President Barack Obama will be faced with formidable challenges once assuming office on January 20, 2009 - a declining economy by the day, rising oil prices (as of today declining but for how long?), energy issues, a worse than ever public image of America around the world, and a military blunder with Iraq and Afghanistan (civilians dying by the day, and American troops in harms way). Why should President Obama care about Southeast Europe?
Southeast Europe is a strategic location for U.S. interests. With Albania and Croatia on their way to full-fledged NATO membership, Montenegro and Bosnia offered NATO membership action plans, Romania and Bulgaria NATO and EU members, and Macedonia soon to become member of NATO and already candidate for EU membership, Southeast Europe has never been in a better position to support U.S. interests. Several problems exist in Southeast Europe. Kosovo, although, being recognized by more countries, still is a haven for drug and human trafficking (we do not hear about these problems that much anymore). It has a 60% unemployment rate and the country faces several obstacles politically, economically, and diplomatically. Serbia is blocking its UN membership and recently won a UN vote to take up Kosovo's independence to the International Court of Justice. Serbia's government is quite nationalistic and has very strong ties to Russia. Russian interests thrive in Serbia and the so-called Orthodox Brotherhood is alive and not going away. This country still has a lot of anti-American and anti-NATO sentiment since the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia. Going further south, Greece continues to be a "Trojan Horse" in the EU when it comes to Russia and traditionally with Cyprus sides with Russia and protects Russia's interest in the EU. Interestingly enough Greece is the only NATO Ally that buys Russian weapons.
An Obama administration must not lose focus when it comes to Southeast Europe. Even though, we as Americans face bigger foreign policy problems like Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, an Obama administration must keep a close eye on the developments in Southeast Europe. During this past April's Bucharest NATO Summit, Greece put a veto on Macedonia's membership into NATO. Membership into NATO of all Southeast European states is of great strategic interest to the U.S. An issue of non-security importance - such as Macedonia's name - was put before a security alliance such as NATO. This is set precedent. A key question during the first few months of Obama's administration will be how long will we keep Macedonia out of NATO to appease a NATO 'Ally' that only contributes 140 troops in Afghanistan. President Obama must do what is right, and fight for what is right. American interest is to see a socio-economically democratically stable Southeast Europe, with Macedonia and others members of NATO and EU, helping to build a better world.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Monday, June 16, 2008
Obama to Bring Macedonians and Greeks Together During Presidency?
Dear Barack Obama,
My friends, most of whom enthusiastically support your candidacy, have been urging me for some time now to write to you and your campaign team. I have watched your rise in national politics with growing respect. However, unlike my friends, who are convinced that you are always on the “side of the angels”, I am wrestling with a bit of evidence to the contrary.
You see, I am an American of Macedonian heritage, an ethnicity that your close and devoted Greek American friends have been working to eradicate from the face of the earth. They first enlisted your support in this effort a year ago, when you co-sponsored Senate Resolution 300. That resolution urges “FYROM” and “Skopje”, a southeast European nation-state that most of the world, including the US government, refers to as the Republic of Macedonia, to cease its “irredentist nationalism” and negotiate a new name for itself that is acceptable to its Greek neighbors.
My friends, your enthusiastic supporters, keep insisting to me that you are too intelligent and too decent a man to knowingly co-sponsor a pandering, racist resolution on behalf of a foreign state and its people. They keep telling me that I need to send you factual information that will allow you to take a more informed position on the long-standing dispute between the two Balkan peoples.
I resisted doing this for a number of months, because I wasn’t convinced that you would be our Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, and as a member of a marginal constituency of the American body politic, Macedonian-Americans, I thought that you had much more important people to attend to during this hectic campaign season. I also thought that the case for the existence of the Macedonian people was so easy to make that I couldn’t see how you might have missed it in the first place.
As the campaign for the presidency has heated up though, and your opponents have dredged up every speck of potential dirt they could find to try and soil your good reputation, it has revealed a side of you that I can only admire and respect. You have not answered the mud thrown by your opponents by flinging a similar kind of mud back at them. In the case of the comments of your Revered Wright, you made it quite clear that you are capable of condemning individual actions of the man as they become known to you, while still retaining a love, honor and respect from years of good and honorable association. That stand has reassured me that you have a capacity to acknowledge our mutual human frailty and face it in yourself and those around you, while at the same time responding to it in a measured way that allows us all to learn and grow from the experience.
