SOZM

I was finally able to meet with another women’s rights organization for my next meeting. SOZM or the National Council for Gender Equality (НСЖМ), is an NGO located in Skopje focusing on domestic violence. They had the smallest office I have yet seen. They had some room that was at most 10 feet long and 5 feet across. They fit about 5-7 people in this office at the time I was there. It was very disorganized- papers and books everywhere, but they were in the middle of a campaign. This was my shortest interview, because they had allotted less than one hour for our meeting. Also, they were very busy at this time.

This interview took place through a translator, because the head of the organization didn’t speak English, however, some of the information I got from the lady who translated. She also worked there and was not just a translator.

After the “reorganization” of Macedonia in 1991, they created the organization in Skopje and a few in other towns. They hosted humanitarian and peace events across the country. About 4 years later, there were 13 different women’s organizations in a network for international women’s rights.
Back then, many women were not involved in political activity. From the first and second parliamentary elections only 4 or 5 of the 120 members were women. The Reason for this, according to SOZM, was the parties themselves. They didn’t have women in the parties, they saw no need at first. This was one of their first goals- to get more women involved in politics. This was one reason for the establishment of their NGO- they saw this as a channel for social activity.
Using the political empowerment of women as the jumping board, they went as network throughout MK. All the different organizations completed independent activities but shared a common vision.

The government is supposed to support local women organizations and build their capacity. In 2011, there are 110 local independent organizations in the network that SOZM is a part of. They are the result of organizations acting as a network to promote the interests of women. Outside of the network, there are 200 other independent local women’s organizations The NGO sector outside of Skopje is not very active, nor visible. But there are a few NGOs that are very active.

SOZM works with the government and the municipalities, but mostly with the municipalities. They have no problem working with the government. They work closely with the local government, but it is “a different story” when working with the national government. Every time they approach the national government the situation is different. The national government  is fine to work with, but just not good for money. They have not received funding from the government for over 5 years; what funding they did get, was very minimal. All the funding comes from international donors. There is more money coming from the national government in the future. After MK became a Candidate Country, there was less funding available to NGOs in MK. In the future, they want to their use of international donors. While many of the people active in their organization are volunteers, they need funds to pay for their office space and main activities.
They work towards fighting the perception of opposition NGOs. They admit there are some NGOGOs and ones that are specifically one party or the other, but not all are. SOZM claims that not very many organizations are perceived this way. They did not elaborate.

While they mainly focus on violence now, they want to branch out to focus on economic and political issues. They do not yet have the funds to realize these goals yet.
SOZM provides a SOS line in three different mobile numbers, so it is no charge to the victims. They are able to reach someone to talk about their problems. Then the women who call will be refereed to other organizations for shelters, legal aid, etc. They can also be advised on their legal rights.  They also have an intervention center. You can stay there for 24 to 48 hours before you have to move. The center provides accommodation and food for the women. Outside of Skopje other organizations provide the same services within the network or women's organizations. They promote the call lines and shelters on local media, leaflets, etc. They even organized a round table with the stakeholders when the lines first became active.

They probably serve about 80 women monthly.

They also focus on the economic empowerment of women. They provide English and computer courses. They will train women how to start their own businesses. Or how to expand a current business. There is also a program for peace and conflict resolution that they work with. They promote the UN Resolution 1325. Towards increasing the participation of women in politics/democracy, their input for decision making, peace and in upper levels in the police and army.

ESEM (Association for Emancipation, Solidarity and Equality of Women of Republic of Macedonia)

was really hoping to meet with this next NGO, I had found one of their publications while I was in the US and it was amazingly informative! So, I was very disappointed when I didn’t hear from them for over a month, and then when I called them to ask about the email, they stated “Yes, we got the email.” Nothing else. However, they did agree to set up a meeting with in 48 hours.

This was Association for Emancipation, Solidarity and Equality of Women of Republic of Macedonia (ESEM). Their office is located right off the main square in an apartment building, like every office seems to be here. When you walk in, you find a reception area, conference room, and 2-3 offices (I am not sure, because I walked directly into the conference room and was not given a tour). There was a built in bookshelf to one side of the conference room, totally filled with books. The table was littered with tons of papers, obviously mid thought. There was also a TV on, which was kept on through the interview.

