“ANNOUNCEMENT - Part 02

Why blame only “one part of the old NOF cadres” and this should not be ignored, when the entire KOEM-NOF leadership was placed under the same scrutiny? The entire group was placed under the same pressure and “did not find the strength to oppose the CPG-DAG leaders and thus succumbed to their pressure” and signed the KOEM resolution. This took place in Prespa in an area called “Africa”, inside a large cave, where the seat of the Provisional Democratic Government of Greece and DAG General Headquarters were located. There were several queues of benches for sitting and the cave was lit by electric lighting. We gathered in the cave, the entire KOEM-NOF military-political leadership, without knowing where we were going to meet with Zahariadis. Then Zahariadis appeared along with Mitsos Partselidis, member of the CPG Central Committee Politburo and President of the Provisional Democratic Government of Greece, and Periklis head of the 2nd Bureau espionage-counter-espionage department. Zahariadis pulled out a piece of paper from his pocket and read it aloud. He then explained that this was part of the Party line and asked everyone to accept it and sign it individually. Zahariadis then took the piece of paper with two-column signatures and looked at it carefully. He then folded it, put it in his pocket and, with a treacherous tone of voice, said: “Posi arages ine ilikrinis…?”(How many here are honest…?) If the original piece of paper is ever found my signature sits somewhere between the 15th and the 20th line while Urania Rakovski’s signature is not there at all. Urania Rakovski herself, on the way back, confessed that she did not sign the piece of paper. I criticized her for it in front of everyone. I said: “This is not the time for open confrontation and new divisions…! You should have signed it…!” Mitrevski said: “Ask to sign it later! Tell them you were busy with your three-month-old baby…! They will kill us all…!” Vaina said: “I did not expect that from you…” Vangel Koichev was also there and began to yell at her. He was also annoyed... The piece of paper Aianovski used in his publication, obviously, was not the same as the one I remember. A Greek hand must have re-worked it and released it. I know that because the names on the “re-worked” piece of paper were Greek, whereas the names on the original document

were Macedonian. For example Tane Naumov never called himself “Tanas” and I did not sign the document as “Pavlos”. I signed it as Pavle. There were other similar examples, which prove that the document Aianovski possessed was not a copy of the original document we signed that day...

I was sitting several rows from the front and signed the piece of paper after the people who were sitting in front of me. The list Aianovski had showed me, I was the first to sign the piece of paper. But, despite everyone else having signed the piece of paper, I was the only person accused of being in contact with “Tito’s agents” in Skopje and Sofia. I was the only one being suspended from the NOF secretariat. So, the entire thing was made to look like I was the first to sign the piece of paper and to generally accept the resolution, and therefore I deserved a unique punishment.

Urania did not sign the piece of paper at all but appeared on the list as “Urania Rakovski” because, supposedly, that is what she was called. Urania, however, went by the name “Urania Alilomova”. A year or two later, while in emigration, and after a court decision, because she had a child, she received the surname “Rakovska” (and not Rakovski as indicated in the list) and ceased to appear as unmarried with a child...

I know that Mitrevski and some of the others did not admit to signing the KOEM resolution probably because they were afraid of being charged and called to account. But we signed a Party document. Similar documents have been signed, adopted and published by many well-known, great and celebrated Communist Parties in the world. When our comrades found out about this, that is, it was not a crime to having signed such a document and in fact signing a “Party” document was a great privilege, they admitted to it and became friendly and cooperative with the CPY. What did we know and who were we to defend and save the CPY? We were a small regional organization located in the northern border areas of the Greek state. We were an organization founded by the CPY/CPM, led by several of us and placed under the leadership and membership of the CPG by the CPY... A delicate situation, right? What should we have done? Formally, yes, we had to do what we did as members of the CPG. But what were we supposed to do as

ex-members of the CPY? Were we to follow the line of open confrontation with the leadership of the CPG? To start new rifts? We were in a cave surrounded by a multitude of armed soldiers, armed with automatic weapons. They could have had our heads shot off. A new rift would have triggered DAG’s disintegration… the units in Kaimakchalan, Vicho and Gramos would have been torn apart. This was the basis for Zahariadis’s accusations of the CPY undermining DAG and the revolution. DAG’s weakening would have made an easy Monarcho-fascist victory in neighbouring Greece…!

