Centrul Diplomatic/Diplomatic Center

Centrul de Studii Politice si Diplomatie/ Center for Political Science and Diplomacy

ROMANIA-TAJIKISTAN: 20 YEAR`S OF DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS

On the occasion of 20 years of diplomatic relations between Romania and Tajikistan, the Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation is celebrating this moment by a round table dedicated to commemorate this 20 years of continuous economic, politic and cultural relations between Romania and Tajikistan.

H.E. President of Tajikistan -Emomali Rahmon and Professor Dr. Anton Caragea  

On 20 December 1991 Romania officially recognized the statehood of Republic of Tajikistan and on 20 July 2012 the diplomatic relations have being fully established. These 20 years of diplomatic relations opened for Romania the opportunity to engage in economic developments projects in Tajikistan and after the end of the civil war (1997) cultural and political relations had emerged.

Today  Romanian people observes, with brotherhood fillings, the full development of Tajikistan in a modern country, with a strong economy, a hub for commerce in the region and a stable and democratic society in a volatile area.

2011 had marked an impressive re-launch in the political, cultural and economic cooperation with the visit of   Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation delegation, headed by prof. Dr. Anton Caragea.

New political, cultural and economic programs are steadily developed and this 20 years anniversary of diplomatic relations is just marking the special fillings of friendship and cooperation between Romania and Tajikistan.

February 21, 2012 Posted by | Diplomacy, Economy, Foreign policy, History, Informations, International Relation, Leaders, Mass media, News, Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

SARBATORIREA A 20 DE ANI DE RELATII DIPLOMATICE ROMANIA-TAJIKISTAN

Cu ocazia sarbatoririi a 20 de ani de relatii diplomatice intre Romania si Tajikistan,  Institutul de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica a marcat momentul prin realizarea unei mese rotunde dedicate comemorarii acestor 20 de ani de relatii economice, politice si culturale continue intre Romania si Tajikistan.

In 20 decembrie 1991 Romania a recunoscut in mod oficial independenta Republicii Tajikistan si in data de 20 iulie 2012 relatiile diplomatice complete au fost stabilite.

Excelenta Sa Presedintele Tajikistanului-Emomali Rahmon si prof.dr. Anton Caragea 

Acesti 20 de ani de relatii diplomatice au deschis pentru Romania posibilitatea de a deveni un partener in proiectele de dezvoltare economica din Tajikistan si la finalul conflictului civil din aceasta tara( 1997) si relatiile culturale si politice au fost reluate.

Astazi, poporul roman observa cu sentimente fratesti dezvoltarea uimitoare a Tajikistanului intr-o tara moderna, cu o economie puternica, un centru pentru comert in zona si o tara stabila si democratica intr-o  regiune volatila.

Anul 2011  a marcat o impresionanta relansare in cooperarea politica, culturala si economica, odata cu vizita delegatiei Institutului de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica, condusa de prof.dr.Anton Caragea.

Noi proiecte politice, economice si culturale sunt dezvoltate intre cele doua tari si aniversarea celor 20 de ani relatii diplomatice marcheaza sentimentele speciale de prietenie si cooperare dintre Romania si Tajikistan.

February 21, 2012 Posted by | Blackseanews Agency, Diplomacy, Diplomatie, Eastern Europe, Ecology, Economia Romaniei, Economy, Educatie, Emomali Rahmon, Environment, Foreign policy, Informations, Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation, Institutul de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica, International Relation, Leaders, Mass media, News, OSCE-Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Relatii Internationale, Romanian economy, Romanian Foreign Policy, Tajikistan, Tourism, Travel, Turism, Universitati | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

DIALOG INTRE PROF.DR. ANTON CARAGEA SI AMBASADOR MARTA FAJARDO PALET

In data de 13 Februarie 2012 a avut loc o intrevedere amicala si de cooperare  intre prof.dr.Anton Caragea , Directorul Institutului de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica  si Excelenta Sa Marta  Fajardo Palet – Ambasador al Republicii Cuba in Romania.

Excelenta Sa Ambasadoarea Marta Fajardo Palet si Prof.Dr. Anton Caragea

Prof.dr.Anton Caragea si-a exprimat sentimentele de prietenie si a subliniat interesul cu care Romania a urmarit recentele evolutii din Cuba, incluzand consolidarea dezvoltarii economice a Cubei si crearea unei perfecte unitati de sentimente si actiune intre popor si guvernul cubanez. Traditia revolutionara cubaneza continua sub supervizarea Comandantului Fidel Castro si a Presedintelui Raul Castro si este urmarita cu simpatie si interes in Romania, a subliniat prof.dr.Anton Caragea .

Excelenta Sa, D-na Ambasador Marta  Fajardo Palet, a prezentat cele mai noi evolutii in relatia bilaterala precum : deschiderea Camerei de Comert Romania-Cuba, dezvoltarea relatiilor culturale si construirea de noi punti de dialog intre Romania si Cuba.

Partile au apreciat ca intre Romania si Cuba exista o larga arie de interese comune menite a garanta o buna intelegere intre doua tari. Relatia intre Romania si Cuba  trebuie sa fie un exemplu pentru relatia intre Romania si America Latina.

Daca in ultimii ani dialogul cu zona Americii Latine nu a fost satisfacator , acum exista momentul propice pentru reluarea acestuia si dezvoltarea lui.

Dialogul a continuat pe teme concrete, de analiza a relatiilor economice , politice si culturale intre cele doua tari si a metodelor practice de dezvoltare a acestora in viitor.

Dialogul Romania-Cuba. Un dialog al prieteniei. 

Totodata a fost discutata si aniversarea in acest an ( 2012) a 85 de ani de relatii diplomatice si marcarea anul trecut ( 2011) a 50 de ani de relatii diplomatice la nivel de ambasada intre Romania si Cuba.

Dialogul de succes promite relansarea unei directii de actiune diplomatica a Romaniei spre zona Americii Latine.

February 21, 2012 Posted by | Blackseanews Agency, Communism, Diplomatie, Economia Romaniei, Economy, Educatie, Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation, Institutul de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica, International Relation, Latin America, Mass media, Relatii Internationale, Tourism, Travel, Turism, Universitati | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

DIALOGUE BETWEEN PROFESSOR ANTON CARAGEA AND AMBASSADOR MARTA FAJARDO PALET

On 13 of February 2012 a friendly and cooperation  meeting between prof. dr. Anton Caragea, Director of Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation and H.E. Mrs. Marta  Fajardo Palet, Ambassador of  Republic of Cuba had taken place.

H.E. Ambassador Marta Fajardo Palet and Professor Dr. Anton Caragea

Prof. dr. Anton Caragea express his amicable fillings and friendly interest towards the recent evolution`s in Cuba, that are consolidating Cuba`s economic development, open society and are creating a sense of perfect unity between the people of Cuba and the government. Cuba`s revolutionary transition under Commander Fidel Castro supervision and President Raul Castro guidance is witnessed with sympathy and interest in Romania, emphasized prof.dr.Anton Caragea .

H.E. Ambassador Marta  Fajardo Palet presented the latest achievements in bilateral relations : opening a bilateral chamber of commerce, developing cultural relations and building new bridges of understanding between Romania and Cuba.

The parties had appreciated that between Romanian and Cuba there are  large area of common interests , designed to forge a good understanding  between the two nations . The Romania- Cuba relationship must be an example for a better relation between Romania and Latin America .

