Mr. President, Greece has accused the countries of the Western Balkans for unilateral moves in the refugee crisis, concerning the closure of the Balkan route. How do you respond to that? Would you say that Athens should have been included in the discussion on a solution to the refugee flows through?

The Republic of Macedonia, as a non-EU country and not a final destination of asylum seekers, was never part of the decision to limit the movement of anyone. Athens being excluded from some initiatives was never our call and we never supported such a move. I have made this bluntly clear at all the many occasions I spoke on the crisis, from Brussels, London, Munich, to Prague. The recipient countries of the asylum seekers and of the economic migrants always drove the agenda. We simply streamlined our policies to the reality at present. When recipient countries were willing to accept the refugees and migrants, we were the most diligent, efficient and humane section of the passage. Once some countries started implementing limitations and eventually declared that they will stop accepting new arrivals, we had to adapt to such a reality in order to avoid a situation where the Republic of Macedonia would be overwhelmed by a problem that essentially can be dealt only by the European Union, where we are prevented to be part of, and you know why and by whom. Irrespective of these facts and of the past legacy of Macedonian – Greek relations, from the very outset we called upon Greece to work with us, but also we called all others to include Athens in all pan-European, regional and sub-regional formal and less formal formats for addressing the crisis. On both accounts, there was little to none response from the Greek side. Greek public should know that the closure of the Balkan corridor is not to the detriment of Greece, but on the contrary – to its benefit.

We have heard and read that there have been efforts by Skopje to approach Athens and increase coordination, mainly on intelligence sharing and police cooperation, because of the refugee crisis but these efforts were met with reluctance by the Greek side. Would you like to tell what has really happened, taking under consideration the recent events in Idomeni?

The migrant crisis is affecting both countries. Since the beginning of this crisis, we have been insisting on strengthened cooperation with Greece at all levels. Upon my personal insistence to Prime Minister Tsipras, with Sisyphus efforts, we managed to establish police cooperation between the two countries. Still, due to the irresponsible behavior by part of the Greek authorities, our mutual communication is still unsatisfactory.

Greece allowed the establishment of improvised camps on the very border line with the Republic of Macedonia, which in turn encouraged migrants to use illegal crossings, thus directly jeopardizing our national security. A confirmation of this is the March 14 incident, when around 2500 persons were illegally ushered into Macedonian territory. Three migrants lost their lives because of this reckless tactic to intimidate a heavy-handed response by our border security forces, which of course, as always, managed to react in a very restraint, professional manner. The tragedy is that we see this practice continuing. In spite of the closed corridor, every night we register over 100 attempts for illegal entry in the Republic of Macedonia. It appears that certain politicians in Greece fail to grasp the seriousness of security risks brought about by this crisis. There are indications already that part of the arrested and suspects for terrorist attacks used exactly the Balkan route. Now, take a look at this paradox. Greece, although a Member State of both the EU and the Schengen area, let the refugees pass without respecting Schengen entry rules. The Republic of Macedonia, although not part of the Schengen, succeeded in establishing a registration rate of 99% for illegal migration, and this by its own efforts and means. Our requests for access to Schengen, EU and EURODAC data in order to properly respond and prevent the consequences of possible security risks were denied with trivial pretexts.

To make the paradox even bigger, there is currently a negative campaign against Macedonia in Greece. Greek citizens should be informed that both publicly, but also in the discussions with my interlocutors from the EU, I have asked for Greece to be helped.
The migration crisis is an opportunity for our two neighboring countries to overcome the mistrust and start cooperating.

Could you describe us the impact of the refugee crisis to your country? Are you satisfied with the assistance EU has given?

No, we are not satisfied. What kind of assistance are you talking about exactly? Who provided assistance, when, for what purpose and to whom exactly? The only thing we got were promises, whose realization we are still waiting for. It is true that there were funds distributed through international organizations dealing exclusively with the humanitarian aspect of the crisis. It is true that there are IPA funds that have been or will be allocated to the Republic of Macedonia for the purpose of development. But, neither the first nor the latter are intended to cover the costs for the security aspect of the crisis. The attempts to present these funds as funds that have allegedly been allocated to Macedonia in order to deal with the migrant crisis are quite hypocritical.
Since the beginning of this migrant and refugee crisis, the Republic of Macedonia has spent 25 million Euros of its own budget funds.
I wish to make it clear that above all, we asked Brussels for technical and logistical assistance, i.e. border protection equipment and adequate equipment for registration of migrants. We received bilateral assistance from certain friendly countries, which also sent their police forces at the southern and northern border, for which we are grateful. The Republic of Macedonia will continue to tackle all the challenges arising from this migration crisis in a responsible and professional manner.

