1.
Following the essential articles of the UNESCO's Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) - right to equality, freedom from discrimination, right to recognition as a person before law, especially that everyone has the right to nationality (article 15) etc. -, or the Declaration of the Principles of International Cultural Co-operation - e.g. that every people has the right and the duty to develop its culture -, one would clearly say that the human rights story belongs to the past - to the 20th century, and that the 21st century will be an age of new visions and super-new frontiers, time of globalization and unquestioned / unconditional tolerance. Some doubts may arise when we find out that the UNESCO's Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions has been adopted as late as 2005! Does it mean that all the previous resolutions, declarations, documents etc., has not fulfilled their goals!? Does it really take so many words to understand and to achieve the simple truth?!
Terms like multiculturalism, minority rights, cultural identities ... were suppose to become key marks of our existence. It is not that the idea (or utopia?) one world - one nation is that simple to achieve, but the concept of multiculturalism, tolerance, diversity ... was meant to be the initial path, the foreword to the bigger story! After all, "the theory and the practice of multiculturalism was a response to the pressure of modern nationalism through the whole period of modern development of Western societies" (Paic, 2006). An initial help to the "globalization with a human face" (Williams, 1999).
2.
I am aware that the minority question is maybe the most complex one. But I am not going to address all recent theoretical issues about multiculturalism, cultural identity, cultural diversity, minority rights etc., because it would take pretty much space. And, as a matter of fact, they have no practical importance here, for example: theoretical discourses raised by several theoreticians (Giddens, 1991; Beck, 1992; Bauman, 1995 etc.); whether really "the 21st century questions about nationhood, ethnicity and identity are in the forefront of political and theoretical agendas" (Martinec, 2006); is really Dieter Senghaas's theory of intercultural communication the only alternative of Huntington's clash of civilizations etc.
3.
In spite of all theories and good practices, in some parts of the world people still think that human / minority / cultural rights is something negotiable, something that is to be allowed or given to somebody. The concept of nation states - or better to say linking the national citizenship with the majority, with the ethnically (and culturally) dominant group of the population - made the initial differentiation. After that, every other form of discrimination was "easier"!
In a broader, world-wide picture, the Balkan region is not an exception in this context. But since this part of the world is at the same time part of Europe where the question of minority rights (at least) today is more or less unquestionable, then it looks that there is a real problem! Having in mind the troubled and (very) often bloody history of the region, the constant change of the borders, the moving (parts of) of people / nations ... some might say it is understandable that the situation with the human / minority / cultural rights is not like the rest of Europe.
But, on the other hand, can we say that the history of the rest of the European countries is much, much less troubled or bloody? No, on the contrary! But still, the rest of Europe has learned how to deal with this "minority question", how to foresee and intercept most of the possible problems with their human or cultural rights.
So where / what is the problem with the Balkan countries?
4.
Of course, this paper is not trying to solve this problem. And it has nothing to do with some local "ghosts" arising from the past or daily politics put into wrong perspective. Still, it aims to point on the current data, on the available notes and information, and then to slightly comment on it or on certain illogical situations, if there are any.
So, one of the possible starts is to look upon the PROPOSALS AND COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY MEMBER STATES IN RELATION TO UNESCO’s PLAN OF ACTION FOR THE 60th ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS. One would say that if there were any complains, proposals or whatever on the situation with the human rights on the Balkans, then it would be noted here. Well, no! The only proposal from this part of Europe came from Slovenia on behalf of all Members of the European Union and countries candidates for European Union admission. And the proposal (1) "called upon UNESCO to play a visible role as regards press freedom and the right to receive and impart information and (2) to organize a photo exhibition at Headquarters within a high level symposium on freedom of expression, in partnership with NGOs, such as the International Federation of Journalists, dedicated to the laureates of the UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize, and to photographers who have suffered because of the exercise of their profession". Nothing about any possible improvement of the human rights or cultural rights or cultural diversity or ... in some parts of Europe, on the Balkans ... Like - everything is OK!?
5.
Just a short glimpse at the Compendium tables shows (at least) a strange situation, especially having in mind that the Balkan Peninsula has always been a national "mixing pot".
For example, Serbia and Croatia have by far most recognized minority groups: Serbia 21 (which is 17.1% of total population of 7 498 001) and Croatia 16 (which is 7.47% of total population of 4 430 000). Greece is by far the biggest country (11 057 000 population) but officially has no national minorities.
