chapter three diaspora politics and australian- macedonian relations

CHAPTER THREE

DIASPORA POLITICS AND AUSTRALIAN-MACEDONIAN RELATIONS

DANNY BEN-MOSHE, JOANNE PYKE AND LIUDMILA KIRPITCHENKO

Introduction Diasporas are complex entities with multiple dimensions, capacities,

and interests. However, the political mobilisation of diasporas has been increasingly seen as one of their recurrent features (Werbner 2000). Politically mobilised diaspora is a site of political organisation for or against the interests of homeland governments (Sheffer 2003). Political activism can also be expressed in advocating for the diaspora’s interests in the receiving countries, such as Australia. This chapter considers the Macedonian diaspora in Australia as a case study of a politically mobilised diaspora.

The chapter is based on the outcomes of a broader Australian Research Council (ARC) Linkage grant “Australian Diasporas and Brain Gain: Current and Future Potential Transnational Relationships”. This investigation of the Macedonian diaspora includes a literature review on diasporas, transnationalism and political mobilisation and the findings of a survey of the Macedonian diaspora in Australia which was conducted as part of the ARC project. This chapter discusses diverse aspects of transnationalism and political mobilisation within the Macedonian diaspora in Australia. Primary data are drawn from an ARC funded on-line survey of the Macedonian diaspora which involved 1083 respondents and was conducted through community networks in 2010-2011. Survey questions included the extent of involvement in Macedonian organisations in Australia, reasons for community participation, and the roadmap for advancing Australia-Macedonia relations.

Chapter Three

52

Literature Review: Diasporas, Transnationalism and Political Mobilisation

In the context of globalisation, the role of diasporas has been increasingly brought into focus as a potentially powerful and important social, economic and cultural phenomenon. For the purposes of this chapter, the concept of “diaspora” is applied, rather than “immigrant or migrant community” on the basis that, while the two terms are overlapping, there are also important distinctions. ‘Diaspora’ and ‘migrant community’ differ in a number of important ways. While all immigrant communities are composed of people who have relocated from a country of origin, diaspora communities differ in displaying salient and profound connections with their homeland. Diasporas are composed of “displaced peoples who feel (maintain, revive, invent) a connection with a prior home” (Clifford 1997:255). In this way, diasporas are understood as people who are dispersed across the globe, yet are linked by a connection to a common homeland, which may or may not continue to exist. Traditionally, the term diaspora was used specifically to describe the exile of the Jews from their Holy Land and their dispersal throughout the world. Later, the term has been applied more widely and generally refers to “connection between groups across different nation states whose commonality derives from an original but maybe removed homeland” (Anthias 1998:560).

The concept of transnationalism is also often used in relation to diasporic connections with the homeland. It is a relatively recent concept which was coined “to focus on the grassroots activities of international migrants across borders as being something distinct from the dense and continuous relations of macro-agents such as multinational or transnational companies” (Faist 2010:13-14). Transnationalism refers to “durable ties across countries, of individuals, communities, as well as other social formations, such as transnationally active networks, groups and organisations” (Faist 2010:9).

Furthermore, the nature of these connections “must be strong enough to resist erasure through the normalizing processes of forgetting, assimilating and distancing” (Clifford 1997:255). Clifford (1994:311, 307) argues that “diasporas are not exactly immigrant communities” because they not only maintain and nurture “important allegiances and practical connections to a homeland”, they also tend to show and practice resistance to assimilation in a host society. A key distinction of diasporas with immigrant communities is that diaspora implies not only to a strong engagement and connection with the homeland, but also suggests agency

Diaspora Politics and Australian-Macedonian Relations

53

and action (Johnson 2012). Importantly, their propensity for agency and action is manifested in “articulations of diasporism” (Clifford 1994:302). As such, a diaspora community is distinguishable from an immigrant community in its strong sense of connection to “home”, rooted in the community members’ resistance to cultural erasure in the new place of residence—they are often not concerned with conforming to the host society.

The links with the homeland of the diasporic or transnational community are generated through entangled combinations of common histories, kinship ties and obligations, political interests, economic imperatives, cultural and ethnic identity and language. They are also dynamic and changing “fractured sites of belonging, participation, disenfranchisement, identification or disidentifications” (Braziel 2008:158). These connections may be restricted to those who have been forced to flee from a homeland. More broadly, diaspora refers to a social condition, a form of consciousness or, as Waters (1995) describes, an embodiment of transnationalism. Diasporas are informal in character and the effects of diasporas are both tangible and intangible.

