October-December 1996 Monitoring. Part A: Bulgaria and Greece.

(This summary is based on the reports of the first three months for most countries (by mid-January 1997, no reports were available from Macedonia, and only the October 1996 report from Turkey); because of its length, it comes in three parts.)

Mariana Lenkova

Although the Bulgarian media traditionally cover the other Balkan states and their peoples in a negative to neutral way, there were a few cases of change in this in the period October-December, 1996. However, it is notable to point out that even when favorable articles appeared in the media, they were not presented in a way as to show how advanced the other country is, but rather as to make a comparison in respect to (and at the expense of) Bulgaria. As regards the internal ethnic minorities, the media were predominantly negative, especially when it came to covering alleged relations with foreign forces (e.g. the Turkish minority and Turkey).

ALBANIA has always been a source of abundant jokes and sensations about its "backwardness", poverty and lack of democracy: "Mad Albanian Runs Down Schoolchildren with Tractor, Injures Six" (T, 19/10); "Beggar in Tirana Throws Stones at Benefactor" (T, 24/10); "Albania persists in implementing its economic reform, though it finds it somewhat more difficult to embrace democracy" (S, 20/11); "The number of poor grows threateningly with every day. Thus though free, the Albanians are not happy. (...). Blackmarketeering, corruption, drugs trafficking and the smuggling of stolen cars are flourishing in the poorest country of Europe." (C, 14/11). However, it is exactly this Balkan country which started being perceived in a quite different way by some of the Bulgarian media. This was so, because this allegedly "backward" state provided a good basis for comparison with the self-confident but unsuccessful Bulgarians "How Are We to Catch up with .... the Albanians?" [the title is an allusion to a popular Bulgarian TV show "How Are We to Catch up with the Americans?"]. "I don’t want to catch up with the Americans, I want to catch up with the Albanians" (De, 23/10). The papers saw a threat in the fact that "Bulgaria is gradually slipping into the place occupied by Albania in Enver Hodja times - the place of Europe’s recluse" (T, 26/10). Even more so, when even the "backward" Albanians started complaining "over low-quality Bulgarian goods" (S, 30/11).

Apart from the neutral references to GREECE (which go beyond the scope of this project) the image of the latter remained predominantly negative. Thus Greeks were presented as universal "hypocrites", as "dishonest", "wicked" and "hostile" people (the word "Byzantine" was often used to encompass all those characteristics): "Athens pockets [steals] EU money for minorities; Athens invented a Pomak and Gypsy ethnic minority asking the EU for additional funds to assist these minorities..., but the money sunk elsewhere" (24 Ch, 16/10); "The kind hosts played a Byzantine trick on our team, sending it to train on a rough and sloping pitch" (24Ch, 13/12); "Greek taxi drivers are notorious for their rudeness and greed, as well as for their disregard of traffic rules" (24Ch, 13/12). All the above mentioned features of the Greeks were described with an even greater ferocity and intolerance when it came to cases of alleged Greek violations of Bulgarian interests. This was seen very well in the media debates about Paissi’s "Slav-Bulgarian History" ( it is considered one of the most important historical books for the Bulgarians and which was stolen from Greece some years ago): "Greece overdoes it. After Paissi it is now out for more invaluable manuscripts." (T, 03/12 commentary headlined "People Deprived of History, Too"); "Greeks Lust for Bulgarian Monuments Again" (C, 04/12). The conclusion was that "Greek megalomania in respect to Balkan history and culture is well known. Greek primary school text books proclaim everything in the Balkans the work of Greeks and belonging to Greece. But Greek claims on Paissi’s History can hardly be explained by Athens’ megalomaniac delusions. They are an expression of the Greeks’ long-standing intentions to lay their hands on the Zographu Monastery on Mount Athos" (T, 05/12, Krassimir Karakachanov, leader of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization-Union of Macedonian Societies). At the same time there was one pragmatic commentary which argued that "[W]hat is most important for a manuscript is how it is preserved and not whether it is in the country of its origin or not. It is also important whether scholars have access to it in order to study it. If because of the crisis it is undergoing Bulgaria is unable to preserve the original of Paissi’s History or other valuable manuscripts and the Greeks offer better conditions, then let us not hesitate and hand them over to them. This would be a by far more patriotic act than stealing them, hiding them and protecting them by human chains." (C, 03/12). However, the attempt of the Greeks to present Bulgarian yogurt (the bacteria used in the making of which is called "bulgaricum") as being actually Greek was assessed as outrageous (24 Ch, 27/11). The occasional cases of positive coverage of Bulgaria’s Southern neighbor were found mainly in the paper of the Bulgarian Socialists, with the suggestion that "another fact favoring this cooperation is that the Socialists are in power both in Bulgaria and in Greece." (Do, 16/10).

