About Fred Abrahams

Author of Modern Albania: From Dictatorship to Democracy (NYU Press, 2015)

Koha Jonë

March 24, 1993

Tens of Tanks Towards Northeastern Border

For almost three days a relatively large number of tanks loaded on transport vehicles (Skania) were sent towards the north of Albania. No announcement or official report was provided on that.

Why were those tanks transported to the Albanian-Serbian border?

Remember that this action took place a few days after foreign journalists had visited the Albanian northeastern border. So, the foreign journalists couldn’t report the presence of the tanks of the Albanian Army at the border area.

First Democratic Party Meeting Minutes

December 13, 1990

Note-takers: Ilenja Mehilli, Sokol Tafaraj

Note-taking under the responsibility of Eduard Selami.

Podium comprised of Arben Imami, Azem Hajdari, Sali Berisha.

Prof. Sali Berisha spoke about the initiators of the movement, who will be the core of the Democratic Party. He spoke about students’ courage, which gave him confidence and was a lesson for him. It showed dignity. Prof. Berisha was impressed from their courage and bravery. Although they were only on the way to become intellectuals, they deserved the position (in the party).

Sali Berisha gave the floor to Andokli Xhaferri, a worker at military plant No. 91. He expressed his belief in the people. Then he spoke about some problems:

  • He was of the opinion that the program should be read in all the enterprises. But the director decided the contrary.

Beni intervened saying that the Presidency of People’s Assembly would pass a new law as below:

“Citizens have the right to form a party. Party’s program and status has to be submitted to the Ministry of Justice. Fascist ideas are prohibited; foreign citizens are not allowed. The procedure to legalize it takes one month. At least 300 people’s signatures should be collected…”

A person in the meeting (a worker) was of the opinion that the time defined for the legalization should be shorter than one month to enable participation in the elections. “We have waited for 45 years, we can’t wait longer.”

Prof. Sali Berisha said that the party should work in democratic ways.

Then Azem said that there were saboteurs, but at the same time thousands of telegrams and letters had arrived. We should work hard and in democratic ways.

An organizational structure should be set up. Its center should be established in Student City. The chairmanship should be comprised of 14 people, of whom six should be students (someone from the audience said they should be six of the best students), the rest should be intellectuals and workers. It had to be extended in all the other districts of the country. We should take good concrete steps. Establishment of this structure is the main topic of the agenda for this meeting.

A student was of the opinion that students should not participate in these structures. But a worker said that this fact was not so essential. It was important to have the structure. He continued that the party should have its press. But his suggestion had to be discussed later.

G. Rama said that students’ courage should be appreciated. “These students declared in the meeting that the press was censured, but Comrade Ramiz said that no censorship exists. In fact, it is true that there is, but according to the existing law there is no censorship.”

E. Budina emphasized that Comrade Ramiz didn’t allow them to speak.

G. Pashko said that the founding of a party was declared yesterday. “The news caused a sensation in the world press. And the mistakes we make, regardless how small, can give an opposite impression.” He didn’t agree with the composition of the party; doctors, sportsmen, etc. should also be members of this structure. “Because like this we will have a party, which would resemble the existing party.”

A core structure should be founded based on four points.

How will the statute be organized?

It is not necessary for the workers to set up a party structure in their working places. All they need to do is to set up trade unions. To this end, the documentation should be submitted to the ministry as soon as possible.

The party program was put closer to that of Kavaja, as if we collaborate with them and the enemies.

A miner was of the opinion that there were two problems:

  • The stand of the organizations,
  • The necessity to read the status.

He also suggested to increase the number of intellectuals in the commission so that Sali Berisha and Gramoz Pashko could be included in it.

The commission should consist of:

6 students; 5 intellectuals; and 5 workers.

The lecturer Mr. Brojsi suggested two students instead of six. According to him, six students was a large number.

Beni said: “This is only an initial organizing commission. This program is very good and serious. These students developed it. They are the organizers and so it would be good for the other students also.” He asked the participants to raise their hand if they agreed. – Everybody agreed.

Nobody is against.

D. Leka (Deko) took the floor “We are not here to elect or to be elected. We are the representatives of democracy.” He was happy that democracy was finally established, and he didn’t want to support the bad declarations on this party made by the enemies. He suggested the party have many intellectuals, because Yugoslavia had claimed that day that Albania’s Labor Party allowed the formation of a students party, because it scared the other parties.

– Azem Hajdari          approved         – a student

– Alma Bendo            approved         – a student

– Arben Likaj              approved         – a student

– Blendi Gonxhe        approved         – a student

– Shenjazi Rama        approved         – a student

– Gramoz Pashko      approved         – a lecturer

– Sali Berisha             approved         – a doctor

– Prec Zogaj               approved         – a writer

– Mitro Cela                approved         – a journalist

– Arben Imami            approved         – a lecturer

Albert Shehu proposed Ilir Myftari. He said Ilir Myftari is one of the best intellectuals of the mine; he is the first partisan of the movement. Ilir Myftari was also approved.

A worker from “Enver Hoxha” Auto-Tractors Plant proposed Sokrat Vesturi, an engineer. He was also approved.

A worker from the Construction Enterprise said that he needed to have a copy of the program to read.

Fatmir Beluli, a representative from Durres and a member of an illegal organization founded in Durres, said that there was not sufficient food. According to him, the program of this party was excellent, and it was going to take very good economic measures. So, they should not hurry to make declarations. Durres is pro this party.

Prof. …….., a lecturer at High Agriculture Institute – Kamza said that there should also be a representative from women. He proposed Merita Zaloshnja. She is an activist, an intellectual, an excellent woman.

A worker supported his proposal making the same description of Merita.

Prof. Berisha proposed Zenel Hoxha, a lecturer.

Azem emphasized that this is an organizing commission and there is no need for too much discussion, but we have to work as best as possible. The group for the statute and the group to contact the Ministry of Justice have already been assigned. So, we have to think of having the best people in this party.

This party should be supported, but not from abroad. The staffs at different workplaces should give some modest contribution for the people who have already quit work.

Another task is deciding on who will be the candidates for the parliament, but this has to be done later. The memorandum with the signatures of 150 people had to be completed and submitted to the ministry.

Prof. Berisha said that everybody should be clear by the end of the meeting.

A worker from Elbasan Plant said that religion was not to be discussed. But it was a wrong thought, because it was included in that program. He also asked whether there would be fractions in the party. They answered that there would be, but not for the moment. That was only the beginning (it was too early).

Beni emphasized this is the initial organizing commission.

The participants were asked to sign before leaving, in order to have the 150 signatures.

They all approved the selected people unanimously.

Alma Bendo did not want to be, so she was taken out. The others accepted.

So, here is the organizing commission:

  • Azem Hajdari
  • Arben Likaj
  • Blendi Gonxhe
  • Shenasi Rama
  • Gramoz Pashko
  • Sali Berisha
  • Prec Zogaj
  • Mitro Cela
  • Arben Imami
  • Ilir Myftari
  • Sokrat Nesturi
  • Merita Zaloshnja
  • Alma Bendo
  • Tefalin Malshyti

The minutes were taken by Ilenja Mehilli

First Meeting of the Organizing Commission

Working groups have to be defined in this meeting. Present in the meeting are also some guests.

Prof. Gramoz Pashko said: This is the initial organizing commission and there are some guests representing different strata of the society.

The commission has to treat some problems to be resolved within 10-12 days:

  1. preparation of the statute.
  2. development of an electoral program to be presented just like that of the other party.
  3. establishment of a commission to lead/manage it.
  4. establishment of a commission to prepare the electoral program on the eve of this electoral campaign.
  5. establishment of the commission of the secretary.
  6. establishment of a treasury commission.
  7. a core group of people will deal with press and other things.

The tasks have to be assigned according to the groups, so that the work doesn’t fail. It is necessary to do it as well as possible. Our strength should be only the quality. We won only because of the existing hatred against the other (ruling) party.

Prof. Sali Berisha said that the most important groups are: the organizing and financial groups (commissions). The most important group for the life of the party is the organizing group. The press group is also very important. The organizational group should be set up.

Beni gave the vote to Gramoz. 

A group, which will go to the Ministry of Justice.

Prof. Gramoz said that a separate group should also be established with separate places/positions for districts’ representatives.

It is necessary to set up a committee to deal with this problem.

Debate:

Is it necessary to assign persons at the head of these sections/departments?

The organizing group (commission), having also the support of other representatives (guests), will deal with the statutes.

A commission should deal with the organizational aspects; status, etc.

This commission should consists of 8 people:

  • Azem Hajdari – chairman of the organizing commission.
  • Arben Imami
  • Sali Berisha
  • Edmond Budina
  • Gramoz Pashko
  • Eduard Selami
  • Leka Dr
  • Edi Rama
  • 4 other persons, whose names are not given.

It is necessary to define the organizing commission, which will be responsible for the documents, statutes; as the brain to think of organizing the work.

Merita suggested this commission be the principle one, and the others should be accountable to it.

Press group:

  • Prec Zogaj – Chairman,
  • Genc Pollo – Vice chairman, press conferences,
  • Mitro Cela

Finance group:

  • Merita Zaloshnja – Chair
  • Arben Likaj
  • Alma Bendo

Expenses, income could be high.