That is why I am writing today to inform you that your Greek American friends have inappropriately engaged you in a campaign their people have been waging for a hundred years to advance the Greek people at the expense of a smaller and weaker neighboring Macedonian people. A decisive moment in the history of their relations occurred in 1912 when the Greek army occupied the southern half of the Turkish province of Macedonia as part of a successful Balkan War against the Ottoman Empire. In order to absorb the conquered territory into the Greek state, Greek governments have, for nearly a century now, been waging a relentless campaign of ethnic cleansing, to eradicate the people and to erase all traces of the history of the old, settled, indigenous Macedonian people that they found there. That people, while drastically reduced in number over the years, still exists in northern Greece today, and they still identify with the language, culture and society of the non-Greek Macedonian people who live in the Republic of Macedonia just over the border to the north.
The sad truth of the matter is that the dispute between Macedonians and Greeks has parallels in on-going disputes elsewhere in the world today between such peoples as the Tibetans and the Chinese or the Armenians and the Turks. The militarily victorious, stronger peoples in each case still deny historical evidence of wrongs perpetrated against the smaller and weaker people in their respective conflicts.
I most recently presented the historical evidence of Greek violation of the human and civil rights of the Macedonian people in a paper I presented at an academic conference held at Portland State University on April 12, 2008. That paper, entitled “Dimensions of the Macedonian– Greek Name Dispute”, even mentions your co-sponsorship of Senate Resolution 300 as a recent element in the dispute. You can access that paper at the website of the 14th Annual Russian, East European and Central Asian Studies Conference of the Ellison Center at the University of Washington, http://jsis.washington.edu/ellison/reecasnwconf2008.shtml
I look forward to the day when you, as president of the United States, bring Macedonians and Greeks together to advance the cause of mutual understanding and social justice in a world that never seems to have enough of those precious commodities.
Sincerely, Dr. Michael Seraphinoff, Ph.D. Slavic Studies
My friends, most of whom enthusiastically support your candidacy, have been urging me for some time now to write to you and your campaign team. I have watched your rise in national politics with growing respect. However, unlike my friends, who are convinced that you are always on the “side of the angels”, I am wrestling with a bit of evidence to the contrary.
You see, I am an American of Macedonian heritage, an ethnicity that your close and devoted Greek American friends have been working to eradicate from the face of the earth. They first enlisted your support in this effort a year ago, when you co-sponsored Senate Resolution 300. That resolution urges “FYROM” and “Skopje”, a southeast European nation-state that most of the world, including the US government, refers to as the Republic of Macedonia, to cease its “irredentist nationalism” and negotiate a new name for itself that is acceptable to its Greek neighbors.
My friends, your enthusiastic supporters, keep insisting to me that you are too intelligent and too decent a man to knowingly co-sponsor a pandering, racist resolution on behalf of a foreign state and its people. They keep telling me that I need to send you factual information that will allow you to take a more informed position on the long-standing dispute between the two Balkan peoples.
I resisted doing this for a number of months, because I wasn’t convinced that you would be our Democratic Party’s presidential nominee, and as a member of a marginal constituency of the American body politic, Macedonian-Americans, I thought that you had much more important people to attend to during this hectic campaign season. I also thought that the case for the existence of the Macedonian people was so easy to make that I couldn’t see how you might have missed it in the first place.
As the campaign for the presidency has heated up though, and your opponents have dredged up every speck of potential dirt they could find to try and soil your good reputation, it has revealed a side of you that I can only admire and respect. You have not answered the mud thrown by your opponents by flinging a similar kind of mud back at them. In the case of the comments of your Revered Wright, you made it quite clear that you are capable of condemning individual actions of the man as they become known to you, while still retaining a love, honor and respect from years of good and honorable association. That stand has reassured me that you have a capacity to acknowledge our mutual human frailty and face it in yourself and those around you, while at the same time responding to it in a measured way that allows us all to learn and grow from the experience.