ESEM focuses on women and equal opportunities They try to make sure that MK and EU standards are aligned. This is difficult because there is no EU standard, every country has a different standard. In MK there is a draft law on equality by the opposition, but it is mostly for general discrimination which is a “defocus” (not positive, but will strengthen the general system). There is no systematic approach to gender equality.

ESEM was formed in 1985. This period was the initialization of civil society in MK. They were helped with aid from a Dutch Development Agency. Their initial focus was on assessing and addressing the urgent needs of women. They have moved into a new area recently on women’s health. But they do focus on violence against women and women’s human rights (monitor quality implementation of treaty). They then are able to report to the UN on their findings. They claim they have the ability to improve certain issues, parallel to the EU progress reports. They have a highly structured organizational framework. There is a small set of employed staff. Any external professionals they have are contracted employees. They use their partner institutions to implement their different activities. ESEM uses all of their resources to lobby and advocate for women. If the current changes work, they will advocate for even more changes.

They maintain legal centers with direct serves. They also have a health info center where they provide advice on health issues. The health center gives them direct access to women who they can communicate. In the last 2-3 years, they have begun to develop budget monitoring in the health sector. Initially they focused on Roma health, but then switched to domestic violence. ESEM has office hours and phone numbers that people can call to find out about services for women (be it domestic violence or health related).ESEM provides services 2 days per week in the afternoon. They offer legal aid and pro-bono court representation when needed. This shows that people are turning to civil society for help; there is a small positive image.

While most of the civil society is really developed, there needs to be certain amount of cooperation between the government and said civil society. The civil society sector has the capacity, history, and potential but they are not used to help society. NGOs are often treated as enemies of the state, since they often monitor the government and act as a watchdog. This even goes are far as the government proclaiming that NGOs are essentially the opposition. Roughly 10,000 NGOs are registered in MK, which ESEM sees as a clear indicator that something is going on. Yet, ESEM believes that citizens see the sector as merely a way to get rich or, rarer, to contribute to society. ESEM theorized that the negative public perception of NGOs came from people who were willing to misuse the funds. Some organizations were used politically, and this contributed as well . There is an Awful perception of the left leaning Open Society Institute, which further negatively effects the rest of the civil society because they often the scape-goat of the government. Since ESEM can’t avoid this type of labeling, they ignore it.

When asked about the cooperation between NGOs and the government, ESEM responded that it depends on the ruling party and then who is specifically in power. NGOs are treated as the enemy and the government thinks NGOs are trying to usurp the government. Any cooperation between the government and NGOs is initiated by the NGOs, ESEM claims; you will rarely find honest cooperation initiated by the government. Often, they further claim, when NGOs have begun the cooperation, government employees often think that it is supposed to be a one way cooperation (NGO to the government) rather than a two way street. While ESEM could think of some examples of good cooperation with the government, it was very very rare. There is a difference between the local municipalities and the national government, but not much. Neither are interested in transparent activities. They also both use NGOGOs to cover up government activities. ESEM goes as far as to claim that the government has created their own civil society sector and that there are two sectors in MK: the real NGOs and the ones created by the government. According to ESEM, civil society is not sustainable in MK. It is hard to find real results of NGO’s work. There is a problem with activism and the formulation of the civil society field. Most NGOs are dependent upon foreign aid. This situation is creating an impossible working environment. Funding is already scarce, and these NGOGOs make it worse. Since 2010, there has been a downsizing in the civil society sector. It has become passive, according to ESEM. The sector exists, but does not do anything productive. Also, the quantity has decreased, possible from the lesser amount of money flowing into Macedonia. Cooperation with the government can be views through different lenses. ESEM meant that cooperation could be seen as equal depending on which issue you judge it off. However, there is no ‘established’ cooperation on any issue. They propose that when the government decides to actually cooperate with everyone who is responsible for subject. If NGOs can work with all ministries that address an issues, then when everyone is included, they can see the result as part of their own work- and thus want to maintain it. The government won’t refuse to work with you if you show them the benefit to them- but there has to be a benefit. Yet, some NGOs also think that cooperation with the government is a threat, a sell out.

