ABSTRACT

* The Turks from the Thrace Advisory Committee and the minority MPs are objects of attacks. * Andreoulakos against the Albanians, Athletics’ Leagues against G. Babiniotis, the Archbishop against the ‘Greeklings’. * The ‘Underground Schools’ - a myth? *Albania - the Greek minority and parallels with Kosovo. * The further improvement of Greek-Bulgarian relations brings optimism. *Macedonia - the name and the minority issue. Two steps forward, one step back. * Serbia and Kosovo - once again with a major role in Balkan horror scenarios. * Turkey - the same old image.

Internal Minorities

The role of the Turks from the Thrace Advisory Committee and the activities of the three minority MPs are now among the most lucrative sources of criticism by the opposition press on the current political status quo. The initiatives of the MPs, both inside and outside Greece, to make known the problems of the minority and secure guarantees for their solution with a view to the forthcoming prefectural and municipal elections, constitute national treason for a large section of the conservative press. "Undisguised anti-Hellenic action is now developed by the Muslim MPs, and the parties’ leaders do not show the slightest disturbance at the international vilification of our country by persons who have been elected on these parties’ ballots!" (E.T. 20/5). This month, the hit is a document drafted by the Turks from the Thrace Advisory Committee. The document has been signed by the minority MP G. Galip from PASOK. It presents the problems of the minority and covers a broad spectrum of the political and social life of the Turks who live in Greece. It aims at making this situation widely known and alerting the Greek and international public. The document, "a document of hatred" (E.T. 15/5) and "a fire memorandum" (E.T. 20/5), focuses on the following problems: deprivation of citizenship; education issues; ["‘Deprived of suitable teachers, educational material and modern facilities, the minority children are faced with the ominous alternative perspectives to either become second-class Greek citizens with an inadequate education or go to Turkey and, in many cases, be deprived of their citizenship. A 1993 decree of the Ministry of Education stipulates that pupils who attend the two lyceums of the minority are selected through lottery… The minority is deprived even of the right to select its own teachers…’"]; the appointment of the muftis by the Greek authorities; incentives and financial opportunities offered by the Greek state to the minority; and, finally, the existence of military surveillance zones over one-third of Western Thrace: "‘They can be described as the new Gulags of Europe. The Turks who live in this area not only are deprived of the basic right of free movement within their own country, but they are also condemned to live under deplorable financial and social conditions, much worse than the ones provided to the people of the same descent who live outside the zone". E.T. (15/5) finds one more opportunity for criticism -the MP mentioned above entered Parliament on the ruling party quota- without, however, addressing any essential issues regarding the arguments put forward by the minority MP. "The Muslim MP hides behind PASOK" (…) "Snakes are fostered in Thrace." In a similar vein, the same newspaper comes back to the issue a few days later (20/5). The specific declaration is said to "constitute an unprecedented preaching of hatred" since it does not hesitate "to describe Greek Thrace as ‘a new Gulag in Europe.’" Moreover, the declaration is seen as part and parcel of the coordinated effort between Turkey and the Turkish Consulate, to stain Greece’s image by transferring the criticism of the human rights situation in Turkey to that in Greece. "The obstructionists are covered up: ‘The minority in Thrace and I are Turks’" (E.T. 20/5).

Nonetheless, in commenting on the coming back to circulation of the Acropolis newspaper, V. (17/5) criticizes both the manner and the motives of the opposition press regarding the projection of the specific issue. The paper then draws a parallel with the policy followed by the majority of the media in Turkey: "I will use this opportunity to inform you that, after ten years, Acropolis comes back into circulation, probably because some [people] think that public life needs a morning newspaper which will denounce as agents of the Turks all those who defend the rights of the minority in Thrace. Exactly as Bhirdal was accused of being an agent of the Kurds".

With regard to the Macedonian minority, El. (11/5) launches a particularly ‘heretical’ view, without making any comments: "The existence of a minority of Slavophones in Greece is acknowledged by the Honorary President of the Communist Party of Greece, Ch. Florakis, in an interview given by him to the Nova Macedonia newspaper. However, he referred to the minority as ‘Slavo-Macedonian.’" The recognition -even with the modifier ‘Slavo’- of the existence of a Macedonian minority in Greece by a politician like Mr. Ch. Florakis gives ‘heretical’ nuances to the interview. The official position of the Greek side, which is in absolute contradistinction with the international recognition of the principle of self-determination and the reports made by various human rights organizations, does not recognize any ethnic or linguistic minority, except for certain religious ones, including the Turkish minority.

The public dialogue around the presence of illegal immigrants in Greece; their correlation with the unemployment and criminality statistics; the framework for their legalization and the margins of tolerance in Greek society are re-defined after the recent statements made by New Democracy MPs A. Andreoulakos and G. Karatzaferis, who are well-known for their extreme right-wing positions. At a Parliamentary all-party committee which discussed the security of the borders, Andreoulakos maintained that "we should send the Albanians away and if they come back, send them to concentration camps and to Makronissia [exile islands]" (El. 21/5). Karataferis, on the other hand, claimed that a financial audit ("a means test") should be carried out for all immigrants who live and work in Greece. Despite the fact that these views were expressed in the presence of MPs from all political parties, nobody criticized the above statements at the time they were made. This fact raises well-founded questions regarding the margins of tolerance in the Greek society and the preconditions for the formation of an independent extreme right-wing nationalist political nucleus. One cannot be optimistic about a society whose Parliamentary representatives are unable to put in their place people who invoke the concentration camps in order to deal with issues infringing on human rights, while the party which they come from pretends that there is no reason for expelling them. This is not the first time that the above mentioned MPs express such positions in public. A year ago, and again inside the Greek Parliament, G. Karatzaferis bitterly attacked the then Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ch. Rozakis, because of the Jewish origin of his name, thus making insinuations regarding Mr. Rozakis’ political choices in the field of foreign policy. Some months ago the same MPs appeared on TV with a political overture for cooperation with the Nazi organization Chryssi Avgi (Golden Dawn). They asked Chryssi Avgi for support, while promising future ministerial seats in exchange. Considering that support for the de-nationalization program of the government constitutes a more serious reason than the defense of human rights to expel six prominent cadres and assessing that the percentage of the extreme right-wing royalist basis of his party is necessary in the elections, Mr. Karamanlis, President of New Democracy, did not proceed to any motion to expel the above mentioned MPs.

