1. From “Millet” to “Nations” and/or “Minorities” By Rubin Zemon Ph.D. Rome, Italy 21.06.2013

2. Nation-state Nation-states are products of a very specific historical development in Europe that was enabled by the introduction and rapid development of capitalism and capitalist way of production. Dominant ethnic communities within certain territories usually determined ethnic identity of nation-states. State=nation=people Nation-states and their population were believed to be ethnically and culturally homogenous entities. The myth of ethnic homogeneity does not correspond to reality of ethnic/cultural plurality. Hostile the diversity and pluralism, nationalism is incompatible with liberal democracy.

3. Nation-state Nations are differencing on how are they imagined and constructed (Benedict Anderson). Two mainstream concepts/models in Europe (Western/Constructive and Ethnic/Primordial) General pattern od state formation among the Balkan nations in XIX and XX century: – first- national “awakening” or growing of national consciousness, creation of culture and literary language; – second-preparation of and unsuccessful revolts or uprisings; – third- foreign intervention followed by establishing of an autonomous state; – lastly- declaration of an independent status and formation of republican form government.

4. Communities and identities during the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans “Dar –ul- Islam” vs. “dar-ul-harb” Shifting to Islam was welcome, very rare it was with violation. Non-Muslim population were raid additional taxes, had a lot restrictions and absolute inferior status. Division according to the social position and function in community: (Ruling class, asker, administrative officials: members of “ulema”- patriarchs of Christian church: “raya” Millet- confessional communities in the Ottoman Empire. – Muslim Millet – Gregorian-Armenian Millet – Catholic Millet – Jews Millet – Urum (Orthodox) Millet – Vlach (Aromanian) Millet from 1905.

5. Islamization, Rum-Millet &Phanariotes An act of accepting Islam religion among the people was known as “poturcuvanje”. For the Christians, shifting to Islam was identification with a process of naturalization, becoming “other”, becoming a Turk ! Two basic categories of belonging “in” and “out” of groups were determined: “Turks” and “Christians”. Rum- Millet, Romei (the biggest community in Rumelia/ Balkan Penisula), was under the control of Patriarch of Constantinople (Istanbul)- “Millet bashi” and “etnarch”. Phanariotes oligarchy had the most privileged position- high duties in a state administration, financial benefits by corruption and significant control over the church institutions. – Overall goal was to re-create the Byzantine Empire (fundament of “Megali Idea”).

6. Politics of “imaged communities”, “our” and “others” in new Nation-states in Balkans “On a question of one Greek national activist at the begging of XX century for the ethnic (national) identity of people from Thessaloniki, are they “Romainoi” (Greeks) or “Voulgaroi” (Bulgarians), they looked him confused! First they “signed of the Cross” and lather answered naively: “But, we are Christians – what is mean “Romainoi” or “Vulgaroi”?” In practice, religion identification did not much conflict with the ideals of nationalism. Language was only the most obvious mark of common nationality, not primary definition.

7. Politics of “imaged communities”, “our” and “others” in new Nation-states in Balkans It was not necessary for individual members of the nation to be conscious of their membership, or even to want to be included. Intellectuals and politicians defined who members of the nation were! Pomaks, Torbeshi, Gorani (Muslim communities that are speaking Slavic language) were considered as “Bulgarian -muhamedanes”, “Serbian- muhamedanes”, “Muslim with our blood”. The Greek nation avowedly included Greeks in Greece proper, who spoke Greek, Greeks in Albania, who spoke Albanian, Greeks in Anatolia who spoke Greek or Turkish, and even Slavic speaking Macedonians, who had no wish to be Greek. In Macedonia, inhabitants were considered to be Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians or Macedonians, depending on who describes them. Being fought over was not a happy experience for the Macedonians.

8. Politics of “imaged communities”, “our” and “others” in new Nation-states in Balkans The new state-borders from 1878 (Berlin Congress) and from 1913 (after the Balkan wars), became the basic criteria for defining the collective identity. The most important segments in forming the collective identity of nation-state are its institutions, especially the local administration, military service and mass education. National governments and administration, mainly implemented restrictive politics of integration of Muslim population and their participation in the public life. In the collective memory of the Balkan population it was impossible to throw the “collective blame and guilt” towards the Muslims with Slavic languages, because they fell threatened and changed their religion and “became Turks”.

9. Exchange of population Lausanne Treaty ( from 1 May 1924 more than a million Greeks and more than 380 thousands Muslims). – In Aegean Macedonia, ethnographic structure was dramatically changed and became sweeping ethnically Greek (89% in 1923, against 43% in 1912) Similar “exchanges of population” or “organized emigration” were made and between other states (Greece with Bulgaria, Serbia or Yugoslavia with Turkey).