If in the last decade the bilateral dialogue with this area was faltering, now it is a auspicious moment for reconstructing and rebuilding this framework of dialogue and friendship.

The dialogue had continued on concrete aspects and analyses  of economic, political and cultural bilateral relations and on ways of fostering this dialogue on to the future .

Also the parties had evoked the history of bilateral relations and the marking in this year (2012) of 85 years of bilateral diplomatic relations and the commemoration last  year ( 2011) of  50 years of diplomatic relations at ambassador level.

Dialogue Romania-Cuba: a dialogue of friendship

The discussion led the foundations of continuing the dialogue and  fostering the relations between Romania and Cuba.

February 21, 2012 Posted by | Diplomacy, Economy, Foreign policy, History, Informations, International Relation, Leaders, Mass media, News, Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

EUROPEAN COUNCIL ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS VOTED AS BEST EUROPEAN THINK TANK

European Council on International Relations has being voted as the BEST EUROPEAN THINK TANK AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION at the Bucharest meeting of european international relations and diplomatic experts from across European Union.

Participants at LAW AND JUSTICE SEMINARY

The meeting hosted by Ecological Institute of Romania and Justice and Law Institute of Romania discuss the evolution in international law`s and justice, the reform of European Law, European Court of Justice and Rome Treaty.

On the conference the international visitors discuss also the impact of international think tank role in XXI Century world in offering alternative views to official point` s, offering targeted analyses and evaluation and offering assistance to governments and ministries across the world.

Also the think thanks are offering new possibilities to public diplomacy, that is extensively becoming the most important area of diplomacy as the nations states opportunities for diplomatic activities are shrinking .

The participants voted EUROPEAN COUNCIL ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS  as BEST  EUROPEAN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION AND THINK TANK and a peerless  model for European public diplomacy. In 2011 European Council on International Relations offered breaking analysis on areas such as Syria, Middle East, and Central Asia etc.  established diplomatic links to important countries such as Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Algeria, Morocco, Venezuela, Argentine and Brazil.

Also EUROPEAN COUNCIL ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS created in parlous condition monitoring missions, supported democracy worldwide, offered priceless training in diplomacy, international relations and elections organizing and monitoring.

The extensively and unremitting exertions for the public good of EUROPEAN COUNCIL ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS   offered to European Union an opportunity to express his values, to assert his unity and to offer a world model for public diplomacy , considered the participants at International Law and Justice Seminary.

February 7, 2012 Posted by | Diplomacy, Economy, Foreign policy, History, Informations, International Relation, Leaders, Mass media, News, Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ROMANIAN ECONOMY IN 2012. ROMANIA IN DEEPENING CRISIS.

Monday 6 of February 2012 at the Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation headquarters was held the first conference of 2012: The evolution of Romanian economy in 2012.  The crisis will continue!

 The conference has joined economical experts from Romania and European Union, economical supervisors and personalities of political, economical and academic life of Romania.

Another example of Romanian economic success : street beggars

 2009 and 2011 – first years of economic crisis.

 The conference started with an evaluation of economic crisis impact in the period of the first years: 2009, 2010 and 2011.

In the first year of the crisis in Romania -2009- the economic crisis has affected the vital areas of economic life: the collapse has started with construction industry and construction material factories, collapse continued by the real estate market shrinking. Others affected sectors where: insurance, banking and stock exchange and in all the financial sector was strongly shaken down. The consumer confidence has fallen sharply and the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has being reduced with 10% in 2010 and 8% in 2011.

 The decrease in our economy has being so devastating that we are below the 2000 level. Unfortunately the economic collapse of 2010 and 2011 has laid the foundation for a crisis without equivalent in Romanian history that will affect the country in 2012 and 2013.

 2011- The year of economic earthquake.

 2011 will be remembered without a doubt as the year of economic turmoil in Romania, had appreciated in one voice all the experts present at the gathering. First of all the 2011has being the year in which the Romanian economy had collected all the hard hits from all the economic collapse of the last years. The financial system has being especially hard hit and this had made the fragile Romanian economy to reach the breaking point. The inflation had resurfaced and the experts appreciate that a 10% percent yearly inflation is unavoidable.

The resurgence of inflation had put a dramatic pressure on population economy and had made any recovery unthinkable for the next 2-4 years. The collapse in economic system, the internal and external investments had being reduced to minimum, the credit on internal market has being practically suspended and all this had provoke for 2012 an economic decrease of more than 15% of GDP or even 18% of GDP after others opinions. A factor not to be neglected in amplification of the crisis is the governmental incompetence that by increasing the taxes, legislative chaos and a deliberate politics of destroying the middle class investors in the favor of big companies all did nothing ells than to aggravate the economic crisis.

 2012 – between crisis and slowing down economy.

 The 2012 will be a decisive year to slow down the economic collapse or to direct the economy in a new catastrophic decline. It must be very clear, all economic experts underlined, that the present economic decline will last for a decade at European level, so all those opinions that declared that Romania will start a new economic growth before the next 10 years; either don’t know what they are saying either is bluntly laying.

All the European statistics are speaking about the lost decade of Europe between 2010 and 2020 , term referring to the blocking of economic development at continental level and the frozen of present situation for a decade.

Those that are declaring that Romania will surpass in the period of economic crisis the France or Great Britain economy , are telling stories that are unbelievable , declared laughing Mihail Racaceanu – chief economist. What is important is to succeed that we have in 2012 a decrease in economy of less than 10% and in the interval between 2012 and 2015 to stop the decline and in 2020 to come back to pre-crisis year of 2007 and in 2050 at the pre-revolutionary level of 1989.

 In 2050 the Romanian economy will reach the level of 1989 as a historic economic reference year.

 This assessment was a strong one, keeping in mind that the pre-crisis governmental statistic declared that in 2025 Romania will succeed in recuperating the gap and reach the level of industrial activity prior to 1989 Revolution.

This perspective is no longer feasible, a new perspective is appearing after the crisis and after the lost decade and a cumulative GDP decrease of more than 60% from 2007 economy level.

This economic recession will be hard to recuperate in the context of nongovernmental involvement, the general economic climate of recession and finally the worst factor of all: the burden of external debt.

 External debt will plunge Romania into financial meltdown.

 The factor that will suffocate Romanian economy in the next period will be, after 2015, the foreign debt crisis.

The Boc government has careless accepted more than 36 billion dollars credit and in total the private and state debt of Romania is reaching the unbelievable sum of 95 billion dollars, this only if the government will no longer accept new loans.

But this perspective is an unrealistically  one as President Traian Basescu has announced new external loans for 2012 , that will surely bring Romania to being incapable to pay the foreign debt. Despite the writing on the wall in all of cases like Greece, Spain and Ireland, Romania is accepting new loan from International Monetary Fund, loans that will not be invested in developing and modernizing the economy but in pay offs for next parliamentary and presidential elections’. This consumer invested loans at extortionate interest rates will suffocate completely an ailing and failed economy as Romanian economy is.

Unemployment: with a rate of registered unemployment of more than 10% of the active population and with another 15% percent of the population already left out of the governmental unemployment aide Romania tops all the EU member countries with a real unemployment figure of more than 25% of the population. This figure must be put in perspective with more that 50% of the population below the poverty line and the full picture of the economic meltdown and social tragedy could be analyzed. Romania economy is in crises and no plans for a future development had not being adopted.

 

2012: The economic crisis is worsening.