MACEDONIA was the country which got the most polarized attitude from the Bulgarian media. When border problems were reported the style was very poignant and bitter: "Macedonian Beats Up Bulgarian Customs Officer" (NT, 8-9/10); "Macedonia Won’t Let 200 Bulgarians to the Toilet; Ohrid Cops Club and Curse Bulgarians" (24 Ch, 26/10); "Skopje Confiscates Bulgarian Passport of Human Rights Activist" (S, 13/11). This bitterness became even stronger when discussing "the language problem" between the two nations. It was in the latter cases that the Bulgarian media were rather ironical and were talking about the "backwardness" and "ingratitude" of the neighbors. "The Macedonians feel America’s support and though we were the first to recognize them and helped them gratuitously during the Greek embargo, they are still bossing the show. It’s high time we sobered them up." said Krassimir Karakachanov, while Stoyan Denchev, MP of the ethnic Turks’ Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF) and Deputy Chairman of the parliamentary Foreign Policy Committee, commented: "No one in Bulgaria is under the illusion that there is a Macedonian nation and consequently a Macedonian language. This is also well known to our friends of the Great Powers". This was the major point of dispute and it was covered in the typical way of stressing that "in spite of the black ingratitude of the politicians, ordinary Macedonians know who their most sincere well-wishers are: ‘In seventy years the Serbs did not build what the Bulgarians did in 1941-1944!’ old men say. They tell it to their grandchildren." (C, 13/12). With suggestions like the above, the Bulgarian press showed a stable position behind both the negative and the positive coverage of Macedonia. Regardless of the general tone of the articles, their indirect aim sounded like that: "‘Bulgaria is our window to the world’, Skopje admitted" (T, 19/10); "They say we cannot understand each other with our brothers from Skopje so we should sign our agreements in English or some other language (...) Even if we sign them in double Dutch when translated the documents will again sounds the same. In Bulgarian!" (T, 18/12). All this came to prove the traditional closeness between the two peoples. Under the headline "Bulgarian-style Autumn in Macedonia" there followed the text: "Peppers, lyutenitsa and rakhia are the main preoccupations of the population; this season [autumn], just like us, our neighbors are busy making lyutenitsa and rakhia; It seems that everywhere where there is something Bulgarian in the population it finds expression in strings of red peppers hanging in the sun to dry. The strings of peppers, plaits of garlic and bagpipes remind of our native land most. As for the rakhia, in Macedonia they make it mostly from grapes as in Bulgaria, and not from plums as in Serbia." (C, 08/11).