That is why I am writing today to inform you that your Greek American friends have inappropriately engaged you in a campaign their people have been waging for a hundred years to advance the Greek people at the expense of a smaller and weaker neighboring Macedonian people. A decisive moment in the history of their relations occurred in 1912 when the Greek army occupied the southern half of the Turkish province of Macedonia as part of a successful Balkan War against the Ottoman Empire. In order to absorb the conquered territory into the Greek state, Greek governments have, for nearly a century now, been waging a relentless campaign of ethnic cleansing, to eradicate the people and to erase all traces of the history of the old, settled, indigenous Macedonian people that they found there. That people, while drastically reduced in number over the years, still exists in northern Greece today, and they still identify with the language, culture and society of the non-Greek Macedonian people who live in the Republic of Macedonia just over the border to the north.
The sad truth of the matter is that the dispute between Macedonians and Greeks has parallels in on-going disputes elsewhere in the world today between such peoples as the Tibetans and the Chinese or the Armenians and the Turks. The militarily victorious, stronger peoples in each case still deny historical evidence of wrongs perpetrated against the smaller and weaker people in their respective conflicts.
I most recently presented the historical evidence of Greek violation of the human and civil rights of the Macedonian people in a paper I presented at an academic conference held at Portland State University on April 12, 2008. That paper, entitled “Dimensions of the Macedonian– Greek Name Dispute”, even mentions your co-sponsorship of Senate Resolution 300 as a recent element in the dispute. You can access that paper at the website of the 14th Annual Russian, East European and Central Asian Studies Conference of the Ellison Center at the University of Washington, http://jsis.washington.edu/ellison/reecasnwconf2008.shtml
I look forward to the day when you, as president of the United States, bring Macedonians and Greeks together to advance the cause of mutual understanding and social justice in a world that never seems to have enough of those precious commodities.
Sincerely, Dr. Michael Seraphinoff, Ph.D. Slavic Studies
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Greeks Claim Macedonians Do Not Exist!
In my research today, I found a YouTube video of over a thousand Macedonians protesting in Indianapolis urging U.S. support for independence of Macedonia. The protest was held in 1922!!
The video can be seen at http://youtube.com/watch?v=Sfyws7TizHk
Towards the end you will notice that someone even flew a plane with the headline 'Independence for Macedonia.'
The Greek government claims that Macedonians do not exist and were a creation of Yugoslavia's Tito. How could this be possible when Macedonian-Americans called upon the U.S. to support Macedonia's independence in 1922.
Furthermore in my research, I came across this posting on the website of the Washington, D.C.-United Macedonian Diaspora about how the New York Times captured the Macedonian freedom struggle in the early 1900s. You can read this at http://umdiaspora.org/content/view/328/1/ and click here for TIME magazine's article in 1925: http://umdiaspora.org/content/view/324/1/
Greece continuously denies the existence of Macedonia and the Macedonian people. One has to ask what is the reason behind this?
The video can be seen at http://youtube.com/watch?v=Sfyws7TizHk
Towards the end you will notice that someone even flew a plane with the headline 'Independence for Macedonia.'
The Greek government claims that Macedonians do not exist and were a creation of Yugoslavia's Tito. How could this be possible when Macedonian-Americans called upon the U.S. to support Macedonia's independence in 1922.
Furthermore in my research, I came across this posting on the website of the Washington, D.C.-United Macedonian Diaspora about how the New York Times captured the Macedonian freedom struggle in the early 1900s. You can read this at http://umdiaspora.org/content/view/328/1/ and click here for TIME magazine's article in 1925: http://umdiaspora.org/content/view/324/1/
Greece continuously denies the existence of Macedonia and the Macedonian people. One has to ask what is the reason behind this?