Of course, I did not want any trouble and I did not want DAG to fall apart or the revolution to fail. All I could think of were the words: “You have to do what you have to do! Under certain circumstances, you may need to act against your own will and conscience... But remain who you really are - the son of an enslaved people… If circumstances were different we would have struggled and resisted differently.” Zahariadis wanted to attribute DAG’s unavoidable defeat, which by the way he himself caused, to the CPY and Yugoslavia. In the KOEM resolution, which he himself wrote, in point 6 he openly accuses the CPY of “creating an internal rift for the purpose of undermining the CPG and DAG…” According to Zahariadis there were three main operations: “The first was the political operation managed by the CPM and personally by Kolishevski, its secretary. The second operation was led by OZNA, and the third by the Yugoslav Army II Bureau. The first oversaw the other two whose work was purely to spy and conduct subversive and self-serving operations in the CPG, in NOF and generally in Greek occupied Macedonia, with its own special organizations and triads, agents, contact points, etc., each striving for the same goal – to undermine the CPG, and especially NOF!” (88)

The truth is Zahariadis tried to conceal his own betrayal of DAG and the revolution by accusing the CPY and Yugoslavia of “betrayal”. It is an undeniable fact that after Zahariadis failed to show “Yugoslav betrayal” through the KOEM “trick”, he was forced to invent a new “trick”, the famous “attack from behind”. He tried to convince everyone that Yugoslavia attacked DAG from behind. But, as it turned out, there was no such attack and Yugoslavia had nothing to do with DAG’s defeat. I have no doubt that anyone researching this

subject based on the events that took place and based on the documents left behind, will easily find the truth; convening the KOEM meeting “five minutes to twelve” on the eve of DAG’s defeat was nothing more than a provocative act with an obvious goal to provoke a new split in the leadership in order to accelerate DAG’s defeat...

Zahariadis had me personally in mind when he wrote item 18 of the resolution in which he said: “KOEM decisively condemns any crypto-Titoist subversion in the ranks of NOF, AFZH and DAG. This is the last warning for Comrade Rakovski and his like-minded comrades who, as they did in Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, made contact with Tito’s agents and are now here in Free Greece spreading propaganda in favour of Tito and his betrayal. I am suspending Rakovski from every function and deploying him to DAG where, with a rifle in hand, he will have to wash his mistakes that led him to treason!” (89)

A day or two later, I left for Gramos to join the front in the Arapades sector as an ordinary fighter. And here, fighting on the first line in battle, besides facing danger from the enemy ahead, I twice happily avoided death from behind. I will talk about this in detail later...

Now the question is who were those “other” NOF Macedonian leaders and cadres about whom Aianovski wrote in “Aegean Storms” and Kiriazovski in “Istoria”, who “did not accept the anti-Yugoslavian politics of the Informburo…”

I believe they were talking about those NOF leaders and cadres who were not in the country, the likes of Goche and Keramidzhiev and their assistants Aianovski and Slavianka. They must have been the ones to “find the strength to resist” from afar, from outside the country. Perhaps that is why they refused to return to the field because they were going to find harassment? Obviously it was not a “betrayal” for Aianovski to have fled the battlefield and to have abandoned the struggle... They could do no wrong… But we, on the other hand, who remained behind and fought, were placed in the same category as the “Grkomani” (Macedonians loyal to the Greek cause) who infiltrated the NOF-KOEM leadership, and were accused of having committed crimes against the Macedonian

national liberation movement and against the Macedonian people. Naturally, the Macedonian cadres resisted and fought under these difficult conditions as much as they could and the fact that they became “organs” of the CPG shows convincingly the duress they were under. It is a fact that they were arrested, severely mistreated and almost executed. They only remained alive because the Albanian authorities refused to allow the Greeks to execute them on Albanian soil. They were tried and found guilty of being “Tito’s agents”, for which they served long sentences. But what does Aianovski have to say about that? Here is what he wrote:

“Treachery is loved by all, and traitors by none...” (90)

This was one of the most stubborn endeavours to tarnish and disqualify the entire NOF-KOEM leadership, to ignore their contribution and to rob them of the difficult struggle they led at home on the ground...

