The conflict between Greece and Macedonia and the limits of international mediation

The bilateral relations between Greece and Macedonia have been problematic since Macedonia's declaration of independence, and got more strained following Greece's objections to Macedonia's integration to Euro-Atlantic institutions with its constitutional name. Greece has repeteadly claimed that Macedonia's using its constitutional name, the "Republic of Macedonia", implies territorial claims against its northern province. The relations got more strained once Macedonia's leaders began promoting the national identity through historical symbols of ancient Macedonian kingdom, whereas Greece asserts that those symbols essentially belong to its own heritage. Although Macedonia reiterated that it has no territorial claims against Greece and, as a sign of goodwill, revised the provisions of its constitution, and altered its national flag, Greece continues to block Macedonia's admission to the EU and NATO membership by using its veto power. The International Court of Justice, ICJ, ruled that Greece breached its obligations stipulated in the 1995 Interim Accord by blocking Macedonia's accession to the EU and NATO. Although the UN brokered mediation efforts, the resolution of the name conflict has been a stalemate due to the parties' intransigence even after two decades. The main strategy of the EU and NATO for stabilizing the Western Balkans through enlargement was derailed due to the name dispute. Settlement of the conflict becomes a priority for international community due to its potential to affect wider regional stability, given the recent developments in geopolitical setting. This study primarily aims at unfolding the limits of international mediation as a mainstream conflict resolution approach. The case study under review suggests that the sole use of international mediation remains dysfunctional in value-based conflicts, particularly that of national identity. Keywords: Conflict Resolution, International Mediation, Interim Accord.