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried on Macedonian Ethnicity
http://fpc.state.gov/fpc/103052.htm
The NATO Summit
Dan Fried, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs
Foreign Press Center Briefing
Washington, DC
April 7, 2008
QUESTION: Lambros Papantoniou, Greek correspondent, Eleftheros Typos, Greek daily. Mr. Secretary, on the name issue between Athens and Skopje, what happened in Bucharest? What is going to happen from now on, since you are (inaudible)? And why are you supporting the last proposal of Matthew Nimetz, which (inaudible) the proposal of February 19th? And what was the purpose of the today's telephone call with the Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: Of course, the position of the United States is well known. We wanted an invitation to Macedonia, either based on the Nimetz proposal or as FYROM, or as FYROM. Greece didn't accept that; however, Greece has made clear that it wants a solution to the name issue, and the Macedonian Government has made clear that it wants a solution to the name issue. Both sides want to move ahead.
And this became clear during the course of the discussions we had and President had with the Macedonian leaders, and it became clear in the course of conversations that Secretary Rice and I had with the Greek Foreign Minister. It's clear that both governments don't want to get into a cycle of mutual recrimination, and I think that the press in Skopje reflects this. If you see, it is -- the Macedonians do want to move forward. They're obviously disappointed, but I applaud their constructive approach.
And, frankly, I'm quite heartened that the Greek Government seems ready to engage intensely, and it's our intention to try. We're not going to give up. We support the Nimetz process. Nimetz -- well, I can't speak for him, but I believe he is ready to engage, certainly not throw in the towel. We want to move ahead.
QUESTION: And your telephone call to Mrs. Bakoyannis today?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: I didn't speak to her today.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MODERATOR: (Inaudible) the microphone.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: I will simply say that I confirmed the -- I can speak only for myself -- confirmed America's interest in moving ahead. And I was quite satisfied with that phone call. I think it's important that we prepare to move ahead. There is plenty -- there are ample opportunities for recrimination and paralysis. Let's not take them.
QUESTION: Hi. Apostolos Zoupaniotis, Alpha Television in Greece. Mr. Secretary, I see many similarities in your negotiating tactics on the name issue and 2004, before the referendum, in Cyprus. And I wonder why you kept pushing in Bucharest for a decision and actually, by doing that, you were taking sides with Skopje, when you knew that Greece would veto it and when you knew that the latest proposal of Nimetz was much worse than the previous one in February 19?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: Well, I'm not going to discuss the merits or demerits of the proposal by Ambassador Nimetz. We support the UN process. So does Greece. So does Macedonia. Of course, we thought -- we hoped that there would be an invitation to Macedonia. We said so. That remains our view. I see no reason to apologize for very active American role. We have, as you know, encouraged Skopje to negotiate in good faith. We have encouraged Greece to do the same. We don't take sides. We do -- our side is the side of a resolution on the most favorable terms possible for both sides, mutually acceptable terms. And I'm glad that we have -- that the United States is supporting Nimetz, and we intend to do so in the future.
QUESTION: Thanasis Isitsas, Greek newspaper Elefthe Rotypia. Mr. Secretary, a year ago, regarding Kosovo crisis, you said for the Serbians that nationalism is like a cheap alcohol; first it makes you drunk, then it makes you blind and it makes you kill. A year later, February 27th, you gave an interview in Radio Kanal 77, before the summit in Bucharest, and you practically justified nationalism coming from the government of the former Yugoslavia of Macedonia. You said that Macedonian patriots have struggled for this moment more than a hundred years to get in Europe Atlantic institutions. Can you tell us, Mr. Secretary, is it a double standard? How come did you call in the first statement the Serbians nationalists and the secondly the Macedonian patriots? Isn't this a kind of double standard? Don't you think you encouraging by certain statements the nationals in FYROM?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: Not at all. You completely misunderstood my remarks, and I should explain them to you so you can understand them properly.
Nationalism -- and Greece knows this very, very well -- in the Balkans has generated wars and bloodshed and killing and instability. And I think nationalism is a grave danger. When I spoke of Macedonian patriots, I spoke of a country which is a successful multiethnic state with ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians in the government and in opposition. Thanks to the Ohrid framework, the government in Skopje averted a major domestic problem, perhaps even a civil war. Of all the post-Yugoslav states, Macedonia has been among the most successful in avoiding precisely this kind of extreme nationalism. The government in Skopje, the Macedonian Government, is looking at a future in Europe and a future with NATO, and in doing so it is rejecting exactly the kind of nationalism which has brought so much pain to the Balkans.
