Front Matter - Part 02

The old VMRO encouraged the people to boycott state courts and establish VMRO people's courts. As guerrillas Delchev's VMRO military units expropriated money and conducted terrorist acts in order to arm the masses. All this was done to prepare the people for a mass armed uprising to win Macedonia's freedom. In the beginning when the Macedonian national revolutionary movement had small military units it propagated revolutionary ideas and organized the village masses into fighting units. Later, as the units grew, they began to clash with the Ottoman army. When the army became demoralized it carried out retribution against the people.

These clashes gave the enemy reason to terrorize the local population and damage the revolutionary organizations. As for the terrorist actions, despite their great heroism and self-sacrifice, the rebels hardly contributed anything worthwhile. At the same time they caused countless acts of prosecution, arrests and made victims of the people, the same people the organization was trying to protect. By their terrorist acts, the internal activists unwittingly complemented the provocative terrorist actions of the supremacists whose aim was to provoke a war. The expropriation of money also produced similar negative results. Delchev's VMRO collected the funds it needed from its patrons and members as well as from extortion, blackmail and kidnapping. This was done to avoid borrowing money from state institutions and becoming obligated to Bulgaria or any other country which had belligerent aspirations towards Macedonia. Delchev's VMRO wanted to preserve its independence.

The Sandinistas - the left in the supremacist VMRO - realized their mistake as early as the Young Turk uprising and stopped the practice of individual expropriation and terrorist activities, and began to use more civilized means to do their work. VMRO (United) on the other hand liquidated all past practices. It didn't practice individual terrorist actions and no other individual actions that would separate the organization from the masses. VMRO (United) led a revolutionary struggle against its enemies only with the people and for the people. In that respect, it was a real organization for the masses. It employed armed revolutionary units only immediately before and during an uprising. VMRO (United)

did not practice expropriation of money. To meet its financial needs to support the movement and the struggle, it collected membership fees. It also accepted donations, gifts and various other funds from its members and from the Macedonian masses. The financial problems were also a political issue, a matter of discipline for VMRO (United) and the mobilization of the masses around it. There was no surer source of collecting funds than to influence the broad masses to support it. But even though it got rid of the tactical weaknesses of the old Macedonian national-revolutionary movement, VMRO (United) still employed Delchev's VMRO tactics in the field of agitation and propaganda.

VMRO (United) understood that using oral and printed propaganda for raising the national and political consciousness of the Macedonian masses was beneficial and necessary for its revolutionary success. That is why it employed both individual and collective agitation by talking to the people and by publishing newspapers, reports, manifestos, etc. VMRO (United) conducted its agitation and propaganda program in close connection with the Macedonian struggle and for organizing revolutionary actions.

VMRO (United) also knew that using agitation and propaganda in general was not enough, it had to be connected to the people's daily economic, cultural and political struggles and it had to benefit the masses to best crystallize their knowledge, raise their fighting spirit and move towards complete liberation. By doing this VMRO (United) was mobilizing the Macedonian masses to struggle against the belligerent colonial policies employed in Macedonia.

Specifically, VMRO (United) fought: against the extraction of the life juices from our unhappy homeland; it fought against the dictatorships in Sofia, Belgrade and Athens; against the unbearable state taxes, obligations and burdens on the Macedonian peasants, artisans and workers; for canceling the people's obligations to the state, banks and money lenders; against colonization; for the expulsion of the rich colonists from Macedonia; for the return of the seized land which should be given back to the Macedonian peasants.

It fought to take back all the expropriated Macedonian lands taken from the people by the state, the municipalities, the monasteries, etc.

All these lands should be given back and distributed among the Macedonian peasants free of charge. VMRO (United) fought:

against colonial low prices with which traders and foreign countries bought tobacco, poppy and other products from the Macedonian peasants; against foreign manufacturer high prices, etc. VMRO (United) also fought for economic and cultural advancements in Macedonian towns and villages; against the accumulation of foreign servants and administrators; for democratic rights and freedoms;

against forced assimilation; for opening Macedonian schools and making the Macedonian language official; for full national equality;

for canceling the debts of the Macedonian people who fled to Bulgaria after the earthquake; for a free organizational, cultural, educational and political life in brotherhoods, youth centres, etc.;

For mass Macedonian organizations; against the bureaucratic-fascist tutelage over those organizations; against the dissolution of the Macedonian Youth Union.