In recent decades, there has been a renewed interest in diaspora discourse and “[t]he language of diaspora is increasingly invoked… [as m]any minority groups that have not previously identified in this way are now reclaiming diaspora origins and affiliations” (Clifford 1997:255). In the context of globalisation, there has been a renewed discussion of the ways in which diaspora communities are different from the traditional conceptions of immigrant communities. The concept of diaspora is invoked in relation to the growth of transnational ties. While diaspora is an old concept, transnationalism is relatively new. The role of diasporas has been increasingly brought into focus as a potentially powerful and important social, economic and cultural phenomenon. The transnational ties of the Macedonian diaspora are the focus of this chapter.

The political dimensions of diasporas (Sheffer 2003) are particularly relevant to the Macedonian diaspora, including the theme of the potential influence that diasporas can wield both on the country of settlement and also on homeland governments. There is a growing consensus in the literature that diasporas can yield a political impact on their home country. Werbner (2000: 5) suggests that “many diasporas are deeply implicated both ideologically and materially in the nationalist projects of their homelands”. Current research literature on diasporas relates to several aspects of this influence, such as the influence of diasporic votes on the outcomes of homeland governments (Cutler 2001), for example, the deciding influence of the diaspora vote on the 2008 Italian elections (Carli

Chapter Three

54

2008). There is also exploration in the literature of how diasporas seek to bring about favourable policies for their homelands in the receiving countries (The Economist 2003) and as such, diasporas build positive international relations for their homelands (Brown 2000). The extent of influence of the diaspora is of particular and growing importance given the potential of communication technologies to strengthen diasporas, whereas previously their influence declined in correlation with their distance from the homeland and the degree of global dispersion of its members (The Economist 2003).

At a broader political economic level, the literature is concerned with the movements of diasporas and their influence on broader homeland political conflict and power relations, as well of those of receiving countries (Cutler 2001). At a political science level, the politics of diaspora represent a challenge to theories of political organisation and development. As Sandler (2003) suggests, the Jewish diaspora exemplifies the difficulties in defining the scope and influence of a diaspora. Since 1948, one could speak of a Jewish state, a Jewish nation, a Jewish diaspora, a Jewish people, Jewish communities, and both Jewish national and international or transnational organisations, all existing concurrently. Sandler (2003) conceptualises the Jewish diaspora as encompassing unique interests and power, a distinct structure of interdependence, and a normative value system, and these principles can apply to other diasporas and transnational actors. Political mobilisation is one of the recurrent features of diasporas and it is a focus of this chapter. Macedonian diaspora in Australia provides a good example of politically mobilised diaspora (Sheffer 2003) acting on behalf on the homeland in the receiving country.

The Macedonian Diaspora in Australia

There is a controversy surrounding the term “Macedonian” due to its contestation by both Macedonians and Greeks. Three basic meanings of the term “Macedonian” exist in the literature (Danforth 1997). The most common use of this term in general scholarly, political and journalistic sources is described in the national attributes. It refers to a national identity of the people living in this country. This meaning of “Macedonian” is perceived as distinct from other national identities, such as the Serbian or Greek. While Greek nationalists might object to this definition, it is nevertheless predominantly used. The second meaning is regional and it refers to the people of a Greek national identity who come from Macedonia who are sometimes called Greek-Macedonians. The third meaning describes ethnic origin of this group in contrast to other ethnic


55

groups who live in the same area (Danforth 1997: 6-7). For the purposes of this research the term refers to migrants and the descendants of the current State of Macedonia which emerged out of the collapse of the former Yugoslavia.

The Republic of Macedonia with Skopje as its capital, as it exists today, is based on the republic established as part of the Yugoslav Federation in 1944, which after World War II was a State of the Yugoslav Federation. Until the early 1990s, the Socialist Republic of Macedonia was a constituent state of the Yugoslav Federation, along with Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro and Kosovo. At the break up of that Federation in about 1990, each constituent state declared independence, drafted a democratic constitution, held elections, and became a parliamentary democracy. The Republic of Macedonia declared its independence on 8 September 1991.

The Macedonian diaspora in Australia began when the first wave of Macedonian immigrants to Australia arrived during the first half of the twentieth century from northern Greece. Sizeable Macedonian immigration to Australia started in the 1920s when quotas imposed by the USA limited migration to this country. Most of these early migrants to Australia were itinerant labourers from peasant backgrounds. Since the second half of the twentieth century most Macedonian immigrants have come from the Republic of Macedonia, which was then part of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia or the present day Republic. During the Greek Civil War (1946-1949) many Macedonians and Greeks fought with the communist-led partisans against the Greek dictatorial regime. Children under the age of 15 were often sent to other Eastern European countries and, when the partisans withdrew to Albania, relatives in Australia arranged for their migration to Australia. This was the context of the significant spike in migration in the late 1950s and early 1960s. The year 1960 also marked a wave of significant migration from the then Socialist Republic of Yugoslavia.

