"The 72th anniversary of the destruction of the real VMRO"
Michael Seraphinoff
Dear Boris, I appreciated reading your contribution from Narodna Volya.
The more I learn about Vancho Mihailov the more I think that he was more
monster than hero. Yet, I am afraid that the VMRO that came before him
helped create this monster by its own tactics. Organizations that
assassinate those who disagree with them to any degree, invite the same.
I have always been a great admirer of my own grandfather, who was a
member of the Leshok and Neproshteno committee group during the Ilinden
period. He was wounded in the fight against the Turks. I was proud that
he fought for Macedonian freedom, and I am proud to have been named after
him.
But when I did more investigating into his heroic cheta I learned of
some sad facts as well. That band, on orders from higher ups in the
organization, killed two very well respected local religious leaders who
would not cooperate fully with the organization. First, Hadzhi Jezikil
from Leshok Monastery in 1901 and the Tetovo Metropolitan Miso in 1903.
The times were very ugly and arguments might be made for a united and
single-minded effort in time of war, but I still suspect that those who
decide that they can "eradicate" what they don't like rather than trying
to live with differences are in grave danger of ending up on the road to
full-blown fascism. Michael Seraphinoff
Boris Docevski
[originally published in the September, 1996, edition of "Narodna Volja",
Gorna Dzhumaja, Pirin Macedonia; p. 4; author: Dimitar Zahov]
[Note: I tried my best to translate this peace from Bulgarian.
Photocopies of the original are available upon request.]
Working on the fulfilment of its diabolical plan, the destruction of
VMRO, the fascist faction [of VMRO], represented by the worst
national-chauvinists, starts to follow certain people [of the centralist
faction]. It is beyond doubt that their leader was Vanche Mihajlov, who
was appointed a secretary by Todor Aleksandrov. Fanatically loyal to the
ideas of the Bulgarian national-chauvinism, he gave general Vlkov and his
circle a hope to succeed for two reasons. Apart from the above said, here
we have the psychological factor as well. The blind love is easily
transformed into pathological hatred. Namely, that's what the fascist
general Vlkov counted on. He was well acquianted with the dealings within
the Organization [VMRO] and could predict the reaction of Vancho Mihajlov
on the murder of T. Aleksandrov on Mt. Pirin. He knew that, after the murder
of the undisputed leader of VMRO a fratricidal war will begin between the
two VMRO factions [pro-Macedonian centralists and pro-Bulgarian vrhovists].
Namely, that was the
aim of the conspiracy...The future blood-sucker of the Macedonians [V.
Mihajlov} then immediately declares himself ready to be the head of the
Organization. Here is how these events were recorded: "What
happened-happened. I cannot do anything-he told Aleko coldly. What is
important now is for all of us to hang tight and to work to overcome the
loss..And, he most cunningly told the members that the Organization will
appoint him the leader." (Stefan Gruev: "Crown of Thorns", 1991)
But, to become a leader, he had to take over the Organization, to destroy
the rulling "troika"-Aleko Vasilev, lt. colonel Atanasov and general
Protogerov-with a very precisely undertaken operation. The death of
Aleksandrov is kept secret for twelve days, till the assassination of the
above three. Meanwhile, the future murderer spends the time planning. He
deceitfully organized a meeting with the leadership of the organization
"Ilinden" under the pretext of solving some internal disputes. For that
meeting, in the role of an arbiter, he invites the "troika". The meeting
will take place in a house of an old Macedonian activist. Vanche Mihajlov
reveals his plan to his most trusted collaborators.
