FIRST REVIEW

FIRST REVIEW

On the work entitled “Идеолошкиот активизам над Македонците под Грција 1945-1949 година” (Ideological Activism -Macedonians under Greece 1945-1949), by Stoian Kochov.

The work with the above mentioned title is a synthesis of published critical review articles found in scientific and public forums in the Macedonian literature to which the author has appropriate affinity and a critical review of the historical events that belong to the political history of the Macedonians in Aegean Macedonia. Stoian Kochov is a passionate researcher who, as a Macedonian historian, brought new winds in terms of the historical problems in the Aegean part of Macedonia. In his work, especially in the second part, Kochov shows his maturity as an analyst of historical events in which he was also a first hand witness. But that does not mean that he has glorified his own participation and presented events in a positive connotation, but clearly, specifically, objectively and boldly he has stated the silent facts that have been omitted in the past. Kochov explained why the Greek Civil War was started in Aegean Macedonia and he did this with an objective approach and strength of arguments. He explained who the agents of the war were, the role of the political and military leadership in Yugoslavia and Macedonia and, of course, in Greece. He explained that the most important thing Greece wanted from this war was to expel the Macedonian people from their ancestral homes, making it a classic genocide, greater than that committed by Germans on the Jews. It is also important to mention that the so-called democratic public around the world kept silent on this matter. There was not a single media report showing that genocide was perpetrated by the Greek state and its accomplices in Greek occupied Macedonia. There is no doubt that this great political game had a disastrous effect on the Macedonian people, which Stoian Kochov has successfully discovered and brought to the fore.

Even though Kochov’s labour is based on reviews and written materials presented to the public through the media and special editions, it does not decrease the value of his work but rather gives it greater weight. Kochov has laid a solid foundation for further research of this topic by the next generation of Macedonian historians. He has raised many questions which need answers and further clarification of the many historical problems that today

plague the Macedonian people in Greek occupied Macedonia, and especially relations between Macedonia and Greece. Therefore, this book will be an excellent addition our collection of important books. Kochov has asked the right questions, which not only bring awareness to the problems but demand the right answers. The Macedonian people were not sufficiently prepared to undertake the task they did during the Greek Civil War and of course this cost them dearly. Just from this point of view this book, although not directly, indirectly brings a message that any further division of the Macedonian people would have disastrous consequences.

Based on the foregoing and considering that this book will have scientific and social benefits, I am pleased to offer it for printing.

Skopje, April 19, 1993. Sincerely, Dr. Gorgi Malkovski

* * *

SECOND REVIEW

Of the manuscript “Идеолошкиот активизам над Македонците под Грција” (Ideological Activism - Macedonians under Greece 1945-1949) by Stoian Kochov.

Reviewer: Dr. Simon Drakul

For the first basic author’s foreword, for this class of important books of vital introductory and unifying meaning, the manuscript consists of sixteen separate texts (reviews, assessments, polemics, articles, etc.) in their predominantly and frequently published form, published mostly in “Makedonsko Sontse”. According to their character, these texts are mainly reviews and evaluations of noteworthy releases (plus a film) - combined, in one way or another. They are normally unique in the virtues of interest – i.e. in the great theme of the Aegean Macedonian tragedy from 50 years ago that took place in the Aegean or “Greek” part of the ethno-historic Macedonian territory. Starting with the evaluation of Petre M. Andreevski’s book “Neveska Timianova”, Dimitar Dimitrov’s books “Umetnost na Chovekuvanie” and “Megiu totalitarism i

Demokratia”, Stoian Kiselinovski’s book “Statusot na Makedonskiot iazik (1913-1987), Ivan Chapovski’s book “Vrakianie na poetot vo Meglen”, Nikola Kliusev’s book “Kamen ostrov”, Paskal Gilevski’s book “Angeli na progonstvoto”, Petre Nakovski’s book “I kamenot e zemia”, Kita Misirkova – Rumenova’s book “Katerni godini”, Kole Mango’s books “Vik” and “Za Makedonskite chovekovi prava”, along with pervasive emphasis on some of the issues raised by Stole Popov’s movie “Tsrvaniot Kon” and the script of Tashko Georgievski’s novel by the same name (Tsrveniot Kon), make up the contents of the first part of Stojan Kochov’s book. The second part, however, contains the fundamental texts that are worthy of the title: “History (still) needs to answer the question of who activated the ‘Macedonian syndrome’ that caused us to self-destruct in the years 1945-1949 during the Greek Civil War?”

(Motive: Reactions to the publishing of the book “(Self) sacrifice the Macedonians of Greece” gave rise to the text “Vreme za rastanuvanie” (It is time for reaction). Among the final and already quite clearly separate pieces of this book, there are two texts with one motive, entitled: “Za eden tip na aktivistichko destruktivno polemiziranie” (For a type of activist destructive polemic”) and “Otkritie na polvekovniot molk (koi e gospodinot Vorias)” (Uncovering the half-century silence (Who is Mr. Vorias?)).).

The second title at first glance, quite logically, seemed like it would be difficult to scratch together as a whole and as such so would be the settling of accounts of the different lines and areas of content units in this likely handwriting. But only at first glance; because the essence of this content not only supercedes heterogeneity, but is namely of such multilateral content that it consistently adds value. And exactly this wealth in these areas, in these views and in these parts make up the manuscript and provide it with is force. Diversity, transformed into quality and energy collected from many places, furnish this important and uncompromising text in its uniqueness. In it, in its basic tone, regardless of what kind of view or title is in question, it gives rise to polemics not with individual views (although it has them) but to polemics with the uniqueness of each situation, silent in the last 50 years in our historical science but, not only there, in all of our social public forums; a cruel and false indoctrination, ideological knowledge of that - that lay in the starting

point; a basis that caused tragedy; that ended with the worst possible persecution of the Macedonian people; being driven out from their ancestral homes from the most heroic, most revolutionary, most freedom seeking and most patriotic ends of Macedonia throughout all its history - Kostur, Lerin, Voden, Prespa, Enidzhevardar, Solun, Seres – and in one word from the Macedonian Aegean region.

Questions have been raised which, in the traditional Macedonian way and experience, when answered, will be turned into historical lesson. Lessons that will hopefully prevent future victims; because there is no greater impairment of a victim than the sense of being ignorant of their own true past.

The history of our people must be learned through strict adherence to critical knowledge and essence. In history, the argument is worthy only as much as it provides a deeper insight into the secrets of the most conflicting elements in a myriad of components that make up the historical moment; meaning, of the most important but invisible elements which are a result of somewhat appropriately declared and widely propagated by the propaganda machine with promises of challenging perspectives.

The author deepens and continues to place meaning on the questions, on the subject which is in his second book – to the end of all his concentration, in this case – inciting and encouraging the placing of consideration on the uniqueness of the question for the totality of the Macedonian territory. Regardless of the borders to which country, when it comes to the specific history and heterogeneity of its historical result, the Macedonians belong, they belonged to one or another Macedonian floor. The division of the Macedonian territory led to the division of the Macedonian National Liberation movement during the antifascist struggle in the Second World War. The Macedonian people were also divided according to the state to which they previously belonged and now, to multiple parties - Greek, Bulgarian and Yugoslav Communist Party, all members of the Comintern. And thus without the existence of a Macedonian Communist Party or any other unifying thread, the Macedonians were left totally divided after the formal dissolution of the VMRO (U).

From this perspective, unwittingly or not, this manuscript has assumed an all far-reaching initiative to expose the Macedonian communist environments that loosely tied the four-part unity of the Macedonian anti-fascist people’s war. And as is shown in the best of light and through the atrocities experienced, we paid dearly for this four-part loyalty.

The situation was complicated even more by the continuation of the conflict in the Aegean part of Macedonia when World War II formally ended. The allies that once fought together in the anti-fascist war, found themselves at odds after that war was over; with the Macedonians being caught in the middle. Stoian Kochov, as part of his effort in this book, has highlighted many of the problems that have resulted from this.

The Civil War in Greece, however, and the emergence of DAG, which continued the war for another 4 years, gave rise to a battlefield, guerrilla warfare, fraction-ization, ideological activism and worse consequences for the people in Aegean Macedonia.

Hidden behind the ideological defeat was the long kept secret of a classic example of ethnic cleansing. How was it possible for such a tragic and irreparable result to take place? - asks the author. This he would not be able to find, not even with the most rigorous means – not a single stranger. Then who was the person who first exposed the Macedonian people to rise in the national liberation struggle on such an extremely dangerous ground at the most explosive possible moment? And as the spell of this slogan took full effect; and when people rose with all their powers - then the handlers of this struggle manipulated the Macedonian participation. The fighting was led by the “cobbler” Gusias and by the “tobacco” producer Markos, now promoted to generals. The entire strategy was created and led exclusively by Greek strategists even though 50 percent of the DAG military force was Macedonian. Because of this, for a long time, Macedonians persistently continued to die after the strongholds Vicho and Gramos were lost to the enemy. Special people were sent to the entire Aegean Macedonian region and a few to the south of Macedonia to recruit patriotically minded young people among whom were refugees that had fled to the liberated Republic of Macedonia. Children were taken from their mothers in the

Macedonian villages and sent out into the world with no hope of ever returning... How was that possible? How was it possible that for the last 50 years all this was explained by the dark ideological falsehood, while we kept silent? There is no end to the questions, which is logical at the very thought of such a tragedy. The question is, was there an ethnic cleansing strategy underlying in relations to DAG in Aegean Macedonia? What was the role of Yugoslavia; the role of the Republic of Macedonia, its politics, its police, in all this? And finally, what kind of results did the Informburo Resolution yield in the end from plotting such a strategy? Who were those indoctrinated individuals among the Macedonian communist cadres, thinking they were performing heroic deeds, while surrendering our people to be exterminated and exiled from their ancestral homeland?

There is a good grasp in Kochov’s manuscript about all the things that have been said. His main characteristics are: clarity, experience, argumentation, principled engagements, a love for the truth and the highest possible accuracy. Of course none of this is possible without making the effort to recover from the ingrained ideology and indoctrination; without a deep and sympathetic truthfulness and love for mankind; which will not let us pass without resistance, even without pain. Those who cannot free themselves from this indoctrination live in delusion and in the confidence that brought them to this crucial moment - heroic! Yes, heroic! But heroic for whom and against whom? Are some of the questions this author and this reviewer are asking… the reviewer, in this case is entirely on the side of the author and in support of his manuscript. It is within the author’s right to ask these questions… which he does with passion.

But the truth is, that which was historic yesterday is still current today; and that is how it is going to be for a long time, especially with our neighbours; such as the one to our south.

The imperative challenge here is for the Macedonian people to generally become familiar with themselves and with the global conditions of the time, but also with the entire simple, complex and complicated chronicle of the Macedonian existence from then until now. Without such knowledge it will be even harder to face tomorrow…

Finally, it is important to tackle the notion that invariably suggests that there were Macedonian self-sympathizing principles and agreements, found in which are the basis for the possibility that a Macedonian would do harm to his own people. This is remote but perhaps possible because our overall history is about suffering and talks about suffering and nothing else, so anything is possible.

In the way the truth is spoken; in the way the merits are taken from those who earned them; in the same way the people expect nothing good from the privileged… In my opinion the highest value of the manuscript lies in this challenge, which I recommend for immediate publication.

Dr. Simon Drakul

* * *