The majority of Macedonians arriving post-1960, moved to the suburbs of Fitzroy in Melbourne and Rockdale in Sydney. Much of the emigration from this region is attributed to a disastrous earthquake in Skopje in 1963. The flow of immigrants waned in the 1970s but resumed in the 1990s with the break-up of Yugoslavia. According to the UNHCR, after six months of escalating conflict in 2001, more than 140,000 Macedonians were displaced. From the 1990s, subsequent waves of immigrants were obliged to pass the point immigration tests that are still current in Australia. This cohort of immigrants was of predominantly educated, professional people and thus very different to the earlier post-War migrants who came from

Chapter Three

56

peasant and working class backgrounds. In the decades that followed, Australia kept attracting high skilled migrants with their families. These migrants quickly proceeded to engage in a wide range of business and white collar professions.

According to the ABS 2011 Census, there are 93,500 Macedonians in Australia, up from 83,963 in 2006 (ABS 2012). The largest concentration of Macedonian communities can be found in Victoria (Melbourne, Geelong, Shepparton), in New South Wales (Sydney, Wollongong, Newcastle, Queanbeyan), Western Australia (Perth, Geraldton), South Australia (Adelaide) and Queensland (Brisbane and the Gold Coast). For a range of reasons, this number is widely understood as an under-estimation of the actual size of the Macedonian diaspora. This is in part due to the reluctance of some Macedonians born in Greece, to identify as Macedonian-speaking due to Greek/Macedonian tensions. Primarily, however, Australian census data does not accurately capture the ethnic background of the community in Australia as it only identifies one second language of census respondents. As a result, if a person is multi-lingual, and in the case of Macedonians this might include English, Greek, Albanian as well as Macedonian, only one language other than English will be identified. As Jupp (2001:577) notes, these factors combined mean that we can assume that the Macedonian population in Australia is around twice as great as official statistics would suggest. The community is served by a range of cultural and sporting groups, media and community centres.

The nature of the most recent wave of Macedonian migration is assessed by applying Cohen’s (2008) influential typology of diasporas that classifies diasporas into four broad categories: “victim”, “labour and “imperial”, “trade and business”, and “deterritorialized” diasporas. The classical form of diaspora is described as a “victim” diaspora which presumes “the idea of dispersal following a traumatic event in the homeland, to two or more foreign destinations” (Cohen 2008:2). Victim diaspora share “a trauma affecting a group collectively … events characterised by their brutality, scale and intensity so as unambiguously to compel emigration or flight” (Cohen 2008:2). Within this typology, the Macedonian diaspora is distinctively seen as a “victim” diaspora given that, until very recently, Macedonian people arrived either as refugees or to reunite with families who had been dislocated following the turbulent dissolution of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. These arrivals now form a core of the Macedonian diaspora in Australia and display two elements from the prototypic victim case: “the traumatic dispersal from an original homeland and the salience of the homeland in the collective memory of a forcibly dispersed group” (original emphasis Cohen 2008:2). This paper


57

argues that it is precisely due to this “collective memory” Macedonian diaspora presents an interesting case study of political mobilisation.

Further, the theme of political dimensions of diasporas (Sheffer 2003) is particularly relevant to the Macedonian diaspora, as well as the theme of potential influence that diasporas can wield both in the country of settlement but also on homeland governments. For the Macedonians at home and abroad, Macedonia remains an object of contestation in terms of national identit(ies), a nation and even a state, in its very being, its composition and, for some, its existence (Balalovska 2012). There is a growing consensus in the literature that diasporas can have political influence on their home country (Werbner 2000) and the Macedonian diaspora presents a good case study for analysing this type of political impact.