The majority of the Greek press, however, sharply criticized the positions taken by the two New Democracy MPs. "Racist delirium by New Democracy MPs" (El. 21/5). "Andreoulakos is sending the illegal immigrants to barren islands" (N. 21/5). K. (21/5) speaks about the "racist, fascist and inconceivable statements," while Eth. (25/5) cares more about the comparison with Turkey and the blemishing of the Greek image than about the necessity to respect human rights. "At a time when Greece accuses Turkey precisely for violating human rights, for absence of democratization etc., the Wall Street Journal, which is well-known for its objective approach to Greek problems, particularly with regard to Greek-Turkish differences, had a front page article in its May 22^nd, 23^rd issue. The paper commented on the stupid racist and xenophobic proposal made by the New Democracy MPs. So, we offer the opportunity to anyone with bad intentions to compare us with our friend Turkey. Congratulations." E.T. (21/5), however, had rather complimentary comments: "Yesterday in Parliament an unquestionably pioneer solution for dealing with the problem of illegal immigrants was introduced by New Democracy MP Ap. Andreoulakos. The suggestion is to deport them and, if they return, to send them to Makronissos and to concentration camps. The idea of another MP from the same party, G. Karatzaferis, can be implemented as an alternative. He proposed to have a ‘means test’ which will be submitted primarily by the illegal immigrants" (E.T. 21/5). The same newspaper criticized the specific statements to a certain extent. However, the issue of criminality was called forth in order to mitigate any negative impressions. "I repeat that the idea is repugnant. But, at the same time, we should not stop at the negative side of the statement. We should not just say our anathema against racism" (…) "Has the problem of security in the cities and in the countryside been dangerously sharpened? Yes or no? Are there thousands of illegal immigrants circulating all over Greece armed with Kalashnikovs? Yes or no? Are there Albanian "importers" of large quantities of drugs arrested every day? Yes or no? Do they come into Greece, steal cars -mainly those belonging to peasants- and take them back to Albania? Yes or no?" (E.T. 26/5).

Criminality and its reported correlation with the immigrants in Greece remains one of the fields of conflict between the conservative and the more progressive political and journalistic world. Thus the former say that "‘Criminality does not have a nationality. That’s why any form of criminality attributed to a minority of Albanians in Greece, poisons the friendly relations between the two peoples’; this was the diplomatic remark made by Mr. Romeos regarding the ‘wave’ of daily criminal acts of Albanian origin which are recorded in the entire country. On his part, Mr. Nano took the opportunity and asked for more jobs for the Albanians so that they are able to live normally and not commit illegal acts!" (E.T. 11/5). The latter type of media ask the following question: "‘What is the Church doing here? There is no Greek who does not have someone from his family in foreign lands and, nonetheless, our behavior towards those who come to us from Albania is unacceptable. I am ashamed of my fellow citizens. The Church, the State, the intelligentsia all keep silent. We are all accomplices. And we forget that during the Occupation we were a people of thieves who stole in order to get food. When somebody is hungry, they steal. That’s why I declare that I am an Albanian. Unfortunately, I am at an age when I cannot join their trade union or go to marches with them.’" [M. Theodorakis (K. 18/5)]. "‘And it is exactly for the reason that the general living standard is lower than any living standard we have found ourselves with, we see the phenomenon of extreme nationalism with racist and chauvinistic exaltations. This phenomenon used to be ascribed to small groups, to marginal minorities and -what is more typical- to imported policies which served the well-known foreign powers who implemented and are still implementing the tactics of divide and rule both in the area and within our people’" [M. Theodorakis (El. 5/5)]. "We were told by the ‘Forum’ of the Albanian migrants that the arrest of foreign workers, of Albanians in particular, on the pretext of verification of identity constitutes an act of psychological terrorism and consciously or unconsciously turns the immigrants into perpetual hostages. As far as we know, legalization is effected in order for the immigrants to go out freely into the squares and not in order for them to frequent the cells of police stations. Social inclusion is not achieved with methods of social dissolution" (El. 26/5).

