Ratsionaalsusest ja identideedist Makedoonia nime näite põhjal
20. November, 2009 by Meelis KitsingEesti keeles on ütlus, et nimi meest ei riku. Küll aga saab nimi rikkuda riigi majanduslikud ja poliitilised suhted teiste riikidega. Makedoonia nime ümber toimuv on selle kujukas näide. Sisuliselt on välistatud Makedoonia liitumine Euroopa Liidu ja NATOga seni kuni Makedoonia nimi on endiselt Makedoonia. Nimelt on Kreeka põhjaosas sama nimega provints ning Kreeka kasutab mõlemas organisatsioonis veto õigust, et blokeerida Makedoonia liitumine.
See kaklus nime ümber on kestnud juba ligi paarkümmend aastat. Mäletan, et juba 90-ndate alguses jagasid kreeklased erinevatel konverentsidel Euroopas pakse ajaloraamatuid pealkirjadega nagu “The Falsification of Macedonian History” leidmaks toetust oma seisukohale. Makedoonia iseseisvus 1991. aastal ning 1993. aastal sai ühendatud rahvaste organisatsiooni liikmeks “endise Jugoslaavia vabariigi Makedoonia” (the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) nime all. Tegemist oli ajutise formuleeringuga, milles kasutamisest on enamik riike maailmas loobunud. EL-i ja NATO liikmeks kvalifitseerub Makedoonia paremini kui osad praegused liikmed ja kandidaatriigid. Samas on need organisatsioonid toonud välja kunstlikke põhjendusi liitumisprotsessiga viivitamiseks, kusjuures kõik teavad, et nimi on olnud liitumise peamiseks takistuseks. See on Makedoonias tekitanud küünilise hoiaku nii EL-i kui ka NATO suhtes.
Sisuliselt on nime teema muutunud tabuks. Hea näide sellest on nime temaatikat käsitleva dokumentaalfilmi “A Name is A Name” ümber toimuv. Selle aasta sügisel esilinastunud filmi rezisöör on islandlane Sigurjon Einarsson. Islandi suursaadik Washington DC-s saatis oktoobris välja kutsed filmi vaatamisele saatkonnas. Samas kaks nädalat enne filmi näitamist otsustati see ära jätta. Islandi ajalehe mbl.is andmetel otsustas Islandi välisministeerium ära jätta filmi näitamise suursaatkonnas kui nad said teada, et tegemist on filmiga Makedoonia nime kohta. Filmi näitamine tähendaks Islandi osalemist Makedoonia ja Kreeka vahelises vaidluses.
Kreeka ja Makedoonia vaheline nimevaidlus on üks probleem laiemast analoogsest teemade ringist, mida on raske lahti seletada mikroökonoomika ning sellel baseeruva ratsionaalse valiku koolkonna eelduste ja printsiipide alusel politoloogias. Ilmselgelt on nime küsimus suuresti sümboolne. Samuti osapooled on loonud oma positsiooni põhjenduseks narratiivid, millest kirjutas oma eelmises postituses Jüri. Need on osutunud oluliseks piiranguks nii kreeklastel kui ka makedoonlastel oma heaolu suurendamiseks. Isegi kui me eeldame piiratud ratsionaalsust, kus lisaks ressurssidele piirab agente ebaperfektne info, tehingukulud, formaalsed ja mitteformaalsed institutsioonid ning strateegiline interaktsioon, on ratsionalistlik seletus ebapiisav. Harvardi professor Peter Hall tõi hiljutisel arutelul interaktsiooni identideedi ja ratsioonaalsuse vahel esile kui ühe teemaderingi, mida sotsiaalteadus ei oska lahti seletada.
Kui eeldaksime, et Kreeka ja Makedoonia mängivad vangi dilemmat, siis on ebaselge, miks nad korduvalt sama mängu mängides jõuavad taas mitteoptimaalsele tulemusele. Miks nad ei õpi eelnevast kogemusest? Samuti on enamik empiirilisi uuringuid, mis vaatavad institutsioonide rolli ratsionaalsuse piiramisel suhteliselt pinnapealsed. Need keskenduvad peamiselt formaalsetele institutsioonidele nagu seadusandlus, mille mõju on kergem mõõta kui mitteformaalsete instutsioonide puhul nagu sotsiaalsed normid. Isegi kui viimast mõõdetakse, siis tehakse seda pealiskaudselt ja metodoologiliselt mitte kõige usadlusväärsemate arvamusküsitluste kaudu.
Samas Makedoonia ja Kreeka vaidluse puhul on tegemist on kultuurilise identideedi domineerimisega nii fundamentaalse kui ka strateegilise ratsionaalsuse üle. Makedoonlastele oleks hea ühineda EL-i ja NATOga ruttu. Kreeklaste huvides on stabiilsed Balkani riigid ning vaidlus nime üle surub teiste Kreeka huvide kaitsmise tahaplaanile. Ent see kõik jääb tahaplaanile, kuna kaalul ei ole miski muu kui Aleksander Suure pärand.
November 20th, 2009 at 13:32
Sorry that I comment in English – the situation just gets more clear every day. The Greek position is the one based on lies and falsification of the history. That’s why it is MUCH easier to defend it and to “sell” it. They can just pile up anything that fits their cause… And we ONLY have the facts to defend the attack.
November 20th, 2009 at 16:46
No worries. Thank you for your comments. It seems that facts are necessary but not sufficient for solving the issue. It is necessary to have a certain degree of rationality to see the facts but this issue has developed beyond this degree of rationality. What is considered a fact or not depends on one’s perspective.
November 21st, 2009 at 16:53
Well, some things are either considered facts for both sides (and all countries) or they are not facts. Like Greece should not prove that they are descendants of the Hellens (term invented in 1834) but we have to prove that we are Macedonians (all the genetic research so far proves that we are the closest of all Balkan nations). Or, that every country can freely name their schools, highways, streets, stadiums, language, ethnicity, BUT we cannot.
Finally, first come first served. We chose the name without hesitation back in 1941 when we were liberated from the Serbs and fighting Bulgarians and Germans. It was our first chance to choose the name in freedom and we are there. What about Athens? They changed their stance at least 6 times since 1913 (they called it New Territory, Occupied Territory, New Greece, Northern Greece and in 1991 they renamed it Macedonia). Until 1991 it was even a filthy word.
Prisoners’ dilemma? It seems to me that it is more 3rd CONCEPT OF NON-COOPERATIVE EQUILIBRIUM http://www.rh.edu/~stodder/BE/IntroGameT.htm
Anyway, to have an issue – let Greece change their name to Republic of Macedonia. THEN WE’LL HAVE AN ISSUE. Now they do not even have the name in official use. They banned us the use of the Macedonian Sun (they call it Vergina Star) and they do not use it. C’mon it is found in Republic of Macedonia on numerous excavations since 1979 (it was then discovered for the first time in the alleged tomb of Phillip II).
Finally, we are limited by the truth. And they can lie as they wish and they can construct their story as they wish. They are used to it. They were invented by German historians in 1840. The language, the term hellenic, even their flag is second-hand British (EAST INDIA company) flag. And they continue to construct the stories… But we’ll prevail as the closest analogy to the problem of our EU accession is as you were asked to let the employer to “have fun” with you and your whole family on a job interview for 500.000 EUR annual salary. No, thanks, the offer is good, but the conditions suck. So, no EU unless we are called Macedonia. Greece does not like it? See you in court…
November 21st, 2009 at 16:59
We never claimed exclusivity on the issue – it would mean that we are separating ourselves from our 10, 20, 50, 100.000 (no greek census shows the real numbers, but UN, UNDP, Britannica estimates) fellow Macedonians.
Here’s some food for thought from an independent scholar:
http://greatersurbiton.wordpress.com/2009/08/29/macedonia-and-greece-what-is-the-basis-for-a-reconciliation/
November 26th, 2009 at 21:08
Many thanks for these comments.
I think that any group of people can call themselves by any name and their state by any name if they wish so. It does not need any historical reference and/or justification. Certainly, it is highly unlikely that any group will chose a name which is completely unrelated to their identity and history.
It seems that in this battle over the name of Macedonia, history is used and abused. Both sides do not agree with basic facts as far as history and facts related to the history are concerned.
My point related to prisoner’s dilemma was that it might seem that both sides play repeatedly prisoner’s dilemma and end up in suboptimal Nash equilibrium. However, I pointed out that such rationalistic framework does not really explain the nature of dispute. It would apply to any game theoretic framework, including the game of chicken you suggested as a better game to characterize the situation.
I used this dispute as an example for illustrating more abstract discussion of interactions between rationality and identity which rational choice based social sciences have trouble explaining. My conclusion was that identity dominates over fundamental and strategic rationality.
November 30th, 2009 at 20:59
Well, if and when we can say that a national identity a rational category
But, even in absence of rationality in the definition of nationality, the rules of the game should be the same for every player. If not, the international community should make it that way as the nationality is important for all of them and the game should be preserved until a moment comes and borders are abolished and we all melt into a greater and only logical state of Earth, or something…
BTW, Macedonian side (PM and FM) repeatedly mentioned that history should be left for historians and that it is a basic human right to self-declare, and, nevertheless, asked Athens to make joint committees to harmonize the history books if it is so important for Athens. The answer from the Greek FM Bakoyanis was “the history is already written, nothing to do about it”. Like she lived then
December 4th, 2009 at 14:43
This is a difficult question. It depends on the definition of rationality. If we assume perfect rationality, then nationality/identity may seem irrational most of the time. If we assume bounded rationality, then identity may be additional constraint in limiting rational action to a certain extent.
However, identity constrains rational action almost completely in this dispute. If we take Greece as an example, then they would benefit from prosperity and stability in Macedonia. The EU and NATO membership will certainly contribute to that. Hence, it would be a self-interest for Greece not to exclude Macedonia. In addition, they might want to spend their energy and political capital on other issues such as Cyprus and most importantly their economy.
Greece’s budget deficit is expected to be 12.7 % of GDP and debt-to-GDP ratio 135 %. Here we assume that the figures are correct which was not the case when they manipulated data to enter the eurozone. The reality might be much worse. Greece is likely to have difficulties financing their government bonds. They may need help from the EU. The bottom line is that it is not in their self-interest to upset their neighbors and their allies over Macedonia’s name when much more important issues need to be tackled. Of course, Macedonia has also fueled the Greek fires by naming Skopje airport after Alexander the Great.
December 4th, 2009 at 18:15
After unsuccessful aggression on weak Turkey in 1923, Greece lost the war and 1,5 million refugees were forced out of Asia Minor to Greece. Like 1 million settled in Macedonia (10 years occupied).
Today we have a argument if modern Macedonians are settled in Macedonia in 6th century (”big movement of the Slavs”). Greeks claim that because of that we cannot be Macedonians (genetic research shows different story – they are more slavs than us!). Nevertheless, their immigrants from the war in 1926 ARE TODAYS “GREEK MACEDONIANS”!
We named our airport Alexander the Great. Tirana airport is named Mother Theresa (born in Skopje, Macedonia, once was in Tirana in 1977). Belgrade named their airport Nikola Tesla – he never was in Serbia, was born in Croatia, lived in the USA. Did Greece pissed us off when they renamed Airport Mikra in Thesaloniki to Airport Makedonia and Airport Kavala to Airport Alexander the Macedonian back in 1992? Naming is a right that nobody can take from us. And, btw, some scientists firmly believe that besides all the ancient Macedonian excavations we also have the grave of Alexander in Republic of Macedonia.
There’s medieval King Marko from Prilep in Macedonia. Both Serbs and Bulgarians and we have legends about him. We do not copyright him.
http://www.jasonmiko.com/the-column-02.html
The only rational exit from this situation is to level the rules for all the sides in the conflict. IF Greece vetoes start of accession talks on the 7th, we’ll probably suspend our EU accession, go to UN to seek justice (or from International Court of Justice). We do not need to be members of EU with double standards. We need EU standards in economy, social life. Not to sell our name for accession. Will never happen.