With the collapse of the former Yugoslavia and the emergence of an independent Macedonia in 1991, the Macedonian community in Australia, like elsewhere in the diaspora, became more involved in the politics of the homeland. The contested nature of the Macedonian state led its sizeable diaspora to engage in the interests of their homeland, and the homeland government often sought their support. As a sizeable diaspora, the community in Australia has an important role in the homeland-diaspora politics of Macedonia and in promoting closer bilateral relations between Australia and Macedonia. This has been reflected in the formation in Australia and in North America of advocacy groups such as the United Macedonian Diaspora, the Australian Macedonian Human Rights Committee and the Macedonian Human Rights Movement International. In June 2011, Australian Macedonians with Macedonian passports voted in the Macedonian elections. An Australian Macedonian, Mr. Miki Dodevski, was elected as the inaugural diaspora representative in the Macedonian Parliament. He was replaced by another MP after the elections for the Macedonian Parliament in 2014.

The diasporas are increasingly seen as an important mechanism for enhancing international economic development and “brain circulation” within and between knowledge economies, as well as being a source of remittances and investment in the homeland through tourism (Saxenian 2005). Diasporas have been described as sites of political organization for or against the interests of homeland governments or as advocates for the interests of the diaspora in Australia and/or in other receiving countries (Sheffer 2003). Diasporas are seen as a vehicle for the provision of transnational care and welfare (Baldassar, Baldock & Wilding 2007) as well as the maintenance of culture, language and religious practices generating both freedoms and restraints for its members and host

Chapter Three

58

communities (Lee 2003). This chapter seeks to analyse the nature of Macedonian diaspora with an emphasis on its political engagement with the homeland, evaluate how their transnational dimensions are manifested and discuss conditions and circumstances that shape these ties.

Survey and Focus Group

As part of the Australian Research Council Linkage project, a survey of the Macedonian diaspora in Australia was undertaken in 2010-2011 using “Survey Monkey” with both English and Macedonian language versions. A survey, a focus group, and interviews were conducted as methods to gather data that could inform responses to the core research questions about the extent and character of diaspora ties to the homeland. The questionnaire included a mix of 57 open and closed questions. Using the snowball method (Bickman & Rog 2008), the survey was distributed as widely as possible through the networks of the United Macedonian Diaspora using email listings, electronic newsletters and personal networks in July 2010. The distribution of the survey was guided by the Australian Research Council Linkage Partner Investigator Ordan Andreevksi, Director of Australian Outreach with the United Macedonian Diaspora. Following completion of the data collection process, 1083 responses were received, of which 864 were in English and 219 in Macedonian. The survey was successful in gaining geographical representation of the community with responses coming from New South Wales (43.5% ABS, 31.8% survey), Victoria (45.1% ABS, 40.5% survey) and West Australia (7.3% ABS, 17.6% survey).

The survey questionnaire included 57 questions that included a mix of open and closed questions. The questionnaire was organized into five sections:

I. Background information about the respondent such as age, gender,

income, education and migration history; II. Household information such as household size, migration

characteristics, reasons for migration and languages spoken; III. Citizenship and relationships with Macedonia including questions

relating to identity, citizenship status and frequency and motivation for visits to Macedonia;

IV. Links with Macedonia including questions about family connections in Macedonia, methods of staying in touch with Macedonia, visitors from Macedonia, ways of staying in touch with Macedonian politics, media and culture, involvement with


59

Macedonian organizations, and political engagement with Macedonia;

V. Family and financial support including questions on care responsibilities for people in Macedonia, and remittances to and from Macedonia; and

VI. Business and professional links with Macedonia and questions about professional or trade relationships with Macedonia.

For the purposes of this chapter, the analysis is focussed on parts of

sections III, IV and V. Levels of analysis include those over and under 40 y/o and those born in Australia or Macedonia. Women were under-represented in the online survey with only 25 per cent of responses. Furthermore, the survey was more popular with respondents who had completed undergraduate and postgraduate studies, as opposed to those with secondary or trade qualifications, who are less accustomed to research of this kind. This problem was partly addressed through the focus group and interviews which ensured representation of women and people without higher educational qualifications.

To probe the survey data, a focus group discussion was held with a group of 12 people who were of Macedonian background. Nine of the 12 participants were born in Macedonia and three were born in Australia. Participants were invited through the networks of the United Macedonian Diaspora and included six women as a measure to off-set the under-representation of women in the survey responses. Consistent with the broader aims of the project, the intent was also to identify future directions for diasporas, so four of the participants were aged 30–39 and three of the participants were in 20–29 age group. No one in the group was older than 60 years. Selection of the focus group was also designed to include greater representation of non-professional workers who were under-represented in the survey.

Macedonian Identity

One of the core sets of survey questions related to the sense of Macedonian identity. The survey established that the Macedonian community in Australia had a very high degree of identification with the ethnic homeland. Asked how they described their identity, of 710 respondents, an overwhelming majority of 90 per cent included Macedonian as part of their identity, as is shown in the following Chart 1:

Chapter Three

60

Chart 1. How do you describe your identity?