10. Treaties for minority rights Balkan states were pushed to signed and adopt Treaties for minority rights, which should had to be observed by the League of Nations. Treaty between Bulgaria and Greece in 1924 and recognition of Greece that in its territory exists “Bulgarian” minority. Yugoslavia threated that would break an alliance with Greece from 1913, if Greece would not recognize “Serbian” minority.

11. Politics of recognition and minority rights in contemporary nation-states in Balkans A need for recognition is one of drivers of nationalistic movements in a politic. A request for recognition has a sign of “urgent case”, because of presumed relation between recognition and identity. A term “melting pot” becomes a synonym of gradual and quiet assimilation of “small” communities into the dominant or massive culture/ethnic group in a nation-state. In the salad bowl model, various cultures are juxtaposed — like salad ingredients — but do not merge into a single homogeneous culture. Each culture keeps its own distinct qualities.

12. After the WWS The concept of human rights influenced rights and protection of ethnic minorities and some news special rights have emerged, and a dual, both individual and collective, nature of minority rights is slowly being recognized; Rights and protection of minorities are regulated by a number of international documents, with UN and other international organizations playing a central role in the development of the international law; The reluctance of governments of modern states that perceive their countries as ethnically homogenous nation- states, has often slowed or blocked further development of the protection and rights of minorities in international law. Although there was a certain progress in the field of constitutional protection of minorities, most constitutions, still deriving from the concept of nation-state, did not include special provisions on rights and protection of minorities. Different mechanisms at the international or within individual states are being established, which assure the realization of rights and protection of minorities. Several problems in the realization and implementation of “ethnic politics”, states fail to recognize even the very existence of ethnic pluralism within their borders

13. Balkan Steams on protection of minorities Negative Stream – Albania – Bulgaria – Greece – Turkey Positive Stream – Bosnia &Herzegovina – Macedonia – Montenegro – Serbia

14. Contemporary main minority recognitions issues Balkan Egyptians in Albania Torbeshi in Macedonia Pomaks in Bulgaria Macedonians in Greece and Bulgaria

15. Vlah issue in Balkans Vlahs were recognized as particular millet by Ottoman authorities in 1905 and their number was around half million people at that time. After the Balkan wars they become a main victim in a “melting pot” politics of orthodox nation-states, and in contemporary live their identity, culture and language are almost melt. Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe on 24 June 1997 adopted Recommendation No. 1333 on the Aromanian Culture and language

16. Concept of the protection of minorities Negative Concept – states guarantee certain minority rights which usually define and establish them as individual (negative) rights of minority members, – states do not have a direct obligation to assure their realization, they react only when rights are violated. – Individuals belonging to minorities or minority organizations can sue violators before courts and request that states prevent further violations of minority rights. Positive Concept – have to provide participation and decisive role of minorities in political decision-making process, – requires active role of a state in the protection and realization of rights of minorities.

17. State UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1965) UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) Council of Europe- European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (1992) Council of Europe- Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (1995) Main issues related with minorities Albania Signed and Ratified Recognition of Balkan Egyptians, Bosnians. Exclusion of minorities from public life. Bosnia and Herzegovina Signed and Ratified Intercultural relation and communication; participation of minorities in public life Bulgaria Signed and Ratified Recognition of Pomaks, Macedonians. Discrimination of Roma; participation of minorities in public life Greece Signed and Ratified SignedRecognition of Turks, Macedonians. Discrimination Macedonia Signed and Ratified Signed Signed and Ratified Protection of Balkan Egyptians, Croats, Montenegrins and other small minorities; Political participation of minorities; Intercultural communication Montenegro Signed and Ratified Relations with Serbian community; Integration of minorities, especial Roma and Balkan Egyptians Serbia Signed and Ratified Political rights of Hungarians, Boshnjaks (Sandzak); Roma issues. TurkeySigned and Ratified Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, Jews and other smaller minorities.

18. Instead of Conclusion Scholars are predicting three scenarios on the future development of the protection of minorities: 1) Status Quo- Nothing New on the Front (no improvement of international standards); 2) “The Dark” Scenario- the Victory of Xenophobia (nationalism and xenophobia to became a characteristics, by reducing the existing protection of minorities), and 3) “The positive scenario”- “All different-all Equal” (Multiculturalism, as ideology based on tolerance, peaceful and equal cooperation is slowly being developed).

19. Instead of Conclusion Historically Balkan states and communities waste a lot of time on Xenophobia and dreaming for “homogenous nations”, as idea that was imported by the foreign powers out of Balkans. Eternal peace is not possible without tolerance and good relations with neighbors and “others” in our societies. A myth of ethnic homogeneity contradicts the existing ethnic and cultural diversity of the Balkans, which can be also a comparative advantage and not just a problem. Development of ideology of equal cooperation should be a start point for transforming nation-states in Balkans into ethnical neutral “body politic” that recognize and promotes the existence of ethnic and cultural pluralism, built on principles of inclusion, tolerance, cooperation and recognition of ethnic, cultural and social plurality and diversity of population.

20. Thank you very much for attention!!!