The image of ROMANIA has evolved just like that of Albania. However, the traditional suggestions of "backwardness", criminality and low living standards were still present: "Use of condoms is not in fashion in Romania" (T, 21/10); "Everyone knows that the country has ended up in the hands of a gang of mafiosi who control everything and have embroiled all levels in corruption and blackmail" (Sega, 7-13/11); "In seven years, Romania has bogged down in corruption" (De, 26/11). Moreover, when it came to preserving Bulgarian interests, the Romanians were accused that "[the Ukranians steal part of our natural gas].Then it is theRomanians’ turn. We have to make do with what’s left." (24 Ch, 15/11). The Romanians have also "blocked the land route for nuclear fuel deliveries to Bulgaria and forced us to use the more expensive air transport" (24 Ch, 16/10). There were even cases of explicit negativism due to historical reasons but even the latter were not able to overshadow the tendency to have articles about Romania’s success in combating its economic difficulties: "Investors flee North where they discover Romanian hospitality." (Sega, 24-30/10); "The Romanian is artful but also hardworking when he senses personal gain. He likes scrounging but is a good bargainer and skillful in running his own business or trade" (NT, 2-3/10). Keeping in mind all this, it is not difficult to sense the bitterness in Continent’s editorial "We have become even Romania’s laughing stock; Bulgaria should not have allowed a Romanian statesman to lump us with ‘the group of the wretched’ even though that is precisely where we belong. (...) We will live to see the day when the Romanian’s correct conclusion is drawn by some Somali or Kurd too" [(22/11); after an interview by a senior Romanian official who was quoted as saying "We have hitherto waged a tough struggle to distance ourselves from Bulgaria which, under the incumbent government, has no chance of leaving the group of the wretched"].

SERBIA and its people were also presented in this ambivalent light of criticism and appraisal at one and the same time. The most discussed issues were the ones concerning the Bulgarian minority in the Western Outlands: "Of all countries where Bulgarian children study their mother tongue, things are most difficult in Yugoslavia which poses obstacles to Bulgarians expressing their national identity" (NT, 19/10); "imposition of Serbian symbols and feasts to wipe out Bulgarian cultural traditions (24 Ch, 03/12); "Serb Authorities Mistreat Our Minority; the purpose was reportedly to intimidate our compatriots with double citizenship, [prompting them to] reject their Bulgarian citizenship and sever ties with the motherland" (T, 12/11) Another largely discussed topic was the alleged lack of democracy in the FRY which is "a society reluctant to have major changes", a society "in Milosevic’s iron grip" (De, 01/11), a society whose "electorate was again subjected to nonstop brainwashing so as to revert Serbia to a state of general amnesia forgetting the war, sanctions and casualties" (De, 15/11). Still the media admitted that "[P]eople are tired by the war and see the positive effects of peace and the lifting of sanctions, identifying them with Milosevic’s consistent policies" (Do, 02/11) and admired the Serbian hardiness in economic difficulties and especially the fact that "[Living] Standards in New Yugoslavia Restored in One Year" (S, 09/11), thus exclaiming with awe: "Look what the Serbs are doing!" (NT, 09/12)