Of those under 40 years of age, 91 per cent defined themselves as

having a Macedonian identity. Discussion from the focus group made it clear that members of the Macedonian community are comfortable in, and have a sense of belonging to, both Macedonia and Australia, with both being strong elements in their personal identity. As one woman said:

...my mum’s side is here and my dad’s side everyone is there, and I lived there when I was young, I was probably five to nine. So whether I’m here or there, I’ve adapted to both of them, so I’m home here and when I go there I feel like I’m at home.

An overwhelming majority of 86.5 per cent in the survey described themselves as being either “very close” or “close” in their feelings towards Macedonia. When asked to explain why they felt close to Macedonia, the focus group respondents established that personal familiarity with the country and having family there were the two main reasons. All the focus group participants, whether born in Australia or overseas and whatever their age, had friends and family in Macedonia.

Another factor associated with the high degree of closeness towards the homeland is the high visitation rate. The written survey established that over 90 per cent of the respondents had visited their homeland with 71 per cent having done so in the last five years.

5%

27%

29%

32%

7%

Australian

Macedonian

Macedonian/Australian

Australian/Macedonian

Other (please specify)


61

Following Macedonian Media

The survey asked about use of Macedonian media and, as Chart 2 shows, keeping up to date with culture and politics was a major motivation, suggesting high levels of political interest and awareness in events in the homeland.

Chart 2. Reasons for following Macedonian media (frequency)

A total of 451 respondents said that they used the media to keep up

with Macedonian politics and current affairs, and 57 per cent of these respondents were under 40. The responses for political, cultural and sporting options were similar for the Australian and overseas born Macedonians.

Involvement in Macedonian Organisations in Australia

Asked if they were involved with a Macedonian organisation in Australia, a majority of 56 per cent out of 601 respondents answered positively, as is provided in Chart 3.

While Macedonian community involvement was spread across a range of organisational types, a sizeable minority was not formally involved in any organisational activity and no single type of communal life attracted a significant degree of personal involvement. It appears that age had a bearing on the type of organisation respondents were involved in. Those under 40 were more likely to be involved in sporting and social organisations, at 62 per cent and 65 per cent respectively, compared with involvement rates of 37 per cent and 34 per cent respectively for those over 40.

Chapter Three

62

Chart 3. Are you involved in a Macedonian organisation in Australia?


63

In the focus group a high degree of frustration was expressed about community organisations, which explains the lack of participation in them. Asked if people wanted to be involved, to do something for the community, one participant responded, “I think so, but I think everyone wants the credit for it, and I think that’s what he was trying to touch on with the communities. Like if you are doing something, well you are going to get the credit, I want the credit, so then I will start something else”. Another reason for limited community participation expressed in the focus group was a lack of awareness about available community activities.

Respondents were also asked if, in addition to organisational involvement, they had been involved in or taken any actions that were supportive of Macedonia’s social, economic or political well-being. The results of 602 respondents are provided in Chart 4.

For 62 per cent of total respondents who were involved, engagement occurs across a wide range of political activities. Those under 40 were less likely to be involved than those over 40. Almost half (48 per cent) of those under 40 were not involved, suggesting that political engagement is lower for younger age groups, although levels of political activity can vary over one's lifespan.

Religious Life in Australia

According to the 2006 ABS Census, the majority of Macedonians (87 per cent) are associated with the Macedonian Orthodox Church (MOC). The Macedonian people have a long and proud tradition of meeting their spiritual needs through the Christian Orthodox faith. Macedonian Christian Orthodox Churches and Jewish synagogues were permitted to operate during the Ottoman period. Since the Balkan Wars of 1912/1913 the Macedonian churches were taken over by the occupying nations. It was only with the recognition of Macedonia as a republic within the Yugoslav Federation, that the process of forming an independent national Macedonian Orthodox Church was established. The MOC received formal status in 1967.

Chapter Three

64

Chart 4. Involvement with activities related to Macedonia’s social, economic or political well-being


65

Prior to the establishment of the MOC, some Macedonians attended Bulgarian, Greek, Serbian and Russian Orthodox churches. This practice of religious affiliation carried on into Australia until the first parish of the MOC was established in Melbourne in 1960. The establishment of the MOC in Fitzroy was not only an emotional and exciting moment for the Macedonians of Australia, it was also significant in the history of the Macedonian diaspora and Australian multiculturalism as the church was the first parish to be established outside of the homeland anywhere in the world. There are now close to thirty MOCs and monasteries throughout Australia.