A lot of hope was expressed after Skopje and Athens agreed on a list of Confidence Building Measures. It seems, though, that this process is stalled for good. What are the reasons for this?

There has been much talk and a lot of high hopes raised by this process, which it's little known in Greece, has been proposed by us for the last six to seven years. Finally now, with the new Greek government it seemed that there is readiness to address the very essential necessity of establishing links that are very basic, although the process has a rather pompous name, given by the Greek side: "Confidence Building Measures." Here we talk about cooperation among universities, on environmental issues, culture, border management, etc. If there was one "unilateral action" from our side in the past years, it was exactly this: doing everything possible to build bridges with Greek society even when the Greek government did everything possible to avoid and even undermine such cooperation. Speaking just for myself, in the past seven years of my presidency, I have hosted numerous Greek business and academic delegations, the last having been in November when I also welcomed the Mayor of Thessaloniki, Mr Boutaris. For seven years now I am the patron of a scholarship scheme so Macedonian students would undertake MBA studies at the University of Sheffield program at the City College of Thessaloniki.

And then, come all the many failed attempts to initiate a meeting with the current and the previous Greek President. It's beyond any reason that the presidents of two neighboring countries, any two presidents now and in the past, have never had any meeting. When two countries have some disputes, those can be overcome only through dialogue and usually, the first steps are taken by the president or at least members of parliament, who should be above and beyond daily politicking. Amazingly, to this day, there was never a positive response from Athens that I meet the Greek president and we do not insist neither on the format, place and time of meeting or issues to be discussed. It would have been essential that we, as presidents, lead the way for the others in showing that through dialogue all differences can eventually be overcome. No problem has ever being resolved by ignoring it and avoiding communication. The migration crisis will not be resolved like this, nor the name issue. Egos and past aggressive policies should be buried for good and for the sake of the new generations and their prosperity we should address problems head-on and not to run away from them. On March 25th, on the occasion of the Greek independence day celebration, for the second time I attended the diplomatic reception hosted by the Greek ambassador in Skopje. A reverse situation in Athens, it seems would be unthinkable for a long time. Actually, the next day, my Greek counterpart, President Pavlopoulos, reacted "in kind" – by issuing yet another insulting statement on my country.
I only hope, and actually I am convinced, that most Greeks realize that the Republic of Macedonia is no enemy of their country, on the contrary, it's a nation with which Greece shares much more, than it generally seems. I would argue, that when it comes to traditions, mentality, the zest for life of our citizens, perhaps makes us the closest two nations of all of our neighbors. If only enough politicians in Athens would have the courage to acknowledge this and couple it with the indisputable fact that a secure, stable, prosperous, country on its northern border, a member of NATO and the EU, is in Greece's best strategic interests.

There is a sense that Skopje's stance during the refugee crisis could re-energize its accession process with NATO and the EU. In July, NATO's Summit is taking place in Warsaw. Are you optimistic?

This question is repeated before every NATO Summit, and I would say that it is starting to sound a bit cynical. Macedonia left optimism back in 2008. Now, we are realists, and the reality is as follows: there are two legal acts. One is the 1995 Interim Accord, that many people seem to have forgotten. The second document is the Judgment of the International Court of Justice, which is legally binding. However, there are also two problems. The first is the fact that Greece does not respect the Interim Accord or the judgment of the International Court of Justice, continuing to block Macedonia in terms of NATO and EU integration. The second problem is that Greece does not suffer any consequences for such an irresponsible approach and lack of respect for international law. Throughout all of these years, NATO and the EU did not manage to find a way to unblock the Macedonian integration processes and enable Macedonia to realize its deserved membership in the Alliance and the Union.

The thesis that Macedonia is now trying to use its role in the migration crisis to bargain its EU and NATO membership is ridiculous.

There seems to be a complete standstill in the negotiations on the name issue. Is this a consequence of the recent "freezing" in bilateral affairs or a choice made by the two sides?

My meetings with Prime Minister Tsipras have been encouraging. I am always ready, as I have been so far, to meet any politician or public figure from Greece. The imposed name difference has been burdening us all for two and a half decades. However, what has not been solved during all this time, cannot be solved overnight. It is necessary to build trust and the right environment to resolve this issue. It is also necessary for all those involved in the resolution of this dispute to be realistic and dedicated to building trust. The reality is that the Republic of Macedonia is a sovereign and independent country, and that with imposed and unilateral solutions, it will be impossible to have a proper closure.