Electoral group:

  • Edi Rama
  • Arben Imami
  • Blendi Gonxhe
  • Shenasi Rama
  • Zenel Hoxha

Group of organizational aspects of the second level.

Leka responsible for the scientific institutions.

Group of service (on duty group):

  • Tefalin Malshyti
  • Arjan Manahasa
  • Ilir Dizdari

Group of the Secretariat:

  • Eduard Selami
  • Ilenja Mehilli

Later the meeting was suspended due to the TV announcements on a situation of disorder.

Working groups departed for different districts in the country.

The meeting to be continued another day in the morning.

The minutes were taken by Ilenja Mehilli.

Meeting of the Organizing Commission

Date: December 14, 1990

Time: 10:30

Azem discussed his meeting with Llambi Gegprifti who would help us with a telephone. The TV was also informed and asked to take another interview and air it on the all news editions.

Prof. Berisha said that the vice chairman for the press group, Genc Pollo, should give that interview. The idea was approved.

Prof. Berisha said that he had had a telephone conversation with the People’s Artist, Dhimiter Anagnosti, who had expressed his opinion to collaborate with us.

These commissions should work to attract the attention of people.

The commissions will report through their chairmen. Every commission will have an office. The chairmen have to meet every day at 9:00.

Prof. Pashko suggested the creation of an information group to inform all the newspapers and the radio.

Pr. Doni (!?) said that he was eager to write. He had a computer and he would help to publish a newspaper. We should be aware of what we publish.

The tapes of the interviews should also be preserved, in order to transcribe them and publish them later. We have the revenge of Xhelili, etc. information.

Doni said that he could provide information from the foreign radios. The archive of the state also helps us.

All the intellectuals who support us should come here and join us.

They decided to gather here at 9:00 and report on the work carried out by the working groups.

Each group left to carry out its tasks. While some people remained there waiting for the TV. Some were asked to explain for the people who were staying in front of the building.

Meanwhile people sent to the districts were coming back.

The minutes were taken by Ilenja Mehilli.

Speech of Two People from Elbasan

Date: December 14, 1990

Time: 16:00

Two people from Elbasan came and reported on the situation there. A religious ritual was going to take place in Elbasan that day. And everybody was there at the mosque in the castle, but many police forces were there showing their rubber batons, close the entry to the castle, and declared that the mosque was clear and they could not make any religious ritual there.

At that moment, many people were gathered outside. They began to shout: Nexhmie Hoxha should resign. And they appealed to face the police forces.

Another student came together with:

  • Ibrahim Bicokun
  • Agron Lajteri
  • Pellumb …

Select transcript of President Ramiz Alia’s meeting with Albanian intellectuals on August 11, 1990

As published in “Democratization on the Road of the Party,” General Sector of the Staff of the Central Committee of the Albanian Party of Labor, Tirana, 1990. 

(p. 8)

Ramiz Alia: First, I would like to point out that the situation, on the international level and in our country as well, has recently undergone important changes. Within less than a year a real upheaval has taken place all over Eastern Europe. We wouldn’t exaggerate if we say that in the Soviet Union, and in all other counties of its former block, power has been seized by reactionary forces. Eventually, socialism has formally been substituted by capitalism.

(p. 9)

We can say that the attempt against socialism as a system, and against the communist party, is nowadays more aggressive than ever. Throughout this struggle of the reaction, the major slogans are multiparty system, human rights, privatization of state property and restoration of a market economy.

(p. 10)

Now the attack of the reaction is focused on us. According to the logic of the bourgeoisie, in as much as socialism has been overthrown in Eastern Europe, there is no reason to go on existing in Albania. That’s why its attempt against our country is so fierce. What is demanded is not about “petty” changes and “cosmetic” modifications in the economic and social spheres. The aim of the anti-communist reaction and the anti-Albanian forces is the overthrow of the people’s power in our country, the annihilation of the socialist system and of the Party of Labor.

(p. 11)

As it can be seen, the international reactionary forces are trying to achieve their goal without directly intervening, even less by aggression, but by instigating the people to be unsatisfied with the existing reality, and by trying to discredit our power, its organisms and the party. In short, the bourgeoisie wants to overthrow socialism without using its armies, and by creating their battalions of mercenaries inside the country. This tactic is clearly visible in all the events that have happened in Europe.

(p. 12)

Our party, over 50 years of its existence, has engaged in great battles, heroic ones indeed. The battle against Titoist revisionism and afterwards against Soviet revisionism were very difficult and full of peril. Neither were easy, the battle against inner enemies.

… But the characteristic of those battles is that the leadership was on the frontline, that they were led from the party. The bases, the common people, expressed their solidarity with the party’s line.

… However, the masses had only to be confronted with the second wave of fighting.

Presently, we can see the opposite, as the enemy is acting on the bases, in direct contact with people, in their workplaces and institutions.

(p. 13)

The outside enemies, in their struggle against our party, have found support inside the country. … Its work becomes easier due to some truly existing flaws and to certain errors and faults that might have appeared during our development.

What are those inner forces in which the external enemy is basing its hopes?

First, support for the enemy’s activity is a conglomerate of disorientated people, who are dreaming to have a paradise existence, like in the advertisements on TV screens. Among this category are some unemployment people, some immature youth, some idle individuals, even some former prisoners, some adventurists and so on. Such a contingent does not have any declared or conscious program against the party and power. Among them there are plenty of nihilistic people, generally unsatisfied, who have a negative mania which makes them see everything through black glasses; there are people who, from morning to night, don’t do anything but complain: “why is the sidewalk not fixed”, “why did X person become a director” etc. True, these strata, as I already mentioned, don’t have any program, but their opposition to the party line and activity, even if unconscious, is dangerous. It produces gossip and disinformation. From these strata come the main contingent of those who entered the embassies; these were the protagonists of the events that took place in Tirana, Kavaja, Shkodra and elsewhere.

Secondly, there is the group of declassed enemies, which is compounded by people who had been prisoners for political reasons. These are firmly anti-communists. I’m not saying that they are organized, because we don’t have evidence, but we have information that precisely some of these people have contacted foreigners and have been transmitters of the instructions coming from the German, Yugoslav and French embassies, and have directly instigated the individuals who entered the embassies. There are people from this category who are inclined to terrorism.

Would it be possible for the reaction to achieve its maximum aims by relying on these forces? I think it will not. Of course, it might create incidents, as it already did, and it might create much ado, or provoke some demonstrations, but not more than that.

I believe it is clear to all of us that the events of the beginning of July were aiming for much more.

The reaction did not expect such a contingent, was not looking for such a clientele. Besides, its calculations turned out to be wrong in the supposition that this question was not going to be resolved quickly, but on the contrary, that it would last the same as the Popaj case did, so that the embassies would be transformed in refugee camps.

The enemies thought that, in this way, they were going to create a reserve army inside the embassies. You can imagine what a dangerous abscess it would have been to have 5,000 individuals inside the embassies. Behind them, there were 5,000 families, which would have gone to visit them every day, not to mention their friends. If that situation would have lasted, at least 50,000 people would have been going back and forth around the embassies in Tirana, which, no doubt, would have created a ferment with threatening effects for our society, as well as the conditions for an extension of the subversive activity.

The quick response of our government paralyzed the foreign hostile forces, it frustrated their plans.

For this reason, the reaction is obliged to change the tactics; presently it is seeking to corrupt, make unsatisfied and involve a more qualified clientele, with more authority, such as officers and educated people, the intelligentsia, the students, i.e. the intellectual potential of the country. To put it metaphorically, the enemy is in need to find commanders and generals. Its aim is to find a leadership to the unsatisfied and unsteady individuals, to create a headquarters for them, which can lead them to concrete actions against the Party and the Power. That is to say, it is looking for the homologues of those which were found in Czechoslovakia, Hungary and elsewhere. Such people – from the ranks of the intelligentsia – might give a program to the disoriented masses, which practically do not know what to demand and why it is fighting. Like that, the dissatisfaction of the masses would turn into a political hostility.

The outside reactionary forces did not find such generals in our country, because our intelligentsia is closely bound with the people, with the fates of the fatherland and the construction of socialism. We have underlined these characteristics several times, but we should underline it again, as a firm victory which has been thoroughly verified by the recent events.

The task of the party, of us, of everybody, is to preserve such a value, to keep always the intelligentsia as pure as it is, and not to permit it to become a victim of fraud, a victim of intellectualism or political snobbery.

Especially great attention should be dedicated to the intellectuals and student youth. It’s here, where the party’s task must be more intensive, more active, more skilful.

(p. 30)

Comrades, these were the questions I wanted to highlight in order to have a view about the preoccupations of the party and of our country. I wish that you also express your opinions about these questions. The party needs to know how its decisions are judged by the intelligentsia.

(p. 38)

Sali Berisha: In my opinion, the information should above all be truthful, but there are many flaws in this regard. I will give an example. In the communication about the event of July 2 it was said that there were slightly injured people on both sides, whereas in fact a 16-year-old boy was agonizing in the Hospital No. 2, and, as it is known, he died. Diplomats from the German embassy were on guard for two days running. You can tell the staff of my clinic as much as you like that there has only been slight injuries, but they won’t believe it. And there are 600 persons working there who will speak out.

Ramiz Alia: Did you personally take care of the wounded person?

Sali Berisha: To tell the truth, it was not me who had to take care of him, but I’m saying what I was told.