Another Balkan country - TURKEY - was presented as "backward", regardless of the fact that it is rather advanced in its overall development. Thus the image which was projected to the Bulgarian public was of a country in which "[W]omen [are] subjected to domestic violence mistrust the official institutions because they think the authorities are on the men’s side; women [...] still are humiliated and maltreated by men; In Turkish law there still are provisions which run counter to the principle of equality of the sexes". (De, 24/10). Even impartial and objective reports on human rights abuses in Bulgaria’s neigbor were written in such a way as to comply to these "standards" of negativism and backwardness which the readers expect to see: "Acts of police violence are frequent in Turkey, but the culprits rarely go on trial" (24 Ch, 19/10); "Turkey Drags Its Feet over Human Rights" (Do, 19/10); "Turkey: Drugs, Kurds and Politics" (De, 24/11). However, the fact that the neighbor is "a nation based on Islam" (Do, 30/10) which is in a "quest for the spirit of the Former Empire" (Do, 29/10) was perceived as an even bigger threat. "Once again the Islamists who are now ruling Turkey, are trying to curtail the rights of the people and impose religious dogmas. Activists of the ruling Welfare Party are competing in inventing the nuttiest of bans. The latest comes from the central parts of the country where an Islamist mayor declared turkeys enemies of the Koran. The next may be still more absurd. It may dawn on some functionary that the giaours eat lamb on St George’s Day and a taboo may be made of the only meat allowed by the Koran" (C, 23/12). Still, the issue which was constantly on the pages of the Bulgarian papers was related to the large Turkish minority within Bulgarian borders and the alleged aid it got from Turkey and other Islamic states: "Ankara Gives 10,000 for Minarets in This Country; the money was delivered legally as a donation by Bulgarian emigrants to Turkey. Experts, however, reportedly established that this was a case of an official position taken by the ruling fundamentalists lined with financial sums. (...) The MRF officially claims that it does not uphold the ideas of Necmettin Erbakan’s fundamentalist party in Turkey" (Do, 18/11) and "Ankara Wishes a Turkish Minority in Bulgaria" (S, 09/12). It is important to point out that even after a series of articles in the Socialists’ newspaper which evoked memories from one of the most tragic episodes in Bulgarian history - the slaughter of the Bulgarian population in Batak in 1876 - "Dogan [the leader of the MRF] prepares to rule Batak" (Do, 18/12), there were other papers which tried to be more open-minded and to see the reasons behind that skilful piece of manipulation which was directed to the heart of hearts of every Bulgarian. Thus Demokratsya condemned Douma’s attempt to use painful historical events in order to illustrate the present state of affairs: "[T]his man’s only fault, according to the Socialists, is his being a Bulgarian Turk [...]. What is more, historical analogies are used to draw an artificial line of pseudo-patriotism dividing Batak of today. History has described such political methods as National Socialism or simply Nazism." (De, 19/12) Perhaps the latter reaction was the one which showed the correct direction towards having more articles like the ones on "Christians, Muslims Celebrate Together; even though Momchilgrad is one of the population centers with the most dramatic events in connection with the ‘Regeneration’ Process, emigration to Turkey is low, and Turks, Christian Bulgarians and Bulgarian Mohammedans cohabit in peace" (NT, 12-13/11) and on the belief that "trust between Turks and Bulgarians is stronger than the woodwork and windowpanes of the mosque" (Do, 09/12; in a report on the bombing of the mosque in the town of Kazanluk). And last but not least there were even texts positively highlighting different aspects of life in Turkey which "has made great progress both in the real economy and in culture (...) Turkish medicine has also made surprising progress (...). Both the government and the public respect medicine (...). Associate Professor Jan Yozgan of the University in Ankara surprised me with his flawless Bulgarian. He was one of the victims of the regeneration process of the 1980s in Kurdjali. However, I felt no trace of bitterness..." (De, 27/12).

The internal minorities were presented in a rather biased and stereotypical way. The titles of the articles on the ROMA were full of irony, slang and offensive adjectives: "Gypsy man was stripped off naked, he bantered a girl" (24 Ch, 15/10); "Minor Gypsies demonstrate intercourse before schoolchildren" (24 Ch, 11/10); "A Gypsy woman smashed the skull of her lover" (24 Ch, 25/10); "Ferocious Gypsy was shooting in the streets of Plovdiv, he murdered one person and injured another five" (C, 12/11). The Roma were mocked at for their "ingenious" methods for making money: "Some years ago the Gypsies in Plovdiv used to make a lot of money out of road accidents, because it is impossible to prove that the accident has been staged. Nowadays the blood theater is once again in fashion. The drivers, who pass by the Gypsy neighborhoods, have to be particularly attentive." (24 Ch, 30/11). Still, there were articles which caugth in a photographic caption the repulsive misery in the Roma neighborhoods, thus avoiding the usual stereotypes and trying to provoke the awareness and compassion of the readers: "Snotty Gypsy kids crawl on the dark ground out of half-houses, half-shacks. The slops are still all over the yard. Shaggy washing clings on the wash-line in the streets. Six households share one water-spring which freezes in winter. Talking about drainage is far-fetched... The big Gypsy families with their babies, hens and mangy dogs roll over the floor." (T, 24/10).