The above dividing lines become even stronger when it comes to tangible every day events the protagonists of which are the immigrants and the Greek society than when it is in the context of a rather philosophical discussion on the coexistence of different peoples and traditions. The coverage of the strike of Albanian and Romanian workers in Magnesia with demands for pay raise and establishment of an eight-hour workday is a typical example of the different attitude of the Greek newspapers, depending on their political orientation. For example, N. (27/5) focuses on the words of the inhabitants in Magnesia who, basing their arguments on everything related to imported criminality, try to draw the attention away from the real reasons for the strike and to distance themselves from the regime of exploitation against the immigrants which they themselves have imposed and use to their own benefit. "‘In the last few years, they have ravaged us, they have broken into our homes and our warehouses, and they have robbed us. In the old days, the Poles used to come here. They were working. They were gentlemen. These people here are of a different race. They left their disintegrated country where they used to live and came here to do the same, but they will not have it their way. If they want to work, let them work under these conditions.’" More provocative, E.T. comments on the same day: "Unheard of blackmail by …Albanian strikers in Magnesia" (E.T. 27/5). K. (28/5) supports a rather different viewpoint: "Until now, we saw them collectively as people outside any culture, either as wild beasts ready to devour each other or as a herd which trusts only its own low instincts. Their strike obliges us to see them as persons absolutely mature, capable of acting in a spirit of solidarity".

The forthcoming revision of the Greek Constitution and the enthronement of the new Archbishop of Athens and all Greece, Christodoulos, have brought to the forefront the question of the Separation of the Greek Orthodox Church from the State. Many intellectuals, academics and politicians express the wish for the state to accomplish the necessary separation. Thus many phenomena which render Greece a ‘problematic’ country with regard to respect for religious freedom will disappear. "It is not permissible, on the basis of Metaxas’ legislation, to consider ‘every free expression of foreigners’ as proselytism; nor does it make any sense to have the requirement that when a place of worship of another religion is established, a permit has to be granted by the Greek Orthodox Church. There is certain identification of Hellenism with Orthodoxy which reduces this identification to a dominant dogma" (El. 2/5). The following come into the realm of the ;problematic issues’ in Greece: compulsory teaching of Religion and church-going of pupils, both of which are included in the official school curriculum; stipulating religious affiliation on the identity cards of the Greek citizens; recognition of a dominant religion in the Greek Constitution; the oath given in the name of the Holy Trinity in Parliament and in the courts. The future, however, does not seem very optimistic. It seems that the political cost leaves margins only for a superficial dealing with the whole issue. "The noteworthy proposal on the abolition of the religious oath made by 53 MPs, as well as the documented appeal of dozens of academics and intellectuals, seem to be simply movements for the honor of fighting in favor of modernization. The antipode to these protests is the act of several New Democracy MPs who outbid in having catechism functioned by the Church inside the schools by demanding more hours for teaching Religion. Only two parties of the Left still insist on the principled position of modern democracies and ask for the complete dissociation between the Church and the State" ["Ios" (El. 7/5)].

The new Archbishop Christodoulos, supported by the conservative opposition press, seems to be unwilling to create on behalf of the Church a suitable climate for seeking the conditions under which it will be possible to have this separation. On the contrary, since the very first day of his term, he demanded from the State to establish a productivity bonus for priests as it is for all other civil servants, and he denounced the supporters of the separation between Church and State, calling them ‘Greeklings.’ "Archbishop Christodoulos’ phrases caused the moral, patriotic exaltation of the people. At the same time they transformed him into a target by the Establishment which has transformed humility into a profession. With his words, the Archbishop expresses the concerns and the sensitivity of the patriots. He does this in a manner which supersedes parties and ideologies. His argumentation becomes universal and irresistible" [editorial (E.T. 29/5)].

The Archbishop’s past and the positions expressed by him at the time when he was still the Metropolite of Dimitriados do not bring a promise for an optimistic future. Sunday’s ‘Ios’ rubric (El. 24/5) demystifies the Archbishop by compiling some of his past public statements. "‘There is a threat from the East and we are not as apprehensive to it as we ought to be. From the North, Pan-Slavism has not renounced its plans against us. Finally, from the West we are threatened by Westernism, namely, the western lifestyle which is a medley of materialism and consumerism.’" Even the most optimistic reader is brought down to earth when s/he reads that "the day after the fall of the dictatorship [the Archbishop] was reading and quoting articles in the organ of the ‘April people’ Eleftheros Kosmos and in the Gendarmerie Review." Among other things, the biography of the Archbishop is ‘burdened’ also with his participation at a meeting of the nationalist newspaper Stohos.