Ramiz Alia: In essence, you are now disinforming us, you are telling us something untrue. You were right in saying that information should be accurate. But you also must be accurate. Indeed, I’m sorry to tell you, but you are not accurate at all about this concrete case. First, the wounded youngster didn’t come to you the day that the communication was made, but after he had stayed for three days in the German embassy. Second, when the communication was issued, that youngster was still alive, and perhaps he would have survived if medical assistance had been provided in time.

Ramiz Alia: You are right in saying that the information must be more realistic, swifter and more up to date. But to claim that everything must appear in the press, this doesn’t make sense. It was said that some persons were wounded, and the TV gave images of the dramatic situation of people inside the embassies and of their relatives. Many other measures were taken. We immediately discharged the director of police in the interior ministry because he opened fire on July 2, and this measure is known by everybody.

Ismail Kadare: There are people saying that he was discharged not because he opened fire, but because he behaved very mildly. It’s them who are spreading such versions.

Ramiz Alia: And what about the two deputy ministers of interior who were discharged: are there such rumors even for them?

Ismail Kadare: But neither is there any official information saying that they were discharged because they transgressed their competences, no explanation was given about that.

Ramiz Alia: I agree with you. The preoccupation concerning information is right. But the examples you all are giving are not accurate, on the one hand, and, on the other, they don’t signify what is typical, for which we should be worried. Why is it not said that one individual was wounded while entering the embassy? Do we have to make a hero out of an individual who was abandoning his fatherland like a thief and fleeing; out of one who was showing more trust towards a foreign diplomat than to the laws of his own government? Do we have to send consolations to his family? The sound opinion condemns such people, although on the other hand the policeman should not have used the gun. But what is the real truth of this question? The car with a youngster who was wounded afterwards was attacking the policeman directly, putting his life in danger.

… What should one demand pity for him, who, even wounded, preferred to stay with the German than to go to the hospital of his own country? On what kind of morality does this stand this?

… I want to say I understand your request about information, and I assure you that I have the same preoccupation. But I’m inclined to the kind of information that is useful to the people, and not that our efforts become a megaphone of our enemy.

Luan Omari: You gave us here a full and convincing clarification of the events of the embassies. The truth is that we learned many things only today, from your mouth. I am not claiming that the press should write about everything, but at least the information inside the party must be thorough. For me, the wounding of that youngster in the embassy is neither to be consoled nor lauded, whereas his act is, at the very least, immoral.

… The problem consists in clarifying to the people and thereby to cut the path of gossips. Of course, there will be still individuals spreading gossip because the hostile activity does not rest, but the trust of people in the party’s words should be reinforced.

(p. 43)

Sali Berisha: Comrade Ramiz, there are two sources of information: our own, and there is the information of those who are against us, which should be outweighed by our information. If it is not us who give complete information about everything happening in our country, including, above all, the meetings of the Central Committee, it will be given, then, by the foreign radios.

Ramiz Alia: Comrade Berisha, I don’t agree with what you are saying. What the foreign radios are broadcasting is not an information but a disinformation. If you trust them, it is your own business, but there is no logic in believing the lie when truth is lacking.

Sali Berisha: That’s why, since the beginning, I pointed out the need for truthful information, because in this case we must deal with competition in which the accurate and truthful information wins. Therefore, we must be very vigilant.

Ramiz Alia: Once more you are not presenting problem correctly. First, it is out of place here to speak about competition, because we are not engaged in an information race. Second, I don’t consider fair your remark concerning information about the meetings of the Central Committee. The documents of the Plenary 11th session of the Central Committee were broadcast part by part, the first and second day, due to a new concept on information, for a more open one.

Sali Berisha: I would better take another example. As far as we know, in Shkodra something has happened, and the people should have been informed.

Ramiz Alia: Nothing has happened in Shkodra recently. In January, indeed, there was a frustrated attempt to organize a demonstration, but nothing more than that. Should we have said in the press that according to some internal information a demonstration might or was expected to take place? It is good to talk about information, but we should not diverge from reality. You might say that there were events in Kavaja too. There were, and maybe something should have been said about it. But I think it is a loss of time for all of you if I start explaining one by one the internal and external reasons why it was not mentioned.

(p. 48)

Luan Omari: As far as I can notice and hear, sometimes we are given the impression that we took decisions under the pressure of international events. There are comments that the decision to increase the low salaries was taken under pressure of the events of Kavaja. It is very dangerous that measures which are favourable for the workers and peasants as individuals are interpreted as concessions, because this creates the opinion, inside and outside the country, that our social system is so weak that it can tumble with a nudge. Our party and its leadership do have a clear program for the future. Therefore, we should not take, so to say, delayed decisions, or arguably delayed.

Ramiz Alia: After the meeting of the Presidency of the People’s Assembly, we declared we are going to create an electoral commission, as well as another commission that will deliberate over the necessity of changes to the constitution, and one of the reasons to declare it immediately was because of what you are saying, i.e. not to give chances for interpretations alleging that we are doing so because of being obliged by someone else. By the way, I also wanted to underline this: that many of the pertinent ideas expressed in this meeting coincide with the acts of our party and our government.

Luan Omari: I might illustrate this with the process of changes that were made to the penal code. Those were also gradually prepared. But it was a closed discussion, and this gave people the chance to say that the modifications were produced because there is much ado about human rights.

(p. 62)

Ismail Kadare: Many valuable things were said here. And your view was even more valuable, being very clear and understandable for all of us.

It is absolutely true that the Albanian intelligentsia is committed to the freedom and independence of our country and to the existing government, to its stability. It must be admitted, though, that there are people in Albania who think the contrary, some of them because of ignorance, but sometimes due to an inborn malevolence, in keeping with the old pattern, according to which the intelligentsia is quite suspicious. When problems come about, there arises also the question: Where do we have to find the cause?  We find it in the intelligentsia. This is an old propensity, since many centuries.

The history of our country, both before and during these 45 years, has demonstrated how interested our intelligentsia is for our fatherland’s cause.

… If it demands changes, evolutions, developments, it is only in the name of prosperity.

Recently, some disorienting acts have appeared.

… This disorientation comes either from outside influences – keeping up with foreign radios and TV stations – or because of gossip, or even due to the way some of our officials are speaking. It seems to me that their contradictory and irresponsible way of speaking has often brought confusion, has been supporting these waves of gossip we are talking about and which have been circulating throughout the country like an ominous wind.

The irresponsible way of speaking has certain causes. Some of the officials are acting like this in order to display an ultrarevolutionary self-image, thereby causing a lot of harm. We discussed certain things during the break, too; a process of mistrust towards the party’s program on democratic measures was incited by words that were spread with regards to the visit of Perez de Cuéllar

Ramiz Alia: Is it really accurate what you are saying, that about Perez de Cuéllar has frequently been refuted?

Ismail Kadare: This is well known by everybody. The audience here present should have heard, too.

Luan Omari: The Comrade Muho Asllani in Durres has publicly spoken in that way.

Ismail Kadare: The bad thing is that there are still contradictory instructions. For example, precisely in the heyday of the process of democratization, of debate, of pluralism of opinions, it is demanded to Drita newspaper to stop the debate. And what kind of debate is the matter? About Albanian literature of the Middle Ages.

Ramiz Alia: I don’t believe such an instruction has been given.

Ismail Kadare: That’s what I was told. Here is the editor-in-chief of the newspaper.

Bardhyl Londo: I was told not to go on for two or three weeks.

Ramiz Alia: But this doesn’t mean there is any order to stop it… Go on Ismail, probably, there is a misunderstanding here.

Ismail Kadare: What I wanted to underline is that all peoples, but especially the Albanian people, are very sensitive towards justice. Therefore, if it is demanded to punish the responsible persons of the events of July, this has nothing to do with revenge or masculinity. Those people, whether directly responsible or not, must be punished, because this creates satisfaction for people, creates security, creates tranquillity. Whereas the opposite creates aggravation.

… Treating the problems in the press realistically, as it was already mentioned, only reenforces the stability of the situation. I neither advocate giving sensational news, nor for satisfying the pathological curiosity of people, but the press must contain necessary information.

… There is a lack of understanding by the officials, which sometimes contaminates also those who complain – a lack of human feeling by their side.

… I don’t know if the municipalities have seen the people who come from other cities and sleep in the parks. I suppose yes. Those people are Albanians, are citizens of this country. There are others too with whom nobody is dealing, not a bit, they don’t figure in any law, in any paper, they are marginal people. But is it possible that there are so many marginal people in our society?

I have the firm belief that our people – despite a certain dynamic and nervous character shown by some individuals who lack patience – essentially is wisely patient. The Albanian people do not have a pathologic impatience, I don’t think it has, I only think that one should find the language of agreement with it, the language of dialogue.

… If excesses and dissatisfactions are created, this happens because of a disfunction of the agreement between the administration and the people.

… As we are in the stage of preparation of the electoral law, I consider it an important one, which will play a special role in a deeper development of the already initiated processes. The perspective of our society will depend very much on the success of this law, on whether it will conceived with due seriousness. This law will play an extremely important role in our life.

Sali Berisha: I would like to add here only a personal message for the comrades of the interior ministry: each illegal beating must be a burden on their conscience and must be condemned. There have been many beatings. I have seen them myself, at the railway station, while waiting for the bus. I will say only this: that each illegal beating is a beating to all of us. Every Albanian, from wherever he or she comes, is part of the social and national conscience. If the policemen beat people without any reason, they have maltreated us all. This is how we must perceive all of these acts. I also feel offended because they have come to violate the orders and the law.