In the future, a Macedonia in Europe, a Greece already in Europe, are destined to be good friends and partners. This is the best outcome, and that's the outcome we want. We want to see an outcome where nationalism of the kind that has brought wars is rejected. We want to see a future with irredentism belonging to history, not current-day reality. And I think that Greece has sometimes shown a great vision, a positive vision of this kind of cooperation, and I hope that Macedonia and Greece, FYROM and Greece, as you say, will be able to find this vision. We want to help.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, I need your attention. A few moments ago, you said specifically, "Ethnic Macedonians" for the first time in history. That means the U.S. Government is recognizing the so-called "Macedonian ethnicity and language."
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: I don't think it is so-called. Macedonian language exists. Macedonian people exist. It's not - you know, we teach Macedonian at the Foreign Service Institute. We teach Serbian, we teach Croatian, now we teach Bosnian. There's a debate in Montenegro as to Crnogorski Jezik, the Montenegrin language. All languages - and I speak now as - not as a bureaucrat, but as - you know, a former --a lapsed historian. All languages are - you know, are human creations and, you know, they develop over time and become codified. And it's not up to - you know, there is a Macedonian language.
There is also the historic Macedonian province, which is different from the country. And it's important. It's quite clear that the government in Skopje, what we Americans call the Government of Macedonia, has no claims. We recognize the difference between the historic territory of Macedonia, which is, of course, much larger than the current country. And we're involved in the - we are supportive of the Nimetz process on the name to make - to settle this issue.
QUESTION: What about the ethnicity? You mentioned ethnicity.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: I'm not - I did - I did mention that. But, you know, this is an issue - you know, it is for people to define themselves, ultimately, I suppose. The ethnicity is - you know, it's just a fact as far as I can tell. The issue of the name is something that is on the table. And this is something to be discussed. I'm not the negotiator and I'm not, certainly, an anthropologist or an ethno-historian.
All right, thank you.
The NATO Summit
Dan Fried, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs
Foreign Press Center Briefing
Washington, DC
April 7, 2008
QUESTION: Lambros Papantoniou, Greek correspondent, Eleftheros Typos, Greek daily. Mr. Secretary, on the name issue between Athens and Skopje, what happened in Bucharest? What is going to happen from now on, since you are (inaudible)? And why are you supporting the last proposal of Matthew Nimetz, which (inaudible) the proposal of February 19th? And what was the purpose of the today's telephone call with the Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: Of course, the position of the United States is well known. We wanted an invitation to Macedonia, either based on the Nimetz proposal or as FYROM, or as FYROM. Greece didn't accept that; however, Greece has made clear that it wants a solution to the name issue, and the Macedonian Government has made clear that it wants a solution to the name issue. Both sides want to move ahead.
And this became clear during the course of the discussions we had and President had with the Macedonian leaders, and it became clear in the course of conversations that Secretary Rice and I had with the Greek Foreign Minister. It's clear that both governments don't want to get into a cycle of mutual recrimination, and I think that the press in Skopje reflects this. If you see, it is -- the Macedonians do want to move forward. They're obviously disappointed, but I applaud their constructive approach.
And, frankly, I'm quite heartened that the Greek Government seems ready to engage intensely, and it's our intention to try. We're not going to give up. We support the Nimetz process. Nimetz -- well, I can't speak for him, but I believe he is ready to engage, certainly not throw in the towel. We want to move ahead.
QUESTION: And your telephone call to Mrs. Bakoyannis today?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: I didn't speak to her today.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.)
MODERATOR: (Inaudible) the microphone.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: I will simply say that I confirmed the -- I can speak only for myself -- confirmed America's interest in moving ahead. And I was quite satisfied with that phone call. I think it's important that we prepare to move ahead. There is plenty -- there are ample opportunities for recrimination and paralysis. Let's not take them.