Along with the above demands, VMRO (United) highlighted the great slogan for the unification of the Macedonian people in an INDEPENDENT MACEDONIAN STATE. VMRO (United) also highlighted the strategic slogan for the Macedonian people's self-determination, which strengthened the national-liberation struggle in the three regions in divided Macedonia, and led the way to a free and independent Macedonia.

VMRO (United) had no illusions that the enslaved people on their own could contribute to the freedom of the Macedonian people, or that Macedonia's national freedom would be won peacefully.

Following Delchev's VMRO example, VMRO (United) stood for an organized and massive armed uprising in Macedonia. As a matter of fact, today Macedonia is divided into three parts and not only is the struggle getting more difficult, its specific path has changed. There is no greater desire than to start a new victorious Ilinden revolution at the same time in the all three parts of divided Macedonia. That, however, presupposes that a revolutionary situation can simultaneously take place in all three belligerent states.

Unfortunately the Macedonian people can't stand up alone against three organized and strong oppressors. At the same time revolutionary situations, due to the uneven development of imperialism, are difficult to start simultaneously in three different countries. Because of this it would be advisable to start a general uprising in one of the three parts either in Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, or Greece. A decisive struggle can begin in that part of Macedonia and in that respective state. In such a case, VMRO (United)'s task in the other two Macedonian regions would be to unite our allies in the other two states, and lead the masses into the struggle in order to hinder any intervention against the revolutionaries where the general uprising is taking place. This is entirely possible when considering the huge revolutionary upsurge, especially after a revolutionary victory in a Balkan state. When considering this, one should bear in mind the revolutionary stage we are living in and the existence of free peoples (USSR). This is a huge fact that imperialists cannot face especially when they have to decide whether to attack the revolutionaries or not. And when a revolution breaks out and the people win in all three parts of Macedonia, the Macedonian national revolution will merge as a victorious new Ilinden in all of Macedonia.

Considering that standpoint, VMRO (United) in the part of Macedonia under Bulgarian rule, is fighting for self-determination in Petrich Region so that it could separate from imperialist Bulgaria and unite with the other two parts of Macedonia in an independent Macedonian state. And as such we have addressed our self-determination demands to Sofia not because we hope Sofia would cede it to us on its own, but to direct its blade against itself and expose the Bulgarian imperialists to the Macedonian masses as enemies of Macedonian freedom and independence and thus to mobilize the Macedonian masses to join the revolutionary struggle.

We addressed the Sofia warriors as follows: You, gentlemen, claim that the Macedonians are Bulgarians and that Macedonia is Bulgarian; you want to appear like you strive for the Macedonian people to be free. We on the other hand say that Macedonians are not Bulgarians and that Macedonia is not yours. On the contrary, you are the same kind of enslavers as those of Belgrade and Athens.

Let us, then, take the question to the population in Petrich Region.

Let them have their say on how they feel and whether they want to live under your yoke. Let us ask them if they wish to live together with the population in the other two parts of Macedonia. Let us ask them if they want to unite in an independent Macedonian state. In other words, give them the right to self-determination. In order for the population to speak freely, to express its will, withdraw the Bulgarian army and police from Macedonia... (Damaged text) It is our joint revolutionary struggle with the Bulgarian workers and peasants that give us the right to self-determination until we separate as an independent state without being forced to accept a socialist system.

Our unique front with the labour movement was built on flat principles, without in the least violating the independence of the Macedonian national movement. Unfortunately our struggle has enraged the Bulgarian imperialists and supremacists, who sometimes wear a mask pretending to struggle for an autonomous or independent Macedonia. But slowly we are unmasking them more and more before the Macedonian masses. Let our enemies rage and slander us. Let them call us "communists". It will not confuse us, because we, who truly love and fight for our Macedonian national freedom and independence, cannot but look for hopeful allies in the struggle, and such are the workers and peasants and other nationally oppressed peoples in the Balkans and in the world. Our path only leads to the national and economic liberation of the Macedonian people. VMRO (United) is the only and true Macedonian national- revolutionary organization, in which revolutionary Macedonian forces are members regardless of their party affiliation. VMRO (United) is an independent Macedonian organization, composed mainly of Macedonian villagers. It had a revolutionary-democratic ideology and held the flag of the Macedonian nationality. It struggled for freedom and independence. "(End of report)

A precise distinction between VMRO (Supremacist) and VMRO (United) was made in the above report. Regarding the supremacists and their activities, it referred to them as an anti-Macedonian organization led by their new non-supremacist VMRO Central Committee composed of Todor Aleksandrov and Aleksandar Protogerov, who remained faithful to Bulgarian imperialist policies both before and after the First World War. Aleksandrov and Protogerov, together with the Bulgarian leaders who participated, were the main culprits for the new and even darker enslavement of Macedonia. They were responsible for making it possible for Sofia, Belgrade and Athens to break up Macedonia and enslave its people.

The situation changed at the Bulgarian Communist Party Executive Bureau's Berlin Conference, which began on December 8, 1927 and lasted until January 15, 1928, when the Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP) leadership changed its attitude towards VMRO (United).

Before that the BCP ignored VMRO (United) and saw it as an unjustified organization, but after the Conference the Bulgarian communists accepted the organization and supported its program.

Basically, there was no difference in the BCP and VMRO (United)

position regarding the Macedonian national question. Metodija Shatorov actively participated in this Conference and was adamant about taking the right position on the Macedonian national question.

He also stated his position that it was not necessary to create a Yugoslav Communist Party (YCP) in the part of Macedonia under Serbia, but to strengthen and support VMRO (United), and to not only form ties between VMRO (United) and YCP but to allow the Macedonian communists to work independently in the United organizations. At this Conference, Shatorov was categorically against individual terrorist deviations. He was against terror responding with terror, because this kind of action did not coincide with VMRO (United)'s principles. 6 Archives of Macedonia, fund VMRO (United) Report by Shatorov under the title "History and essence of VMRO (United), pp. 1-9 (hereinafter it will be known as Shatorov's report).

6 KIAF document no. 495.

2. Extract from the minutes of the BCP Second Party Berlin Conference held at the end of 1927 When Metodija Shatorov-Sharlo was a delegate of the Sofia party organization he took an active role at the Berlin Conference and in his speech presented his views as follows: "I am a participant in the national revolutionary movement and to this day there are young and old comrades who call all Macedonians fascists. That is wrong.

I will say more about the period from 1918 to 1927:

a) The Macedonian movement has a long and independent history which the majority of our people do not know and do not understand.

b) After Bulgarian nationalism collapsed in 1918, nationalism in the Macedonian movement also collapsed and favourable conditions were created for that movement to fall into our hands. In 1918-1919, Dimo Hadzhi Dimov's useful initiative and the Serchan people set VMRO to a new starting place. Since it was not supported by the party, it was left out on its own and we had to create the Emigrant Communist Union, which left the Macedonian movement to the bankrupt Bulgarian nationalists headed by their agent Todor Alexandrov. In this way, we allowed that movement to pass into foreign and harmful hands, to play a fatal role in the internal struggles in Bulgaria.

c) Because we did not understand our mistakes, even later, when the nationalists were still weak in 1919-1920, we did not do anything, not even to protect our Petrich Region mass movement, which was being terrorized by Todor Alexandrov's small terrorist gangs, who did not have the support of the Macedonian masses. The vast majority of the people were with us. While Alexandrov's henchmen were attacking our people we abandoned them and with that, we abandoned all sincere Macedonian revolutionaries from those parts of the country. At the same time the party made no effort to become involved and vigorously break up Alexandrov's gangs, which then would have been an easy task, and to put the Macedonian movement back into our hands. Instead, the Central Committee retreated into its passive mode and wrong line, while the nationalists took over the Organization and after that it was difficult to build a front with them.

It was not an easy task, because they openly worked for the Bulgarian bourgeoisie with whom the party was in open struggle. In those days, even before the coup, if the party had undertaken a vigorous struggle against the nationalists and their Bulgarian agents, and had relied on the Macedonian masses in Petrich Region who were with the party, it would have succeeded in defeating them. And if the party then had taken the right line on the Macedonian national question, it would have taken over that movement and in fact the Macedonian national revolutionary movement would have existed under one front together with the workers' and peasants' revolutionary movement in Bulgaria and the Balkans.

When the supremacists killed Petrov the Communist Party Central Committee remained silent. When they killed 14 of our most active comrades in Petrich Region, again the Central Committee remained silent. And when the Central Committee was threatened with ultimatums from Todor Aleksandrov '5 gangs, it hid those threats from the party. After all that it wasn't difficult for the Bulgarian bourgeoisie agents and for the Bulgarian nationalists to dominate the Macedonian movement and oppose the Communist Party worker and village movements.

d) After the coup, we started looking to connect with Macedonian organizations and the Macedonian movement. We broke up the communist emigrant union and stopped the v.k. "Liberation", i.e. we were already forced to completely capitulate. But even before that, the Central Committee hid from the party and the people all the ultimatums it had received.

We then joined the fraternities and started working. That was the right thing to do. As a result we achieved significant results. But then we were disappointed with the VMRO masses and the fraternities because Todor Alexandrov's clique made its maneuvers and oriented itself towards the left. It started looking towards the USSR and towards our party. This was before we had a chance to confront Alexandrov and organize and build an effective left suitable for our internal struggle and to lead the Macedonian movement. We published our "Manifesto" (VMRO (United)) and made it easy for the military league and its VMRO detachments to carry out pogroms against the Macedonian movement and its left. I blame the Central Committee for not taking measures to save Dimo Hadzhi Dimov, who easily became a victim. The Central Committee did nothing even though it was well known that they would kill him.

Now we have VMRO (United) but we don't support it in Bulgaria and in Bulgarian Macedonia in fact and in deed. And because of that we haven't been able to suitably bring it to gather around the Macedonian movement. The Yugoslav party in Macedonia works with the supremacist VMRO and not with VMRO (United)".

Here Shatorov renounced the necessity for creating an independent Communist Party of Yugoslavia in Macedonia in favour of a VMRO (United). He also suggested that the communists form factions, which should be enough. At the Balkan Communist Federation (BCF) Eighth Conference, held in September 1928, immediately after the VI Communist International (CI) Congress, held from July 17 to September 1, 1928, V Kolarov reported that there was ongoing assimilation of Macedonians within the borders of Bulgaria, and that there was no difference in how the Macedonian people were treated in the three occupying countries. The Macedonians are being nationally suppressed in Bulgaria, as well as in Yugoslavia and Greece. Positions were also taken at this Conference on the right to self-determination up to secession in an independent Macedonian state. By this VMRO (United) was given the right to act as a national liberation organization on the territory of Bulgaria. 8 In regards to the actions taken to implement the right to self-determination up to secession of an independent Macedonian state, a position taken by the Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP) and by the Balkan Communist Federation during the Conferences, authorized Shatorov to reconstruct VMRO (United). This was also authorized by the BCP Central Committee Foreign Bureau. As a result Shatorov was dispatched to Bulgaria in August-September 1928, and tasked with implementing the course taken during the Berlin Extract from the minutes of the Second Party Conference of the CPSU in Berlin held at the end of 1927. A.M. Shatorov fund.

8 D.Dobrinov,pp. 119, 121.

Conference regarding the Macedonian national question. After he arrived in Bulgaria, he prepared a report on VMRO (United)'s condition and activities. According to the facts presented in his report, Shatorov stated that as of that moment, the Bulgarian Communist Party had no functioning commission for a national revolutionary movement at the Central Committee level. This was because the BCP underestimated its value. Shatorov's task therefore was to build a completely new basis, with the understanding that the national-revolutionary movement would have a liberating function in Bulgaria, which until now the Executive Bureau disputed. This unfortunately was expressed as not-acceptable by the BCP, that is VMRO (United) could not be involved in the state's affairs as a national organization. It had to remain as purely a class organization.

Shatorov managed to reactivate the organizations by convincing people that the incorrect political line previously taken had been corrected. He also recommended and in some cases ordered Macedonian communists to join party factions and Macedonian brotherhoods and begin to implement the BCP line. And where such factions didn't exist they were ordered to create them with the same goal in mind. He then led a commission responsible for creating a national liberation movement at the BCP Central Committee level.

Apart from the central one, local committees were also created under Shatorov's leadership in the respective party committees.

An assembly of Macedonian communists was convened in September 1928, and under Metodija Shatorov's initiative, was charged with laying down VMRO (United)'s foundations in Bulgaria. This included clarifying party policy, VMRO (United)

basic platform positions, work directives and assignments. A leadership was elected for the VMRO (United) 3rd revolutionary district which included the Macedonian territory under Bulgarian rule. Simeon Kavrakirov was elected District Committee Secretary, and N. Grnev and B. Mihov were elected members. The District Committee was expected to do the following:

9 Ibid.,p. 123.

'° Ibid., p. 123.

1. Create active VMRO (United) organizations and groups in the Pirin part of Macedonia.

2. Involve Macedonian emigrants in the creation of VMRO (United)

factions. Employ ex-revolutionaries from the recent past in the VMRO (United) ranks who have authority among the emigrants.

With the establishment of VMRO (United) in Bulgaria, BCP factions in the emigrant organizations (brotherhoods) and all others in the national-revolutionary movement became VMRO (United)

factions. Activities were no longer carried out in the name of the BCP, but in the name of VMRO (United), thus strengthening VMRO (United)'s brotherhoods who then began to demand that the murders and violence against the Macedonians stop. They called for ending ties with VMRO (supremacists) and accept the VMRO (United) platform highlighting the slogans: "Down with imperialism", "Long live free and independent Macedonia". These calls were also directed against the anti-Macedonian VMRO (supremacist) policies which falsely called for the creation of an independent Macedonia and a Balkan federation and for a single front against national and social suppression. 11 In 1928, VMRO (United) described both groups of VMRO (supremacists), that of Aleksandrov-Mihailov and that of Protogerov, as "narrow-minded Bulgarian nationalists, Bulgarian supremacists-annexationists, supporters of the Bulgarian reaction and fascist dictatorship, facilitators of Italian imperialism". VMRO (United) which struggled against Bulgarian fascism was also charged with struggling against the VMRO (supremacists). 12 So it became clear to the VMRO (United) leadership that in order to win the hearts and minds of the Macedonian people it had to infiltrate these hostile organizations to instill a Macedonian national feeling among their members. Also, a clear position had to be taken against denationalization and assimilation, 1 3 and against the Macedonian fascist VMRO (supremacist) leaders who were in favour of joining Macedonia to fascist Bulgaria, who strove to "Ibid., pp. 123, 124 and 125.

12 D. Dobrinov, p. 128 and VMRO (United) doe. and materials, Book 1, p. 159.

'3 D. Dobrinov, p. 131.

liberate Macedonia so that they could unite it with Bulgaria and for the liberation and unification of our homeland which was divided between Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria, 14 and for the realization of the holy ideal of the Macedonian people and the first apostles of the Macedonian revolution, who had as their ultimate ideal an independent Macedonian state. Opponents of this position were only the hidden supremacists, conductors of the Bulgarian conquest policy inside the Organization, who fought for Macedonia's autonomy only as a stage in its accession to Bulgaria. These ideas, however, were opposed by the hidden supremacists, whose policy inside VMRO (United) supported Bulgarian conquests. They only fought for Macedonia's autonomy so that they could stage its accession to Bulgaria 15 In the second half of 1928, the VMRO (United) leadership took measures to consolidate its like-minded people and create a healthy organization in Macedonia. Several Macedonian communist emigrant groups existed and operated in Bulgaria that were supposed to be united and led by Kavrakirov and Shatorov. In addition to them, there were also groups composed of non-party national-revolutionaries, who accepted the principles of the May Manifesto, and had wider connections with the Pirin area and with the Macedonian emigrants in Bulgaria, and who could contribute to the expansion of like-minded people in VMRO (United). The idea behind this was to create a single revolutionary Macedonian front, based on the VMRO (United) declaration made in October 1925 and in August 1928, calling for Kavrakirov and Shatorov' s groups to unite, thus implementing the idea of a single revolutionary Macedonian front, for a mass revolutionary struggle to fulfill the VMRO (United) principles. 16 At the same time, the national-revolutionary groups that respected the basic principles of the Macedonian national liberation movement were united.

This is what Metodija Shatorov said in his report regarding the unification: "Among the groups to be included in the VMRO (United) ranks are the old centralist and Ilinden fighters, the federalists, the left from the autonomist organization, the

14 VMRO (United) documents and materials, book 1, p. 161, 163. 15 Shatorov's report, p. 1. 16 VMRO (United) documents and materials, book 1, pp. 157, 164.

Macedonian communists and the young Macedonian generation.

Under the new conditions the Macedonian people have found their new revolutionary leader for their national independence struggle." 17 In accordance with the authority assigned to him, Shatorov carried out his orders to overcome the specific conditions in which VMRO (United) organized in the Macedonian area under his control with a collection of the various national-liberation elements. But as new members joined, the situation became more complicated and, according to the communist factions, there was danger of ideological upheavals in the organizational leaderships. The communists saw a guarantee in that relationship only if they controlled the organizations. The communist faction in VMRO (United) made efforts to immediately connect with the Comintern and the Balkan Communist Federation (BCF). Some people saw this as a Macedonian communist party and a section of the Comintern and the BCF. 18 This, however, contradicted Shatorov's views expressed at the illegal BCP Berlin conference in 1928 that it wasn't necessary to create Greek, Yugoslav and Bulgarian communist parties in Macedonia but to strengthen VMRO (United), and the Macedonian communists to act as factions and constitute themselves in a separate Communist Party of Macedonia (CPM), an independent section of the Communist International and Balkan Communist Federation. 19 In 1928 Shatorov's home was burglarized and his revolutionary activities were discovered by the Bulgarian police. As a result he was imprisoned for eleven months, where he was subjected to severe torture.

This is what the newspaper "Makedonsko Delo" wrote about Shatorov's imprisonment: "A characteristic example of the unprecedented inquisition to which the prisoners were and are still being subjected is the case of businessman Metodi Shatorov. He was beaten several times on his hands, head, and back from 2 o'clock in the afternoon until midnight. One day they threw him from the

17 Shatorov's report, p. 5. 18 D. Dobrinov, p. 136. 19 Document of CI and AF No. 495 AM Skopje Shatorov Fund.

window of apartment no. 71 or down the so-called "black tube".

One day, after being beaten to the point of unconsciousness, they transfered him to the walkway on the stairs of the third floor and made him "confess" while hanging upside down. At that time his interrogators stood on the first floor of the staircase and wanted to beat him again. After 11 months of continuous torture and harassment, he was found innocent and released!

This is how the working masses are treated in Bulgaria under the shadow of Ljapchev's "democracy".. 20 On October 18, 1930, the newspaper "Vreme" wrote the following about Shatorov's imprisonment entitled "Metodia Shatorov in the basements of the Bulgarian police. During his "interrogations", Metodia Shatorov was beaten and abused. They beat him for four days with batons on the head and back, and then subjected him to torture which included raising his arms up and beating him with wet ropes until his hands bled, then they beat him on the ears until they also bled and until he fell unconscious. Then they put him under cold water and when he regained consciousness they asked him to write a statement. They beat him continuously from two o'clock in the afternoon until the evening. But because his hands were swollen he could not write so they beat him again by rolling him on the floor and hitting him from all sides. They then tied him to a beam and dragged him along the floor and stairs to the fourth floor. One of the agents dragged him to the third floor and grabbed him intending to throw him over the fence. Metodia defended himself as much as he could. The front part of his body was already hanging outside the stairs, and he was about to crash down at any moment. Then they again asked him to tell the "truth" if he wanted to stay alive. They did the same again on the fourth floor. He suffered excruciating pain in his head and whole body for several weeks. His head was constantly kept wet with wet sheets wrapped around it..." 21 At a VMRO (supremacist) meeting, held in 1931, in the presence of Vancho Mihailov, VMRO (United)'s program and activities were discussed, especially VMRO (United)' s affirmation of a

20

"Makedonsko Delo", 25.X.1929, page 5. 21 Letter from Sofia published in the newspaper "Vreme" dated October 18, 1930, Belgrade, p. 4.

Macedonian nation and a united Macedonian state. They also discussed comments made by VMRO (United) regarding the national slavery that existed in the three parts of Macedonia, and that there should be an organized Macedonian national-revolutionary movement. This program, however, was contrary to the Mihailovist program which branded the Macedonians as Bulgarians, called for Macedonia to be annexed by Bulgaria and that national slavery existed only in the parts of Macedonia under Serbian and Greek rule. And because, according to them, no national slavery existed in Bulgaria the Mihailovists were against the creation of a Macedonian national-revolutionary movement in Bulgaria.

During the same VMRO (supremacist) meeting the supremacists declared that Metodija Shatorov and Simo Kavrakirov, VMRO (United) Regional Committee Secretary for the Pirin part of Macedonia, were the most dangerous people working against VMRO (supremacist), and both were sentenced to death in absentia.

On June 8, 1932, the Mihailovists kidnapped Kavrakirov. This is what Kavrakirov's collaborators said about that: "After two years of being persecuted and abused by the Mihailovist gangs Simeon Kavrakirova was killed..." 22 This is what his collaborators said regarding Shatorov's death sentence by Mihailov: "The fascist obscurantists and Mihailov's gangs followed him and forced him to hide and immigrate to the Soviet Union." 23 Another article wrote: "After 1928, Shatorov was imprisoned for a whole year, released due to lack of sufficient evidence, later again persecuted and sought after by the fascist police and their Macedonian mercenaries. He managed to hide and cross the border again." 24

3. Report by Metodija Shatorov addressing his party leadership regarding his activities in 1928

22 VMRO (United) documents and materials, book 2, pp. 324, 325. 23 "Pirinsko delo", no. 74, 16.IX.1959. G.D. Popov. 24 "Rabotnichesko Delo", no. 246, 3.IX.1959. S. Popov, member of the BCP Central Committee.

Metodia Shatorov-Sharlo submitted a report to the party leadership regarding his activities in 1928 on the state of the national revolutionary movements, in which, among other things, he wrote:

"After the BCP Second Conference in Berlin and after my return to Bulgaria in 1928, I decided to work for the party especially in the field of the national-revolutionary movement. I found that there was no national-revolutionary movement supported by the party until then, and that the national-revolutionary movements in Bulgaria were inactive. After my arrival, I created a committee of 3-5 people who worked under my leadership. I recruited a friend from Dobruja, one from the Macedonians, and one from Thrace to make up the committee. During our first session we defined our obligations and decided to create factions inside all the leaderships in the Macedonian and Dobrudzha associations, and determined what guidelines they should employ in their activities.

In addition to the central national-revolutionary commission, local commissions were created under the leadership of local party organizations. It was necessary to explain why this was done in order for our party to understand the importance of the national-revolutionary movement, especially the significance and importance of this issue. Many considered the national-revolutionary movement to be of secondary importance. I saw then that a second question arose about the central, regional, local and other organizations, about the internal and especially about the foreign policy of the bourgeoisie in Bulgaria and the continuation of existing conditions.

Necessary attention had to be given because there were half a million Macedonian, Dobrudzhian and Thracian emigrants in Bulgaria, and because of that we had to give attention to all the organizations.

After organizing the central committee and adding organizations in Sofia (there was a large emigration in Sofia), we approached the idea to create factions in the Macedonian brotherhoods (legal mass organizations). With this we created party sections which created opportunities to manage all factions in the Macedonian revolutionary movement in Sofia, also in the provinces. It is especially important that we clarify this to the party masses especially the idea of what the national-revolutionary movement stood for, as well as the character of the national organizations. We, the party, had to put a lot of effort to tackle this problem in order to break certain incorrect views, which were, at this time, held by several party members. Many thought that VMRO and the legal emigrant organizations were acting on the ground and were the only organizations belonging to the national-revolutionary movement in Bulgaria and in the Balkans, and that only the communist party refused to cooperate with them. There were many peculiarities among the Macedonians that needed to be resolved by the party during its conferences. However, measures taken by the leadership are not subject to criticism.

We were not allowed to talk about a national-revolutionary movement in our party, especially following the war years, even though such a movement existed inside the composition of the party (emigrant communist union). This situation existed until the Second Party Conference (held at the end of 1927 in Berlin), when this position was changed and it was accepted that a national-revolutionary movement in Bulgaria existed. But even then, many comrades stood by their former position on the Macedonian national question. That is why it was necessary to clarify to the party that a national-revolutionary movement in Bulgaria indeed existed.

Furthermore, it was necessary to rout out VMRO (supremacist) as a fascist organization. The VDRO (Internal Dobrudzhia Revolutionary Organization) also needed to be mentioned. These two "illegal" organizations in Bulgaria acted negatively in the legal emigrant social organizations, as well as in the brotherhoods. After explaining the situation, we decided to activate the party factions in order to clarify the party line on the national question and on the national revolutionary movements in Bulgaria (adopted at the Second Party Conference).

Factions were especially created in Sofia, in certain emigrant organizations and in the central ones. Only Macedonians and people from Dobrodzhia were included in the composition of those factions. Factions were organized in several Sofia party organizations with a larger number of comrades leading them. With that, the central committee established direct connections with them, from which we received data about the situation in those organizations and about our internal struggle against the VMRO (supremacists). Thanks to that, the Party Central Committee accumulated much data on the internal struggle among the Macedonian autonomists. It was clear that two currents existed and that the infighting was intensifying and that they were preparing for a showdown. The Central Committee knew the reasons for the split, namely: the Protogerovists followed Tsankov's political current, while the Mihailovists followed Ljapchev's political current. The Central Committee unfortunately didn't pay careful attention to the data received and made incorrect assessments regarding the social composition of the groups. It assumed that the Protogerovists were the big bourgeoisie of the Macedonian emigration, while the big bourgeoisie turned out to be the Ljapchevists. Mihailov's wing on the other hand was connected with the petty bourgeoisie led by fascists. However, the real situation was: the Mihailovists were with Ljapchev and the Protogerovists were with Tsankov." 25 A confrontation between the national forces and the communists took place inside VMRO (United) as a result of certain people in the leadership departing from the organization's position. Vasil Hadzi Kimov for example decided to return to the old position, towards creating a third centre to fuse with Vancho Mihailov's VMRO and the National Committee he supported. VMRO (United) criticized these behaviours and their ideological basis under which they were organized. According to VMRO (United), the position taken towards the third direction by these people shows that they were influenced by the supremacists who expressed their views as follows: VMRO can have a national character; Macedonia is a Bulgarian country; there is no national oppression in Petrich Region;

there is need to achieve reconciliation between the two VMRO (Mihailovists and Protogerovists) wings in order to avoid a decisive fight between them... After VMRO (United) was empowered in 1928, however, Shatorov had already laid a new foundation for VMRO (United) which diametrically opposed the old attitudes and beliefs that in Bulgaria there is only class and not national slavery. 26 Because of the position VMRO (United) took it fell into an extremely unfavourable situation. By insisting that there was national slavery in Macedonia under Bulgarian rule, and in the 25 Dokiad 3 - 1 or 396, 2161, AM Skopje Shatorov fund. 26 D. Dobrinov, pp. 212, 213.

context of that relationship, it attacked BCP policies in regards to the national question.

VMRO (United)' s complex political and organizational situation necessitated the convening of a new regional Conference to resolve the newly emerging issues instigated by the supremacists and Bulgarian monarchy. For this purpose Metodija Shatorov was brought back from Paris to lead VMRO (United). The Regional Conference was convened in the Bela Voda area of Vitosha immediately after he arrived. In presence were 10 delegates representing various groups and organizations as well as VMRO (United) leaders. The following items were put on the agenda: 1)

report on the internal and external position; 2) report of the Central Committee of the III revolutionary district; 3) clarification of views on self-determination and the Macedonian nation; 4) leadership selection.

During the discussion, new disagreements arose. All those present did not support the position of self-determination for Macedonians in the Pirin part, until the right to secede from Bulgaria and joining the other parts of Macedonia that were under Serbia and Greece, under an independent Macedonian state. Not all supported the position about the uniqueness of the Macedonian nation and about its national slavery in the three parts (Bulgaria, Serbia and Greece)

of Macedonia and that a struggle should be waged against the triple national slavery, and not only for class liberation. Against these views were B. Mihov and A. Martulkov. Mihov expressed himself particularly harshly. He was against the existence of a Macedonian nation and advocated for abandoning the stance on the national-revolutionary character of the movement, that is, he was against equating national with class slavery. He claimed that there was no essential difference between the BCP and VMRO (United). 27 All this, however, was already decided. A principled setting of the issue was already settled at the Communist International Fifth Congress and especially with the February 1934, Balkan Secretary Agreement. It was clear from this that the Communist International and the Balkan Communist parties were in a position to recognize

27 Ibid., p. 213.

the Macedonian nation and language. However, certain BCP members, as well as members of the VMRO (United) leadership, opposed the views on the existence of a Macedonian nation, and especially on the recognition of a separate Macedonian language. In its disagreement the opposition didn't want to create organizations of VMRO (United) in the Pirin part of Macedonia. Those objecting claimed that it was undesirable to conduct propaganda from the position of a "Macedonian nation". 28 After assuming the VMRO (United) Regional Committee leadership for the Pirin part of Macedonia, and after observing the situation on the ground, in addition to his other activities, Metodija Shatorov also took measures to bridge the gap between the various factions. He wanted to overcome all resistance that existed on the line against self-determination of the Macedonian people and against the existence of the Macedonian nation. Shatorov wrote an article regarding these disagreements, entitled "A united front for the Macedonian masses and their struggle with deviations" published on May 1935, in the magazine "Propagandist" no. 5, an organ of the BCP Central Committee. Here Shatorov listed what various individual communists in Petrich Region had said who were of the opinion that the VMRO (United) organizations shouldn't be created, because the struggle for social liberation could also be successfully led by the BCP. Shatorov clearly stated the party leadership position regarding the claim that the masses want to create VMRO (United)