The TURKISH minority got coverage both in articles dealing with the relations between Bulgaria and Turkey, and in separate ones. Similarly to the Roma, the Turks were presented from the point of view of the sensational and the ironic: "Deo sprays from Mecca freshen air in our Mosques" (24 Ch, 22/10); "Ahmed Dogan will be given rights inaccessible even to Daddy ("Daddy" is a nick-name of the former leader of the Communist regime in the past - Todor Zhivkov)" (168 Ch, Nov). Things became even less tolerant when talking about the relationships between the ethnic Turks and the Bulgarians in the regions with mixed population: "racial attitude of Turks to Bulgarians; ethnic Turks discriminate ethnic Bulgarians in those towns where they are more than 50% of the population" (Do, Nov). However, it is exactly in this field of inter-ethnic relations that positive coverage was to be found as well: "Bulgarians and Turks munch and crunch together; the ever-so-far calm co-existence of the different ethnic groups".

And last but not least it should be pointed out that religious denominations, different from the Christian Orthodox one, got a very large coverage and were usually described as a threat to society and to stable moral values: "Forbidden sect sues journalist" (Do, 21/11); "A whole town rose against a sect" (De, 21/11).

Guide to newspaper initials: 24 Ch "24 Chassa", C "Continent", De "Demokratsiya", Do "Douma", SN "Standart News", T "Dneven Troud", NT "Noshten Troud", Sega "Sega" magazine, 168 Ch "168 Chassa".

In the period October - December, 1996, the Greek media remained within the scope of their traditional approach to the treatment of the neighboring nations and states, but at the same time they marked the beginning of a new development as regards some specific issues (e.g. the change in the attitude towards the political leaders of the FR Yugoslavia). This is an overview of the most dominant trends in the coverage of the major political and social issues, concerning the "Balkan neighbors", presented in the mainstream Greek press.

ALBANIA was covered on the basis of the state of the Albanian immigrants in Greece, which are not well-accepted either by the Greek society or by the media themselves: "Illegal immigrants, the bleeding wound" (E.T. 06/10); "The Albanian Mafia promotes and controls infant prostitution in the center of Athens and offers protection to nights clubs" (Ap. 07/10); "Minor (Albanians) criminals; murderers, thieves, rapists, kidnappers, burglars" (E.T. 13/10); "Who will save us and our property from the plague of Albanian illegal immigrants?" Ap. (27/11); "there are many Greeks dead from Albanian cut-throats" (Ap. 27/11). The Albanians were thus projected as victimizers and still there were a number of articles which covered the information that a gang of taxi drivers was robbing them. The coverage showed sympathy for the victims but at the same time it kept on using the persistent image of "[T]he ragged, miserable, and fearful Albanian illegal immigrants and the little money they had been saving were the "target" of ruthless taxi drivers, who were robbing even with the use of clubs!!!" (E.T. 1/11). There were also occasional voices against the racism which meets the Albanians who go to Greece as illegal immigrants "The rise of criminality is attributed to illegal immigrants. So, we have passed from sympathy to attacks against economic refugees by men wearing stockings on their heads. " (El. 4/10); "Organized groups attack illegal immigrants’ houses located in an Athens ‘ghetto’". Forty one incidents near the frontier with victims of Albanian immigrants were mentioned but as Eth. (1/10) concluded "[F]ears against immigrants are unwarranted".

Traditionally BULGARIA is not one of Greece’s favorites, and it is usually mentioned mainly in reference to the uncertain situation in the country and the poverty which its population is subjected to: "Mafia and political chaos strangle the neighboring country. Murder of Loukanov" (Ad.T. 03/10); "violence, chaos, uncertainty" (El. 06/10); "More hunger and poverty for Bulgarians. Garbage disappears before it reaches the dump. At night, the dustbins in the good neighborhoods of Sofia are "plundered" by hungry ragged men" (N. 30/11). That is why poverty, misery but also illegality are allegedly imported from Bulgaria into Greece: "when we say cheap used models do we mean only cars? Or also Russian and Bulgarian girls and the like?" (El. 26/11). When it comes to business, the Greek media tend to a more positive attitude towards Bulgaria, the latter being a favorable market for Greek goods: "We are the best suppliers of Bulgaria; there may be political changes in Bulgaria and many problems but Greek-Bulgarian relations remain good" (Eth. 21/11).

After the "name-issue" has reached a comfortable status quo, the problems with MACEDONIA have subsided to a great extent. However, there are still articles which aim at keeping the Greeks alert to the danger which their neighbors might pose over their "sacred" name. The "evidence" which is used is usually taken from history and thus the stereotype of the Macedonians (who are constantly referred to as "Skopjans") as forgers of this history becomes a stable one: "Is the regime of Skopje still insisting on us exporting our name and it exporting Macedonians?" (Ad.T. 14/10); "Macedonia was Greek. Whoever dares challenging that will have to answer to history. As one should know that states and nations are not created neither in the "kitchen" of the palaces nor in the international organizations with forging foreign names and symbols. They are the result of centuries and millenaries of contribution to civilization." (Ad.T. 7/11); "history gives an answer to the Skopjans as English historians proved the Greekness of the Macedonians in the Himalayas" (Ad.T. 5/12); "the Pope did not fall in the Skopjans’ trap and did not bless the newly-made "Macedonian" forgers of history. (...) Well, how could it be otherwise. The liars, the thieves, and ... the forgers of history can rejoice only in the first year!" (Ad.T. 28/12). There were also articles full of sarcasm which managed to provoke exclamations like: "That’s a state! It’s only been 5 years since the declaration of their independence and poor Skopje get mobile telephones" (K. 26/10). Still, from time to time the media stressed more the profitable development of business activities between the two countries: "24 companies from Northern Greece prepare to sign contracts of cooperation with companies from Skopje. That is faits accomplis. Let them try to overturn it in the negotiations in New York. Everyone will rebel" (Ad.T. 21/11), thus showing that business might be one of the bridges for concord between the two states.

There were two opposing lines of reaction to a statement by Ch. Florakis who "asks to put an end to the discrimination against Slavomacedonians and allow their free repatriation" (El. N. 4/11). The first one was represented by PASOK deputy Mr. Stelios Papathemelis who called the refugees who live in the Republic of Macedonia and want to go back to Greece "janissaries of Greek origin who have undergone an internal and mental ethnological mutation" -meaning that from Greeks that they were, according to him, when they left Greece, they have now become Macedonians- "and having rejected the Greek conscience turn against their previous fatherland creating themselves the problems". (Ad.T 18/11; Eth. 19/11). But there were also some articles which condemned the "short-sighted expediency, adopted by our leaders in the last twenty years, when they agreed to let return to their ancestral homes all political refugees except the Slavomacedonians thus creating passions and hatreds."(El. 27/11). Those articles showed a marked difference in the approach to the "Macedonian problem" hinting on the fact that the Greek society itself is to blame for a great part of this problem: "[S]ocial and political racism does not concern only some citizens (...) Combined with the appropriate dose of ethnopatriotism, it really blossoms among our political leaders (...) as the pure-blood Greeks with a certificate of purity of their genes (...) shape up consciences and affect broader social strata that have been accustomed in scare-mongering and demonization" (El. 26/11).

With the exception of the report on Romanian burglars (Ap. 3/10) "Romanian illegal immigrants turn out to become a scourge that robs houses and shops daily" ROMANIA and the Romanians are usually presented in a neutral to positive light. "There is hope for Romania" (K. 27/10); "Greek-Romanian friendship that historically bonds the two peoples" (El. 29/11). The media also projected the image of crisis on the economic and social level with mentions of the poverty that plagues the country: "a thousand babies were abandoned in Romania’s clinics." (Ap. 10/12).