There is some MK funding available to NGOs, and there is even a Department for Civil Society. The government announces grant opportunities, but the amount is quite small and maybe less than 1-2% of the budget. ESEM finds it “annoying” how funds are awarded. According to ESEM, the ministers directly decide which NGOs to support. Further, they do not see the applications as an opportunity to connect with many different NGOs, just preferring their own NGOs. While it is all “official and proper,” it is not “fair.” ESEM has received money from the MK government in the past.

Women’s NGOs are treated the same as other NGOs, and much is based upon the capacity of the different civil society organizations. Compared to the other civil society sectors in Macedonia, the women’s civil society sector is highly developed. They are more capable than the other NGOs in other sectors of the civil society sector. There is sustainable opportunities within the civil society sector for women’s NGOs. Since ESEM is striking out against cultural norms and traditions, this makes them stronger. Many NGOs can’t escape from general development and often lack the organizational funding and vision needed.

The meeting was very informative, especially about the ‘women’s situation’ in MK, but I am saving that for another collaborated post with information I have gained from another source as well.

„Акција Здруженска“ or “Akcija Zdruzhenska

I had sent out about 30-40 emails to different organizations in Macedonia, mainly women’s non-governmental organizations. I got one response in three weeks. Later I called the main organization I wanted to work with before I got over here to follow up on my email and they said “Yes we got your email” *pause* “We will respond with in the day. Sorry.” Needless to say, I just met with them and didn’t offer to actually complete any other in person research, which is sad, because they are one of the best online organized companies and I had great hopes, but if that is how they actually treat people offering free labor and their sense of business response then I would go stir crazy within one day there!

But back to the organization that responded the first time I tried to reach them, the only one remember. Their name is „Акција Здруженска“ or “Akcija Zdruzhenska” which means “Women’s Action Association” roughly. According to their website they: “Akcija Zdruzenska works on strengthening and developing the women’s movement in Macedonia, competent in terms of women’s human rights and gender equality issues, in compliance with the global commitments and needs in this field. Organization’s basic determination is to strengthen knowledge, skills and ability for identifying and reacting to the specific needs in Macedonia in the light of gender equality.”

I meet with almost their entire office staff, and in a effort to maintain anonymity, I will be quote them without referencing who they were. This research took place on October 3, 2011 at 10am Skopje time. They had given me the address, but since I couldn’t find it on a map, I got into a cab and told the cab driver the address. He looks at me and starts to pull out his map. I then start to laugh and offer to call the people I am meeting and have him talk to them. They were very willing and told him where to go, since he understood the directions, off we went!

On our way there, he started asking me questions about what I was doing in Skopje, what I thought of the country, and so on. I am pretty sure I got across that I was studying on a US Embassy grant, but separate from the embassy and that I would be here for 9 months, and that I had almost been in the country for one month. Also, that I really liked Skopje and the people were really nice! We arrived safely at our destination, which was this itty bitty little street that was on the map, but not labeled (I found this out when I went back home to see where I had been.)

When I got into their office, they offered me tea or coffee like everyone does around here, but all I wanted was some water. I had brainstormed a few questions to ask them, but I didn’t really need them. I asked a few open ended questions and just nodded (thanks Dr. Fewkes for teaching me that interviewing tip!) and we talked for almost 2 hours before they had to go for a meeting with some official.

I met with four women in the room, and we sat at a boardroom style table with many chairs around it. There were bookcases filled with books, publications, printed papers, and flyers lining the wall immediately across from the door way. The room was small, holding only the table, chairs and bookcase, but the space was well utilized. Off one side there was a small balcony where they often went to smoke. I counted four rooms, including the meeting room, two offices with many desks in there and a small kitchen off the side of boardroom. All of the rooms were small by American standards, and even a bit small by Macedonian standards, but still well maintained and nice for office space.

The main lady I talked to, we will call her Sally, is the one almost all of the quotes are attributed to. She was fluent in English, well almost fluent. Every now and then she had to ask the others for a word or two, but other than that, perfect!

Sally sees the NGOs in Macedonia (MK) as an intermediary between the government and society. Akcija Zdruzenska is more of a lobbying organization than direct services organization. They like to support local women’s organizations and try to bring their voices to a national level.

Their main problem is with access to information and the cooperation between NGOs and local governments. Sally claims that the government (and by this, she usually means the national government) is only open for cooperation on certain projects that they initiate. Then, the projects become a way of perceiving the achievement of the government (and thus the party) rather than the individual NGOs or the cooperation between the two. Sally claims that after the project is over, the government will forget about the NGO.

Akcija Zdruzenska wants to monitor the implementation and development of policies that try to identify the gaps between the legal situation and the actual situation. The government is not happy, Sally claims, with their NGO due to the critical nature of their work. Yet, still Akcija Zdruzenska works towards standardizing cooperation with the government, on paper at least. But in practice, the standardization has a long way to go. A few of the questions that must be answered are Who represents civil society to the government or the public? How can the NGOs network or cooperate? Which platforms do they all support?

The government would work with an organization for a few years to provide advice or services. Sometimes the government would even provide funding to these (other) organizations, then elections would come and they would switch to a different organization, often times created specifically for this purpose, that would promote the parties ideals with no hesitation if the original organization would not support their campaign.

Speaking of elections and the government, “neither the issue of gender equality or women’s rights are not treated the way they should be treated in these platforms.” They have tried to create issue based platforms but the problem, in their eyes, is that many of the other NGOs that believe in the same thing they do are not very well developed. Their problems in creating a group of women’s NGOs has lead to an even further “lack of solidarity between women’s groups” which is problematic since they all compete for funding from very limited sources.

Sally said that the European Union has been pushing for an mechanism of formal cooperation between NGOs/civil society and the government, but it only recently ended with a Code of Conduct. That was for the National government, but it is different with the local government because they are more independent.

We then switched gears (and this interview took place when I was still searching for just women’s groups to work with, so some of the questions are along that line, like the ones that follow) to discuss women’s rights in Macedonia. Sally claims that women’s rights is not high on the agenda for the current government, that it is present in the discussion at all because someone is asking about it. Women rights groups receive almost no funding from the government, the only funding comes from international donors. On paper there is a law against sex or gender discrimination, but not in practice since there is no monitoring of their . There is a “huge gap between promises and expectation.”

Sally believes that the government discounts women’s NGOs as lacking the ability to actually implement changes. Even though on paper, the women’s groups across the country have a large list of supporters, the government only reaches out to them at election time. Further, the governments believes that the women’s NGOs are not even relevant to the discussion since they lack knowledge about the ‘real world.’ The first women’s NGOs were not feminist in nature and could not even be called a movement, according to Sally. In the beginning, women’s NGOs were the largest in number, but their limited success (legally) was due to a lack of specifically requested rights. Sally even claims that some NGOs ended up in or with the structures they were working against (a hierarchy of sorts).

On top of all of difficulty outlined above, it is even more difficult to mobilize around a specific issue. An example they provided was abortion a few years ago. Different organizations tried to go to the streets to collect signatures, but it was hard to mobilize people for public speaking or even standing together. When pressed for why it was so difficult, they theorized that people were not ready to be publicly challenging the government. As well as the relative ease of being linked to the opposition of the current party in power. The government (read party, for this discussion) also began funding specific NGOs that no one had heard of before that specifically supported the government side of the issue, no other ones were funded. In fact, this is a problem that they saw in the NGo sector: NGOs that pop up around elections to support a specific cause and then disappear immediately after it.

With a specific focus on the national government/party in power, they believe that the government is pro-life/pro-family. The government has begun to roll back many of the success that the women’s rights movement had made in the past few years, or rather these success stories are being seen as being “taken away” by the legislature and are now seen as “highly problematic.” It is forbidden to mention sexual orientation and gender in the legal government. However, the current party in power, VMRO, has added religious eduction in school even though MK is supposed to be a secular country, Sally alleged.

In a policy to increase the birth rate and population of MK, the government has started to reward parents for having a 4th or 5th child.They will receive ⅔ of their expenses, which is higher than most salaries.  It was meant to only be for the areas were birthrate is low (AKA ethnic Macedonians only), but the constitutional court ruled that this was unconstitutional. Now the government only give extra money for the 3rd child only for 18 years, and it is 70% of the average salary. In addition, if the woman has never worked outside of the home, but raised 3 or 4 kids when she reaches 62 she is entitled to a full pension. Sally called this “crazy!” [Meaning I think, the idea that she would get a full pension if she works only as a mother and that if you do not have children that you are NOT entitled to a pension.]

Sally says that the new government is trying to keep a low profile but traditional values and the role of the family is emphasized to the detriment of transgendered individuals. The government is creating a hostile environment, Sally charges.

There have been numerous challenges to the different laws in MK, meaning that the government is trying to change the law that is on the book, rather than from the public against a law. Such as the attempt to define marriage (as between a man and a woman), while there is a definition of this in the Family Law section, the government wanted it in the Constitution.

There is a gap between men and women’s rights. At least in the implementation, as well as in the law. Sally suggested that this could be a hold over from the Socialist past where people were declared equal (even when they were not). She also claimed that many women did not know that they were not equal. Many people perceive that men and women are currently equal. In addition, there are other issues that are considered more important- such as ethnic minorities- before women’s rights are considered.

Yet, Sally and the others wanted to point out that there are connections between the different  forms of discrimination and that if the political discourse was open about one form (ethnicity) it should also apply to the other forms (sex, gender, etc). Since marginalized groups are not considered important to women’s issues, it is even harder to get women’s rights on the political agenda.

Sally suggested...
- that networks of women’s organizations be formed to facilitate discussion and interaction to better serve the women of MK.
- organizations should help the government formulate laws, but not produce them with in the NGO because they do not have the jobs or resources
- organizations should demand that the government do it’s own job and develop policy (currently she believes this is done outside of the government by many organizations who produce the laws and then give it to the government members, who present it to parliament.)
-there should be more cooperation with collecting the public opinion to write legislation.

Since they view themselves as a ‘watch dog style’ organization, it is very hard to fund raise and requires institutional funding (which they d not have). Institutional funding would give Akcija flexibility in the business affairs to do their job properly.

Also, Sally believes that the government (especially the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy) believe that that they have an “open door policy” and that is enough forms of cooperation. That organizations should come to them, rather that the Ministry going to different organizations. Sally believes that the government needs to be proactive in consultations where exist. That the government invites a few different NGOs for a few hours and then say they have consulted with the NGO sector.

Intersecton of gender and The State

The book Gender, Politics and the State edited by Vicky Randall and Georgina Waylan is aptly named. Most articles connect the three and how they interact with each other. Yet, we as readers and thinkers need to understand that you cannot analyze women and/in politics without both understanding the structures that constrain choices that individual women make and impact that other choices have on the state and those structures (Waylan, 2). In addition, often times we refer to “the state” or “the government” without realizing that they are not “a unitary structure but a differentiated set of institutions, agencies and discourses, and the product of a particular historical and political conjuncture” (Waylan, 7). Waylan concludes that thus, the state (and its gender policies) are a reflection of the society that built it as well as the society that is currently using it (7).
There are three ways that the state implements policies towards women

1. policies actually aimed at women
1. such as protective legislation (in the workplace) and laws aimed at reproduction
2. policies dealing with relations between men and women
1. such as property rights, sexuality, family relations
1. these are often insitutionalized
3. General policies (which are further sub categorized as
1. “gender neutral” policies
2. policies linked to the public sphere and seen as masculine
1. state-defined politics, war, foreign policy, international trade, resource extraction and long distance communication
3. policies concerned with welare and social reproduction
1. home related issues, health and education

[Taken from Charlto et al. (1989) “Women, the State & Development,” Albany, NY: SUNY Press, but found in Waylan, 9-10]

These discussions are important to keep in mind as I switch to the interaction between sex and the state. A helpful definition of the modern European state is one that has the “power which claims the supreme right to make and enforce rules for all the inhabitants of a given territory” (Vogel, 32). In addition, “the state serves to establish a legal order capable of enforcing the peaceful coexistence and cooperation among individuals” (Vogel, 32). A being part of a modern state, an important concept is citizenship. Citizenship “provides a major link between states, individuals and collectives” (Waylan, 12). Citizenship is often presumed to be universal by the fact that citizens are defined by “what they have in common and in opposition to the particular characters of different groups” as well as the idea that “laws and rules are the same for all and are blind to particular individual and group differences” (Nash, 46).

The UN Commission on the Status of Women has been requesting all states to set up “specialized institutions to advance the economic, social and political position of women” (Howell, 167). While Howell notes that women are being employed in post communist Eastern Europe, it is mostly in the “light industries” such as health, education, and textiles (Howell, 169). These industries are often considered less central to the economy and wages are often lower in these sectors of the economy.


Gender, Politics, and the State, edited by Vicky Randall & georgina Waylan. London: Routledge,1998.

Jude Howell, “gender, Civil Society and the State,” 166-184

Kate Nash, “Beyond Liberalism? Feminist Theories of Democracy,” 45-57

Ursular Vogel, “The State and the making of gender: some historical legacies,” 29-44

Post Communist Transition

 Many articles I found linked the Balkans and all of the other post-Soviet countries as having similar “women’s issues.” Since they share a part in a Communism past that directed that women and men were equal “created a cultural and developmental legacy that differs in key respects from the Western democracies and countries in the developing world” (Matland & Montgomery, 19). After the fall of communism, when “democracy” was beginning to take over Eastern Europe many things changed in the political system while transitioning, specifically with in women’s roles and rights. (While this may seem like a “duh” statement- they went from communism to democracy! of course things changed- bear with me.)

Women went from being considered equal by law to having their issues considered “tertiary issues that could be dealt with once the ‘real issues’ of transition had been resolved” (Matland & Montgomery, 39). In fact, most students of democratization have either over looked gender entirely or treated the decline i female representation as a return to ‘normal politics’ in the region” (Montgomery, 3). Yet, it is important to note that while legally  women and men were equal and there was no difference between the sexes, the stress remains on legally. In practice, the household remained the burden of the wife. While men were often advised to “help out more” their role within the family was never officially challenged. (Matland & Montgomery, 36) So this transition appeared on paper, could be argued that it was just changing to reflect the actual status of the family.

It is not to say that women were forced to give up all of their political power by the new regimes, sometimes women were “eager to shed their many burdens...voluntarily  withdrew from the public sphere” (Montgomery, 7). Matland & Montgomery go on to point out that at a practical level, women were promised greater access to Western goods and services if they retreated and allowed the government to transition ‘properly’ (38). However, when women lost their power, at least in Macedonia, they were not provoked due to their concern about the safety of their children and families than their own political representation (Ristova, 212).

It does not help matters that in many countries in Eastern Europe, “at least some voters believe men are better suited for politics than women and that men are more able executives and legislators” (Wilcox, Stark, & Thomas, 42). Further, many people believe in the traditional stereotype that women are “too moralistic to engage in the back-room dealmaking that often allows legislatures to reach compromise [nor are they] sufficiently rough to manage the rough and tumble world of politics” (Wilcox, Stark, & Thomas, 42). While I see a back-handed compliment in there, it is disastrous to the idea of women in politics (and politics in general) that women are too moral to be engaged in politics. {Maybe politics should be cleaned up so moral people can lead the country?}

In Macedonia, after the transition, the first 3 elections through 1998, only 3 to 7 % of the Parliament was filled with female representatives (Ristova, 196). All of the political parties in Macedonia declared their “dedication to gender equality” (Ristova, 203) during these elections. There was a difference between the elections and what was highlighted.

• 1990- women in the context of family relations
• 1994 & 1998 - covered a broader range of issues with gender relations and status of women
• improving women’s political representation, protection of employment rights, etc.

Women’s Access to Political Power in Post-Communist Europe, ed: Richard Matland & Kathleen Montgomery. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Richard Matland & Kathleen Montgomery, “Recruiting Women to National Legislatures: A General Framework with Applications to Post-Communist Democracies.”

Kathleen Montgomery, “Introduction”

Karolina Ristova, “Establishing a Machocracy: Women & Elections in Macedonia (1990-8)”

Clyde Wilcox, Beth Stark, & Sue Thomas, “Popular Support for Electing Women in Eastern Europe.”