 The conclusions of the most important economic experts of Romania where clear: the crisis is not over by far, but has entered in a more difficult faze that will affect financial and banking system and economic fundaments. The economic crisis will continue until 2015 at the earliest and a coming back cycle that will last until 2020. This decade will be without a doubt the lost decade of Romania but if the necessary measures are not rapidly taken to re-establish control on economic decline than we risk that Romania economy will not come back not even in 2020.

February 7, 2012 Posted by | Blackseanews Agency, Danube Delta, Diplomacy, Eastern Europe, Ecology, Economia Romaniei, Economy, Environment, Foreign policy, History, Informations, Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation, International Relation, Islam, Leaders, Mass media, News, Open Letter, OSCE-Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Politics, Relatii Internationale, Romanian economy, Romanian Foreign Policy, Romanian Revolution, Tourism, Travel, Universities | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

UNDERSTANDING MACEDONIA – A SERIES BY Irina Simonovska – Spirkovska ( part II)

Macedonian Specifics of the Civil Society Development

Macedonian Political Researcher -Irina Simonovska – Spirkovska

Regarding the position of Republic ofMacedonia, one thing can be immediately seen; a small country and nation. The small countries and nations have the destiny for their survival and progress to be dependent on the global events and trends. Hence, they intensively feel the changes within the global human society, both on political and economy level. Resolving their internal problems, they always must keep themselves awake and in touch with the global changes, following the general progressive trends, predominantly taken by powerful countries.

Thus, even the process of modernization follows this pattern. Obviously, one of the characteristics of the processes that have marked the end of the twentieth and the beginning of the twenty first century can be observed through the fact that the position of the small countries, the concept of their organizing of the commercial life, the efficiency of the economic system, political stability, social security, the material situation of citizens, the degree of social development throughout the whole country, is greatly determined by the ruling current global relations and the dominant part of various countries in them.[1]

            The dissolution of the communist/socialist model had different socio – political implications in different countries of Southeast, Eastern andCentral Europe. Its consequences varied greatly, dependant by many factors, beginning with different historical perspectives of the countries and (eventually) ending with the ultimate result of possible security or insecurity of citizens in the system. Thus, on one hand, progress, social and economic stability, employment, predictability of future, but on the other hand, war, poverty, famine, moral deterioration, social insecurity and total unpredictability of nearly every segment of the system.

 

The Macedonian Particularities of the Civil Development

There are few Macedonian (but also Balkan – andMacedonianot being part of them) specifics that are worth to mention:

A sharp ideological break with the leftovers from the communist/socialist past had taken place, inspired by the classic civil – societal concept, supported by the continuing aversion to the same; one can find similar views and manners of behavior when it comes to foreign organizations and various development agencies which were active in this respective domain – while at the same time, there was broader (and scientific) public opinion opted (and was convinced) for the (nearly) absolute usefulness of the latter, as a breath of fresh air, with capability not only to solve crucial social problems and underdevelopments, but also to bring benefit by transplanting (and more frequently) importing the Western experience into the East.[2] Furthermore, an atmosphere of distrust towards the capacity of state authorities to deal with the mentioned problems facing the Macedonian state, economically and politically, had been created.[3]

In terms of segmentary division, during the period of transition, large number of civil associations was established as a response to the rapid social changes and the great expansion of the concerns and needs of society.

 Regarding the domain, first (even before the transition), ecological organizations appeared (the end of the 80s), followed by youth organizations and humanitarian organizations (beginning of the 90s) and with further establishment and implementation of the principles for protection of the human rights – appeared great number of respective organizations. Afterwards, till present days, the structure was becoming more heterogeneous since there were organizations from every segment of society.[4]

Speaking of large civil organizations’ initiatives from abroad, it seems that they favored their own organizational structures instead of the already established, under the pretext that the latter are already outdated, communist, bureaucratic and inefficient forms of action, which in turn produced some problems in understanding the effect of the civilian system and confidence in the usefulness of the same, while at the same time they also contributed to modernization in the civil aspect, bringing in foreign expertise for approximation of basic liberal values and necessary assistance in achieving important goals, especially in the field of social justice and interethnic relations.

Together with the old subjects, the foreign subjects have worked on creation of additional auxiliary entities which played the role of intermediaries between the foreign and domestic factors – putting the latter in rather discriminative role.

Certain problems of non – continuity had existed, meaning of primary direct financial interest as a true motivation, meaning that the continuous and dedicated work as a security from foreign funds.[5]

Renaming certain already existent subjects of the civil society with new terminology had taken place (to avoid any similarities with the past one) eventually leading to confusion about their number: in this context, for example, it was confusing which part of civil initiatives are not NGO’s (because they had been presented exclusively as the main carriers of the civic modernization), so the insight into the real number of subjects in the wider civic system remained quite unclear.[6]

The institutional placement of the subjects partly coincided with the organizational framework of the foreign factor, meaning that the latter was defining the priorities in the favoring of certain branches at the expense of other: for example, the number of subjects that were dealing with personal and political rights was far greater than the number of the same – dealing with social and economic rights (they were not properly included because of the fact that the fall of the communist state couldn’t be achieved without privatization (primitive accumulation of capital) and free market. As a conclusion, the organizations and initiatives for women, youth sector and similar, were present only nominally.

A big part of the organizations inMacedoniawere (and still are) working on constantly improving the civic background for successful implementation of democratic principles in the interethnic sector within a new environment (with reference to the continuing process of decentralization, especially after the constitutional changes in 2001).

There had been a problem of limited self – regulation within the civil sector itself; lack of internal democracy in the organizations; existence of small number of “big” civil organizations with well developed internal structure.[7] According to more recent analysis, “…The strongest values are peace – non-violence and gender. The weakest value is transparency. Democracy is somewhere between and CSOs are on half way in practicing internal democracy…” The civil society has shown better in the promotion of democracy than practicing the same internally. Many of the organizations were founded by (charismatic) leaders. Some of them are failing to divide the leadership from the management and/or limit their powers and terms”.[8]

Few institutional innovations in the civil domain had taken place, such as an introduction of the practice of mandatory communication between civil society and the state and the inclusion of the same into the creation of certain policies[9], as well as the recent legal changes that facilitate the registration and financing of the entities in this sector.[10]

The civil sector is characterized by a high degree of representativeness of the social groups and good organized infrastructure for support, plus significant level of networking between the different organizations (but also indifferent relationships with other stakeholders in society, especially the business sector!) which reflects into dynamics in their communication, coordination and cooperation, which in long terms’ speaking, results in strengthening of the social capital. [11]

One of the very positive aspects is the economic potential of the civil initiatives through their role of employers, including in their activities – the economically active population and by that, contributing to the reduction of unemployment.[12]

There is clearly a difference between the transition in respect of civil society between Central and Eastern Europe. With exception of Slovenia(whose transitional model has more similar to the Central European model than to the Southeastern one) the trade unions and respective organizations are hardly organizationally represented. The only civil sector that has been really active is the sector for ethnic and minority rights, as we can see in the cases of Macedonia, Montenegro, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovinaand Kosovo.[13]

Observing these positive and negative features of the civil society in Macedonia, the objective assessment mark is generally positive. Its top spots are promotion and practice of the positive values, thus creating the basis for its achievement and influence, while one of the weak spots is the view of the public opinion, displaying lack of confidence and public spirit, which had an adverse effect on the civil society image as a moderate in size and unbalanced in its structure.[14]

 