Australian Politics and the Road Map

Participants were asked how important the policies of Australian political parties in relation to Macedonia were in terms of how they affected their vote in Australian elections. More than three quarters (77.6 per cent) of 618 respondents said these policies were either very important or important in influencing their voting decisions.

A series of questions were also asked in relation to the “Roadmap for Advancing Australia-Macedonia Relations”. The Roadmap is a Macedonian community initiative that maps out key issues to be addressed by all relevant stakeholders in order to advance the bilateral relations between Australia and Macedonia and to improve the status of Macedonians in Australia. The Road Map for Advancing Australia Macedonia Relations came about as a result of the necessity to develop a constructive narrative and a strategic plan for achieving positive outcomes and for addressing pressing issues facing the diaspora and Australia-Macedonia Relations. The Road Map is an initiative of the United Macedonian Diaspora Australia whose aim is to increase the influence of the Macedonian diaspora in host societies for positive public policy change and community development and to harness the power of the diaspora in support of Macedonia and its place in the world by building on economic, social, cultural and political networks of Macedonians globally.

The survey found there was overwhelming support for all measures proposed that envisaged the Australian Government doing more to advance bilateral relations with Macedonia:

• Asked if Australia should recognise Macedonia’s constitutional

name without delay, 95 per cent agreed or strongly agreed; • Asked if Australia should open an Embassy in Macedonian similar

to that in Croatia, 94 per cent agreed or strongly agreed;

Chapter Three

66

• Asked if Australia should open an Embassy in Macedonia, 94.1 per cent agreed or strongly agreed; and;

• Asked if Australia should sign and implement all the bilateral agreements which have been on stand-by for several years, 86.1 per cent agreed or strongly agreed.

Responses were similar for the overseas and Australian born and those

aged over and under 40. A theme of the focus group discussion was to elaborate on these views. One opinion expressed was to “Get in touch with the Australian government to recognise our country as a normal country with a normal name, that’s our biggest problem I can tell you. I can speak for all. That’s what is killing us here”. This immediately led to an outpouring of similar sentiment. Another man added, “I speak Macedonian at home, Australia recognises that; Australia recognises that I’m Macedonian Orthodox – however, Australia doesn’t recognise that my country is The Republic of Macedonia”. The focus group participants made it abundantly clear, as did the survey, that the issue of name recognition was deeply felt and of paramount importance to the Macedonian community in Australia. It appears that the strong sense of identity with Macedonia and interest in its affairs, also leads to a strong political position in relation to the policies of the Australian Government.

Philanthropic Activities

Given the traditional role of remittances by diasporas to their homelands, the survey asked about such philanthropic activity. As is indicated in Chart 5, despite strong political identification with the homeland, most philanthropy goes to family rather than public organisations and the majority of gifts are under $1000.

The survey also asked about reasons for sending money which are provided in Chart 6.

Despite a relatively high total annual household income and a strong identification with the homeland, patterns show that philanthropic activity is relatively low compared to income. Money is sent to family members, rather than broader community organisations and homeland development causes, although the village also remains a nucleus for support.


67

Chart 5. Philanthropy of the Macedonian diaspora

Chart 6. Reasons for sending gifts and money to Macedonia (frequency)

Patterns of philanthropy were also explored with the focus group,

which explained that the giving through family or city/village networks rather than official systems and organisations was due to mistrust of officialdom. The following is an indicative comment provided by the focus group: “My father's been here for 40 years, and the village he comes from is outside of Macedonia, in that village, although a lot of them do go back there in summer, but the people here in Melbourne have contributed a great deal financially back into that village to develop roads, or do whatever needs to be done in that aspect. And I think that’s quite prevalent not in just his village”.

Chapter Three

68

United Macedonian Diaspora in Australia

Diaspora activism is done through establishing and maintaining prominent diaspora organisations and United Macedonian Diaspora (UMD) Australia is one of these organisations. It was established in 2004 as part of a joint initiative between young Macedonian activists in Australia and North America. The aim was two-fold. The internal aim is to strengthen, unite and increase the influence of the Macedonian diaspora in the host societies for positive public policy change and community development. The external aim is to harness the power of the diaspora to support Macedonia and its place in the world by building on economic, social, cultural and political networks of Macedonians globally. UMD Australia is an integral part of the UMD international network and has contributed ideas and resources in support of the UMD Global (which has its headquarters in Washington DC. USA). UMD Australia’s objectives are to shape national, parliamentary and public policy debates in support of the Macedonian community and in support of developing closer ties between the two countries. The Road Map for Advancing Australia Macedonia Relations came about as a result of the need to develop a constructive narrative and a strategic plan for achieving positive outcomes and to address pressing issues facing the diaspora and Australia-Macedonia relations. It was launched in September 2009. Since 2009, UMD Australia has over 17 opinion pieces published in Australia’s e-journal for social and political debate On Line Opinion on various topics in support of closer relations between Australia and Macedonia.

