Resolving Political Disputes of National Identity by Treaty: An Examination of the National Identity Provisions of the Prespa Agreement

Abstract

This dissertation considers the effectiveness of the 'Prespa Agreement' in resolving the Macedonia Dispute by closely examining its national identity provisions.

The central underlying question of the Macedonia Dispute between Greece and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (fYROM) was how to resolve competing claims to the same elements of national identity by two independent states and their respective peoples. These elements of national identity were of a fundamentally political and social nature, yet it was a legal instrument, a bilateral treaty, that was chosen as the mechanism for resolution of this dispute. The use of national identity provisions was designed to bridge the gap between the legal and the political or social, and accordingly dealt with issues of nationality, nomenclature, linguistic classification, historic and cultural patrimony, and the use of historic symbols- matters generally absent from treaties.

The dissertation examines these national identity provisions and the overarching objectives of the 'Prespa Agreement' within the historical and political context of the Macedonia Dispute, analysing relevant significant periods in history and highlighting the roadblocks which prevented resolution for the previous 27 years. Ultimately, it argues the 'Prespa Agreement' has been effective in specific areas and failed in others, and for this effectiveness to be more comprehensive and lasting, the 'Prespa Agreement' must receive adequate and continuing political support from the governments in both states. At the time of writing, such support was lacking which raised questions of the longevity of the ‘Prespa Agreement’.