Macedonian Social Changes in Multicultural Context

As speaking of transition towards liberal – democratic civil society, it must be emphasized that the transition of the multiethnic societies, such as Macedonia, is often burdened with another layer: ethnic sentiment against the universal civil one, or put in other words, individuality of the sovereign citizen and his feelings toward his ethnic collective as a complementary part of his attitude towards the state. Ethnic pluralism is an important issue, which, roughly speaking, rebels against the state institution and thus, centralization. According to some authors, this social manifestation can impede the road to democracy – whether it had culminated in a war or conflict (such as in the case of Macedonia) or not. Thus the question, is existence of democracy of groups (organized on basis of different organizational principles) possible?[15]

Speaking of the Macedonian case, there are some authors who argue that in this respect, political transition in unitary civil state (regarding interethnic relations) is possible through the cohabitation of the two partners – civil society and state[16], only if the official state politics is efficient enough in solving problems on the political front. Then, the state centralization can play a crucial role in creating a policy of homogenization and intensification of contacts between cultures (where now civil society plays a crucial role), as demonstrated in the field of interethnic relations in Macedonia after crisis since 2001.[17]

Macedonia is a multi – ethnic, multilingual and multi confessional society within a small territory and population, imposing another “problem” that had waited long for before it was constitutionally and declaratively solved after the armed conflict 2001, concluded with the Framework Agreement giving wide scope of collective rights and promoting the principle of inclusiveness of minorities; its implementation is and will be a long – term project.

In this regard, the civil society is a basic condition and a “must” for every multicultural and multi confessional society – asMacedoniais, because it is a fundamental prerogative and major source of strength and civic identity of the primary social core of the country – the demos. Its essence lies in the fact that it is an ongoing and constant process of learning and analyzing beyond the differences, as well as building trust and tolerance between various social, to be more specific – ethnic groups. Through continuous communication, interaction and compromises there is a process of building own separate identity, but, shaped by a new layer whose core is the community of interests and common values (as proved through the Macedonian example in 2001 and the Framework Agreement).

 

* * *

 

The establishment of an open civil society in Macedonia turns out as one of the most important issues, or can be even considered as a basis (or even one of the initial triggers) in the process for the modernization of the country as a whole. The reorganization, though, as a process, could be a very slow one, and its benefits – could not visible for a very long time. Its primary meaning is raising the citizen (and his welfare) on the pedestal as an ultimate (passive) principle in society, but also as an active creator (and inspiration) for new social reorganization. The newly gained political, economical and normative legitimacy of civil segment gave it a new role and opportunity to action and affect almost every aspect of social life, transplanting and importing experiences from the West, but with necessary adjusting to the domestic characteristics and circumstances.

However, in the past, given the fact that ethnic identity among the various groups was quite accentuated in nearly every sphere of social life, this had a negative implication on the development of civil society and building common civil identity among citizens, which issue cannot be related only to transition, but is a never ending and constantly upgrading process.

Through continuous efforts for embracement and implementation of the multicultural model, Macedonia, as a state, but more as a society, in the last 8 – 9 years shows, how in real life, through the use of civil instruments, a process of building of liberal – democratic society can bridle the centrifugal tendencies in the society (in ethnic respect) and create a centripetal tendency for homogenizing the social structure.[18]

The above mentioned helped Macedonia to create a very positive image in the international community for choosing the right way to step out of backward traditionalism and head into new era of cosmopolitism.

 

 

 

RESUME

 

After gaining of independence, the actual process of modernization Macedonia witnessed numerous political, economic and social problems in general. The building of the civil sphere as a continuous process till present days has shown complete determination of the society to carry itself out of post communist – socialist sphere of organizing social relations, while displaying certain level of willingness to adapt to rapid structural changes and represent the country in a very positive light in front of the international community (which is moreover important for the integration in the EU). The civil society in Macedonia became a scene for expressing of sharing common values. Since Republic of Macedonia is a multiethnic, multilingual, multi confessional, and in cultural sense, plural society, this characteristics inevitably had certain implications (or even reflections) in the development of the civil society as an aspect of modernization. That feature can be seen in remodeling the social sphere in that context, before and after the crisis in 2001 and the respective changes of the constitutional and political system towards plural democracy with respective elements of communitarian approach. Creation of the civil multiculturalism is a continuing action of creating opportunities for practice and preservation of particularity within a group and further, its compliance with the wider system of common values and interests and pleads forward harmonization of common interests of all citizens of a community by bringing their special interests whose realization is guaranteed through highest forms of normative protection.

Regarding the institutional background, it must be concluded, as in elsewhere where communism / socialism was present as a dominant form of social relations, that in Macedonia, the success of the civil project is highly dependent on the relationship with the state and its institutions, as well as the international factor. Although the civil sphere is formally separated from the state sphere, this does not mean that no special relationship of cooperation takes place, especially given that the state is one of the participants in the process of creating policies that support joint civil identity and cultural distinctiveness. When it comes to the international factor, its presence and significance is greatest in the harmonization and approximation of the liberal – democratic values in the way of the country’s aspirations towardsEuropeand European Union as one of the final road at the end of the transition.

 

 

Selected bibliography:

 

  • Frchkoski, Ljubomir, Model of the multiethnic relations inMacedonia, Krug,Skopje, 1998;

  • Kacarska, Simonida, Civil organizations in theRepublicofMacedonia, a Connection Between the Public and the State or an Isolated Entity? Analysis of the period 1990 – 2007, MCMS, Center for Regional Research and Cooperation,Skopje, 2007;

  • Medrano, Juan M., Some Thematic and Strategic Priorities for Developing Research on Multi – Ethnic and Multi – Cultural Societies, Discussion Paper, MOST, 1996;

  • Pavlovic, Vukashin, The Suppressed Civil Society, Article in the Publication: Civil Society in the Countries in Transition, Comparative Analysis and Practice,Subotica, 1999;

  • Pechijareski, Ljupco; Nikoloski, Dimitar; Dimeski, Stevcho, Macedonian Citizens at the End of the Twentieth and the Beginning of the Twenty- First Century, Metaphore, Prilep, Macedonia, 2002;

  • Trajkovski, Ilo, The Politics of the Post – Communist Civil Society, Article in the Bulletin: Development of the Political and Legal System of theRepublicofMacedonia, University “St. Cyril and Methodius”, Law Faculty,Skopje, 2000;

  • Conference “Strengthening the triangle CSOs-National Governments-European Commission” Reinforcing the Europe-wide Civil Society and Building Partnerships”, Prepared by Macedonian Center for International Cooperation, Zadar, Croatia, 19-20 October 2009;

  • ”National Human DevelopmentReport,Macedonia, 1999 – Civil Society in Transition, UNDP (Skopje), Ministry of Development,Skopje, 1999;

    • RepublicofMacedonia(Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) Country Analysis, Forum Syd, 2007;
    • Strategy for cooperation of the Government with the civil sector (With Action Implementation Plan 2007 – 2011), General Secretariat of the Government of theRepublicofMacedonia,Skopje, 2007.

[1]Pechijareski, Ljupco; Nikoloski, Dimitar; Dimeski, Stevcho, Macedonian Citizens at the End of the Twentieth and the Beginning of the Twenty- First Century, Metaphore, Prilep, Macedonia, 2002, p.15.