On their urging, its is decided to spare the life of gen. Protogerov, in
order to gain support within the Organization. On the agreed for day and
hour, in G. Dzhumaja, the capital of Pirin Macedonia, all gather and wait
for the initiator of the meeting to arrive from Sofia. He, on his way,
said these things:" Oh, for shame, I cannot go. I am so sorry I won't be
able to personally murder Aleko." The group of assassins from Sofia left
without him. He immediately went to see the defence minister, gen. Vlkov,
to work, together with the internal affairs minister, on the fulfilment
of the rest of the plan. To that effect, they would cut the telephone and
telegraph links between Sofia and G. Dzhumaja and the other big cities in
Bulgaria, so that Macedonians and the world as well will not learn of the
crime in making. According to the plan, several, independent from each
other, groups of assasins are sent to G. Dzhumaja to fulfil the orders of
V. Mihajlov. They occupy the surrounding houses, so as to make sure noone
from the intended victims escapes alive. Among the activists invited to
the meeting there are several vanchovists. Everyone waits for Vancho to
arrive, but he isn't there yet. Instead of him, his courrier arrives. He
is the son of one Macedonian hero, Kiril Drangov, and he wasn't chosen
by happenstance. Using his father's name and authority, he becomes
close to the "troika". He is led to the room where Aleko and gen.
Protogerov are. Lt. col. Atanasov had stepped out for a little while. A
few words are exchanged, the excuse for Mihajlov's absence is told, and
his letter is delivered, which begins in a very civil and business-like
form: "Dear Aleko, I wanted to be present myself very much to help end
out internal squabbles, but..." Aleko, good-natured as he was, heads for
the other room, to give the letter to lt. col. Atanasov. As he opened the
door, Kiro Drangov shoots him in the back. A shootout ensues. The lt.
col. fires back from the other room. Bombs are thrown. Two of Aleko's
and Atanasov's bodyguards are murdered. Atanasov escapes from the room
and temporarily evades the assassins in the darkness outside. He is soon
caught by the youngest assassin -- 17-yrs-old -- and taken to the nearest
house to be shot. Aside from Aleko, Atanasov, and their bodyguards, all
the marked victims were murdered that night. Following the agreement btw
Mihajlov and his helpers from Sofia, the whole district as well as the
city itself are surrounded by the Bulgarian police and army checkpoints,
to make sure noone escaped alive by chance. The next day, the [VMRO]
squads arrive, having heard of the tragedy, but they are met by the
police and the army. They are not harmed, and they retreat, sorrowful.
The bodies of the murdered are displayed at the city square, with the
note saying: "Agents of Moscow". With the assassination of the two from
the ruling "troika" of VMRO, the organization was virtually beheaded. The
door was open for the Bulgarophile Vancho Mihajlov. His mentor was gen.
Vlkov, one of the key people in the establishment of the pro-Nazi gov't
in Bulgaria at the time. Hence, VMRO was redirected from its path for the
struggle for free, independent and united Macedonia towards being a tool
of the Bulgarian Gov't. That was the road taken by Vancho's VMRO, which
descendant nowadays is VMRO-SMD, being Macedonian only in its name.
The conspirators weren't satisfied with the G. Dzhumaja deaths that day
only. There already have been quite a few revolutionaries,
under the wing of Jane Sandanski, who could take over VMRO and continue
the struggle. This was well known to the Bulgarian agents under Vancho.
Hence, they took upon the task of killing any and all of these Macedonian
activists. The very next day, Sept. 13 [1924], not knowing of the G.
Dzhumaja
murders, Dimo Hadzhi Dimov serenely steps out of his house and is
murdered by Vlado Chernozemski, Vancho Mihajlov's chauffeur [the same guy
who killed the Serbian king in Marseilles..So, he want such a hero after
all -- as some wrote on Makedon recently-- having murdered Hadzhi Dimov, a
true Macedonian patriot and activist]. Still the next day in Plovdiv
Chudomir Kantardzhiski, a close comrade of Sandanski, is killed as well.
That or the next day, Vancho's people, with the help of the Bulgarian
police, kill yet another comrade of Sandanski. One after another all the
prominent VMRO-vists, of the Sandanski [pro-Macedonian, centralist,
faction] are murdered. Al. Bujnov is killed. The vojvoda of Nevrokop,
Dimitar Penkov, is killed. Stojo Hadzhiev is killed in Petrich. Taskata
SSerski, Georgi Kazepov, and Lakoto are killed too. In Sofia and the other
Bulgarian cities, murders of prominent Macedonians took place every day.
The next year, 1925, in the Burgh Theater in Vienna, Austria, Mencha
Karnicheva, Vancho's mistress, using her frendship with Katerina
Izmirlieva, kills her husband Todor Panica, a prominent Macedonian
patriot. The same year, Vancho's people have Macedonian patriots from
Dabnica and Kovachevica burned to death. After a short respite, the
murder frenzy starts anew in 1928, with the assassination of gen Al.
Protogerov, under the supervision of the Bulgarian police. All that ended
May 19, 1934, when the Bulgarian leadership decided that Vancho's VMRO
had played out its role, and disbanded it by force. The Macedonian nation
was by now under three different foreign tyrranical regimes [Bulgaria,
Greece, Serbia]. Luckily, the Macedonians from the Vardar part of
Macedonia, consolidated their ranks and started their struggle that led
to the second Ilinden in 1944, and finally the independence [of the
Republic of Macedonia] on Sept. 8, 1991.
Boris Docevski e-mail:
doce...@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu
WWW: http://www.isc.rit.edu/~bvs4997/Macedonia
Home: Reed Hall 705, 1620 McElderry St., Baltimore, MD 21205, USA; (410)
550-6521
Work: JHU Med. Sch., Human Genetics, PCTB 802, 725 N. Wolfe St.,
Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
Mihail Petkovski
> The more I learn about Vancho Mihailov the more I think that he was more
> monster than hero. Yet, I am afraid that the VMRO that came before him
> helped create this monster by its own tactics. Organizations that
> assassinate those who disagree with them to any degree, invite the same.
Michael,
This sounds like the "peace & love" theories of the 60s. It works
nicely if my dad is making enough money so that I can
spend a couple of years smoking dope, making love, reading
zen-budhism and protesting against animal testing. The
whole thing should be considered in its context. Can you fight
fascism with democracy? King Aleksandar was not voted into
power. What was their alternative to violence? Someone (you?)
mentioned Ghandi. If we were 600 million, ruled by a bunch of
well-organised Serbs, we could have resorted to the same
tactics (that is if we forget that Ghandi "invented" the tactics
somewhat later). Nazi Germany was smashed with
brutal force. Do you believe that the rest of the world was actually
wrong? Perhaps they should have tried some more civilised
methods, like educating the Germans that gassing children
was not a nice thing to do? Wherever we turn in the history,
we come across violence. Most of the heroes became
heroes by killing other (bad?!?) people. Why ambushing
innocent Turkish merchants on the winding mountain
roads is more heroic than shooting key enemy figures?
> The times were very ugly and arguments might be made for a united and
> single-minded effort in time of war, but I still suspect that those who
> decide that they can "eradicate" what they don't like rather than trying
> to live with differences are in grave danger of ending up on the road to
> full-blown fascism. Michael Seraphinoff
Well, they did "live with differences" for about five hundred years.
I guess they got pretty fed up. Seems like a fairly long period to
stay calm. Fighting wars is not an environment for developing
democracy. I have never heard of any army in the world where
they take a vote before storming the trenches. What you call
fascism is usually known as army discipline.
Regards
Mihail
Michael Seraphinoff
You are certainly right about what you say, Mihail. But I noticed that
you chose to ignore my more disturbing examples of VMRO eradicating local
Orthodox priests who were not totally cooperative with them, and, of
course, there were so many examples of the killing of faction members to
the left or right of themselves. It just strikes me as such a slippery
slope, and I begin to suspect that the people who come to power with a
maximum of violence are liable to be no better than the people they
removed from power. But I don't dispute the fact that people backed up
against a wall have every right to fight with whatever means they might have.
Glen Camp
I think you are perhaps mistaken if you think "army discipline" is
the same as Fascism. The latter was a fairly detailed *ideology* whereas
army discipline as such does not relate the individual to the state or vice
versa as a general proposition.
You might wish to read Hannah Arendt and W.Y. Elliott on Fascism
or Sabine who has a useful history of Fascism in Italy. I have interviewed
a large number of Nazis and a few Italian Fascists and their views are much
broader (and vastly more destructive) than simple minded military-minded
soldiers or officers. One key issue is, "who controls the military" and
in the US it's civilians, not officers. May it remain so!
Glen Camp