Here is something else that happened to me. I submitted my review of the book “Aegean Storms” in which I spoke about Aianovski’s endeavours, which was then published in “Istoria” number 1/1978. Then, a few years later, this was published in “Istoria” (2/81): “In order to confront Aianovski with the entire NOF managerial asset, Rakovski, in his review, groundlessly and stubbornly argues that Aianovski is the one who allegedly attacked the entire NOF leadership because it signed the KOEM resolution against the CPY on June 20, 1949. However, the truth is different altogether. Aianovski sharply criticized only those NOF-KOEM leaders who not only signed the KOEM resolution, but rather pronounced it, and in practice, implemented it…” (p. 288.)

Let us have a closer look at things. In “Aegean Storms” on page 406, Aianovski wrote that the overall KOEM-NOF leadership, i.e. all those (without exception) who then were fought on the ground and constituted the “KOEM-NOF managing asset” (among whom he is not), are proclaimed traitors, and not in general, but specifically pointing to each individual, by name and surname! (pp. 383-389.) This is the truth… There is no “different truth”. I have not argued “groundlessly” or “stubbornly” in my review, and above all I

did not confront Aianovski with the entire KOEM-NOF managerial asset. Aianovski did that himself…

If one were to read Vangel Aianovski’s book “Aegean Storms” they will get the impression that the revolution in Greek occupied Macedonia began and ended with Aianovski. He has the tendency to practically disqualify and eliminate, i.e. politically bury the entire KOEM-NOF management asset. And this was not done by accident…

But the question is why does Aianovski want to politically bury them?

So that he, himself alone can remain clean and upright…!

The editors of “Istoria” wrote: “In order for him (Rakovski) to minimize Aianovski’s revolutionary activity, or to achieve some other goal, he is “insinuating” that Aianovski and the Political Commission for the Macedonians under Greece, were working on some kind of informative activity, and not on organizational and political activities. It is very clear who Pavle Rakovski is serving with this suspicious misinformation - those who put themselves on the side of the Informburo!” (91)

Simply unbelievable! There is no such “insinuation” in my review. There is no “insinuation” that the Political Commission, of which I was a member, dealt with “SOME KIND OF INFORMATIVE ACTIVITY AND NOT WITH ORGANIZATIONAL AND POLITICAL ACTIVITIES”. There is nothing else there but to conclude that this was pure speculation so that they can say “Rakovski spread a lot of suspicious misinformation that served those who put themselves on the side of the Informburo.” Their wish was to present me as a supporter of the Informburo and therefore very biased and malicious. By removing me from the picture as a reliable critic of Aianovski’s revolutionary activities there would be no one else to minimize his glory. Then he alone would remain to be the foremost story teller of the Macedonian national liberation movement in Greek occupied Macedonia. Thanks to Dr. Kiriazovski, a lot of the material, reports, newsletters, etc., he wrote over the years ended up in the main content of separate volumes in

the “Aegean Macedonia in the National Liberation War” edition. His name was also entered in the encyclopedia and he was described as a famous revolutionary. Conclusion: You can achieve a lot more with a pen sitting in the background than you can with a rifle in hand fighting at the front line!

Forgive me but at this point I would like to point out some of the charges brought against me before the public through the pages of “Istoria” - a fact that obliges me to do so.

“Pavle Rakovski irresponsibly and loudly stated (in the above-mentioned review) that in “Aegean Storms” and in “Chronology” issued by the Union of the Associations of Fighters from the National Liberation Army of Macedonia in 1973, that is, in our historiography of the Macedonian national liberation movement in the Aegean part of Macedonia, events were supposedly rewritten and adjusted. Rakovski utterly and irresponsibly said: ‘This was done by some people who are bitter about their own fate because they were unable to participate in the movement, that is, they were thrown out and eventually dropped out of the movement, and now they are making an effort, through such publications, to convince the public that they were the soul of the movement. And those who stayed at the front lines of the movement (because of some kind of natural selection) are nowhere to be found in these publications, or mud has been thrown at them, or they are proclaimed traitors…’ Rakovski here is extremely biased and malicious. According to him, his ‘comrades who have fallen from the movement’ are those Macedonians and leadership cadres from the Aegean part of Macedonia who in the angry CPG anti-Yugoslav campaign in early 1949 came into conflict with the leadership of the CPG, both in terms of defamation against the CPY, and in relation to the Macedonian National Question. (The truth is that the CPG initiated this campaign in October 1949, during the CPG Central Committee VI Plenum.) All of these comrades took up various functions in the People’s Republic of Macedonia and with their efforts contributed to the reconstruction of our homeland and, in bad times, proved to be consistent fighters and sons of the people and the Party in the struggle against the Informburo. (Apparently Goche, Keramidzhiev and their assistants Aianovski and Slavianka were not mentioned

here.) And here Pavle Rakovski dares to call these comrades ‘outcasts of the movement!’...” (92)