[2] The analysis of the relationship between the civil organizations and public was addressing two key factors: the influence of communism and disappointment with the transition. The combination of these factors complicates the formation of organic connection between him and the wide public. In accordance with the abovementioned, when talking about public participation in, the formal structure is present, but lacking the substantial aspect of the civic participation. The case ofMacedonia fits the findings of the theoretical literature on transition, whereby the development of civil activism is one of the hardest tasks of the process democratization. InMacedonia, an additional contextual element represents a disappointment with the transition and the constant postponement of the benefits of this process. Reference: Kacarska, Simonida, Civil organizations in theRepublic ofMacedonia, a Connection Between the Public and the State or an Isolated Entity? Analysis of the period 1990 – 2007, MCMS, Center for Regional Research and Cooperation,Skopje, 2007.

[4] Strategy for Cooperation of the Government With the Civil Sector (Action Implementation Plan 2007 – 2011), General Secretariat of the Government of the Republic of Macedonia, Skopje, 2007.

[5] Civil society organizations remain heavily dependent on foreign funding. Since 2005 whenMacedonia became an EU candidate country focus of the international donors shifted to other regions that led to their withdrawing. As a result EU funding (mostly Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance) became main interest for CSOs. But there are also several concerns related to the capacity of CSO to fulfill the requirements of EC, in particular high annual budget of the organization, co-financing or complicate application procedures. Consequently, only limited number of CSOs can participate in the process of application for projects of tenders. Taken from: Conference “Strengthening the triangle CSOs-National Governments-European Commission” Reinforcing the Europe-wide Civil Society and Building Partnerships”, Prepared by Macedonian Center for International Cooperation, Zadar, Croatia, 19-20 October 2009.

[6] Without having an adequate understanding of the meaning of this imported “symbol,” (NGO), and its place in the concept of civil society, the total number of CAOs was reduced to approximately 600 NGOs. By doing so, more than 4,000 registered and active CAOs were excluded from the “actual civil society.”National Human DevelopmentReport,Macedonia, 1999 – Civil Society in Transition, UNDP (Skopje), Ministry of Development,Skopje, 1999.

[7] Strategy for cooperation of the Government with the civil sector (With Action Implementation Plan 2007 – 2011), General Secretariat of the Government of theRepublic ofMacedonia,Skopje, 2007.

[8]Republic ofMacedonia (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) Country Analysis, Forum Syd, 2007.

[9] The Strategy for Cooperation of the Government with the Civil Society (January, 2007) provides a base for setting structures and process for civil dialogue. In the frames of activities to achieve the 2nd Strategy goal “Participation of the Civil Sector in the Decision-Making Process” a change in the Rules of Procedure of the Government were adopted in March 2008. The changes were made in order to enable the access to the draft laws on the web sites of the Ministries drafting the laws. The Rules of Procedures stipulates “every interested party can submit opinion, remarks and proposals to the electronic registry regarding the published proposals for a novelty is the obligation of the relevant ministries to prepare report on the received opinions, stating the reasons why the remarks and proposals were not accepted, which should be published on the web site of the relevant ministry and electronic regulation registry1. For example, proposals have been published by the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Labor and Social Policy, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Transport and Communications and Ministry of Health. Taken from: Progress Report on the Implementation of the Strategy for Cooperation of the Government with the Civil Sector (2007 – 2011) for the period January 2007 – December 2008. Source: Conference “Strengthening the triangle CSOs-National Governments-European Commission” Reinforcing the Europe-wide Civil Society and Building Partnerships”, Prepared by Macedonian Center for International Cooperation, Zadar, Croatia, 19-20 October 2009.

[10] Based on comparative analysis and overview of the financial support to CSOs by the state made in 2007, information with draft measures was prepared to be adopted by the Government of theRepublic ofMacedonia. After the consultations with the ministries, only the Code of Good Practices for Funding of Citizens’ Associations and Foundations from the Budget of theRepublic ofMacedonia was adopted. The Code is based on the provisions stipulated in the draft guidelines. This activity has contributed for improving the criteria for allocation of funding, but not the amount of the funds allocated from the budget. Furthermore, most of the funding (particularly the funds allocated from the games of chance) are reserved for an exclusive number of organizations. Although the open call for funding of citizens associations and foundations from the budget in 2008 was published on time and in accordance with the provisions suggested in the Code, the further monitoring of the recommendations was missing, particularly in terms of respecting the deadlines. Ibidem.

[11] Source: Index of Civil Society, CIVICUS, 2005, Taken from: Strategy for cooperation of the Government with the civil sector (With Action Implementation Plan 2007 – 2011), General Secretariat of the Government of the Republic of Macedonia, Skopje, 2007.

[12] Ibid.

[13] For further references, see: Trajkovski, Ilo, The Politics of the Post – Communist Civil Society, Article in the Bulletin: Development of the Political and Legal System of theRepublic ofMacedonia, University “St. Cyril and Methodius”, Law Faculty,Skopje, 2000, p.208.

[14] Ibid.

[15]  There are theories (R.Dahl) which suppose that the social organism as a whole is divided into many micro systems forming their “micro – elites” who presumably have their internal organizational principles. Furthermore, that “correlation” of that micro – elites creates equilibrium on the global political spot for making decision. But, enev in that scheme, there are key “value and procedural verticals” and direct connections between the citizens and the central institutions of the system. Reference: Frchkoski, Ljubomir, Model of the multiethnic relations inMacedonia, Krug,Skopje, 1998, p.17.

[16] The autonomy of civil society from the state and politics is perhaps one of its main differentiae specificae. Of course, this autonomy cannot be absolute, and it is precisely here that perhaps the greatest theoretical and practical difficulties are concentrated concerning identification, examination and understanding of civil society. The autonomy of civil society refers to the relatively free social space for the self – regulation of certain interests and needs (economic, cultural, religious, social, charity, educational etc.). If the state doesn’t recognize or threatens the autonomy of this space, i.e. if it curtails the space for civil society and wants to subordinate it to the logic of the state and politics – then, in the long run, it acts against itself and its own stability. Reference: Pavlovic, Vukashin, The Suppressed Civil Society, Article in the Publication: Civil Society in the Countries in Transition, Comparative Analysis and Practice,Subotica, 1999, p.98.


[18] The Ohrid Framework Agreement and later, the constitutional changes transformed the majority democracy model (which ensured the monopoly of the majority), and was ‘’corrected’’ by the elements of consociative and plural democracy, which on the other hand enables balance of power and influence between the majority and minority communities, when it comes about the positions and interests of main importance for keeping and developing the identity of the later.

February 2, 2012 Posted by | Foreign policy | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

UNDERSTANDING MACEDONIA – A SERIES BY Irina Simonovska – Spirkovska ( part I)

Cultural Diversity in the Process of (Re) Building of Macedonian Society

Macedonian Doctorate Candidate:  Irina Simonovska – Spirkovska

The cultural or social integration as a complex concept is extremely important process which has unifying impulse in its core. Although its immanent cohesive attribute remains undisputable, however, in relation to the aforementioned, there should necessarily be put attention to the positive embodiment in a normative framework. Of course, this process, as well as all other social processes are very difficult, complex and always cover a great historical period. In most cases, it is compounded with the ongoing problems that inevitably impose on societies living in many social, ethnic groups, more specifically, where there may be varying degrees of acceptance of joint actions and alleviating the difference in achieving common goals.

In the years after gaining of the independence of theRepublicofMacedonia, no matter how good it looked in official documents, the true social cohesion was not satisfactory, especially when it comes to the two most numerous nationalities, Macedonian and Albanian.

