skopje as the official name of the state in any context. Second, terms ‘former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia’ and ‘fYROM’ will cease to be used as references to Skopje. Third, and most importantly, the term ‘Republic of Macedonia’ (Republika Makedonija) will continue to be used internally until the date of accession to the EU,” says “To Vima”.

The paper also analyses the prerequisites and possible complications that could arise, but also sections that require clarifications from the mediator.

“Mr Nimetz underlines that even after EU accession, there may be exceptions to the use of the new erga omnes name for all official purposes internally as well as internationally. What are these exceptions? When ‘use is exclusively internal’ (within FYROM) and ‘the affected internal activity and documents’ related to it ‘are not within the competence of the European Union’. Mr Nimetz, however, refrains from specifying exactly what he says, exacerbating the confusion. This will be a point that will require serious clarification as the EU accession process is usually long and the neighboring country has a long way to go,” notes “To Vima”.

Diplomatic sources in Athens also pointed out that “the implementation of the solution will be gradual but will also require specific guarantees in view of Macedonia’s accession to NATO”. Circles of the Alliance noted that between a country’s invitation to join and a final membership, there is a period that is not binding (although the practice shows that it does not exceed 4 months).

“At the same time, a number of major European NATO member countries (Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain) have expressed reservations about Macedonia’s accession to the Alliance due to the internal policy of instability,” underlines “To Vima”.