QUESTION: Hi. Apostolos Zoupaniotis, Alpha Television in Greece. Mr. Secretary, I see many similarities in your negotiating tactics on the name issue and 2004, before the referendum, in Cyprus. And I wonder why you kept pushing in Bucharest for a decision and actually, by doing that, you were taking sides with Skopje, when you knew that Greece would veto it and when you knew that the latest proposal of Nimetz was much worse than the previous one in February 19?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: Well, I'm not going to discuss the merits or demerits of the proposal by Ambassador Nimetz. We support the UN process. So does Greece. So does Macedonia. Of course, we thought -- we hoped that there would be an invitation to Macedonia. We said so. That remains our view. I see no reason to apologize for very active American role. We have, as you know, encouraged Skopje to negotiate in good faith. We have encouraged Greece to do the same. We don't take sides. We do -- our side is the side of a resolution on the most favorable terms possible for both sides, mutually acceptable terms. And I'm glad that we have -- that the United States is supporting Nimetz, and we intend to do so in the future.
QUESTION: Thanasis Isitsas, Greek newspaper Elefthe Rotypia. Mr. Secretary, a year ago, regarding Kosovo crisis, you said for the Serbians that nationalism is like a cheap alcohol; first it makes you drunk, then it makes you blind and it makes you kill. A year later, February 27th, you gave an interview in Radio Kanal 77, before the summit in Bucharest, and you practically justified nationalism coming from the government of the former Yugoslavia of Macedonia. You said that Macedonian patriots have struggled for this moment more than a hundred years to get in Europe Atlantic institutions. Can you tell us, Mr. Secretary, is it a double standard? How come did you call in the first statement the Serbians nationalists and the secondly the Macedonian patriots? Isn't this a kind of double standard? Don't you think you encouraging by certain statements the nationals in FYROM?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: Not at all. You completely misunderstood my remarks, and I should explain them to you so you can understand them properly.
Nationalism -- and Greece knows this very, very well -- in the Balkans has generated wars and bloodshed and killing and instability. And I think nationalism is a grave danger. When I spoke of Macedonian patriots, I spoke of a country which is a successful multiethnic state with ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians in the government and in opposition. Thanks to the Ohrid framework, the government in Skopje averted a major domestic problem, perhaps even a civil war. Of all the post-Yugoslav states, Macedonia has been among the most successful in avoiding precisely this kind of extreme nationalism. The government in Skopje, the Macedonian Government, is looking at a future in Europe and a future with NATO, and in doing so it is rejecting exactly the kind of nationalism which has brought so much pain to the Balkans.
In the future, a Macedonia in Europe, a Greece already in Europe, are destined to be good friends and partners. This is the best outcome, and that's the outcome we want. We want to see an outcome where nationalism of the kind that has brought wars is rejected. We want to see a future with irredentism belonging to history, not current-day reality. And I think that Greece has sometimes shown a great vision, a positive vision of this kind of cooperation, and I hope that Macedonia and Greece, FYROM and Greece, as you say, will be able to find this vision. We want to help.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, I need your attention. A few moments ago, you said specifically, "Ethnic Macedonians" for the first time in history. That means the U.S. Government is recognizing the so-called "Macedonian ethnicity and language."
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: I don't think it is so-called. Macedonian language exists. Macedonian people exist. It's not - you know, we teach Macedonian at the Foreign Service Institute. We teach Serbian, we teach Croatian, now we teach Bosnian. There's a debate in Montenegro as to Crnogorski Jezik, the Montenegrin language. All languages - and I speak now as - not as a bureaucrat, but as - you know, a former --a lapsed historian. All languages are - you know, are human creations and, you know, they develop over time and become codified. And it's not up to - you know, there is a Macedonian language.
There is also the historic Macedonian province, which is different from the country. And it's important. It's quite clear that the government in Skopje, what we Americans call the Government of Macedonia, has no claims. We recognize the difference between the historic territory of Macedonia, which is, of course, much larger than the current country. And we're involved in the - we are supportive of the Nimetz process on the name to make - to settle this issue.
QUESTION: What about the ethnicity? You mentioned ethnicity.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY FRIED: I'm not - I did - I did mention that. But, you know, this is an issue - you know, it is for people to define themselves, ultimately, I suppose. The ethnicity is - you know, it's just a fact as far as I can tell. The issue of the name is something that is on the table. And this is something to be discussed. I'm not the negotiator and I'm not, certainly, an anthropologist or an ethno-historian.
All right, thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)