On the other hand, although neighboring countries, there are no Albanians in Greece, but there are Greeks in Albania. And the same applies between Greece and Bulgaria: although neighboring countries, there are Greeks in Bulgaria but there are no Bulgarians in Greece!
And slightly different example: although neighboring countries, there are no Macedonians in Greece and there are no Greeks in Macedonia! The same situation applies on Bulgaria and Macedonia: although neighboring countries, there are no Macedonians in Bulgaria and there are no Bulgarians in Macedonia!
The situation becomes even more "strange" when we have in mind the historic events, the population movements, the porous borders (especially in the past) etc. So, how is it possible not to have a certain (even small!) number of populations from the neighboring countries in the above mentioned states? How is it possible for Macedonia to have Serbs and Albanians but not Greeks and Bulgarians; how is it possible that only Greeks live in Greece and not Albanians, Bulgarians, Macedonians too, etc.? But that is another story.
Another interesting question in this context is between Croatia and Macedonia. Croatia recognizes the existence of Macedonian minority, but Macedonia does not recognize the existence of Croatian minority in Macedonia! And in 2006 there was an official demand made by Croatia to recognize the Croatian ethnic minority as a Constitutional minority, but this demand was not accepted by the Macedonian Government!
What has to be stressed in the context of the minority rights in the Balkan countries, is that it seems that Albania is the only country that puts difference between minority rights and cultural and linguistic rights. So, cultural rights are recognized for three national minorities (Greek, Macedonian and Serbian - Montenegrin), and ethno linguistic rights are recognized for two minorities (Aromanian and Roma).
6.
What is common between all Balkan countries considering the "minority politics" is that they all do not have main cultural policy document addressing national minority groups. So, a logical question is: if there is no main cultural policy document, how are the minority "problems" being solved? It seems that all countries rely on the provisions guaranteed by the constitution. Besides the constitutional provisions, Serbia has Law on the Protections of the Rights and Freedoms of National Minorities (2002), Croatia has Constitutional Law on National Minorities (2002) and Macedonia has the Ohrid Framework Agreement (2001). And these provisions guaranteed by the constitution or other documents are more or less the same: rights to preserve and develop their cultural, religious, ethnic and linguistic identity,
In all Balkan countries the Ministry of Culture is the main administrative body that provides support for cultural activities of the minority groups. And, more or less, in all ministries there are special departments or sectors that deal with the minority groups: a Public Council on Cultural Diversity in Bulgaria, Office for Promotion and Advancement of Culture of Nationalities in Macedonia, Office for Minorities in Croatia etc.
Beside the ministries of culture there are also other different bodies that provide support to the minorities, such as: Government's Council for National Minorities in Croatia, National Council for Interethnic Interaction in Bulgaria and etc. In Macedonia there are several bodies that foster the interethnic cooperation, such as: Committee on the Political System and Ethnic relations (in the Parliament), within the Government's General Secretariat there is a Sector for Implementation of the Ohrid Framework Agreement etc.
Most of the Balkan countries have signed and ratified the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expression. Greece has signed but not ratified the Convention. The ratification of the Convention is in process in Serbia. Albania and Greece are also members of the intergovernmental committee to promote and monitor the objectives of the Convention.
7.
Recalling that United Nations General Assembly designated 2008 as the International Year of Languages and having in mind the estimation that "in few generations, more then half of the 7000 languages might have disappeared", the UN General Secretary Mr. Matsuura stated that "the costs of losing linguistic diversity are high and may jeopardize international cooperation to promote sustainable development, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and Education for All goals". "Only if multilingualism is fully accepted as an invaluable asset can all languages find their place in our globalized world", concluded Mr. Matsuura.
In this context, the minority "language situation" in the Balkan countries is regulated in different way. More or less they all recognize and support the use of the major minority languages (on local level, in schools, in the media etc.). For example:
- in Albania, besides the official Albanian language, Greek is the second major language spoken by the Greek minority, and others are Macedonian and Romanian;
- in Bulgaria, where in use is the term "mother tongue" instead of "minority language", Bulgarian language is in official use, and for those whose mother tongue is not Bulgarian there are certain regulations addressed in two specific laws;
- in Croatia the official language is Croatian and special laws regulate the status of the minority languages and alphabets and their official use on local level;
- in Macedonia the official language is Macedonian and its use is regulated by special law and the use of the minority languages (on local level as second official, in the Parliament etc.) is regulated by other laws and agreements;
- in Serbia the Serbian language and Cyrillic alphabet is in official use and in those areas where significant numbers of ethnic minorities live, the minority languages are in official use parallel with the Serbian language.
8.