I don’t know what the foreign secret services do, but the principal mechanism of the events that have happened was the existence of a mistrust on the seriousness of the measures stipulated by the party, which, as a matter of fact, has done so much.

… I have a remark concerning the party itself. The party has brought about a lot of changes in recent times. I think it is a Marxist attitude that, by changing the reality, it should change itself too, in certain respects. For example, concerning the freedom of thought. I consider indispensable the pluralism of opinions.

Ramiz Alia: The pluralism of thought or the multiparty system? To open a parenthesis: the pluralism of thought is being demanded and led by the party itself. What do you think about the question I just put forward? There is nothing wrong in discussing such problems, too.

Sali Berisha: To tell the truth, I cannot imagine how a multiparty system could be now, in the present period, when the pluralism of thought is still lacking. In this phase, at this stage, I consider the pluralism of thought indispensable. Our society will lose nothing from the pluralism of thought; on the contrary, those disciplines and sciences that have deprived themselves of pluralism of thought have faded and did not prosper. Whereas the disciplines and sciences which have used it have advanced and have made great contributions.

How can the pluralism of thought be initiated? I think a good step in this regard might be the creation of independent associations, NGOs, such as an association of physicians, for example. Because when we tell our colleagues abroad that we depend on the ministry of health, they take distance from us. Which country, in the course of the history of humanity, has lost anything because of professional associations? No one. The Writers’ Association is almost that kind of association.

Ramiz Alia: It’s true that some organisms or pre-governmetal or nongovernmental associations are bound somewhere and are treated almost as governmental ones. But this is because of a bureaucratic mentality; I do not think there is any political agenda behind this.

Sali Berisha: I’m saying that the independent associations might make a great contribution to the development of the country. I don’t believe that, by being dependent on ministries, they can prosper or make any significant contribution, and I think indeed that like this they cannot comply with the principles on which they were founded.

The pluralism of thought must exist not only in meetings, but also in the press and in the mass media in general. What should be done? Zëri i Popullit is the newspaper of the Central Committee of the Party. In my personal opinion, Zëri i Popullit can be the newspaper of the Party of Labor of Albania. In fact, if I would be asked as a party member, I would advocate for this option.

Ramiz Alia: I consider the problem deeper than what you are putting forward. I think you are simplifying the question. In my opinion, qualifying Zëri i Popullit the daily of the Central Committee or the daily of the party is something formal. Our line is only one, both for the Central Committee and for mass of the party members. Either you are wrongly explaining your idea, or you have some obsession to make an analogy with Eastern countries.

Sali Berisha: By saying “we are the newspaper of the Central Committee,” they are putting restrictions on certain useful opinions. It would be different if it is called the newspaper of the party.

(p. 75)

Ramiz Alia: I think you are not so much worried about why this or that member of the Central Committee did not write in the newspaper. You are putting forward the question: would it be possible to express in this newspaper ideas which are not in agreement with the party’s line?

Sali Berisha: I was rather speaking about a wider range.

(p. 77)

Ramiz Alia: Ismail told us that there is a certain disorientation, the others did too. But – I’m speaking from the position of the head of this meeting – isn’t it our own fault too, of every one of us, that there is disorientation?

… Perhaps, we also have to draw a conclusion: that all of us must be more active, that we must react, and not get confused because of some shallow words, slogans and gossip that gets spread by the enemy. When we judge certain phenomena, we shouldn’t go so far as to see the national conscience offended because a policeman has beaten two persons, as Sali said. This is a correct concern, but not so much as to upset the national conscience.

… In this respect, our main preoccupation must be about what Luan said: why our secret police is so clumsy, so incapable? Why its officials showed themselves to be so weak, so incapable, so ignorant? By the fugitives in Germany, France, Italy etc., we are learning now how the scheme of the July events has been prepared, how the German, Czech, French, Yugoslav, or Italian diplomats have acted, how they came into contact with our people. 

…This activity of the enemy should have been discovered and struck before the events took place.

(p. 83)

Ismail Kadare: In 1972, Comrade Enver said that the party does not have unlimited rights. This idea has never been fully developed.

Ramiz Alia: This idea has to do with relations between the leading party and the power, the party and the people, the communists and the masses, with relations between the party and mass organizations. This is a question which must be treated more deeply. There is no doubt that this question needs to be elaborated. I’m not able today to tell you anything concrete, but the necessity to discuss it has already appeared.

Sali Berisha: It is about the law that declares the party as the hegemonic leading force, which is included in the constitution.

Ramiz Alia: I understand that is your concern. We cannot decide anything here, but if the leading role of the party is denied, this will suppose the existence of other parties. Are you advocating this idea? The political pluralism, the multiparty system?

Sali Berisha: … (hesitates to respond).

Ramiz Alia: Come on, you are a highlander, be direct, tell us openly the idea you have in your mind.

Sali Berisha: I’m convinced that for the moment the people are not prepared for a multiparty system.

Ramiz Alia: After all, you are not telling us what’s the point. Don’t speak about preparation. You are a physician: when you make an operation, you know what you are going to find out. I mean, if you accept an idea, you must see the consequences.

Sali Berisha: I’m advocating that the leading role of the party should not be sanctioned in the constitution. The party will demonstrate by its own acts what its place in the society is, and it should not rely on what the law provides.

Luan Omari: In reference to the multiparty system, there is the well known thesis of Stalin that the party of the working class doesn’t share the power with any other party. This is a very general thesis, so it cannot be a rule for every country or people which enters the route of socialism. After all, there is also an earlier thesis, which is in the Manifesto of the Communist Party, where Marx and Engels say that the communist party is one of the parties of the working class.

These are theoretical premises. Personally, I think that the unique party system corresponds better to the conditions of our country. In our country the Party of Labor has a very high prestige, it is bound to the people more organically than the parties of the Eastern countries, which were often imported from Moscow. Besides, in our country, there is no multiparty system tradition. There is no opposition in our country, not even oppressed, as there have been in Bulgaria, Rumania and elsewhere. Considering the inner conditions, I think that the pluralism of thought is indispensable and must be deepened, whereas political pluralism is not a question imposed by reality as a necessity.

Meanwhile, there is the external aspect to the question that cannot be neglected. As you said, presently the world is demanding of us not a cosmetic modification, but the overthrow of the people’s power. They can put forward the multiparty system or religious freedom as conditions for the participation of Albania in the Helsinki Process or with regard to relations with the European Common Market. In such a case, we shall be confronted with problems.

Ramiz Alia: Here is the problem. How to disarm the adversaries? How can we deprive them of these arguments?

Napolon Roshi: The creation of parties should not be forbidden by law.

Luan Omari: By law it is not forbidden now, either.

Napolon Roshi: After all, there would have been nothing wrong with the creation of an ecologist organisation.

Ramiz Alia: I don’t know what Ismail thinks about this. How can we harmonize these two aspects?

Ismail Kadare: I don’t consider the question of religion a serious one. In practice, we have officially permitted religion. Whereas the prohibition would have been something in vain.

Ramiz Alia: I think that Luan was speaking about religious institutions rather than the religious conscience.

Ismail Kadare: If we pose the question in this way, I as a writer wouldn’t be against the construction of a church in a village of Dropulli, if this is demanded by its people. We have already said that we cannot forbid it to them.

Before speaking about what Luan was arguing, I would underline, in relation to the party, that sometimes, on the whole of our propaganda, it is treated as a metaphysical entity in Albanian life. The construction of factories, the granting of pensions, etc., all of these are said to be a gift from the party. It seems that the people and the party are distinct. The party provides goods to the people, and the people takes and enjoys them. As a first step, one must put an end to this. It seems that we think we can avoid a multiparty system by intensifying a banal propaganda for the party, which is something meaningless.

(pg 88)

… As for the meaning of pluralism, this problem is not enough clear to me from the juridical point of view, I don’t understand its status.

Ramiz Alia: Nobody is going to believe that you don’t understand what pluralism means. If it was said by anybody else, yes, perhaps it might be acceptable, but is it you who doesn’t understand it?! You understand it, yes you do.

Ismail Kadare: It is not very clear to me what this means for our country.

Ramiz Alia: I’m going to explain it to you, since you have not understood it yet. A multiparty system means to have, besides the Party of Labor of Albania, one or several other parties, social democrats, republicans, liberals, greens or ecologists, as it was already mentioned here. This is the idea of a multiparty system.

Ismail Kadare: Presently, this is a very hard question to be considered because it involves many political connotations.

Ramiz Alia: There are political connotations, and this is a thoroughly political issue. Therefore, it is a very delicate issue. Practically we shouldn’t permit a multiparty system. As to how we can avoid the attack of foreign propaganda, this is something to be thought about and reflected upon.

There are people saying that there is no danger to allow other parties, because there is no party that can compete with the Party of Labor. This is true, I also firmly believe that there is no other party that can compete with our party, but the reactionary forces are insisting on this point, just because they know this might be the first great gap in the national unity.

… What we call pluralism of thought is something different. The social opinion must be elaborated as deeply as possible. And I think that even the electoral law that is being prepared should, in a way, express and reflect the question of pluralism.