As we can see they are having problems explaining things. The Macedonian leaders who remained and fought in the front of the movement and in the battlefields are either not mentioned in our national history, or mud is thrown at them… Some, like myself, were even declared traitors… This, it appears, was one way of skipping the scandalous fact that they were denying it all by putting the “ultimate irresponsibility” on Rakovski. Rakovski was a liar and he lied about everything. They were certain that no one was going to check! And to emphasize this: “The comrades taking various functions in the People’s Republic of Macedonia and with their labour contributing to the reconstruction of our country... and in very difficult times proved themselves to be consistent fighters and sons of their people and the Party in the struggle against the Informburo”, and to impose it as “the only healthy driving force, as the soul of the movement at that difficult time in Greek occupied Macedonia…” is truly rich indeed!

This is historical injustice! The struggle in which our comrades in the Republic of Macedonia participated was done from their offices where they were clean and warm, nicely dressed and well fed. This is not and cannot be the same as fighting in the armed struggle fighting on two fronts on Paiak, Vicho, Kaimakchalan and Gramos mountains. Sitting in the office is not the same as fighting against the Athens regime forces, against the Greek “patriots” in the CPG and DAG ranks, and against their robotic obedient “Grkomani”. It was their duty to do whatever they needed to do as officials in the People’s Republic of Macedonia, but let us face facts, they were absent from the decisive battles that took place during the last year of the armed struggle from the fall of 1948 to the fall of 1949. There is nothing they can say to change that...! And to underline: “These same comrades... who in very difficult times proved themselves to be consistent fighters and sons of their people and the Party in the fight against Informburo…”, who Pavle Rakovski dares to call “outcasts of the movement”… is obviously another attempt to inflict another hard blow below my belt...

This too was written: “In order to challenge or downplay the activities of MAO, the Macedonian anti-fascist organization, Pavle Rakovski said that during 1942 and 1943, he allegedly worked in isolation as an illegal person (undercover) in the Voden districts of Meglen and Ostrovo. He claims that he never received any news or information. This however, is more misinformation being spread by Pavle Rakovski. Namely, in 1943 he did not work as an illegal person because there was no need for illegal work given the fact that the said districts were freed…!” (93)

This is ridiculous! Ostrovo District, through which the Solun-Voden-Bitola road passed, was under German occupation until November 3, 1944. This was when the Germans withdrew from Greece. I worked there as an illegal together with young Tosho Simovski-Laki and others. I worked there from November 1943 to May 1944, a total of about seven months. It was not until many years later, here in Skopje, when Simovski found out about MAO from the people of Voden Region, that I also found out. Like I said, we were isolated and heard nothing and knew nothing about MAO while we were there, in the field. So to say that “my goal was to challenge and belittle MAO’s activities”, especially after informing them that I knew nothing about it, is an attempt to distract from the main issue which I pointed out to be “the anti-Macedonian PRACTICES that the CPG, EAM and ELAS conducted”. MAO was not allowed to expand outside of the city Voden and was completely liquidated after its short existence. The main and essential issue here is: the negative and real attitude of the Greek leadership exercised against the Macedonian national liberation movement, i.e. against MAO, and not some ridiculous question of whether I (Rakovski) worked there legally or not…!

There is more: “Pavle Rakovski disagrees with Aianovski and claims that MAO was the first Macedonian organization in Aegean Macedonia over the course of the Second World War. Whereas Aianovski claims that MAO was the first organization of the Macedonians from Aegean Macedonia during the period of the occupation... Rakovski has made similar claims in connection with the newspaper “Tsrvena Dzvezda” (Red Star), an organ of MAO, which operated in 1942 and 1943. In order to deny Aianovski’s claim, Rakovski stated that the newspaper “Rizospastis”, organ of

the CPG Central Committee, occasionally published letters from Macedonia in the Macedonian language and this, he claims, was in the beginning of the 1930’s. This claim made by Rakovski is also not true…!” (94)

