Treaty of Nuilly, 1919 - any questions?

[Bill77]

I'll be less technical about it but Thessa will get my point (i will not hold my breath though)

When a woman gets ganged raped, Is she asked which position she prefers?

Point is the victim has no say. The treaty was to appease the waring factions at the expense of Macedonians. The Powers felt it was irrelevant for Macedonians to get involved. Would've it mattered if there was a Macedonian representative?

[Pelister]

May I kindly ask where your representatives were during this critical treaty in 1919?

Let me tell you something, mate.

The League of Nations was simply a foriegn policy tool of the victorious Powers.

If you look at the Treaties, such as this one, there were many stipulations relating to the 'exchange' of people, but only one relating to the protection of rights.

The other point is that the extermination of the Macedonian people was implied in the treaties. The Treaties, formulated by the League, gave international recognition to the recen transfer of territory, including the recen balkan war, and the New borders.

And to add insult to injury, the League then set out providing financial aid and expertise to assist the Hellenic Republic in its conquest of Macedonian territory, by colonising it.

This doesn't even touch the surface of just how evil the League of Nations was - the principle of self determination was applied only very selectively, and not at all to 'problem minorities'. The Macedonians were not only classed as a 'minority' the League actually faciliated the conquest by representing them as 'Greeks' and 'Bulgarians' in various treaties - it was part of an international naming system.

Britain, for example, knowing just how powerful the League of Nations was in giving politicaly legitimacy and recognition to anyone on the international stage, took measures to block Macedonian grievances, to prevent thousands of Macedonian grievances, petitions, letters not only from reaching the Council, but from ever being published and made public. One way it did this was by referring a grievance to the accused country - and requiring permission to publish it. The League had stitched up, and sandbagged the Macedonians. It had driven them into opposition - beyond the protection of any law. It not only deferred the issue of protection to a State it new was hostile and had targeted the Macedonians for extermination, but went further, by actually blocking grievances it new were genuine, and perhaps the worst examples of abuse anywhere in Europe, of its kind. Yes, we are talking about the fk League of Nations here.

And IF I can throw in one more thing. The League of Nations made it illegal to acquire territory through the use of force, in 1919. In other words the right by conquest, or the principle of effective occupation which gave the Hellenic Republic the right by victory in war to acquire Macedonian territory, occupy it, destroy the natives...etc, the League of Nations at the same time, made it illegal. It recognised this principle in Greece's conquest of Macedonia, while making it illegal for the Macedonians to appeal to the same principle in the defence of their territory. The right of self preservation was denied, and all protection was denied.

The League refused to count them.

The League also refused to name them.

The League blocked Macedonian grievances, letters, petitions...etc.

The League made sure they were beyond the protection of international law.

The League took the lead in depopulating the region, and colonising it.

[thessalo-niki]

The First Balkan War had the Balkan League comprising of Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro and Serbia fighting against the Ottoman Empire which resulted in a Balkan League victory and the Treaty of London.

The Second Balkan War had Bulgaria fighting against Serbia, Greece, Montenegro, Romania and the Ottoman Empire resulting in a Bulgarian defeat and the Treaty of Bucharest.

Greece's position is clear in these wars.

Where was todays Republic of Macedonia during these battles or who were they represented by?

Again, in the first, we believed that we were going to be liberated by our Orthodox brothers. You came promising us freedom, yet took everything. And it wasn't just the Macedonians that are now known as being of the Republic, but all Macedonians in all of Macedonia.

The first Balkan war was a grab for land, the second was stopping the Bulgarians from getting too much. I would equate it to to World War II and the Cold war. The nations of Balkan league are allied against the Ottomans, although after the end of the war, one of the allies wants more land and the rest stop them.

Our role in the first war was helping the Balkan league get rid of the Ottomans, as for the second , i am not really 100% sure what the role of the Macedonians were, but if it is like any other, i would assume that of fodder.

While Daniel's answer implies an a posteriori collective feeling I wonder if there are any facts about it. So, WHO did represent the (non-Greek or non-Bulgarian) Macedonians. OK, no one did it officially in Bucharest or Neuilly Treaty. Yet, were there any organizations or, at least, any individuals that should have? Or tried to? Any names? Were there at least any public statements recorded in History?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Bucharest_(1913)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Neuilly-sur-Seine

_________________________________
Odysseas Elytis - Our name is our soul

[Daniel]

I was unable to find you a link, but here is an out take of Risto Stefov's book 'History of the Macedonian people from Ancient times to the Present'.

Backed by the Entente, a group of pro-Venizelos officers launched a coup in Solun against the official government and created a provisional pro-Entente government with its own army. Once again the Macedonians, deceived by Balkan propaganda, joined the war with hopes of being liberated only to end up "cannon fodder" used by both sides of the front.

I believe that it can also be found in Micheal Radin's 'IMRO and the Macedonian question', but i may be wrong in assuming this.

[toothpaste]

Excuse my ignorance Daniel, but what vanguard are you talking about? Can you supply me with a link or information on this please.

I guess it is this link ...http://a guy from a forum

[Makedonia]

I would not really call it 'representing', but those that did were the Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs and Montenegrins. I really don't like repeating myself, but, they came as liberators and we excepted them with open arms. Since we had the failed uprising a decade ago, we were waiting for any chance to be rid of the Ottomans.

I do not know what the Macedonians role was in the second, I just made an assumption by what happened in other wars latter on. For instance the war against Italy where the Macedonians made the van guard which was pretty much destroyed, whilst the Greeks stayed back, readying themselves.

Excuse my ignorance Daniel, but what vanguard are you talking about? Can you supply me with a link or information on this please.

[Daniel]

I would not really call it 'representing', but those that did were the Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs and Montenegrins. I really don't like repeating myself, but, they came as liberators and we excepted them with open arms. Since we had the failed uprising a decade ago, we were waiting for any chance to be rid of the Ottomans.

I do not know what the Macedonians role was in the second, I just made an assumption by what happened in other wars latter on. For instance the war against Italy where the Macedonians made the van guard which was pretty much destroyed, whilst the Greeks stayed back, readying themselves.

[Makedonia]

Who in the Balkan League was representing you in getting rid of the Ottomans during the First Balkan War?

Who was using you as fodder in the Second Balkan War?

[Daniel]

Again, in the first, we believed that we were going to be liberated by our Orthodox brothers. You came promising us freedom, yet took everything. And it wasn't just the Macedonians that are now known as being of the Republic, but all Macedonians in all of Macedonia.

The first Balkan war was a grab for land, the second was stopping the Bulgarians from getting too much. I would equate it to to World War II and the Cold war. The nations of Balkan league are allied against the Ottomans, although after the end of the war, one of the allies wants more land and the rest stop them.

Our role in the first war was helping the Balkan league get rid of the Ottomans, as for the second , i am not really 100% sure what the role of the Macedonians were, but if it is like any other, i would assume that of fodder.

[Makedonia]

The First Balkan War had the Balkan League comprising of Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro and Serbia fighting against the Ottoman Empire which resulted in a Balkan League victory and the Treaty of London.

The Second Balkan War had Bulgaria fighting against Serbia, Greece, Montenegro, Romania and the Ottoman Empire resulting in a Bulgarian defeat and the Treaty of Bucharest.

Greece's position is clear in these wars.

Where was todays Republic of Macedonia during these battles or who were they represented by?

[Daniel]

They lured us with the false hope of liberation, but instead, showed themselves to be captors. They each sent their army's as far as possible and kept what ever land they could lay their hands on. It stayed like this until the second Balkan war when i guess you could say the Bulgarians got too greedy, and lost quite a lot of land, especially to Greece.

After this period, each of the nations used an extensive program of assimilation and denied the right of the Macedonians to call themselves anything other than Greek, Bulgarian or Greek.

[Areianos]

What did the Greeks, Sebs and Bulgars do exactly?

[Daniel]

Once again under the Ottomans, until we tried to liberate once more in 1913 with the help our Orthodox 'Brothers' the Greeks, Serbs and Bulgars, which turned out to be even worse that being under the Muslim Ottomans.

[Areianos]

What happened after Illinden ?

[toothpaste]

We had no battle of Navarino. No French, Russian, English, Germans etc.
We had Ilinden.
We had some others as well.
But alas, no friends.

Does that help?

The eternal fairy tail of nationalism of small states/nations.

"We were always fewer against more"
"We have no friends"
"We serve justice...they are the bad guys"

Nationalists have more commons than odds