Nowadays, the question of permitting different political parties is becoming, indeed, the principal weapon of the bourgeoisie against socialism, against Albania, and for that reason we must be consistent in defending our attitudes.

Without any doubt, the multiparty system would amount to overthrowing the people’s power.

… Somebody here mentioned also the question of Stalin, which is all the same rather complex, therefore we must act prudently.

… The important thing is that we are not Stalinists, in the sense this term is used by the bourgeoisie and the reactionary forces.

(p. 91)

Sali Berisha: In Kosovo too there is a different view about Stalinism.

Ramiz Alia: Comrade Berisha, the question of Kosovo is a separate question, which must be treated very cautiously.

(p. 94)

… Well, since it seems you have nothing more to say, I’m going to add a few words.

(p. 95)

… One can draw a parallel between the present day and that of the war. What other choice did our people have at that time? Either to fight, or to disappear as a nation. There was no other way. The first one was very difficult, and moreover, by that time, we didn’t see the end quite clearly. But what other choice could we follow? To leave the fate of our country in the hands of the occupier? The people chose to die while fighting and not to be subdued, and it made sacrifices and ended up a winner.

Nowadays we have the same situation. If we take the wrong path, if we succumb to the pressure of foreigners, to the attack of enemies, then we will lose the freedom and the independence of our fatherland, not to speak of socialism. The freedom and independence can be lost not only by accepting to host military bases, not only by classical occupations either. They can be lost also if we leave our economy, our national sovereignty in the hands of others.

Koha Jone, February 1, 1994

Threats against “Koha Jone”

All of you will be put in prison

Teodor Keko: “I am responding politely: You will eat our shit…”

Democracy, freedom, free speech, and human rights in danger

Koha Jone editor-in-chief Aleksander Frangaj and journalist Martin Leka imprisoned

Today, our colleagues were arrested without being judged by a court and justice.

Our Appeal: Remove the handcuffs from the hands of our colleagues and the free press.

Teodor Keko: “This is a war, and we are going to teach the state a good lesson.”

Thoma Gëllçi: “Anti-law has gone ferocious.”

Gjergj Zefi: “This is not the state, but a bunch of mafiosi.”

A day before yesterday the president came back to Tirana.

Yesterday two journalists were arrested.

The path to the free press goes through the prison.

An unfinished report by the journalist M. Leka…

Truth Does Not Harm Democracy, But Helps It

Interview with Rilindja Demokratike former editor-in-chief Mr. Frrok Çupi given to Koha Jone editor-in-chief Nikolle Lesi and the Albanian journalist living in Stockholm and working for the European press, Milaim Zeka.

Koha Jone

August 9, 1991

Currently, a lot is being said about your dismissal from the position of chief editor at Rilindja Demokratike, where you were the first chief editor and one of the main founders. They speak, you keep silent. Why?

Silence is not always dumb. Silence has its own language and philosophy. My silence, I think, is meaningful. Whatever I could say at the time, when you said I was silent, and because I was going to say the truth, it would have caused pain, because it is only 7-8 months ago that I along with some friends, such as Sali, Preç, Gramoz, Mitro, entered a war together. Others joined us. Now what should I speak about? Against myself? Against my friends? The truth is against some of them. This human pain didn’t allow me to speak. But sometimes people emerge from pain. Speaking then? In such tense situations, I couldn’t believe it. I couldn’t believe that it had happened: my close friend, who together with me decided to sacrifice everything, is attacking me from behind. I couldn’t believe it at first.

Those were the first days of silence. Later, I continued to be silent, but I kept a cool head: I was waiting for my friends to speak about what happened or what they did. On several days, some newspapers made such an appeal in their pages. They spoke publicly, as you may have read in Rilindja Demokratike. But unfortunately, it was cynical.

I would have continued to be silent if you didn’t ask me for this interview. Silence or non-silence, these days worry me. I thank you for taking me out of this situation. Some people used to come and ask me: What are you doing? Why don’t you say something? Rilindja Demokratike articles and statements in different meetings do not convince us. Some others used to say: Please be patient, be patient until it ends. We know you are right, but don’t say anything. Because if you speak, democracy will be seriously harmed.

In the meantime, in the meetings held in different districts, the representatives of the Democratic Party were asked why that happened to the chief editor of Rilindja Demikratike. Different explanations have been provided. Somewhere it was said that he was promoted; somewhere else that he would be appointed as ambassador; somewhere else that he didn’t obey us and we didn’t have the newspaper under control; and elsewhere that he hadn’t sacrificed enough.

Things said in a meeting are different from those said in the Dajti Hotel or on the sofa of a living room, or by those whispered in the ear of somebody. All these forced me to tell the whole truth. I am convinced that this will help democracy and won’t harm it.

Public opinion has expected you to explain the reasons you left because you are the person to speak about this.

I would sincerely like to have a reason, even against myself. If I had a good reason to let the people know, I would say: this is the reason. Then everybody would be calm; I and them. The worst thing is when you have nothing to tell the others because you are forced to mutter in order not to tell the truth. But this tortures you a lot. It tortures also the people you speak to. I think I was not alone in this situation. My friends, leaders of the Democratic Party, were also in the same situation. What they once declared, next time they didn’t; what one of them said about this problem, the others didn’t. When this was discussed in the meeting of the Organizing Commission of the Democratic Party, it was said only that “the newspaper is weak.” But the following day, other things were said. In the newspaper it was not mentioned, but at Dajti the thing about the headlines was mentioned. It was muttering words and pieces of reasons.

However, there is a true thing, unfortunately not yet said: it is the way the newspaper Rilindja Demokratike was conceived by senior official of the party. They had conceived it and wanted it to be their own instrument. So, in the most vulgar sense: e.g. I left the house, the newspaper should write that Mr. X left the house when the sky was cloudy; or when I, the leader, stepped out of the car – the newspaper should immediately write that when the door of the car was opened, the true happiness was seen on people’s faces; when I step onto the platform, the newspaper should publish the photo and the great news that a new program was launched from this platform.

But I, as one of the newspaper heads (and as agreed in the newspaper program: the newspaper won’t simply be a party instrument), couldn’t allow that.

This is the true reason. The newspaper would neither create cults, nor do services to certain people. It would only serve the democratic movement and the truly democratic press. But why don’t the Democratic Party authorities declare this publicly? This would help them and help me too. Because that is the truth, and the truth helps. But if they know another truth, which they do not make public, but hide it perhaps to protect me, then I would ask them to say it openly on the newspaper, bulletin, or on radio. But it should be the truth.

It is said that the lynching organized against you lasted three hours only. What about it?

Yes, three hours. The most difficult hours of my life. It was 15:00. I was about to leave the office when I saw Napolon Roshi coming towards the office. With a bitter expression on his face, which he always wears when he has to hide, something under his skin, and with a voice just like that of an old woman saying: “Frrok, here is the material with the analysis of the newspaper. The meeting will be held today at 18:00.” He headed towards the door. I was surprised.

What analysis, I said. I had no information about it. Nobody asked my opinion. Nobody came here. What does it mean?

Ah, I don’t know. The doctor knows that. Why do you ask me, Napolon said.

The meeting is after three hours. I have no time to read the material, let alone to analyze or discuss it with the newspaper staff; to agree or object to it.

You are right Frrok. You are right, but you know the doctor told me that. Napolon whispered some words and hurried down the stairs.

After that moment, three hours were left. Three hours of exhaustion and heat. I opened that material written by Napolon personally on behalf of the whole staff and read. But, what to read? It was all dark. Dark about the newspaper. I couldn’t read it to the end (if the reader is curious, I can publish it). I put it in my bag and I went home…. The meeting began at 18:00. Who knows what happened to them during the past three hours but everything was clear and simple to me. A real lynching, perhaps the first lynching in this epoch called democratic.

Do these purges resemble those of Enver’s time?

Many DP leaders have developed an interesting rapport with Enver Hoxha, the cruelest dictator of this country. Their statements, speeches and rallies, and their declarations to unmask the dictator are already known. But in my opinion they are in the same line as him: Imagine Enver Hoxha on a cart riding on his own path. Exactly on the side of Enver’s cart, travels the cart of these democratic leaders. These democrats are in this cart not to accompany Enver but to have him as close as possible and to whip him. However, willingly or not, they are riding close to each other along the same road, though they are in different carts, are angry or are fighting with each other. This is the real way to perceive the relation between these democratic leaders and Enver Hoxha. This rapport will continue until they leave from the cart of Enver at any bend in the road, so until they will find the true path to democracy with democratic methods.

Because Enver’s methods or similar methods are often used. Consider the method used against me: It was an Enver or Stalin style of dirty tricks. I was with a delegation in America while everything was prepared here. As soon as I landed in Albania, I heard some rumor that “he will be discharged once he comes back.” This is exactly as it happened in Enver’s period, when any of Enver’s collaborators had to be openly criticized or sacrificed, the psychosis was developed in advance through some rumor or gossip. In the first edition, I was going to publish after my return from America, Sali came to the printing house late at night and he shook my hand coldly. (The workers said that “he calmed down, because he saw you, but earlier he had shouted: Where is he! What is going on here!) Then he ordered to remove an article and to publish another one instead. He left.