SERBIA used to be the only Balkan country in the region capable of bringing warm feelings to the pages of the Greek media (except for the cases when the Serbian basketball teams beat the Greeks): "Satisfaction in Greece with the end of embargo against Serbia" (Eth. 03/10); "Greece is intervening in the European Union on behalf of Serbia" (El. 18/10); "The friendship with Yugoslavia has been confirmed" (K. 24/10). A very interesting development started in November when there was a shift in the coverage of the daily demonstrations against Milosevic from positive to neutral. This was a remarkable change after the almost universal support which this "friend and ally" used to get from Greece: "Serbia: all spotlights on the wife’s part (...) now it is clear that all the major national aims of Serbia for which Yugoslavia was destroyed and her peoples impoverished were the interest of a power machine and a family." (El. 1/11). As time went by this tendency became even stronger and Milosevic was called "the father of Serbian irredentism, who tries to create a country that will suit him, his wife, his son, his daughter and their company" (N. 21/12), a person who "had succeeded in rallying the large majority of the Serbian nation around the line of a nationalist struggle that transcended classes, put brother against brother, and was extremist (...). But not for quite long. Time had taken its revenge again, washing ashore on the corpse of Yugoslavia all the same economic and political problems of the early 1980s. (...) Huge waves of demonstrators who demand again bread and freedom." (N. 18/12). Among the titles on the rebellion, there were some occasional stories reminiscent of the old friendship: "relations between Belgrade and Athens become even closer" (Ad.T. 26/11); "Karadjic who is prosecuted like a war criminal from the powerful of the world, as he did not accept to submit to their plans" (according to the President of a Greek-Serbian friendship association P. Mihalakakos, E.T. 5/12).

The negative pole in the attitude of the Greek media has always been "reserved" for TURKEY, The latter is seen as "the traditional enemy" while its people are "primitive", "backward" and "hostile": "The Turks even today behave according to primitive instincts, like a few centuries ago ... when masses of their blood-lust conquerors knocked on the gates of Europe ... And how does the civilized West react to the disobedient towards the international laws and agreements barbarian Asiatics?" (El. 02/10); "Turkey is a huge hell, its system is an uncontrolled monster; Ankara ... is built on a hill in the depths of East, controlled by masses of soldiers and Islamists ..." (Ap. 06/10); "Islamists kill dogs in Turkey" (El. 5/12). Thus the Greek public is led to believe that there is "a need for weapons (...) when there is a direct threat from Turkey and her claims against the sovereign rights of the country are permanent and repetitive." (Eth. 14/11). In such a dangerous situation, the Greek Foreign Ministry’s comment on a possible foundation of a "bank of Greek-Turkish fraternization" (i.e. the fraternization between a Greek and a Turkish city) comes only natural: "in the present situation, and given the effort of the Turkish leadership to give the impression that, despite territorial claims, it is possible to have normal relations, it is not encouraged to have fraternizations, especially when from the other side there is no clear condemnation of the Turkish occupation of Cyprus, the attacks and provocations against our islands and the beastly violation of the human rights of the inhabitants of Turkey and especially the Kurds" (El.; Ad. T. 7/11). However there were voices which gave some hope for the betterment of the relationship between the two states: "the diplomacy of the citizens can help de-escalate the tension" (Ad.T. 8/11). A markedly positive development could be seen in the 7/11 issue of El. in a commentary on education in Turkey which ran contrary to the general stereotype on the "backwardness" of the country: "[I]n a place which on the one hand gives the image of the country with guns, violence, human rights violations; on the other, there is that Turkey which resists, fights for freedom of speech, (...) has ultra-modern universities of which every European country would be jealous." There were positive references to the Turkish-Hellenic Business Council as well: "Make business not war. A message of hope" (El. 15/12); "A business bridge in Greek-Turkish relations. The first positive step" (E.T. 15/12); "Greece-Turkey: business brings us closer" (K. 8/12) but at the same time some papers treated the subject with suspicion and skepticism: "Turkey throws economic nets; [T]hey steal tourists from us with ridiculously low prices" (Eth. 12/12); "invest and make peace, but Ankara unshaken lays claims on Greek sovereignty. That simple." (N. 16/12). Similar was the case with the coverage of the row in the basketball game between Aris and Turkish Besiktas in Salonica: "[P]rovocation"/"Greek-Turkish beating with American interference" [because the Turkish team’s player who started the row was an American] (N. 12/12); "Turkish provocation, the rout was planned ahead," "of course they were upset when they saw the banner ‘Constantinople capital of Greece’ not because it offended them but because they understood that those who wrote it meant it" (Ad.T. 13/12), while other papers decided to take a sober stand: "The empty-headed will continue dominating for long. That means that the sober ones should keep open the road between the two peoples. This is the only visible perspective. The other one, the traditional one is only conflict" (Ad.T. 13/12, N. Mertzos).