UMD Australia has focused on meeting the most pressing needs in the community and on improving Australia’s foreign policy and relations with Macedonia. In 2008, UMD Australia worked in partnership with the Macedonian Community Council of Victoria and other organisations in the successful delivery of the Macedonian Public Protest March for Recognition of Macedonia under its Constitutional Name in front of the Victorian Parliament. In particular, UMD Australia managed the media relations strategy which resulted in widespread coverage of the event with the mainstream media. In 2009, UMD Australia worked in partnership with the Australia Macedonian Parliamentary Friendship Group and with key Macedonian organisations from across Australia in organising 'The Inaugural Forum for Advancing Australia Macedonia Relations' in September 2009.

In 2010, UMD Australia organised an Australia and New Zealand speaking tour for its President Meto Koloski. In 2011, UMD Australia made a number of submissions to the Parliament of Australia in regards to


69

the Independent Review of Australia’s Aid Effectiveness, the Inquiry into Multiculturalism and Social Inclusion and the Inquiry into Australia’s Overseas Diplomatic Representation. In October 2011, UMD from Perth launched a campaign for Australia to Recognise Macedonia’s Constitutional Name. In November 2011, UMD Australia organised a Diplomatic Outreach campaign to develop closer relations with Macedonia. In August 2012, UMD Australia worked with key stakeholders in organising the official launch of the landmark research report “The Macedonian Diaspora in Australia: Current and Potential Links with the Homeland”. This ARC Linkage report was launched at Parliament House in Canberra.

In 2013 UMD Australia organised a Gala Dinner in Sydney devoted to advancing Australia-Macedonia relations. It gave the UMD Macedonia Friendship Awards to Australia's Foreign Minister Senator Bob Carr and to the Co-Chairs of the Australia Macedonia Parliamentary Friendship Group Luke Simpkins MP and Stephen Jones MP. It also bestowed a UMD Lifetime Service Award to Mick Velosky. In 2014 UMD Australia made a formal submission to Australia’s Consular Strategy 2014-16. In its submission, UMD called on the Australian Government to open an Embassy in Skopje and a Consulate in Bitola to fulfil the unmet needs of the community and to advance bilateral ties.

There is a whole range of other Macedonian organisations that play an important role in raising the profile of the Macedonian diaspora and in building closer ties between Australia and Macedonia. Prominent Macedonian organisations in the community sector are the Macedonian Community Councils of Victoria, South Australia, Queensland and Western Australia. Prominent welfare sector organisations are HOPE (Nadez) and the Macedonian Welfare Associations in Victoria and NSW. There are over 30 Macedonia Orthodox churches and monasteries across Australia. There are prominent soccer clubs like Preston Lions/Makedonia and the Rockdale Ilinden Football Club. There are dozens of Macedonian cultural and folklore organisations like Nikola Karev and Rockdale Macedonian Dance Group. The Australian Macedonia Human Rights Committee has been active for over two decades. The Australian Macedonian Medical Association has recently been established in NSW and spread across Australia. Macedonian language schools and Macedonian Teacher Associations work in Victoria, NSW, the ACT, SA and WA. Each of the above makes their own contribution to raising the profile of Macedonians and Macedonia in Australia.

Chapter Three

70

Discussion: The Political Role of the Macedonian Diaspora in Australia

This research used two variables, age and place of birth, with the aim of establishing what differences may exist in terms of engagement and identification with the homeland. Overall, it can be said that identification and engagement with the homeland is very high for the overall sample: those born in Australia and overseas and those aged over and under 40 y/o. However, the findings also show that those born in Australia have lower levels of engagement and identification than those born overseas. As subsequent generations are born in Australia and are further removed from the original migration from the homeland, a diminishing in depth and nature of these ties is likely. This means that other models for engagement between this younger Australian born diaspora and the homeland will need to be developed.