I had seen the same scene in a theater performance, when the first secretary leaves the stage before there begins the storm of demotions of the personnel. The workers thought “everything is finished between them.” But they didn’t say a word. Then came the announcement for the meeting, the three hours lynching that we spoke about. Ugly and disgraceful. But not like Enver because Enver gave warning a long time in advance. He also guarded you until he finally was ready, etc. Most disgraceful and scheming was the way the report was compiled. Napolon Roshi had been assigned as a specialist to deteriorate the newspaper work. That Napoleon, who sat at the end of the hall, sometimes made gestures as if to tell me “they don’t have any idea about a newspaper” and sometimes he was servile to the others. He stood there as the beautiful devil; an angel you would presume. That Napolon who told Rilindja Demokratike journalists that he was not involved in the plot against Frrok. But when some days ago I by chance went to his previous office, I found a lot of papers written by him trying to devise a plan and convince the party that the newspaper is weak; it is not the newspaper of the party; the party doesn’t have it under control, etc. so it was necessary to make changes in the newspaper’s management. So, he wanted to have that position. He had come to my office some time ago with some pieces of papers pretending that there were some remarks of the masses, but because I knew him since when working for Bashkimi newspaper, I reacted calmly and told him “put them on the desk.” Who is that person to do that; he was not even a member of newspaper publishing council. Well, let’s leave Napoleon and come back to the dirty trick. A dirty trick, I have declared this there, too. The Organizing Commission of the party gathers in a meeting at 18:00 and analyzes the newspaper. There were said things about the newspaper, but not about the editor-in-chief. When, suddenly they said: “Please go out because we have something to discuss.” I went out. The following morning, it was Sunday, the chairman of the party called me and told me that they had decided to discharge me and to replace me with Napoleon Roshi. How so? I am elected by the Newspaper Publishing Council, so the same council has the right to discharge me, I said to him. But nobody heard me or asked me about that. This is how we, the party, decided – the chairman said.

The Publishing Council knew nothing about what was going on. Nobody asked their opinion or view. Me neither. Journalists were not asked and listened to either. The editorial staff was completely ignored. The following day, I went to the office. I thought someone from the party officials would come and discuss with the editorial staff, at least now; I thought I could have a coffee with the new chief editor (who is going to retire soon) and have a friendly talk. But no. I tried to open my office but the key didn’t work. The newly appointed editor-in-chief was in the office. He had come very early, took the key from the cleaning woman, and was sitting on my chair.

  • What about you, I said to Napoleon.
  • Well, they asked me to become the editor-in-chief. But you may stay for a while, leave also your bag today.
  • Well, the bag, I said, but will the editorial staff have a meeting and be informed, won’t they?
  • Ah, yes. You are right.
  • He dialed the telephone. Arben Imami answered. Napolon’s words: “Let’s gather those who are present and say two words.” Arben’s car soon came. Arben said that he came to communicate the decision.

So, they were the chiefs of the staff; appointments made from the top. You mentioned Enver, but when Enver knew that somebody violated their competences, then he made them pay for it. One of the editors denounced that as unjust and declared “that he would not work for this newspaper anymore.” Two hours later, he was called and informed that “He was discharged.”

I think you asked me about the Enverist style of purges.

Your party accused you of having neglected the Kosova issue. What is your defense in front of the public prosecutors (the people)?

When I read this statement about Kosova in the newspaper, I had two sensations one after the other. First, I thought it was a joke by Sali while writing that for the newspaper. Then I learned that the article was written by Napoleon Roshi and I felt horrified. Me ignoring Kosova?! And this is declared by a Greek, Napoleon Roshi. If somebody has to protect Kosova, then first of all he has to be Albanian. How can a Greek accuse an Albanian of not loving Albania, that is Kosova? And here comes this Greek, who had denied his nationality to become a servant of Enver Hoxha’s regime, to defend the Albanian issue of Kosova. This is not simply absurd. It goes beyond it. I remember a debate in the parliament and press about the viewpoint of the Greek clan regarding the contemporary democratic national Albanian movement. It is my duty to remember that. Now, Albania is like a woman in a labor, seen by others as appropriate to inject their infection, e.g. Napoleon, who deliberately begins with a public attack against an Albanian democrat or several Albanian democrats and intellectuals in order to set the Albanian nation against them. Several days later, this Napoleon writes an article in Rilindja Demokratike pleading to Italian government authorities: “Please do not return the Albanian to their homeland.” Well Koçi Xoxe declared then: “Why should I feel pity for Albanians, I am not an Albanian.” I perceive Napoleon’s appointment at the head of the democratic press as suspicious, especially regarding the national issue.

But if Sali had written that, I would have considered it a joke. Because he knows very well how much attached to Kosova I am, even personally. He knows how and where I took Kosovan newspapers to happily read them. He knows that whenever we met we spoke largely about Kosova. While regarding the contribution of the newspaper to the Kosova issue, it is clear for everybody. The name of the newspaper Rilindja Demokratike was taken from a statement by the Kosovar intellectual Prof. Rexhep Qosja. On the front page of the very first edition of the newspaper, an article about Kosova was published. The editorial of the first edition states that the newspaper serves and will serve for a resolution of the national issue and union. Articles and information of Kosovar intellectuals, or of others about Kosova, have been published. Articles about Kosova were the first to be published.

But if the Organizing Commission, so not the party (perhaps the question was not clearly stated), share the accusation of ignoring the Kosova issue, then another issue is raised: As a chief editor I am also accused of ignoring the village. This is the old style. Every time something went wrong in an area, Enver Hoxha would sacrifice somebody. He would blame that person and give the impression that everything was resolved. While the problem was with his political line and its failure. How can a party ask a newspaper to resolve the village issue?

It seems that Rilindja Demokratike helped the party leadership more than was expected: It opened the way; time after time it showed the right path to follow, and showed what was right or wrong. Now the newspaper is asked to do even the autumn sowing, because we are staying in Tirana.

In true democratic countries, party newspapers are in opposition with the party. In your case, did Rilindja Demokratike dare to criticize the wrongful actions of the Democratic Party?

One day prior to the first edition of Rilindja Demokratike, I gave an interview for Voice of America, saying that the newspaper will be in opposition with its party in order to clean up and help the party and the democracy we want to establish. This is one of the objectives defined in the newspaper program. A day after the first edition, Elene Paukku, vice chairman of the international journalists association, came to meet me. She posed almost the same question. I gave the same answer I gave in my interview. Then she continued: “Aren’t you scared that your party will cut your head?” She posed this question and then tried to make it sound less hard. “Well, this is how it happened between the parties and the newspapers in the Eastern countries.”

“No,” I said. “I am not afraid, because I am not alone. There is a Publishing Council consisting of intellectuals who have a good understanding of the relations between the party and newspaper.” I explained to her the reason we established the Publishing Council. It was to protect the newspaper from the party’s direct attacks. But the party used the occasion when the Publishing Council was dissolved, partly because of other government assignments, or because it was not very attentive, and the party did not respect it and did what it actually did.

I had explained the function of the Publishing Council to some Eastern European journalists who came here. They appreciated this measurement and told me that they also had problems with their own parties. I explained that also to the journalist in western countries, when I had the chance to be there, and western journalists coming to Albania, and they appreciated that, too. I spoke about that also to Rexhep Qosja when I met him in America. He listened to me attentively and askedca lot of questions about the way we had preceded. He appreciated the idea, that the party should not subdue the press, as much as he appreciated the newspaper itself.

The newspaper was in opposition to the party in the sense that it did not allow the party to publish the crazy things that they wanted to, or develop cults and publish leader’s greetings, as had happened before, when the newspaper was completely subdued by the party, etc. We hadn’t yet begun with direct critiques of the party. We thought the party was very fragile and young. Perhaps we could break it. We were going to start now.

You, Mr. Çupi, are accused of a serious deviation of the editorial line of the newspaper Rilindja Demokratike, and of ignoring the Kosova issue. After these accusations it seems as if you have acquired an even more important role. Why does it happen so?

Across from a false thing stands a false thing. So, as the accusations made are not true, neither is that I have taken other positions. I am simply a journalist of Rilindja Demokratike. But they still do it, according to the old style: they beat you and they behave as if they are offering new positions. They would really like to offer me some position to say then that we have nothing against you. Well, leave me in the position of journalist. This is my profession. I want nothing else. Furthermore, this is what we declared when we found the Democratic Party: we want no positions, we will soon come back to our professions.

You were a persecuted journalist in Enver’s time. You dreamt of the victory of democracy. But please tell us the reasons why many persons from the opposition keep the same old attitudes.

I am concerned about what you say, because many people who applaud for democracy are bajraktare, careerists and dictators. I see the truth in your words. I am not concerned for myself but for the thousands of people who were ready to make big sacrifices; to sacrifice their sons and daughters; their life for the victory of democracy, for democrats. What can we say to people if we turn out to be dictators rather than democrats? I am sure people would prefer Enver Hoxha to be alive, and this would be the end. So, they are recently asking for Leka Zogu and his monarchy to come here because they have don’t have the same trust in Democracy. You ask: For what reasons? What is the source of all this? The source is Enver himself and his morals, and other persons as well. There are people who have adapted Enver’s tactics very well. It is not their fault, they can’t be different, they use the same methods.