However, the decision of the Council of State which considered one hour of teaching of Religion in the secondary schools brings doubts as to whether it is only the Church that opposes the idea of the Separation. "The decision is based on Article 16 of the Constitution which stipulates that ‘education constitutes a basic vocation of the state and aims at the moral, spiritual, professional and physical upbringing of the Greeks, the development of the national and religious consciousness and their formation into free and responsible citizens’. (…) When arguing against the reduction of the hours of teaching of Religion, the Council of State points out that ‘in order to be able to develop the religious consciousness of the pupils in accordance with the principles of the Orthodox Christian Creed at least to a sufficient degree, the state should take appropriate legislative and regulative measures, so that the teaching of the subject of religion is secured for a sufficient number each week’. (…) ‘The overwhelming majority of the Greek people are Orthodox Christians. The development of the religious consciousness of the Greek children in accordance with the principles of the Orthodox Christian Doctrine is among the aims of Greek education. Therefore, the teaching of the subject of religion as well as its attendance by pupils who belong to the Orthodox Church is compulsory’" (K. 27/5). According to the same decision, the right to exemption from attending the class is provided for in the event that "the pupils themselves or their parents state that they are atheists, heterodox or belong to another religion and, consequently, they have a problem related to their religious consciousness" (K. 27/5). Thus, a purely private matter like that of religious consciousness, is both regulated externally and "publicized." This procedure runs the risk of becoming a source of discrimination for all those who would want to deviate from the norm, since they will be compelled to invoke in public the reasons for which they are unable to follow the majority. The specific verdict, as well as the reasoning behind it, provoked many journalists and intellectuals. However, it is also a tangible proof of the conservatism which prevails in Greek society, thus posing justifiable questions regarding the dynamics that this conservatism commands. "What sort of things are these now? And which, if you please, respectable gentlemen …judges, is the ‘sufficient’ number - surely, if you are pressed, you will know this too! We are not in our right minds, what else? The decision says that all parents (who are responsible for the religious education of their children according to the Council of State) who are, say, atheists, will have to submit a sworn statement that they want their children to be exempt from Religion classes. When, years ago, the teaching of Ancient Greek was abolished or restricted, nobody thought they should intervene and say that we were destroying our national education and cultural consciousness. Now our judges (but how can this be possible…) substitute for our teachers and for the Ministry of Education. They tell us just ‘how much’ Religion we should learn (any ideas about …Biology or Physical Education?)" (K. 27/5). "So, the national consciousness is threatened by the Babiniotis dictionary, the religious consciousness is also threatened because the hours for teaching Religion are not ‘sufficient.’ Nonetheless, common language is the ‘norm,’ the rule, the measure of judgment and comparison of the language communication of the community. And if there is degrading meaning, the dictionary is not to blame for recording but rather the community for establishing this meaning. The role of the Church, on the other hand, is a primary and determinant role in many forms of social and individual practice, in many venues of public and private life. Therefore, if its word is degraded, certainly this is not due to the fact that the ‘theoretical’ and ideological preparation of the young people through the school subject of Religion has not been imposed to the degree desired but rather to its credibility" (K. 28/5). By preserving the balances, N. (27/5) and Eth. of the same day limit themselves in presenting the decision without any further comments and without any replies. The following day, however, both newspapers quote views which criticize the decision. "‘The subject should be optional’" [N. Tsoulias, president of OLME (Secondary Education Teachers Union) and Em. Metaxopoulos, Rector of Pantios University (N. 28/5)]. "The court exceeds the limits of its annulling competence as it is coming into the essential judgment of the administration regarding the suitable number of the hours of teaching" [A. Manitakis: (Eth. 28/5)]. More pleased with the decision, E.T. (27/5) presents the mother and lawyer who took recourse to the Council of State and won the case. "The mother who saved Religion".

The magnitude of lack of freedom and the excessive conservatism which prevail not only in Greek society at large but also in a section of the Greek intelligentsia are substantiated by the ‘national v. anti-national’ tone which is ascribed to scientific works, when these deal with sensitive issues like minorities and the formation of national consciousness. Greek public opinion met with wrath the research of some scientists who doubted the existence of the ‘Underground Schools’ [indirectly renouncing the myth which presents the Orthodox Church as the exclusive guardian of the Greek tradition and Greek identity during the Ottoman Domination]. Being prophetic, El. (13/5) points out from the very first moment what is going to follow: "The author of the research, A. Anghelou, claims that the underground schools did not exist in reality, except for some in certain areas which were under the control of revolting Greeks. The professor at the University of Crete, E. Zachariadou, states to the Associated Press Agency that ‘these stories [about secret schools] are myths cultivated by the Church, in order for it to strengthen its prestige among the Greeks.’ New uprisings are foreseen - not against the Turks, but by the slayers of the Turks against the author and the professor…" Indeed, the extracts which follow prove how right the El. commentator was. "Before we proceed to an unjust attack against the large news agency, we should point out that the one responsible person is the university professor and historian, Mr. Alkis Anghelou. This issue is mentioned in his book, so the international agency took its information from there and made the following caption which will make the Turks and the Turkophiles very happy!" (…) "The new book comes to the conclusion that these schools did not exist, that not all the clergymen were heroes and that not all the Turks were tyrannical conquerors determined to trample on and write off Greek culture!" (…) "It seems that the choosing of the moment for contesting the role of the clergymen during the Ottoman Domination just after the comments against Archbishop Christodoulos serve other aims in addition to the presentation of the book of Mr. Anghelopoulos. In his monumental speech at his enthronement, the new Archbishop stressed the role of the Clergy and Orthodoxy in preserving Hellenism! However, the essence of the matter is (and the column is waiting for your possible reaction) that, once more, ‘the darts come from the ‘intimates.’" [E. Bistika, columnist (K. 13/5). "Surely, the Associated Press is not responsible for the international denigration of our history and our tradition. It is crystal-clear that some ‘Greekling’ started the initiative for this shameful act which constitutes national shame. But it is also an incomprehensible action, because the ‘Underground Schools’ were of no interest to the world public opinion; they are an issue exclusively of Greek interest and do not concern any international press agency. But, certainly, the well-known obsessed ‘Greeklings’ who have the means in foreign media, those who, every now and then, bring back the issue of the ‘Underground Schools,’ are not interested in historical truth. This is because their primary and, I would say, exclusive, goal is to belittle the contribution of the Church to the Nation. And all this is supposedly in the name of historical truth’ [a letter by the writer K. Sardelis, (K. 15/5)]. V. Kremmydas, a professor of surgery, also via a letter (K. 22/5), considers as "exasperating, unrealistic, ignorant of history and derogatory for Hellenism" all that has been written, and maintains that they constitute "an offense to the idyllic traditions of our people". "Other peoples do not have traditions, so they fabricate them retrospectively. At the same time there are some allegedly progressive arty fellows among us who write our traditions off." All the above positions are exhausted in a ‘sterile’ reproduction of the myth of the ‘Underground School’ without quoting any scientific conclusions (accompanied by bibliographical documentation) which would refute Mr. A. Anghelou’s viewpoint and would thus create the preconditions for essential dialogue and for the drawing of valid conclusions.

