Greek Deputy Prime Minister Theodoros Pangalos is again in the focus of the public attention because of his positions with regard to the issue concerning Macedonia’s name, Utrinski vesnik reports. Pangalos went public for the first time since the criticism aired by one of the most prominent Greek columnists about the secrecy of his positions and two months since the publication of the of WikiLeaks document. In the WikiLeaks document, Pangalos said that Macedonia should freely use the name “Macedonia” but he would not say it in public because it would prompt a storm of harsh reactions. Aside from the name “Macedonia”, he speaks also about the geographic qualifier, the nationalistic heating up of conflict situations and the abuse of the issue for political popularity.

Writer and columnist Nikos Dimou is asking in his column in the weekly Lifo why Pangalos, who is considered to be a very outspoken man, did not air his view about this strenuous issue in public to help Greece get rid of the “pseudo-problem” that has held both countries hostage for 20 years. The Greek deputy prime minister provided the response in a letter, contending that he had never concealed his position that Macedonia should be allowed to use that name.

“I strongly believe that the problem was not created by the Skopians. It was us who created it and I believe that this problem would not have existed if we had had maturity to say that we were not at all interested in how they wished to call their country,” Pangalos says.

Further on, he says that he and Konstantin Mitsotakis were the only ones that had told the public the truth about the dispute and that, in his view, is the only thing he and the former Greek prime minister had in common.

“The entire situation is a classic example of a nationalistic delirium and the person responsible for that is Mr. Andonis Samaras,” Pangalos says, adding that the name issue is an example of how wrong person at key positions may do damage at a national level. He says that the present leader of the opposition New Democracy, Samaras, is most to blame why the issue has not yet been resolved.

According to Pangalos, the assorted groups of nationalists in both countries only encourage creation of nationalistic conflicts over a non-existent subject.

“Everybody knows there is no ‘Slav-Macedonian minority’ and nobody stopped anyone in Greece from being a ‘Slav-Macedonian’ or anything else for that matter,” Pangalos says.

“If Skopje wishes to call itself Macedonia, it is their business,” Pangalos explains, adding that the attempt of the Macedonian Government at usurping parts of history, such as Alexander the Great, in fact reveals great national insecurity primarily because of the rising Albanian nationalism. His proposal with regard to, as he says, Macedonia’s wish to call itself Macedonia is that there should be a qualifier to make it distinct from the other two territories of Macedonia in Greece and Bulgaria. In other words, there should be a complex name for all use.

“In fact, the effects of this subject are not as important in the bilateral relations between the two countries as they are important in the two countries’ internal affairs where certain political powers use use the sensitivity and patriotism of the citizens to win votes easily,” Pangalos concludes.