Well, look: the first Enverist persecution or, as some others call it, the second neo-Stalinist persecution. They have things in common. Then, in 1984, an order was given (by Enver, they said) to take severe measures against me, because I wrote the truth in the newspaper. Then: “We can not accuse him of the article only because the facts are true. But we accuse him of having damaged the reputation of our state.” After that they fabricated something about my biography. Then they said he did not work well in the production. They just used one argument after the other.

Today: Once they said the newspaper is weak. But soon they resigned because the reader was of another opinion, so were Ismail Kadare and other true intellectuals. Then they fabricated headlines and editorials. Then the important position. Then they fabricated and published things I had never heard of.

So can you see the similarity?!

It was July 12 then also. It was already midnight when the phone rang. The chief editor of Zëri i Popullit at that time (a half crazy person, known by all) had ordered a meeting of the editorial council to punish me according to the order issued from the top. In the middle of the night. Members of the editorial council were immediately summoned. I found them standing in front of chief editor’s office. When I entered editor’s office, the son of Enver Hoxha, Sokol, and his wife Liljana came in. All were frozen because of … respect. It was clear. The chief-editor A. Xh., who was a close friend to Sokol and Liljana, had called them to go there in the middle of the night as if to tell the people: “So, can you oppose me and protect Frrok?” So, I was the sacrifice at the presence of Enver’s heirs. But they couldn’t stand very long meetings, and they left. The chief editor accompanied them and had a coffee with them at Dajti. The punishment would be declared the following day. I heard the phone in my office ringing time and again. Surely, my children shocked from my leave late at night were trying to speak to me.

Even this time I left the house the same way. It was Saturday evening, when all the people go home. In addition, I hadn’t stayed enough with my children since my return from America. I saw very dark faces that day! Sali had a toothache, but he went and pulled it out as soon as possible. He told that he would be back very soon and find everybody there.

These similarities worry me. This is my only concern, my dear people.

Don’t you think that it’s difficult to realize your dreams for democracy?

Difficult, yes, but not impossible. I always knew that. I want to tell something to the people thanking them for listening to me: Don’t fall into pessimism and resign from the work for democracy, if you see that somebody, who claims to be a democrat, doesn’t behave as such. I don’t feel anger against the leaders of the Democratic Party. The bad anger cuts the dream for democracy. Not the other obstacles: neither dictatorship, nor the bullet, nor the fabrications. Only you yourself, your inner world. In fact, I was seriously insulted by a friend of mine in the editorial staff who wanting to express his appreciation for me but, in a scholastic style, said that he had only one remark for Frrok: “he is too democratic…” These people’s dream for democracy is dying.

In a Scandinavian RTV program, I (M. Zeka) emphasized that people in Serbia and Albania need 20 years to learn to discuss in a democratic way. Was I right?

I can’t say exactly the time needed. But if we consider a certain time in the future, it will be prior to that in Yugoslavia. We should feel pity for Kosova’s people having the Serbs over their head and feel happy with each other, Albanians with Albanians, and find the democratic language. I have a big hope in the coming generation, in the generation of my 15 year-old son. Have you seen them? They have a kind face, a clear look, a confined anger, rich language, and do not bear the others holding fingers up when it is not appropriate. They are the hope. So less than 20 years.

Years ago, Rexhep Qosja spoke about cultured dialogue in his book “The Anatomy of Culture.” I am personally shocked when I listen to some of the deputies in the parliament. Does the same behaviour take place in the newspapers staffs? (M. Zeka)

Most of the actual members of the parliament have not read “The Anatomy of Culture.” It was illegally brought to Albania. I read it secretly. But this is not the point. The point is that people are calmer and more cultured than the parliament. Fortunately, people demonstrate calm and good manners, while the parliament demonstrates the opposite. But surely the composition of the parliament in the next elections will not be the same. People will have a better understanding and they will vote for the deputy and not for the party. This doesn’t mean that there is no current deputy deserving to be as such. But these deputies who are real democrats also have other tasks and duties and cannot always be in the parliament. For example, I see Preç Zogaj, a friend and a co-founder of the democratic newspaper, who I appreciate so much, go rarely to parliament.

Regarding the same behavior among the newspaper staff. Yes, there is such behavior, since a deputy, sitting at the bottom of the parliament hall often saying “Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman,” was appointed the chief editor of the newspaper. He is Napoleon Rroshi. He is so quiet in the parliament but so hostile in the newspaper. “You sabotaged me,” he says. Journalists tell a political joke: “It seems that our staff will make the party happy by discovering a group of enemies.”

Many of your colleagues in the newspaper were indignant at your dismissal. Tell us something more concretely about their support, and have you resigned from the party or the newspaper staff?

The party arbitrarily discharged me without asking the opinion of the newspaper staff or the Publishing Council and without having made any previous comment or remark on the newspaper or me. That is why the staff felt indignant and insulted. If party people ever ask me, I would implore them not to destroy that staff, because it is a staff of talented journalists and good people and democrats. But they sent Napoleon Roshi who is continuously telling them: “you will not take another salary here, find another job, because you are not staying longer here.” What a shame!

Who decides about the editor-in-chief? The Party or the editorial staff?

When we founded the newspaper, we decided that only the Publishing Council had the right to appoint or discharge the chief editor. But in fact something else happened: the party took the decision about the chief editor. So long as the party will do what they want, so long as the party takes decision without considering other norms, so long as other people, being not journalists and writers, will decide on the newspaper and literature, then we have the same situation as in a one-party state. I think that the Democratic Party should discuss about such facts and signals, because its leadership is demonstrating a tendency towards a one-party state. This is a misfortune.

Napoleon Rroshi says that he was appointed the editor-in-chief against his will. Then, how did it happen?

I heard that. And I am not surprised. Nobody knowing Napoleon is surprised. You don’t know him…?

This Napoleon worked in the world news section of Bashkimi newspaper. I worked for that newspaper also. So many phrases and expressions against American imperialism were said and written by him! Most probably instead of asking for a cup of coffee in the morning he might have said “American imperialism.” I remember when he worked for Bashkimi and Enver Hoxha criticized him because he had gone beyond Enver’s idea itself. This Napoleon had written an article about the Helsinki Conference with the headline “The Conference for European Insecurity.” He criticized Helsinki (which he is now supporting) very hard. He criticized Russians and Americans. He declared the world’s danger comes from Helsinki. He blamed America for everything bad in the world. But he criticized the Americans so illogically that Enver personally felt angry. Enver burst into anger: “what is this pseudo-journalist who, to satisfy me, violates the political line of the party and causes problems for us with the Chinese, who complained that we have unfairly criticized the Americans too much.” Then Napoleon was scared to death because Mehmet Shehu also criticized him. But the chief editor protected him. He served so willingly to the politics of that time, so that he was appointed the director of radio (in foreign languages). He continued to be a director even when the Democratic Party was founded, when demonstrations were taking place, as well as in other difficult situations. After the publication of seven or eight editions of the newspaper I asked him for an interview.

“No, no, no,” he said. “Don’t mix me up with that newspaper, please.” Then he sent a journalist from radio to take some notes he had in my office, because he was afraid “they were going to be sent accidentally to the printing house and published in the newspaper.” Several days later, I met him in front of the Art School. He was going to a reception at the Embassy of France. I asked him to write an article about the Greek minority, as he belonged to this minority. But he refused categorically. I don’t know what happened on the eve of the election campaign. I think that they couldn’t have a thorough list of candidates for deputy, so they included Napoleon. Then the Democratic Party learned that Napoleon was also listed as a candidate of the Republican Party. They called him and told him that this situation should be resolved. He said promptly: “Don’t worry. I can resolve this immediately. I can be yours from now on. I quit from the Republican Party. So don’t worry. Tomorrow morning I will be your candidate, not theirs. I promise!” So, he also became a deputy. He knows how he dealt with other things. He messed things up in Rilindja Demokratike and wrote a report on the work of the newspaper, underestimating and criticizing the work done. Perhaps one day he will be awarded as a hero of democracy. Well, if the people have their eyes shut. But I don’t believe it. It’s not a matter of a Napoleon, but of some renegades having joined the democratic movement. 

This Napoleon, who in the editorial staff meeting of the 5th of August was distanced from the Party’s Steering Committee), criticized them as much as he could, and then resigned as a editor-in-chief.

I heard you have applied for a job at “Zëri i Popullit. What is your comment?

It’s not true.

You are among the first people who attacked the Enver Hoxha regime. You joined the DP willingly and enthusiastically. Now, several months later, do you think that your ideals have been betrayed?

I notice something positive in the Democratic Party. Its members from all over the country, when they have a concern about the party or something related to the tarty, they come and meet the party chairman. They express their opinions freely, without any hesitation. This didn’t happen in the Labor Party. A communist couldn’t go to Enver Hoxha and tell him that he was not right about this or that.

However, this is still a little. I think we should wait for the party elections in districts and here I think the Albanian TV should broadcast them live. I think, let’s wait until the leadership advances. Let’s wait until the free Albanian press starts; we, some journalists, writers, and other intellectuals have to start organizing and to make it. Let’s be patient until everyone gets some economic independence. Let’s also wait until our little children grow up. Let’s wait and work until the nation within and on the other side of the border unites. Until then I am convinced that I will not lose my hope in democracy. On the contrary, I become constantly optimistic that our people will achieve democracy. This will never be betrayed.

According to our opinion, Albanians have never been Bolsheviks. Albanian bajraktarism was born prior to Marx. What is the affect of this bajraktarism within the political parties and other institutions?