Similar was the way in which some politicians and journalists, especially in Northern Greece, dealt with G. Babiniotis’ dictionary. The issue is related to the second interpretation of the entry ‘Bulgarian.’ After pointing out that the term is used in an insulting manner, G. Babiniotis refers to the way supporters of Northern Greek football teams (P.A.O.K. in particular) are called by fans of teams in Central and Southern Greece, mainly Athens. The lodging of summary measures against the author and the decision for a temporary prohibition on the circulation of the dictionary in Thessaloniki opened up a new arena for confrontation in the Greek media. The valid questions were whether words in themselves are offensive and ‘anti-national’ or, rather, the intentions of those who use them; whether it is possible to censor scientific discourse; whether it is possible to base any criticism on petty political issues and interests, instead of on the scientific integrity of the work. The whole problem becomes even more absurd when one realizes that such ‘anti-national’ intentions are ascribed to a principally ‘national’ scholar who, throughout his life, has defended the linguistic purity of the Greek language and has advocated its ‘cleansing’ from words which are evidence of any multicultural ‘sinful’ past. "The professor in the Linguistics Department of the Aristotelio University of Thessaloniki and Director of the Linguistics department of the Greek Language Center, Mr. Christidis, defends G. Babiniotis’ right to freedom of expression, but does not fail to blame him for ‘cultivating, for two decades, views of linguistic ‘cleansing’ and for investing in various versions of nationalism and sterile adoration of everything that is Greek" (El. 29/5). "In other words, in order to counteract any criticism, [G. Babiniotis] justly invokes his national position, because in fact he has a conception regarding the nation and the national language in the very fixed meaning of the adjective national, I would say" [A. Frangoudaki (N. 27/5)].

The former President of AEK, M. Trochanas and the President of PAE Aris, E. Ioannidis, characterize the controversial interpretation "roguery" (E.T. 23/5), while D. Psomiadis, who is in charge of the Union of Football Leagues of Macedonia maintains that "it is a stupid provocation by the Athenian establishment" (El. 23/5). Other people supported the same positions, on the grounds that the expressions come from the field of athletics, so scientific research is hardly necessary. The following positions taken (Eth. 26/5) should, therefore, be considered in light of the court’s prohibitive decision which followed soon after. The Minister of Culture and Constitutional Law expert, E. Venizelos, considered the entry a "lexicographic error"; for the former Minister of Public Order, S. Papathemelis this was an "impropriety"; the Minister of Macedonia and Thrace, F. Petsalnikos said it was a "great mistake." Th. Lazaridis, a candidate mayor of Thessaloniki, proposed (Eth. 26/5) that the controversial interpretation be taken out, on the grounds that it was abusive. Th. Aspassidis, a member of the municipal council, characterized it "unholy" and "anti-national" and demanded "summary measures and personal detention for one year [for the author]." (Eth. 26/5). Meanwhile, New Democracy MP E. Chaitidis characterized the content of the dictionary as "unprecedented, unacceptable and abusive" (E.T. 28/5). In turn, G. Kazazis, Vice-president of the Greek Language Center, professor and philologist, disagreed with the court decision. However, he also disagreed with G. Babiniotis’ decision to include the second interpretation in the dictionary. In his opinion, a special section should have been integrated in the dictionary and not only some isolated words and expressions from the football grounds. E. Kriaras, a lexicographer and professor at the Aristotelio University, shared the same opinion. He assessed the court’s decision on the summary measures as "excessive," while pointing out that "he considers completely unnecessary such an entry in a dictionary of high standing," as well as "any entry of any obscene expressions" (El. 26/5).

The type and quality of the arguments in favor of removing of the controversial entry are characterized by peculiar broadness. From the theoretical context of the ‘legalization’ of words by means of a dictionary up to the strengthening of the irredentist intentions of our Balkan neighbors. "The Babiniotis dictionary does not record reality faithfully and objectively… It inflates a marginal phenomenon" [K. Zouraris (El. 27/5)]. "Mrs. Papastavrou [President of the Pan-Hellenic Association of Families of Fallen Aviators] says the following in regard to the controversial entry ‘Bulgarian’: "Do not tell me that you have not perceived that this analysis of yours conceals a geographical determination of the Macedonians. And that this is not a phrase which sets a dangerous precedent in favor of our neighbors who are on the alert for catching in mid air whatever the local counterfeit Greeks throw into their open mouths, and this is to the detriment of the harmless Macedonians? This should definitely have legal consequences. Is it possible that such obscure and insidious actions have the ratification of the people commissioned with our foreign and domestic policy?" (N. 30/5). "And it would be even more consoling if all these sensitive people rose against the Skopjans who firmly insist on monopolizing Macedonia…" [S. Kargakos (E.T. 30/5)].

