What do we really want on the Macedonian issue?

When Phillip II assumed the throne of Macedonia, his kingdom faced existential threats.  He had just taken over a kingdom whose predecessor fell in battle; the same battle cost Macedonia most of its army.  Youth, inexperience, a weak military and threats on every border. To label the situation that Phillip II inherited “not promising” would be an understatement.

Needing time to rebuild his army, Phillip resorted to treaties, bribery and a marriage of alliance in order to quash the threats to Macedonia.  It was Phillip’s diplomacy – not his phalanx – that bought time for Macedonia’s rise, for Alexander the Great to come on the scene, and for the Hellenic legacy of Macedonia to make its way through time down to us.  Nearly 2,400 years later, the northern region of Greece that is Phillip’s Macedonia is in need of the same statesmanship to secure its future and perhaps regain some level of glory or significance. Yet the debate over the Prespa Agreement is marked more by the demagoguery of Phillip’s archnemesis Demosthenes than by Phillip’s diplomacy.

Read more

Leave a comment