Out of the aforementioned premise, numerous sub – questions could be drawn: to what extent the Macedonian society was really integrated; was, if possible, the eventual non – integration, fault of the majority Macedonian population and their official policy, or, the Albanian factor too bears some of the responsibility; whether other minority groups were strong enough to launch an independent real ethnic and political mobilization, or, their treatment was only a “side – effect” of treatment of the Albanian community. The commitment of the Macedonian cultural and political element – in order for the plural policy project to succeed despite everything, in the broad political and general social area, still remains undisputable, as such. Unfortunately, it failed to relieve the social and more importantly, the political scene of ethnic tensions, the tensions that were often elevated to the level of potential affect, which unfortunately came true in the cross point – the year of 2001.

Despite the good intentions in declarative commitments, despite opened opportunities for social integration of the diversities  (standing on a higher level than narrow respect for the rights of different ethnic groups and their cultural identity), despite the official policy of coexistence of the state (an ideological term that was not sufficiently explained  with assumption – was supposed to mark the peaceful coexistence), and despite repeated opportunities for integration (the absence of open and violent conflict, as well as respect for equality and diversity) reality reflected different perspectives.

Cultural Premises of the Macedonian Society (From Independence until the 2001 Conflict)

 

The socio  – demographic characteristics of the society were reflected primarily by the formation of one – national political parties (as stated above), through the intensification of the processes of formation of ethnically clean villages and settlements in the cities, forming companies based on ethnic ownership, ethnic organizations and nongovernmental organizations and etc.

This was the direction path of the post – independence Macedonian society, creating two parallel worlds that (co)exist, consisted of “clean” groups and individuals. Macedonian society became a divided society. In this sense, the social model of integration of the Macedonian society can isolate several assumptions in the process of interaction between ethnic groups, primarily in relations between the Macedonian and Albanian ethnic group. After 10 years of independent functioning, a sufficient critical mass and qualitative preconditions for greater integration of the Albanian ethnic minority (or community in society) were not achieved. Moreover, there are some positive elements in the processes of structural integration, but the process of cultural integration lacked away, and even less has been achieved in the processes of acceptance and common interests. In these processes of interaction, more elements of opposition and tension were present, rather than elements of community and social cohesion.

Hence, the Macedonian society followed the path of disintegration, rather than social integration, where the main ethnic prerequisite, followed by strict isolation and socio – political pluralism, when many social issues had not been resolved (as in the case of very long period of transition and economic crisis).

The above lead to reinforcing of the destructive pressures, as well as to escalation of the struggle for redistribution of power in society. The aforementioned had strengthening influence on the degree of conflict to the level of full confrontment (which happened in 2001, and the consequences of the same are visible till present days). Instead of creating a favorable climate conditions (among which could be mentioned: establishment of competitive environment and broad – enough field in which the communities gladly take part); instead of implementing the strength of constitutional provisions that were paying attention to the civil society and its central and most important part – the people and their well – being; instead of enabling the citizen to take equal part in the economic system and its inputs (which would have made negligible the feature of ethnicity), occurred twisted politics of equality.[1]

Another thing had emerged on almost every level of the relatively brief historical development of the independent Macedonian society: building of cultural – pluralistic society has an inverse influence by the strengthening of the common civic identity. Putting the stress on “cultural community” did not offer a formula for a common belonging, equally acceptable to both communities that otherwise do not have problems with communitarian self – definition. The elements with which this belonging should be constructed were (and maybe still are), mutually exclude ethnicities. The supporters of multiculturalism in its classical meaning defend this thesis as an advantage, that it doesn’t represent radical communitarianism nor is blind to the differences of classical liberalism and/or republican assimilationism.[2]

The mentioned policy of inequality and division of (then) – Macedonian social sphere (in which regional events were not without minor importance), puts light to the factor of influence of the ethnic division of the population into the political, economic, and finally, the common “ordinary” sphere of life, which is in a way quite contrary to previous traditions and practices of common history and struggle for common goals, resulting in a detached way of dealing with things, then the issue of the languages which are quite different, different religious practices and so on. Thus, instead of approaching these two groups, they diverged constantly, while building an extremely degrading and stereotypical image of the other group the communications between them reduced to formal political – presidential addresses and contacts of an economic nature. The institutional, administrative, and normal – everyday communication was skillfully avoided.

In the Macedonian society, the separation factor of ethnic groups (as in many other democracies where Muslims organize their relations according to the strict rules of Islam), is enhanced due to the existence and respect of different values, which, regarding the Muslim population, historically have not changed too much. While in Europe, especially Western Europe, the universal democratic values and equality of all people (especially between genders) are accepted and practiced several centuries, in some societies (among which the Macedonian one) the traditional family  concept is quite different, which is particularly noticeable in the unequal and (somewhat) discriminative treatment towards women, i.e., the existence and practice of family rights and their participation in social and political life; their education takes much less time than the education of the boys, they are being less employed, the expectancy for them to marry very young is quite high and etc.

The separation factor was very negligible in the early nineties, when the ethnic background almost didn’t matter, but that image has changed radically in the nineties, when the concerns about belonging to other ethnic groups were growing and beginning to occur in almost all segments of society. The religious affiliation, which in the traditional spirit of multicultural and multiconfessional living inMacedoniahad never previously represented the cause of intolerance among different groups, had apparently become a divisive factor. This way of thinking was prompted by various political parties, but also from imported ideologies. All this, in that period, resulted in the closure within the respective groups and their appropriate attitudes, as opposed to others. During this period, ethnocentrism was most expressed among Albanians (60%) and Macedonians (50%), while other minorities were not subject to such views. As a result of such attitudes, ethnic and religious prejudices – whose existence is an essential prerequisite for the creation of inter – ethnic tensions.

In the period from 1990 to 2000, viewed year after year, the trend in the field of ethnic relations was obvious going downwards, showing dynamic changes in intensity. If the total research is presented in chronological summary, it would look like this[3]:In 1990/1, the main outline in this respect is the presence of prejudice, for mutual perception of ethnic groups as different. The key category in this period is the ethnic (and religious) distance. In this sense, Macedonian society is categorized by a higher degree of integration, because major historical changes are absent, citizens have equal status and privileges, the majority wasn’t feeling threatened by the minorities; citizens had equal economic opportunities, as class, not the material was the main factor of distinction; groups (especially ethnic) were not considered as categories, but concerned the individual[4];

In 1992/3, the principal issues that dominated the consciousness of citizens were related to the loyalty of state institutions in the system etc. Notable are mutual accusations and evaluations of ethnic groups in this aspect;

In 1994 – 1996, among the citizens exists a dominant sense of threat from each other, as well as willingness to start open, even armed conflicts;

In 2000, given the deteriorating situation and intolerance, all questions related to the security and internal stability of the state.

As already stated, the field of public relations had also faced a large degree of distrust, with communication being primarily a subject of coordination within each group, thus expressing the common views of the same, then spoken out, often non – coinciding with the respective positions of the other group. This was, quite expectedly, accompanied with frequent discontent, especially when needed to express the position of minorities, or their “fair” or “unfair” treatment in the implementation of their collective rights.