In any case, opposing voices can also be heard. The main counter-argument is the gagging of scientific research and the restraint of free expression in exchange for a ‘nationally correct’ political and scientific discourse. "In conclusion, I think that the Greeks, whether they are called Bulgarians, or Turks, or Germans, or English, or Americans, they get insulted. That’s what they feel. That’s how they take it. Because they believe that they are superior than anybody else - the chosen people! All the others are just nonentities. To be exact, they are either barbarians or ‘sissies’" [N. Tsagris (Eth. 26/5)]. "It is about the reaction of a primitive nationalistic egoism, which proves -once more- that what is disturbing in our country is not the problem but its detection" [G. Mavros, legal counselor of the newspaper (E.T. 27/5)]. "The lesson to be drawn is that it is enough to invoke national pride (no matter whether this is done sincerely or hypocritically) and every critical function of society gets paralyzed for some time. (E.T. 29/5). "The reactions of certain circles in Thessaloniki regarding the entry ‘Bulgarian’ run the risk of leading to an international ridiculing of the country" [P. Efthimiou (V. 24/5)]. "The court’s decision on the temporary prohibition of circulation of the dictionary in Thessaloniki is an unprecedented phenomenon." (K. 27/5). "The most significant and fundamental issue, however, is the prohibition of circulation of a publication, because the majority of the representatives of the political power and the entire society considers it anti-national. If the political power and, even worse, society at large, accept that the public expression of a viewpoint which is considered to be anti-national should be prohibited, then the fundamental principle of democracy is hit and freedom of speech ceases to exist". [A. Frangoudaki (N. 27/5)]. The same columnist maintains that it would be nice to present the source of the insulting meaning given to the word: "When the word was first used as an insult, it meant ‘Communists.’ And whoever is old enough to remember, back then it was used not only in the athletics grounds but also in school. Thus it was said that the Greek Communists ‘were not Greeks but Bulgarians’" (N. 27/5). "However, their ability to use institutions of the State in order to prohibit the circulation of a book is disturbing. It is a consequence of the chauvinistic fever which has appeared in our society after the end of the Cold War". (…) "In the case of the name of Macedonia, there was an explicit inability to accept that the meaning of the words is not dictated by political laws. The words belong …to their meaning" [A. Kourkoulos (K. 27/50]. In commenting the events, the ‘defendant’ himself states: "I consider that we are introduced into a practice and reasoning of censorship of scientific expression. Moreover, this happens in fields where scientists do not express personal views but record social realities" (N. 27/5).

Albania and the Albanians

Scant are the articles (compared with the recent past) which are devoted to describing the political, social and economic situation in Albania and its inhabitants. The general impression is that the relations between Greece and Albania are better than ever and the margins for closer cooperation are large. However, one of the permanent points of friction and a basic area for extending criticism towards the government by the opposition press is the Greek minority in Southern Albania. Time and again the Simitis government has been criticized for the reported slackness with which the issue is addressed, an attitude which is due to the Greek government’s desire not to disturb its relations with the Socialists in Albania. Indeed, the parallels drawn with the situation in Kosovo give a stamp of legitimacy to specific demands. The extract which follows is typical: "At last there is a Greek politician who can speak about the Corfu Protocol. Moreover, he did so at a European Forum, but the paid journalists of modernization hurried to tear him to pieces, referring collectively to the …exile islands. ‘He declared autonomy in Northern Epirus,’ the mouthpieces of the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs shouted in chorus with the well-known scorn. This Ministry will accept only the demands raised by the shabby neighbors, but when it speaks about our own demands, it brings about …disasters. Yet, the Political Spring Member of the European Parliament who found himself under attack said nothing more than what is self-evident. Namely, that in the case of Northern Epirus and contrary to the cases of Bosnia and Kosovo, there is already a declared autonomy which has been agreed on not only by all European powers, but also by Albania itself as far back as 1914! And if nothing else, somebody should give a reply as to whether Tirana which aspires to join Europe will be called upon to respect its conventional obligations" (E.T. 24/5).

Bulgaria and the Bulgarians

The articles dedicated to neighboring Bulgaria are scant this month. The opening of the Bulgarian Consulate and the meeting between the Greek Minister of Foreign Affairs, Th. Pangalos, and his counterpart, N. Mihailova, cultivate a positive and optimistic climate in the Greek press. "Pangalos and Mihailova at the opening of the Bulgarian Consulate" (Eth. 25/5). "The relations with Bulgaria are ‘exceptional’" (El. 25/5).

Macedonia and the Macedonians

The issue of finding a mutually acceptable solution to the ‘name issue’ wins more and more supporters, mainly from the progressive journalists and politicians. Those in favor of a mutual compromise rather accept the diplomatic errors of the Greek side than the right of the neighbors to self-determination. Given the fact that valuable time has already been lost because of the implacability shown by Greece, it is proposed that a compromise be acceptable with the best possible result, so that there are no problems in the future. More than ever before, the blame is now put on nationalist demagogy which has been cultivated during the previous years, and which has obstructed a smooth evolution in the relations between the two countries and the assumption of a the role of a Balkan leader for Greece. The positions of the Greek Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Tzoumakas, and also that of Mr. Ch. Florakis, former chief of the Communist Party of Greece, are included in the category of positions criticizing the policy followed until now. They also aim at clarifying the Macedonian criticism, going beyond any misunderstandings and stereotypes: "‘It is a very easy solution to make demagogy, for example, with the national questions. They are tremendous characters, there is a whole school of national questions now. And all these characters are Greek-Turkish characters; and now the Macedonian question has arisen, this is another school…". "’By the way, who created the Macedonian question?’; ‘A group from PASOK which formed an alliance with Mr. Samaras who wanted to become leader of a party’" [K. Tzoumakas (E.T. 11/5)]. "‘President Gligorov made a clarification for us. He said that they call their country Republic of Macedonia and, with the concept of Republic, they want to show that they are a state which extends up to the Greek and Bulgarian borders. Yet he was unequivocal as to the fact that they do not claim any Greek territories. On the contrary, he stressed that they respect Greece’s national independence and integrity and spoke about Greek Macedonia. What is more important is that he supported friendly economic relations between the two countries. In my opinion, Gligorov was very positive in all this" [Ch. Florakis (El. 7/5)]. It is obvious, however, that a large section of Greek public opinion is still unprepared to accept a compromise on the name issue, let alone to recognize the existence of a Macedonian nation, state and a Macedonian minority on Greek territory. "Iasson presses a button and the apparatus produces a white paper. I am informed that ‘The native Greeks comprise the majority of the population of this country; the remaining population is comprised of Macedonians, Turks, Albanians, Bulgarians and Gypsies’. This comes from encyclopedia ‘Britannica’! I wonder: did the encyclopedia take the information from Karakassidou, the pampered child of the American Universities? And, to prevent us from having any doubts as to its intentions, it places north of Macedonia the word MACEDONIA with Skopje as the capital! Of course, the encyclopedia belongs to them and they can write whatever they wish!" [S. Kargakos, (E.T. 15/5)]. "Skopje was never Macedonia. And if, for political expediency, the name Macedonia was given to one of the constituent parts of the former Yugoslavia, that was one of the Federation’s parts and not a Macedonian state". (…) "There has never been and there is no Macedonian language" [O. Planaki letter (El. 22/5)].