It is strange how easily the truth can be distorted. I have the book “Aegean Storms” here in my hand. The subject of discussion is “THE REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT IN VODEN REGION AND NOF IN AEGEAN MACEDONIA”. This subject is discussed here on the front page. The first part of the book generally talks about “THE STRUGGLE OF THE VODEN REGION PROLETARIAT AND THE ANTI-FASCIST RESISTANCE FROM 1919 TO 1945. In other words, it is not only DURING THE COURSE OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR, or DURING THE PERIOD OF THE OCCUPATION, but from 1919 to 1945. And here on page 94 there is a statement made that “MAO was the first organization of the Macedonian people in Aegean Macedonia, which called for a national liberation struggle…” This is rewriting history. The historical truth is that this same thing was done earlier (in the mid-1930’s) and it was done by the self-styled and short-lived Macedonian organization MRO (United). There is also the claim made here that the MAO newspaper “Red Star” was the first newspaper written in the Macedonian language, which also does not correspond to the historical truth. As is well-known Andrea Chipov’s newspaper “Zemiodelsko zname” (Agricultural flag) appeared in the Macedonian language in the early 1930’s in Lerin Region and managed to print seven issues…

The expressions “DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR” and “THE TIME OF THE OCCUPATION” are not in Aianovski’s text. But, unfortunately those claims had to be made because there was a need for them to kick me below the belt. That is why, I believe, they were inserted there.

The case with “Rizospastis”… that was quite another thing. Soon after MRO (United) was formed the Macedonian people began to write letters to “Rizospastis” with demands to have them published in their original form and in the Macedonian language. Some of these letters were indeed published in the Macedonian language, not with the Cyrillic alphabet but with the Greek alphabet. Examples of

these can be found in “Rizospastis” number 203/7141 published in October 3, 1934 or in number 213/7151 on October 13, 1934, ten days later. (95) Historically, this was a short-term tactical move, a maneuver to deflect pressure from the “Slavophone” communists and their demands to have their own revolutionary press...

I have also been publicly accused as follows: “Pavle Rakovski has disputed Aianovski’s claim that a pre-Congress meeting was held in 1947 between NOF and CPG representatives to come up with a list of NOF leaders to be appointed during the 1st NOF Congress. Pavle Rakovski truly has no measure of objectivity. He very well knew that, not one, but two such meetings were held through which the CPG actually infiltrated NOF with its own people. It also removed some of the old NOF cadres among whom was Aianovski, who Pavle Rakovski himself then opposed…!” (96)

The truth is, I participated in those meetings and, although we did not keep a record, I should know what happened. And now we have Aianovski and Kiriazovski, who were not even there and did not take part in those meetings, telling me what happened. This is a classic move of tactlessness. But no, it is not about tact, it’s about something else. Let us see what Aianovski said… In his book “Aegean Storms” he said: “At the CPG Central Committee pre-Congress meeting... through its representatives Ioanidis and Stringos, members of the CPG Central Committee Politburo, the CPG demanded the removal of Vangel Aianovski-Oche, NOF organizing secretary for Aegean Macedonia... This request encountered opposition from those present, with the exception of Paskal Mitrevski who fully supported the CPG Central Committee decision. Ioanidis and Stringos did not allow any further discussion on the issue by setting a Party veto. Despite the controversy the CPG decision was accepted…!” (p. 253)

It is characteristic of “NOF organizing secretary” Aianovski and Dr. Kiriazovski to provide “different” information. The first part, on page 253 above, stated that the pre-Congress meeting was held in the village Rula on January 12, 1948, while the second part stated that not one, but two meetings were held in early 1947.

As I have already stated earlier, Aianovski, in “Aegean Storms”, claims that with the implementation of the agreement, the CPG, on November 21, 1946, reorganized the “NOF central leadership” appointing Paskal Mitrevski member of the CPG Provincial Committee for Macedonia, Mihail Keramidzhiev NOF Secretary, and Vangel Aianovski-Oche, etc., members of the leadership... (p. 234.)

He did not say it directly but indirectly he has suggested that Aianovski was appointed second or organizational secretary of NOF after Keramidzhiev who, of course, was the first or political secretary of NOF. Further into his book, again talking about the NOF asset (May 20, 1947), Aianovski said this about the previous NOF leadership: “It consisted of 8 people (7 attendants), two of whom were in charge of special functions and Mihail Keramidzhiev - Secretary, Pavle Rakovski - agitation, Evdokia Baleva-Vera -AFZH, while the remaining members were used as instructors and directly led and assisted the NOF District Committees. These were Vangel Nichev in Gumenzhe District, Vangel Aianovski-Oche in Voden District, etc.” (p. 239.) The NOF Executive Council was headed by the Secretariat Keramidzhiev, Rakovski and Vera.

So, according to his own accounts, Aianovski was not the “NOF organizing secretary”, but an instructor in Voden Region.

Aianovski has written extensively about NOF’s work but has said very little to nothing about his appointment to “organizational secretary” and has remained silent on his immediate suspension after the CPG intervention. Nothing happens without a reason, not even this. Georgios Eritriadis-Petris at the time was the CPG representative in the NOF active. He was the organizational secretary of the CPG Bureau for Macedonia and Thrace. He criticized me in front of Karamidzhiev and Vera for nominating Aianovski for that position. I did not know, until we started talking about him, that Aianovski was going to be suspended as was decided by the Party. One of the charges was that he had signed a police statement condemning communist activities as betrayal… another charge was that he had received Bulgarian legitimacy from the “club” in Solun… another was because he was engaged in spy activities... and so on. And, soon enough, a directive did come down

from Paskal Mitrevski, then CPG instructor at NOF, suspending him from his duties. Aianovski was called in and given the news. From there Aianovski went to work in the field as an instructor. Due to the nature of this issue, it was decided his suspension was enough of a punishment and that it should not be announced in the press because it was already taken care of. Aianovski too kept quiet about this while working in the field. But keeping quiet was not everything he was doing… A few decades later, he, with help from Dr. Risto Kiriazovski, managed to provide what he called “undeniable evidence” that he (Aianovski) was the “second person in command of NOF”. This “information” was published in “Aegean Storms” as well as in many places in the “Aegean Macedonia and the national liberation struggle” edition. In “Aegean Storms”, starting on page 245, Aianovski included a report written by Vangel Shamardanov-Ilindenski, a political commissar of the DAG Kaimakchalan battalion. The report was addressed to “Oche - senior leadership of NOF”, and dated August 30, 1947. This was proof, according to Aianovski, that he held that position. If Aianovski had written in “Aegean Storms” that he was appointed NOF organizational secretary and then suspended, this document would have been totally invalid. But by not telling that he was “suspended” and with this document in his possession, no one was going to deny Aianovski’s own “say so” that he was the “NOF organizing secretary” until the 1st NOF Congress held on January 13, 1948. Later on, in his book “Aegean Storms”, on page 358, while talking about the decisions made during the 1st NOF Congress, Aianovski said: “Because of showing disobedience to the CPG some of the NOF leaders were (on recommendation of the ‘CPG Central Committee deputies’) removed from the list…” He meant leaders such as Vangel Aianovski the organizing secretary of the NOF Main Board. On page 235, however, he wrote in detail how this decision was made (by a “Party veto” from the CPG Central Committee representatives) at the pre-Congress meeting of the central leadership. Years later Simovski asked me: “Why do the documents of the secretariat not bear Aianovski’s signature…?” I told him because, after the NOF asset was selected, Aianovski was suspended and continued to work as an instructor in Voden Region. If one were to look at the documents of the time, including those provided by Aianovski, they would easily find out that Aianovski was never organizing secretary of NOF. His signature was absent from the

documents because he did not participate in any of the secretariat working sessions. Even Dr. Risto Kiriazovski KNEW that none of documents generated by the NOF secretariat had Aianovski’s signature on them. Obviously this was a carefully prepared attempt on Aianovski’s part to “create” his own history with someone else’s effort and measures...

This is what Kiriazovski wrote on page 293 in “Istoria”: “Pavle Rakovski blames the editors of the collections “Aegean Macedonia and the national liberation struggle” for a friendly twist and tendency to “beautify” Aianovski’s biography. As one of the editors, with full moral and professional responsibility, I stand behind everything written about Aianovski’s revolutionary activities and I think that the editors fulfilled their obligation to the man who remained faithful to his people…”

As I mentioned earlier, when considering the question of who and how TOMO was established, what happened at the convening of the first regional conference in Voden Region, as well as the recently mentioned removal of the “NOF organizing secretary” allegedly by a “Party Veto” at the pre-Congress meeting, we have to conclude that, from what was said in Aianovski’s “Aegean Storms” and in Kiriazovski’s “Chronology” (“Aegean Macedonia and the national liberation struggle”), that events have been invented and history has been re-written in order to satisfy one’s actions and tastes. It was not unusual to refer to Aianovski as the “NOF organizing secretary” in “Chronology” (p. 174 and 182), which also alleges that “requests” were made to remove him the first time by the “CPG Macedonian Bureau” in November 1947, and the second time during the “NOF Central Council” pre-Congress meeting in January 1948. These so-called “requests”, however, are total fabrications. Vangel Aianovski was “suspended” shortly after the NOF asset was selected in May 1947, and afterwards, like I said before, continued to work as an instructor. Kiriazovski, however, insisted that it was not like that, as if he were there, and has used every opportunity to elevate Aianovski as the most important person in the Macedonian national liberation movement in Greek occupied Macedonia. In a recently published series of articles in the newspaper “Nova Makedonija”, about the struggle of the Macedonian people in Greek occupied Macedonia, as part of an educational and cultural plan, for example,

Kiriazovski did not fail to mention that: “MAO, the Macedonian anti-fascist organization in Voden Region, after requests were made by the Macedonian people, and after the CPG District Committee for Voden Region approved it, was formed in April 1942. The founder and leader of MAO was Vangel Aianovski-Oche. The goal of the organization was, in addition to fighting for the expulsion of the occupiers, to fight for the acquisition of national rights for the Macedonian people. MAO developed a wide range of activities and achieved major successes in involving the Macedonian people in the struggle. MAO also issued its own newspaper called ‘Tsrvena Dzvezda’ (Red Star)...” The truth, however, is that MAO was established by the Greek leaders, exactly the same way MRO (United) was established. When the Greeks saw that MAO functioned well, unlike the stillborn fictional MRO (United), and was being transformed into a dynamic revolutionary organization (despite being constrained in Voden) the Greeks liquidated it... This is proof that MAO was yet another “Greek project” that served its useful purpose before it was killed… But, contrary to the evidence provided, Kiriazovski continued to insist that “Aianovski was one of the most important leaders of NOF”. He said this in his “Chronology” three times as well as twice in Aianovski’s biographical data (p. 59 and 85) and once at the end of the book, together with the biographies of CPG and NOF leaders. He did not do this for anyone else. It was a conscious effort to impose Aianovski in the consciousness of the uninformed readers, especially in the CPM, and more widely, as an important, and most precisely, as the most important leader of all, a true revolutionary in Greek occupied Macedonia. This friendly affection has come to the fore by the fact that Kiriazovski tried to “beautify” Aianovski’s biography at the cost of violating the dignity of his own profession as a historian. He did this in volume V, in volume VI and in other volumes of “Aegean Macedonia and the national liberation struggle”.

In Aianovski’s biography, among other things, Kiriazovski wrote: “He was a communist from the pre-war period…” But the truth is, about which Aianovski wrote in his book “Aegean Storms”, that he signed a police declaration and became a renegade. He condemned all communist activities as treasonous… Unfortunately Kiriazovski is silent on that.

The statement: “Aianovski was the founder of the MAO in Voden Region in 1942…!” is false! The CPG founded and disbanded MAO. Aianovski was not engaged in any of it…

It was said that: “Aianovski was appointed Assistant Commissar of the Aegean Brigade in November 1944!” But what was not said is that, as a result, he only participated in the brigade’s parade in front of the Political Committee on November 18, 1944. After that he was withdrawn and sent to Voden to monitor and report on the situation there. This explains why Aianovski was not in the Headquarters’ composition when the Brigade entered into action against the Balisti. But, of course, nothing was said about that either.

It was said that: “TOMO, the ‘Secret Macedonian Liberation Organization’, was formed in Voden Region in January 1945, and led by Aianovski until the First District Conference, held on April 28, 1945…” But nothing was said about Aianovski’s own reports contradicting that… This information too was consciously ignored...

It was said that: “Aianovski became secretary of the NOF District Committee for Voden Region in the spring of 1945, after that he became member of the Executive Board and organizational secretary of the NOF Main Board for Aegean Macedonia…!” (97)

It is true that Aianovski, at my recommendation, was appointed first president, i.e. Secretary of the first TOMO District Committee, at the TOMO-NOF district conference on June 20, 1945. It is also true that during the reorganization of the NOF staff structure as per the Agreement with the CPG, in November 1946, Aianovski became member of the NOF Executive Board with the position of instructor in Voden Region. But it is not true that he became an organizing secretary of NOF because after the election he was suspended and continued to work as an instructor. This explains why Aianovski never took part in any of the Secretariat working meetings, and his signature did not appear in any of the Secretariat documents.