In this respect, the Albanian community has developed particularly strong sense of belonging and especially high cohesive degree. Albanians, primarily because of the location of their dwellings (with high percent in rural areas and due to the relative “isolation”), are less susceptible to influences and more prone to traditional and patriarchal way of life, strictly observe the hierarchical organization of their community and likely to show deference to leaders. Thus, the “assimilation” is more than clearly absent on the social stage. The communication between two groups, as stated, was not satisfactory, and when it occurred, it was usually formal and involuntary, that further contributed to tensions, instead of relaxing them, creating new misperceptions for the “others”. Some surveys even show that, in mixed towns, Macedonians were very reserved when it comes to open communication, because they feel endangerment, while the same feeling among Albanians is not expressed to the point, so they respectively are more opened to communication, even when in a clear minority; conversely, where Macedonians were in a clear and dominant majority, they were more willing to carry on an open communication with the ethnic communities, because it reinforced their sense of security and lack of fear of rejection and hostility. Certainly, the linguistic issue is once again an important issue. Ethnic Macedonians do not speak Albanian, and more importantly, they strongly resist learning it. Big percent of Albanians, of course, speak the Macedonian language, but many of them, especially in closed rural areas, do not speak or want to learn. Therefore, one of the central issues for the new reorganization of Macedonia’s society after the conflict since 2011 was precisely the question of language and its use.[5]

As stated above, the post – Yugoslav war of the early nineties, further emphasized the effect of separation of nations, but more important, of religions, where one of the primary meanings reflected the need to belong in one of the groups, which in its turn, reflected the need for protection within their own “circle” of people and put all the blame on the “other” group, implying a production of relatively high degree of ethnocentrism, nationalism and prejudices. The changes and consequences that the economic sphere has produced  – is comprised in nothing else, but in a quickly enrichment for one layer, leaving the other social strata with feeling of uncertainty, aided by the (in) ability of the respective governments to find a transitional political option for the management of structural inequalities and tectonic shifts in the social sphere, which proved so critical for the loosening of potential danger for intercultural tensions that almost always follow the same structural inequality and the shifting of the ethnic field.

 

Cultural Diversity in Macedonia After 2001

 

             The question of cultural diversity inMacedonia(and the various mechanisms for that achievement), pose the question whether the population and political elites seek to achieve consensus, and if the answer is affirmative, what is its nature?

              Experience shows that the loyalty of the Macedonian citizens to society, state institutions and the system shouldn’t be built on cultural – different colored base, or on the basis of certain ethnicity but it is best to remain focused on mechanisms for organizing the plurality that can be called “macro – loyalty”. The latter would represent one of the essential features of the ability to organize the culturally plural societies, and its primary goal would primarily be, a creation of stable climate in which the “loyalties” of other ethnic communities could be expressed smoothly, or to organize a plurality of loyalties directed to preserve their specifics, but also to allow individuals to move freely between many “other” loyalties. [6]

            The issue of minority rights and their protection is closely related to the principle of non – discrimination. Whether it will become a principle of positive discrimination is another matter. Citizens of theRepublic ofMacedonia are equal in their freedoms and rights, regardless of gender, race, color, national or social origin, political or religious beliefs, property and social status. They are equal before the Constitution and laws.  Article 9 of the Constitution, expressly forbids any discrimination based on national origin.

One of the most important points, when discussing the period of the independence of Macedonia, of course, is the question of its attitude towards the issue of cultural pluralism, and in that sense, the attitudes towards minorities and cultural communities. That relationship can be presented in the most representative manner, by analysis of treatment towards the largest minority community in Macedonia– Albanian. First, the issue of cultural pluralism, which was treated twice (first time in 1991, the second time in 2001), received positive reviews by the Commission of Robert Badenter, which is a rare, perhaps only recognition on the methods and procedures of implementing the legal standards for human rights in the constitutions new democracies in Europe. The second aspect is the creation of a multicultural society which is reflected in the institutions of the political system, with high degree of tolerance towards cultural diversity of the levels of minority protection in European countries. This created a policy of inclusiveness in the institutions of the system, not only of the Albanians, but also of other minorities, which once was a true rarity in the Balkans,  still inspired by different policies, as “nation building”, or the famous, “melting pot ” thus neutralizing  possible secessionist plans, as well as the “conspiration” for establishing the “Great Albanian state”. It was a significant contribution to decomposition of this “great state” idea and a significant contribution to the final pacification of the region.[7]

Regarding the perspectives (towards which the society strives), one of the most important issues was and would be the saving of the unitary character of the state.Macedoniais probably the only country on the Balkans and the region which advocates cultural pluralism in a unitary form. This excludes any striving for federalization of the same.

The historical review showed that any territorial aspiration in this direction leads to forceful displacements of population, ethnic cleansing, in some cases even to genocide. In this domain, one of the main neutralizing roles is played by civil society, as an active manager in the cultural “market”. Second important factor in this regard, besides the civil society, would be stable and effective institutional system, which in its operating mechanism inevitably involves different ethnicities, but is ethnically neutral in implementing the law. Namely, a strong investment in an uncorrupted administration is also an important contribution to the performance of others “accessory”, and “assisting” policies, thus enhancing the effects of their results. Only an effective state in this regard, will be strong to resist the nationalist pressures and to serve the citizenry, because, no matter how important the concept of civil society is, it still cannot replace the role of the state, but can complement it. The third factor refers to material or normative representation and protection of the categories relating to cultural plurality, where, unlike Western countries, these are raised to the highest degree. In this sense, the politics of cultural diversity substantially differs from the majority policy (or national policy) and supports the concept of individual civil rights. One of the advantages thatMacedoniahas always had is the ability to accept advice and help from the international side. Closure into self – sufficiency and isolation can be very harmful.Macedonia, since the beginning of conflict was open to all types of expertise and “soft arbitration”. Discussion on all matters concerning human and minority rights took trilateral form, government – minorities – foreign experts and institutions. It enhanced/s the operative forces of the government in ethnic relations and promotes the results to the international community. Thus, the state succeeded to show that it is possible to achieve what was previously identified as such only in the books and scholar circles, but also to leave sufficient capacity to face ongoing challenges that are still waiting, (unfortunately) in joining Euro-Atlantic integration, as: further promotion of democracy and more specifically, promotion of individual and minority rights protection; constant improvement and reform of political, legal and economic system and their approximation to European standards.

* **

With regard to the Macedonian question, the existence of cultural diversity in given society and its role in terms of social cohesion can be of vital importance for the stability and survival of a community or state. As stated earlier, depending on the treatment they receive from the wider organized community, they can become a constructive element, or a highly destructive one.

The cultural differences however are not the only or the most important factor of influence in the process of social integration. One could say that equally important role is played by other factors, such as general social, economic and political picture, history (on the basis of which a given community reaches the level of integrity and readiness for integration), preparedness for implementation of aforementioned goals through the operation of the rule of law and law, compliance and readiness to preserve the values and fundamental human rights etc. In their turn, the specificities that every state and society possesses, from a cultural and historical perspective, are also determinants of its development in that sense, defining their internal relationships, but also put it in a broader international constellation, thus having influence on a simple perception and definition of a state and society as tolerant and developed to undeveloped and intolerant, reaching out to their broader effective performance in international social, political and economic flows and processes.

 

SUMMARY

 

The cultural societies’ pluralism significance impact (as in the case ofMacedonia) and more important, the influence of the identity of communities on the general social performance is great. It will not and should not be solely influenced by them, because getting into a sphere of exclusivity is in danger of inclination towards ethnic society as the ultimate sign, and it leads to destabilization of society. The same happens in the opposite case of negation of ethnic and national emphasis, leading to negative putting on pedestal of the ethnic identity of the Albanian population and finally to the crisis / conflict in 2001. The sense of “belonging to” a certain ethnicity and cultural group as a means of identification must not prevail the principle of modern civil society. Thus, the ethno – cultural identity of minority groups must placed in different context which has a major impact on the necessary loyalty of minorities not only towards to the majority, but to the society as well, and through them, towards the broader environment, further leading to Europe, the European Union and the wider global environment . That inclusiveness of society in a culturally plural context provides the confidence and loyalty of minorities and sometimes goes beyond narrow ethno cultural frameworks.

 

Selected bibliography:

  • Assessment of Ethnic Relations inMacedonia, USAID/Macedonia, December 2000;

  • Atanasov, Petar, Atanasov, Petar, Multiculturalism as Theory, Policy and Practice, Evro Balkan Press,Skopje, 2003;

  • Marinov, Tchavdar, The Multiculturalism in the Balkans: Is it necessary? The Use of the Term in the Context of the Balkans, Article in the Journal of Politics, Gender and Culture, Vol. 5/no.2, Institute Euro  – Balkan, 2006, Skopje.

  • Cvetanova, Ganka, Cultural Differences and Social Integration (Macedonia Before and After the Framework Agreement), Institute for Economic Strategies and International Relations Ohrid,Skopje, 2007;

  • Frchkoski, Ljubomir D., Republic of Macedonia: A Stable Model of Interethnic Relations?, Article in the Yearbook of the Faculty of Law,University ofSt. Kiril and Metodij, Edition 39, 1999 – 2001;

  • Frchkoski, Ljubomir D., Gaining Independence of the Republic of Macedonia, Article in the Bulletin of the Scientific Gathering for the 60 years Yubilee of ASNOM (15 – 16 December 2004, Skopje, Macedonia), Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Skopje, 2005.


[1] See in: Atanasov, Petar, Multiculturalism as Theory, Policy and Practice, Evro Balkan Press,Skopje, 2003,pp.119 – 121.

[2] Marinov, Tchavdar, The Multiculturalism in the Balkans: Is it necessary? The Use of the Term in the Context of the Balkans, Article in the Journal of Politics, Gender and Culture, Vol. 5/no.2, Institute Euro  – Balkan, 2006, Skopje.

[3] Cvetanova, Ganka, Cultural Differences and Social Integration (Macedonia Before and After the Framework Agreement), Institute for Economic Strategies and International Relations Ohrid,Skopje, 2007, pp. 106 – 107.

[4] Atanasov, Petar, pp. 141.

[5] The situation in mixed schools can be particularly tense. Students, while using the same facilities and studying the same curricula, have no formal points of interaction. Ordinary schoolyard fights often acquire an ethnic cast when they occur between children of different groups. Serious problems are more likely at the high school level than in primary schools. In the first three months of 1999, there were fourteen reported clashes between ethnic Albanian and ethnic Macedonian high school students, none of whom had a previous police record. There were even signs that some of the clashes were supported by teachers. In 1996, 34% of adolescents reported that it would be difficult to be friends with someone who was not of their group. Ten years earlier, fewer than 4% had given that answer. Source: Assessment of Ethnic Relations inMacedonia, USAID/Macedonia, December 2000, pp.4 – 5.

[6] Frchkoski, Ljubomir D., Republic of Macedonia: A Stable Model of Interethnic Relations?, Article in the Yearbook of the Faculty of Law, University of St. Kiril and Metodij, Edition 39, 1999 – 2001, p.275.

[7] Frchkoski, Ljubomir D., Gaining Independence of the Republic of Macedonia, Article in the Bulletin of the Scientific Gathering for the 60 years Yubilee of ASNOM (15 – 16 December 2004, Skopje, Macedonia), Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Skopje, 2005, pp. 141.

February 2, 2012 Posted by | Foreign policy | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

DIALOGUE BETWEEN ROMANIA AND VENEZUELA

On 30 of January 2012 the taking office protocol meeting between prof.dr.Anton Caragea, director of Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation and H.E. Mrs.Z. Coromoto Prieto de Rodriguez , Charge D`Affairs of Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had taken place.

Prof.dr.Anton Caragea, director of Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation and H.E. Mrs.Z. Coromoto Prieto de Rodriguez , Charge D`Affairs of Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Prof.dr.Anton Caragea express his heartfealted  congratulation on the occasion of beginning of mandate of H.E. Z .Coromoto Prieto de Rodriguez    appreciating that between Romanian and Venezuela there is a large area of common interests , designed to forge a good understanding  between the two nations . The Romania- Venezuela relationship must be an example for a better relation between Romania and Latin America .

If in the last decade the bilateral dialogue with this area was faltering, now it is a auspicious moment for reconstructing and rebuilding this framework of dialogue and friendship.

H.E. Mrs. Z. Coromoto Prieto de Rodriguez  had expressed here appreciation for the encouragement`s offered by prof.dr.Anton Caragea and had stated that the vision of a economic, politic and cultural special relationship between Romanian and Venezuela is a shared vision.

The dialogue had continued on concrete aspects and analyses  of economic, political and cultural bilateral relations and on ways of fostering this dialogue on to the future .

The dialogue led the foundations of a successful diplomatic mandate and  fostering the relations between Romanian and Venezuela and is constituting a promise for re-launching a romanian diplomatic action towards Latin America  in the nearest future.

February 1, 2012 Posted by | Foreign policy | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

DIALOG ROMANIA-VENEZUELA

In data de 30 ianuarie 2012 a avut loc intrevederea protocolara intre prof.dr.Anton Caragea , Directorul Institutului de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica  si d-na Z. Coromoto Prieto de Rodriguez- Insarcinat cu Afaceri  al Republicii Bolivariene Venezuela in Romania.

prof.dr.Anton Caragea , Directorul Institutului de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica  si d-na Z. Coromoto Prieto de Rodriguez- Insarcinat cu Afaceri  al Republicii Bolivariene Venezuela in Romania

Prof.dr.Anton Caragea a prezentat felicitarile sale  cu ocazia inceperii mandatului doamnei  Z. Coromoto Prieto de Rodriguez   apreciind ca intre Romania si Venezuela exista o larga arie de interese comune, menite a garanta o buna intelegere intre doua tari. Relatia intre Romania si Venezuela trebuie sa fie un exemplu pentru relatia intre Romania si America Latina.

Daca in ultimii 15-20 de ani dialogul bilateral a stagnat, acum exista momentul propice pentru reluarea acestuia si dezvoltarea lui.

Excelenta Sa  D-na Z. Coromoto Prieto de Rodriguez   a apreciat incurajarile venite din partea prof.dr.Anton Caragea  si a apreciat ca viziunea din partea Venezuelei este similara : Romania trebuie sa isi ocupe economic, cultural si politic locul privilegiat in relatia cu Venezuela.

Dialogul a continuat pe teme concrete de analiza a relatiilor economice , politice si culturale intre cele doua tari si a metodelor practice de dezvoltare a acestora in viitor.

Dialogul a pus bazele  unei mandat de succes pentru dezvoltarea relatiei intre Romania si Venezuela si promite relansarea unei directii de actiune diplomatica a Romaniei spre zona Americii Latine.

February 1, 2012 Posted by | Blackseanews Agency, Diplomacy, Diplomatie, Eastern Europe, Ecology, Economia Romaniei, Economy, Educatie, Environment, Informations, Institute of International Relations and Economic Cooperation, Institutul de Relatii Internationale si Cooperare Economica, International Relation, Latin America, Leaders, Mass media, Ministerul Afacerilor Externe, News, Open Letter, OSCE-Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Politics, Relatii Internationale, Religion, Romanian economy, Romanian Foreign Policy, Socialism, Tourism, Travel, Turism, United Nations Global Compact, Universitati, Universities, Venezuela | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment