| |
 |
|
| |
Project: "Interethnic Coexistence
and Dialogue in the Western Balkan Region" |
| |
Part I: Macedonia- Ohrid, May 18 - May 20, 2001 |
| |
 |
| |
Marie-Hélène
Bricknell, Resident Representative, World Bank, Skopje
Dr. Geert-Hinrich Ahrens, Ambassador, Head of OSCE Presence in Albania,
Tirana
Hildegard Dunkl, Chargé d'Affaires, Embassy of the Federal Republic
of Germany, Skopje
Gernot Erler, MP, President, Southeast Europe Association, Berlin
Donald Kursch, Deputy Special Coordinator for the Stability Pact for
Southeast Europe, Brussels |
| |
Executive Summary
Macedonia, lynchpin of the Central Balkans,
is in danger of collapsing. In an effort to help find means for
shoring up this state and aiding its people gain political, social
and economic stability, the Suedosteuropa-Gesellschaft (Southeast
Europe Association / SOG) sponsored an interethnic dialog in Ohrid,
Macedonia. More than 65 participants convened from May 18 - 20,
engaging in dialogue meant to promote greater interethnic understanding
and thus to promote preventive conflict resolution in Macedonia.
The meeting was chaired by Gernot Erler, President of the SOG and
prominent member of the Deutsche Bundestag, the German Parliament.
Participating were representatives from Macedonian civil society,
the academic community, business, the media, and the arts. Invitees
from Macedonia reflected the diversity of ethnic groups and civil
engagement within Macedonian society. Those from abroad included
outstanding regional experts and representatives of international
organizations active in Macedonia, along with, diplomats and members
of the German Parliament. Each participant was asked to candidly
present her or his views on the issues discussed.
The meeting was held during a time of acute
crisis for Macedonia with fighting in Northern Macedonia between
the Macedonian Army and ethnic Albanian rebels from National Liberation
Army ongoing. Discussions were informal, open and always serious.
They were focused on issues of special importance to furthering
interethnic coexistence. The participants were divided into three
groups, each of which undertook discussion of the problems associated
with each of the following general areas:
1. Education, Science and Vocational Training;
2. Media and Culture;
3. Economic Reconstruction
and Development.
Within these Working Groups, participants found
areas of broad agreement, as well as thorny issues that led to strong
disagreement. The articulated aim of the discussions was to find
some common ground and to recommend concrete measures that might
promote peaceful inter-ethnic coexistence in Macedonia. In fact,
the working groups produced a number of concrete proposals on how
the relationship of the different ethnic groups in Macedonia could
be improved. Topics that were been discussed and associated recommendations
are contained in the Reports
of the Working Groups. |
| |
 |
| |
Working Group
I:
The Role of Education, Science and Vocational Training,
May 19, 2001 |
| |
The discussions were marked by a sincere willingness on the part
of participants to openly talk about issues regarding interethnic
coexistence. This in itself signalled a success for the initiative,
because soon after discussions began, it became obvious that the
rift between the ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians is far
wider than the public in the West commonly understands. While many
ethnic Macedonian participants agreed that the collective rights
of the ethnic Albanian community must be expanded, others did not
feel that there is need for substantial reforms since the ethnic
Albanians, as well as other minorities, already participate in government
and thus have access to the means for bringing about reform through
democratic decision making. Among ethnic Albanians, on the other
hand, there was a consensus that their community suffers discrimination
and that there is a serious need to increase the number of ethnic
Albanians in state bodies and in other sectors of society. They
stressed the need to give ethnic Albanians constitutional equality
with ethnic Macedonians. None of the Albanian participants suggested
changing the present boundaries of Macedonia. Members of smaller
minorities, notably the Roma and Vlachs, expressed their frustration
that while the demands for improved circumstances for the ethnic
Albanians attract great attention, their concerns gain little notareity.
There was a general conviction that the Macedonian state urgently
needs deep-rooted reforms. Many reforms, including the fight against
corruption, only indirectly, if at all, are issues that have interethnic
relevance as corruption transcends ethnic boundaries.
Participants generally felt that the "Government of National Unity",
installed in May, presents one of the last real opportunities to
save Macedonia from civil war and territorial break-up. When, during
one of the panels the question was raised "what constitutes the
advantage of a multicultural Macedonian state ?" there was a consensus
by all that such a state in the only viable alternative to civil
war and disintegration. There was also a consensus that the ongoing
armed conflict has to be ended immediately. Apart from the obvious
consequences of this action, it offers xenophobes a platform upon
to which to engage in "hate speech" in the media, and thus further
polarize the population .
The SOG Interethnic Dialogue demonstrated that
there is a severe need for concrete and immediate action in many
fields. Some of the doable suggestions must be undertaken immediately:
Among these are the revision of history textbooks; development of
teacher training programs, further efforts to provide high-quality
university education for members of all ethnic groups; the creation
of an "ethics council" or journalism board for establishing guidelines
for what constitutes professional journalism and for setting up
means for self-policing of the media; the transfer of knowledge
and know how to Macedonian business; the enactment of functional
legislation that promotes fair business practices. Participants
agreed that many of these measures can only be implemented with
the help, active support, and sometimes prodding from outside of
Macedonia.
As concerns follow up activities, the Southeast
Europe Association intends to:
1. Make the results of the interethnic dialogue available to a broad
spectrum of decision makers in Macedonia and internationally;
2. Seek ways to enhance
as many of the concrete measures that were identified by the participants
as being crucial for interethnic coexistence in the reports of the
three Working Groups.
3. deliberate the utility
of follow-up meetings concerning Macedonia and, if appropriate,
will continue for the dialogue and the search for interethnic harmony
in Macedonia. |
| |
 |
| |
Working
Group III:
Economic Reconstruction
and Co-operation,
May 19, 2001 |
| |
|
| |
report
working group I 
report
working group II 
report
working group III  |
| |
|
|
| |
| ©
2008 Southeast Europe Association. All Rights Reserved |
 |
|
|