There is clearly a paradox in terms of the political mobilisation of the Macedonian diaspora in Australia. As the data presented in this chapter has shown, there is a high degree of identification with the homeland which is reflected in following the media and attitudes towards issues expressed in the Road Map. Clearly there is a high degree of Macedonian identity. This provides a strong foundation for political activity. There are also strong family, friend and community ties with the homeland reflected in remittances. However, there is limited involvement in political activity, organised communal life and structured philanthropy on a state based level.

Diasporas can be powerful advocates in lobbying their country of settlement on behalf of or sometimes in opposition to the government of their country of origin. The Macedonian diaspora in Australia has the potential and arguably the need to be such powerful advocates. Interest in the political events of the homeland is one distinct expression of Macedonian identity in Australia. While all forms of media are used to share information of interest to the diaspora on political and current affairs, there is a disconnect between the level of concern expressed about these issues and the absence of action in relation to them.

Conclusion

This study of the Macedonian diaspora confirms theoretical understandings of diasporas as complex entities with multiple dimensions, capacities, and interests. It also confirms the politically mobilised nature of the diaspora, which in the Macedonian case is active and impassioned,


71

about furthering the interests of the homeland and its government in Australia. The very high degree of conviction on political issues between Australia and Macedonia suggests that the community can increase its lobbying efforts on issues of concern, primarily relating to the contentious issue of constitutional name recognition and Australian diplomatic representation in Skopje. There is clearly scope for greater involvement of the diaspora with the homeland. Strong cultural and nationalistic motivations indicate the clear potential to develop a formal strategy to enhance this engagement. This will require frameworks to facilitate involvement in Macedonian community life in Australia.

References

ABS. 2012. "Reflecting a Nation: Stories from the 2011 Census: Cultural Diversity in Australia". At http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/.

Anthias, F. 1998. "Evaluating 'Diaspora': Beyond ethnicity?" Sociology 32 (3): 557-580.

Balalovska, K. 2012. “Discovering the 'Macedonian diaspora': A Web cartography of actors, interactions and influences”. Social Science Information 51 (4): 611-630

Baldassar, L., C. Baldock, & Wilding, R. 2007. Families Caring Across Borders: Migration, Ageing and Transnational Caregiving. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Ben-Moshe, D., J. Pyke and O. Andreevski. 2012. The Macedonian Diaspora in Australia: Current and Potential Links with the Homeland Report of an Australian Research Council Linkage Project. Melbourne: Deakin University.

Bickman, L. and D. J. Rog. 2008. The Sage Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications.

Braziel, J. 2008. Diaspora: An Introduction. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing.

Brown, G. 2000. "The diasporic challenge to identity: insights from the Australian-Croat Experience". People and Place 8 (3): 67-73.

Carli, C. 2008. "Italian citizenship and the transcending of territory". People and Place. Melbourne, Monash University.

Clifford, J. 1994. "Diasporas". Cultural Anthropology 9 (3): 302-338. —. 1997. Routes: Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century.

Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Cohen, R. 2008. Global Diasporas. London and New York: Taylor &

Francis.

Chapter Three

72

Cutler, T. 2001. "A clever country connection". Business Review Weekly. 23 (33): 26.

Danforth, L. M. 1997. The Macedonian Conflict: Ethnic Nationalism in a Transnational World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Economist, The. 2003. "A world of exiles". Economist 366 (8305): 41-43. Faist, T. 2010. "Diaspora and Transnationalism: What Kind of Dance

Partners?": 9-34 in Diaspora and Transnationalism: Concepts, Theories and Methods, edited by R. Baubock and T. Faist. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Johnson, N.C. 2012. "Global Journeys: From Transnationalism to Diaspora". Journal of International and Global Studies 4 (1): 41-58.

Jupp, J. 2001. The Australian people: an encyclopedia of the nation, its people and their origins, Cambridge; New York; Oakleigh, Vic.: Cambridge University Press.

Lee, H. 2003. Tongans Overseas: Between Two Shores. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Sandler, S. 2003. "Towards a conceptual framework of world Jewish politics: state, nation and diaspora in a Jewish foreign policy". Israel Affairs 10 (1/2): 301-312.

Saxenian, A. 2005. "From Brain Drain to Brain Circulation: Transnational Communities and Regional Upgrading in India and China". Studies in Comparative International Development 40 (2): 35-61.

Sheffer, G. 2003. Diaspora politics: at home abroad. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Waters, M. 1995. Globalization. London: Routledge. Werbner P. 2000. “Introduction: The materiality of diaspora – between

aesthetic and ‘real’ politics”. Diaspora: A Journal of Transnational Studies 9 (1): 5–20.

chapter three diaspora politics and australian- macedonian relations

Documents