When speaking of minorities within the boundaries of Greece the press is rather hostile to any suggestions from foreign sources that there are such minorities: "Americans see Turks and Macedonians" (E.T. 5/11), and, in that way, "the Great Powers grant themselves the right of "interference" and "control" in the Balkans, in a region they want to include in the "second-class league" of countries in the European continent. The "minority" issues give a suitable excuse to the planners of the "new order" for their intention to "deal with" the Balkans like a "banal" region in pain, which should not be considered like a typical European one’ " comments Kathimerini (8/11). There was an even stronger reaction after the publication of the annual report of the American organization Human Rights Watch: "Wild attack against Greece by an American organization. Dirty story. They baptized Skopje as Macedonia" (Ad.T. 07/12); "Greece the target again" (N. 06/12). Thus issues concerning the so called "MUSLIM minority" (they name themselves a "Turkish minority") are viewed as dangerous for the integrity and national security of Greece: "Pamir [the Turkish Ambassador} insists on seeing a Turkish minority in Thrace" (E.T. 18/10); "Racist treatment, ghetto, marginality, failure of regular integration in the Greek society, absolute dependence of the woman on the man, insecurity, manipulation by others, cultural inferiority are the results of their ignorance. Their ignorance facilitates their manipulation by various centers of power: their religious leadership and the Turkish propaganda" (N. 14/10).

The tendency to represent the ROMA minority was limited to the usual references to their alleged criminal behavior: "Gypsies ravage the area and threaten even the workers’ lives" (Ad.T. 01/10); "The Mafia of the garbage; Gypsies and Albanians sell dangerous food coming from the garbage" (Ad.T. 05/10). This attitude was moderated a little after the cold-blooded murder of a Rom (Gypsy) by a policeman. The event, mainly because of the humanitarian aspect, was dealt with positively by the press which stressed the grief and the wrath of the Roma but also their demand not to be treated like second-class citizens. (Ap., N., E.T., El., Ad.T., K. 22/11). In a statement, Minister of Public Order Mr. G. Romaios said that "the sad event should not be considered as a phenomenon of violence against the Greek Gypsies" (El.; N. 23/11). It is noteworthy that some newspapers stressed more in their titles the -unjustified from all available evidence- fear for vengeance and vendetta by the Roma: "Gypsies threaten with vendetta; they swore to take revenge for the murder of one of their own" (Ap. 23/11). And a third group of papers used this occasion to make generalizations on other minorities as well: "there is an even latent tendency of racist treatment (...) and Gypsies, Albanians, Pakistani and all sorts of "marginals" and outcasts are by definition suspects, they carry the hereditary gene of criminality" (El. 22/11).