Romania and the Romanians

This month there are almost no articles about Romania. The few articles which the Greek papers published pertained mainly to the economic course of the country and to cigarette smuggling. "Romania, the budget was approved" (K. 27/5).

Serbia and the Serbs

The disorderly situation in Kosovo is again on the forefront of media coverage. The conservative opposition press, traditionally pro-Serb, is that which projects the official Serb viewpoint. That is why it speaks about Albanian nationalism which undermines the foundations of a state already suffering multiple wounds imparted to it by the West and the USA. The Albanian speaking minority is "a minority which is not so innocent" (E.T. 31/5). The essence is elsewhere: "Clinton does not give a fig about international law. He remembers it only if and when it suits him. Sadam and Milosevic have been called ‘butchers’ because this was convenient for Clinton and his policy. Had they played his game, they would have been ‘respectable and reliable’ interlocutors in all respects. It would have been like the Turks who are butchers of Cyprus and who have disregarded the UN and all its resolutions for twenty-four years. Naturally the Turks do so not because they have the strength but because the various Clintons and Blairs allow them to." (Eth. 20/5). "The whole Serb nation, personalized in Slobodan Milosevic, is again leveled by the vindictive policy of the USA which has never forgiven the ‘disobedience’ of Belgrade" (E.T. 31/5). It is exactly because the Serbs were in the past allies against the Turks and because they are Christian Orthodox and even now they react to the ‘imperialist’ plans of Turkey and its supporters, that they enjoy the special respect of the Greek conservative press. "And as the NATO soldiers are playing the role of ‘Gendarmerie,’ it is certain that, in the only too real prospect of imposition of new economic sanctions on Serbia, it will be impossible ‘even for a mosquito’ to pass through Greek territory towards the friendly country of the same religious belief." (E.T. 29/5). "The consent which the Greek government gave to this collective methodical handling against Serbia is undoubtedly ‘a political disgrace’ against a friendly ally of the same religion which, to tell you the truth, is also the last anti-Turkish bastion in the Balkans. In addition to being ignorant of history and speculative, this political choice is also a national blunder of the highest degree by Messrs. Simitis and Pangalos, which the country will be called upon to pay in the future. And this is because, as we have repeatedly warned, if it is the turn of Serbia and Kosovo at present, the day after tomorrow it will be the turn of Greek Thrace where the powerful of the globe will make one more a la carte discovery of a ‘minority problem’" (E.T. 31/5). The collapse of the Kontic government is recognized by the entirety of the press as an effort on the part of S. Milosevic to bring back the country’s political game to his own control, especially in view to the elections in Montenegro. The opposition press includes this intervention in the incontestable authority of a leader like Milosevic, while the more progressive press warns about the dangers which they see in the political instability of the country. "‘A victory’ for Milosevic or a collapse of the government. The government of Yugoslavia under Prime Minister Radoje Kontic collapsed yesterday, when it was voted down by both bodies of the parliament. It was one more attempt on the part of S. Milosevic to place his opponents under control. In accordance with the Constitution, his political friend M. Bulatovic takes over. Mr. Milosevic wants to shake the pro-Western President of Montenegro before the general elections which will take place there on May 31." (E.T. 19/5). "Dangerous political games on the part of Milosevic. His direct rupture with Montenegro includes the danger of a new cycle of bloodshed" (K. 21/5).

The greater section of the press seems to be particularly careful with the positions it takes in regard to the whole question of superficial neutrality. However, when presenting both sides, the Serb definition of the situation is usually adopted. The need for respect of human rights is not addressed much, while ‘the separatist trends of extremists’ are discussed at length. The Greek papers use ‘Albanian speaking people,’ instead of ‘Albanians’, suggesting that the latter are not an ethnic but a linguistic minority. "Encouraged by the support given to them by the West, the Albanian speaking people of Kosovo reject every proposal put forward for discussion by Belgrade. By setting independence as their final goal, they draw to this direction the Albanians from FYROM. This is made easier by the fact that the regions of Kosovo and Tetovo border with Albania. With regard to the developments in Kosovo, the Serb leadership is not totally uninvolved. As a supreme diplomatic source was saying, being unable to understand the changes which have happened internationally, S. Milosevic ‘bangs his head on the wall’ as he refuses to give willingly what he knows he will be obliged by the international community to offer to the Albanians". (Eth. 3/5).

