The problems of the pre-agreement are not merely restricted to the name, citizenship and language issues. And those who are trying to confine them to these issues alone, ought to wonder why the pre-agreement doesn’t only obtain Article 1, and Article 7, instead of having a total of 20 Articles. They ought to also explain to us, why the phrasing of Article 12 of the Interim Agreement has been modified in order to become Article 18 in the preliminary contract, and in doing so it indirectly changes Article 13. It would be wise for us to be told, why does Article 14 exists in this pre-agreement, and why didn’t they wait until the finalization of the agreement in order for this energean issue to be addressed. If the pre-agreement is intended to facilitate the accession of Skopje into the European Union and NATO, then why should Greece support the integration of Skopje into other organizations and institutions, both at an international level, and at a regional one as well? Which is the reason for the existence of Article 8, and especially the creation of a Joint Interdisciplinary Committee of Experts on Historical, Archaeological and Educational Issues under the supervision of the two Foreign Ministries? And why is it, that, because of Article 6, we will no longer be able to express ourselves freely in relation to Skopje, since the Rallies will be considered as actions “which instigate chauvinism, hostility, irredentism and revisionism.” So no. The preliminary contract has many traps, and not merely the name issue.