This same “friendly and clear affection” was shown by Dr. Kiriazovski for Aianovski, during the drafting of the trial edition of the National Committee of Fighters’ “Chronology”. As the editor-in-

chief of the “Chronology”, Kiriazovski followed every step Aianovski took in Voden Region like he was one of the most important leaders. He made sure to mention every meeting Aianovski attended in Voden Region, and when and where the meetings were held. Everything was catalogued like it was “very important work” and not like the ordinary and routine organizational work Aianovski was doing… and not only in Voden Region… On top of that Aianovski, of course, was portrayed as the only one person arranging these events and then writing about them in his notebooks… which Kiriazovski then took and turned into public knowledge...

A lot of “invented activities” were entered into the history of our Macedonian national liberation movement, in the name of science. I say this not only because Kiriazovski personally tried to “trample on me” in public, that is to portray me as a negligent anti-party hostile element that invented slander against the CPM/CPY, while publicly portraying Aianovski as the only famous revolutionary in Greek occupied Macedonia; the same person who far surpassed everyone in writing and systematically inventing deeds he had never done before. No! I say this because I believe Dr. Kiriazovski was generally unprincipled, subjective and ill-intentioned. Unfortunately, I am not the only target here. I also remember what they did to Urania Iurukova. This is what he said about her: “In March-April 1944, ‘dressed in white’ Urania was seen among the occupiers in Kostur working against our Macedonian national liberation movement...” (98) But that is not true. She was a well-known hero during the struggle fighting for DAG and was appointed secretary of the AFZH General Board and member of the NOF Executive Board. As for the other Urania, Urania Alilomova, she was twice appointed member of the NOF Central Council, once in the 1st and again in the 2nd NOF Congress. (99) But Dr. Kiriazovski, while citing her biography at the end of volume VI of “Aegean Macedonia and the national liberation struggle”, kept silent about that… (p. 481.) Of course that was unfair...

Let us continue…

After I was removed from the NOF leadership and demoted to an ordinary fighter I was sent to DAG Headquarters where I was

unexpectedly and politely welcomed by Commissar Bardzhotas. Mincho Fotev and I arrived there on June 23, 1949. After a good meal and some rest, Bardzhotas gave me a horse and a courier (escort) and sent me to DAG 10th Division Headquarters. There too I was unexpectedly and politely welcomed… like it was by some kind of order from above. I was then sent to the “annexartito tagma” (independent battalion) which handled heavy weapons, heavy machine guns and mortar cannons. There I met Hrisostomos, the battalion commander, a healthy looking man with bright, yellowish red eyelashes, eyebrows and hair. He was also polite to me. Located somewhere below us on the cliff was a line of bunkers equipped with heavy machine guns. That evening I was assigned to “guard duty”. The first thing I did was sit down behind a heavy machine gun and fire a short burst to test it. There were other fighters there with me. They were assigned to assist me. Our unit commander was a cheerful fighter from Thessaly named Georgios Hadzharas. I was impressed with how the line of bunkers with heavy machine guns was interconnected via trenches. July passed almost without any major incidents. Below us down at the bottom of the hill was a river which served as a border between us and our opponent who was entrenched at the top of the hill on the opposite side of the gorge. I guess you can call this the lull before the decisive battle that was going to take place in August 1949. My services as a machine gunner did not last long. Early in July I was assigned to operate an 81-mm heavy mortar cannon. My commander was an 18 year old young man named Micho Sarievski from the village Kolomnati, Lerin Region. His left arm was in a gypsum cast and it hung from his neck. He, together with several other young Macedonian fighters of similar age, left the hospital in Elbasan (Albania) without being discharged, and arrived at the front on their own. Even though their wounds were not healed, they were not sent back to the hospital. They were sent to the front line instead. The mortar cannon I was operating was located about a hundred metres higher up the hill, behind the heavy machine gun bunker line. No one could pass by us. Commander Hrisostomos made sure of that. While on duty I was given seven targets to hit. Each target was identified by a piece of stick stuck in the ground in front of me with a number pinned to it. Each number and target was written on an empty cigarette box and the sticks were stuck in the ground in a semicircle in front of me. To this day I am sad about the damage I inflicted on the enemy in those