Turkey and the Turks

The question of respect for human rights combined with the peculiar political and military regime of the country, is again on the forefront. This time discussions were started after the assassination attempt against A. Bhirdal, a human rights advocate in Turkey. "The reaction by the Turkish authorities to the assassination attempt of the most noted defender of human rights in the country is infuriating. It almost seems to suggest that the regime itself turned him into a target by letting information regarding his relations with Otzalan leak. The anger of the Western capitals was hypocritical, because for so many years they have kept their eyes closed to the violations of human rights." (N. 14/5). This event emphasized the importance of the mass media, the role which it plays in cultivating and strengthening the negative stereotype images regarding Turkey and the manner in which they are nationalistically used. "To be exact, we did not learn that Bhirdal exists. Once again we learned that there are extreme right-wingers, terrorists, people forming a para-state structure, who are tolerated (if not used) by the Turkish secret services. There were all the ingredients necessary in order to prove again what had to be proved - that the neighboring country has a ‘dark and barbarous’ face. From what I know, Bhirdal’s bright, peace-loving, democratic activity had not concerned the Greek media until now. Because it does not fit in the image of Turkey which we have. If we get to know that there are peace-loving forces on the other side too, our anti-Turkish reflexes will get blunt and this is considered nationally harmful" (V. 17/5).

Turkey is constantly presented as a country with intense contradictions, with internal problems, with a deficit in the ‘balance of democratic tradition,’ with an ‘inferiority complex,’ not only towards its past, but also towards its present, and with a provocative attitude towards Greece. "The Turkish pseudo-democracy, which is supervised by the military leadership playing a ‘guarantor’s’ role, is staggering. And Turkey’s supporters in the West, the Americans and the Europeans, are greatly embarrassed since the Turkish ‘crossword’ cannot be solved either by the ‘western-like’ political order of the country or by the leadership of the armed forces. The West supports the ‘invalid’ political leadership of Turkey in a thousand ways and preserves close, yet futile, ties with the ‘star’ general Bhir. The Turkish system of the so-called Kemalism has been led to an impasse. It will be able to survive only by means of civil or military coup d’etats, and this does not help in any way the ‘European orientations’ of Ankara." (K. 15/5). "It is exactly the structure of Turkish society and its crippled political system which close in upon the country. Every movement towards democratization and liberalization would simply free the centrifugal forces of Turkish society (workers’ movement, unemployed, homeless etc.) which now simply do not dare to react. The contradiction covered by the Turkish political system looks like a dynamite at its foundations. The regime of lack of freedom has been imposed by the military establishment in order to safeguard the secular character of the state. And this is exactly what reinforces the Islamic movement" (Eth. 22/5). "If the Group of 14 really wants Turkey’s affiliation with the anti-democratic militarist regime in Ankara today, they only have to say so openly and stop pretending. They only have to tolerate the massacres of the Kurds, the violation of human rights, the persecutions of the dissenters, the permanent presence of ‘Attilas’ in Cyprus, the contempt of International Law" [editorial (El. 21/5)]. "It is about a state which, since the beginning of the 20th century and by means of a lot of crimes and genocide, violates human rights often surpassing Nazi Germany in ferocity. At present it is at the highest point of world unreliability and aversion" [P. Nantsou letter, K. (28/5)]. "And what does Mr. Yhilmaz want to tell us? That the Turks have the right to conquer and to plunder and to murder? And that the peoples who suffer the Turkish ‘treatment’ do not have the right to fight for their freedom, their homes, the homes of their ancestors?" (E.T. 5/5). "25% of the women in Turkey are victims of domestic violence." (El. 18/5).

Indeed, on many occasions, articles which satirize the vacillation between the past and the present, between the West and the East are brought forward, in order to strengthen the impression of a pseudo-dilemma with regard to Turkey’s identity and perspective. The message is that, through artificial means and tricks, Turkey tries to prove, first to itself and then to the rest of the world, that it constitutes (by nature and power) an integral part of Europe. "And …women’s underwear is under persecution in Turkey! Hurriyet reported, following an order issued by the Mayor Konak in Smyrna, that the Market Inspection Service started to confiscate women’s underwear sold by street peddlers. As mentioned in the report, 5,000 pieces have been confiscated, with the argument that they were an offense against common decency and because selling them in public is an immoral act" (E.T. 20/5). "A yardstick for the seriousness of the dictatorship which governs the neighboring country is found in the measures taken as regards the mustaches of men who work in the greater public sector. A few days ago, an urgent circular was sent to all civil servants giving instructions as to the length, shape, seemliness and uniformity of their mustaches. Our own modernization is running some years ahead of the Turks as, without any circulars and other bureaucratic procedures, it has abolished mustaches as an anachronism" (K. 15/5). The reactions of the Turkish government regarding the recognition by the French Parliament of the genocide of the Armenians, are presented as an anguished attempt by a country to renounce its past immaturely and dishonestly. The Greek press welcomes the decision and it concludes that this is yet another official recognition of the Turkish barbarity and yet another failure on the part of Turkey to achieve absolution from sins for the things it has done and is still doing against other peoples. "The recognition of the Armenians’ genocide is a hard blow against Ankara" (E.T. 30/5). "Demonstration by members of the Gray Wolves against France" (N. 1/5).

At the antipode of all this, there are certain comments of journalists and politicians who see dialogue, cooperation and the European perspective of Turkey in good faith. A typical example is the economic reportage news which follows: "Benefits from Turkey: Positive results (for Greece also) from the customs affiliation of the neighboring country with the EU." (N. 27/5).

Newspapers abbreviations: