The momentous vote of Macedonia's MPs to change their country's name sets it on a path into the international mainstream — but the questionable way it was won leaves deep political scars and doubts about the rule of law.

The small Balkan state's parliament voted to change the country's name to the Republic of North Macedonia Friday evening in an effort to unblock the path to joining NATO and, potentially, the European Union.

But though the step has been widely welcomed by the international community, the vote was marred by allegations of bribery and political dirty tricks. Opposition and civil society activists say the country must follow the change with a renewed focus on judicial reforms that will be necessary to join the EU.

Eighty-one lawmakers narrowly passed the amendments to the constitution after three days of intense negotiations. Prime Minister Zoran Zaev needed a two-thirds majority, or 80 of the country’s 120 MPs, to ratify the deal he made back in June with Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras. Greece has blocked Macedonia’s membership of both NATO and the EU since the early 1990s, arguing that the name infringes culturally and territorially on its own region called Macedonia.

A beaming Zaev — who had hours earlier been embroiled in intense crunch talks with a small group of MPs who raised last-minute objections — shook hands and hugged colleagues. The decision to change the country’s name was “tough”, he said, but “a better deal could not be reached, and without an agreement with Greece there will be no NATO and European Union [membership].” On Saturday Zaev called on Greece to also ratify the deal.

“There was not an ounce of free and fair in [the process]. It was the opposite. For me it was the most disgusting thing I’ve ever seen in Macedonian or regional politics” — Aleksandar Nikoloski, VMRO-DPMNE party

Foreign minister Nikola Dimitrov said the country had shown its dedication to European values. “We have taken ownership of our destiny. We are making history by opening up our future,” he said.

Leaders from NATO and EU member states offered congratulations. NATO secretary-general, Jens Stoltenberg, hailed the “important contribution to a stable and prosperous region” in a statement on Twitter. EU commissioner for enlargement, Johannes Hahn, tweeted that Friday was “a day that made history!” Hahn said he hopes it “creates a positive dynamic for reconciliation in the whole western Balkan region.”

U.K. Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said, the vote "brings the country closer to a more secure, stable and prosperous future at the heart of the Euro-Atlantic community."

Most lawmakers agree that the country’s swift accession to NATO — which officials hope will be waved through in the coming months, pending approval from the Greek parliament — brings significant benefits. It is hoped it will safeguard against growing Russian interference as well as ward off internal threats in a state roiled since 2015 by a series of deep political crises.

“In this country, every single aspect of statehood is contested by one group or another. The major achievement of finishing the process is stability,” said Ljupcho Petkovski, executive director of the Skopje-based Center for European Strategies: Eurothink.

But concern has grown in recent weeks that the ugly road to the two-thirds majority could carry costs further down the line. Nationalist opposition party the VMRO-DPMNE boycotted the vote, claiming the new name threatens Macedonian identity. They also accused Zaev of using “blackmail and threats” to push it through.

Aleksandar Nikoloski, vice president of VMRO-DPMNE, told POLITICO: “There was not an ounce of free and fair in [the process]. It was the opposite. For me it was the most disgusting thing I’ve ever seen in Macedonian or regional politics.”

Objections center around an independent parliamentary group of eight VMRO-DPMNE defectors who backed the name change. It is alleged that the government won their support by passing a controversial amnesty for VMRO supporters who were on trial for alleged involvement in an attack on parliament in April 2017 during which nearly 100 people were injured. Zaev and his center-left SDSM party deny such a deal was struck.

“It will follow this agreement forever because it was obvious for all of the public that was a trade with the rule of law and the judiciary to get the votes,” said Nikoloski.

“Will some EU member states evaluate the steps taken in this process as counter to EU values and see this as an obstacle for EU aspirations?” — Eric Manton, conflict analyst

There are other doubts about how the vote was won. On December 28, a group of 17 Macedonian NGOs condemned MPs for passing a raft of changes to the criminal code that allow reduced punishment or expiration dates on some cases at the Special Prosecutor’s Office, which investigates crimes linked to the wiretapping scandal that plunged Macedonia into political crisis in 2015.

Three of the group of eight VMRO-DPMNE defectors, including former culture minister Elizabeta Kanceska-Milevska, were connected to such cases. “Impunity lives on,” the NGOs warned in the open letter.

Kanceska Milevska denies any wrongdoing and the group overall deny their votes were bought. They say they support the name change for no other reason than thinking it is good for the country.

Fani Karanfilova-Panovska, executive director of Foundation Open Society Macedonia which signed the NGOs' letter, said that the name change was “a very good thing” for the country. “We needed this ... [but] the price might have been too high in terms of derogation of the rule of law.”

Karanfilova-Panovska and other observers are concerned that if Macedonia does not enact judicial reforms and step up the fight against organized crime and corruption, EU member states could delay the start of accession negotiations — as they did last June.

“There are serious concerns that the way the process was carried out and that painful compromises, made in the name of achieving the result, will be difficult to overcome in order to fully capitalize on the new opportunities of Euro-Atlantic integration,” said conflict analyst and former rule of law officer Eric Manton. “Will some EU member states evaluate the steps taken in this process as counter to EU values and see this as an obstacle for EU aspirations?”

Florian Bieber, professor of Southeast European history and politics at the University of Graz, said the struggle over the name change reflected the realities of political dynamics across the region. “It shows the fundamental dilemma of trying to resolve such an important political dispute. What price is it worth paying in terms of doing a deal which is not exactly transparent, but which in a certain way achieves the ratification?” he asked.

For civil society activists who protested to topple nationalist and former PM Nikola Gruevski, who largely abandoned Euro-Atlantic integration in the 2000s, the name change is a dream come true though.

“Nobody until a few months ago could predict the result of this process,” said Ivana Tufegdzic, an MP in Zaev's party said as she left parliament after the vote. “The country is moving forward, and that is a process that cannot be stopped.”