The affect of bajraktarism can be: Bajraktarism can make possible the archaic lifestyles; the people can be further divided into groups; within the bajraktar areas, an danger to the Nation can emerge; it might necessitate reestablishing the Enver Hoxha dictatorship.

But the most likely to happen is that the parties and first of all the people demand that this bajraktarism be destroyed and removed from their lives. Then the people is the winner. Well, we keep saying that it depends on the people; it is in their hands. This time it really is.

I know Eastern countries quite well. I have the impression that in Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia, and Albania a true opposition is considered only that person who attacks the president. I have rarely or never heard of attacking or criticizing the political programs of each other’s party. Is that correct?

First, I don’t like it when they attack through the newspaper. What is it? But I think this will soon be over for the Albanians. In addition, I would like to be patient and calm to wait until these people who attack get tired of it. Then we could ask them: “Is it over, because now we want to build a democratic order.”

According to you, if we gave ourselves the right to change, should President Ramiz Alia also have this right?

The right to change cannot be denied to anybody. Neither in the most critical moments nor in the happy moments. I would say that this is not only a right but also a responsibility. Whoever that might be, even if s/he is only two days in politics or he has only two days left in politics. But the president once changed does not have the right to say I am not who I used to be or that I was not who I used to be.

Who would you actually propose as a President?

I think of the President as a common person, who walks and works together with us; a person who wisely joins us with his honesty and culture; who loves people; who sincerely respects the nation; who has no complexes from the past and supports none of the parties; who has a soft and kind look and face; who does everything because he feels and thinks that it is the right thing; who the day he is elected a president he belongs no longer to himself; who the day he is elected, the political and economic life of the country will feel his influence; who is devoted only to work and the politicians will be devoted to his word and opinion to regenerate our country; who continues to be as human as we are and as he is today. I know this person. He is among Albanian people. Everybody knows this person and loves him, I believe. So, this is the person to be our president.

Thank you.

Four Great Days of the Students

By Ben Blushi and Blendi Fevziu

Rilindja Demokratike

January 5, 1991 (first edition of the newspaper)

Should youth, especially students, and could youth undertake such endeavors? Does their position and status justify this? The results are the best answer.

Considering the past 46-years, you could never find a solidarity act to justify that.

Those days somebody with official authority blamed the students, calling them law-breakers and pampered people who complain only about a two-hour blackout. As they were official authorities, they declared that they could expel all the students from the university.

Do youth and students have any other fault, besides that of knowing how to age?

Saturday – December 8

It’s several nights that the power is off. As an irony, the lights in Tirana completed the contrast. Since October 25, 1971, when the electrification of the Socialist Popular Republic of Albania was completed, millions of power cuts in the country can be counted. But none of these millions of cases was accompanied by a protest and the indignation like that of December 8. Those cases were tolerated and they will be tolerated in the future. So, everybody understands that this served only as an excuse. The way that the excuse was chosen at the right place and time shows maturity. Everybody understands that if it had not been the power cuts, another excuse would have been found – maybe the lack of food or a car accident. If it were not December 8, it would have been December 25 or perhaps January 1. Everybody finally understands that the day to destroy the walls that unjustly separate us from Europe was coming.

Sunday – December 9

In a legend of the ancient Greeks, the night was presented as a pregnant woman delivering the day. I don’t know why the dawn, while the previous night filled with tension was giving space to the determination of the students, reminded me of that legend. In the square and streets of Students City, where everything common was forgotten, thousands of people shout different slogans, which were for a long time had been uttered in whispers.

It seems that violence, instead of suppressing determination, did the contrary, exactly what we wanted, killing the fear.

About 10 o’clock thousands of students march towards the university headquarters. Armed police forces block the streets and most of the protestors (about 3,000 students) are stopped at the art school. Protestors at the front lines touch the shields of the police. Shouts: “We are peaceful; we don’t want violence; remove the police.”

10 o’clock. The group of students keep protesting. The Secretary of the Socialist Youth Union of Albania comes for dialogue. He guarantees that the violence of the previous night will not be repeated. We sing the hymn of the flag. Shouts – “Freedom, democracy;” “We, as all Europe” – can be heard everywhere.

11 o’clock. Concern grows. The situation is strange. The possible danger is neglected by sincere smiles. Maybe they will give the order to shoot, somebody says. He smiles. The others smile too. Can death be so easily perceived? Maybe yes, maybe no.

12 o’clock. Our determination remains the same. We are demanding something legal. The words Democracy and Pluralism are felt everywhere, just as we feel the indignation for the words “hooligans” that radio and television can call us in the evening.

12:30. “Police forces” dressed in civilian clothes unexpectedly begin to disperse the crowd. The only way out is the field in front of the Italian Embassy. What happens can be described as: boys running and helping girls to run, brave people stooping to pick up the wounded, books dropping to the ground, roars of pains, armed civilians pursuing and attacking us.

There were the houses of Tirana people, which were opened to let us in and protect us from the rubber batons. The houses were full. We cannot forget the trembling hands and faint voice of a boy from Kolonja, who lost temporarily his sight. “Do not tell my father,” he said. In all those families there were fathers and mothers. An hour later when we left the host house, we looked at the field once again. It was empty, but the torn pages of books and lectures lay on the ground. In order to come here the democracy was obliged to walk on our books.

During all these days, the people of the city spoke so much about us. We were tired and wounded. The reality used the rubbe batons against us, so as to force us to believe that dreams are only dreams.

Monday – December 10

After a day full of curses, threatens and violence (December 9), it seemed to many people that apocalypse day for the country was approaching. The photos taken the other night during the terror of rubber batons and violence were developed in the dark laboratories of their minds. One party was expecting the method of violence to give an end to the epidemic, while the other party was expecting this method to become petrol for the fire of the epidemic.

The morning of December 10 was a strike morning. It had all the elements: the objective, the interests, the demands, the leaders, and the strike-breakers. The strike also constituted a moral test. It divided the students into two camps. Naivety, fear, morality and political beliefs, personal or familial political commitment made some of the students walk down Elbasan Street and stay in the house or dormitory. While the leaders of the movement headed by Azem Hajdari, a student of philosophy (third year), presented the 11 demands from the first pluralist tribune of post-liberation.

They did not rest, but they had thoughts; they had not slept, but they had dreamed; they had not forgotten the violence, but they wanted to replace it with dialogue for the sake of the thousands of people who supported them.

In the meantime, the orators (it was very easy to be an orator that day) held speeches on the stage one after the other.

Some professors approached the microphone. It was time to differentiate among them. However, the orators kept speaking until it began to rain. Wet but fresh pluralism. Awaiting the response from the president, the tables at the main Students City cafeteria was changed into a tribune. President Alia accepted the dialogue.

Tuesday – December 11

The pilgrimage of Tirana citizens continued in the streets of Students’ City. The bus of the representatives drove slowly among the crowd surrounding it. It seemed that it would break down from the students’ shouts of joy and greetings. Freud said: the enthusiasm of the moment is the golden key to raise the simple man onto the pedestals. It seems that everyone has a moment like that inside them. I saw indifferent students shouting like children; I saw strict professors wiping tears from their eyes; well-known writers and scientists following the bus; young people kneeling in front of it. Ovations started there and stopped at the Palace of the Brigades, where the President was waiting.

“This is the best day of my life,” a worker waid. While we thought that, it was the first day, which opened the way for many other happy days.

Some hours later, when the representatives were back, we felt that at least de jure we had won pluralism, the absence of which only some weeks ago had kept us out of civilized Europe.

The Truth About the Founding of the Republican Party

By Gafur Muco and Shpetim Spahiu

Bashkimi

July 22, 1991

We have been silent for a long time, but now we think it is over. We took this decision when we learned that in the first Republican Party Conference, Sabri Godo declared Vangjush Gambeta as the first Republican in Albania, and himself as the second. This hurt us because the first Republicans of December are out of the Republican Party, while their names are used by “the leadership,” which lies and deceives hundreds and thousands of people all around the country to develop its activity.

We will try to speak based only on facts…

On December 18, 1990, we submitted a request, the program, and a regulation to the Ministry of Justice. On December 29, 1990, we had a meeting with the Minister Enver Halili and the lawyer Jani Vasili, where the program of the Republic Party was considered. In the document ref. no. 75, dated 4/1/1991, issued by the Codification and Legislation Department, headed by Mr. G. Muco, we were asked to go to the Ministry of Justice. Present in the meeting were the same persons who received us on December 29, 1990, who said that a list of 100 persons should be presented.

On January 7, we met Vangjush Gambeta by chance. We spoke about the recent events and the new democracy in Albania. We asked him to join us and we suggested him to run the newspaper in the future and to help us gather names. He accepted to make a list of names, but on the same day in the evening he gave it to us blank, and he did not even accept to sign himself. In collaboration with the other members of the organizing commission, we completed the list of the first 100 R epublicans, who had supported us since December. We gave it to Mr. Jani Vasili. The list was considered valid, and we had to go to the Ministry on January 9, 1991 in the morning. On January 8, 1991, I (G. Muco) went to Vangjush, but he was not there.

On January 9, we were told at the Ministry of Justice that the legalization of the party was planned for January 13. I insisted it take place on January 10, on the eve of “January 11.” Finally, it was decided that three people would go there on January 10. We decided it would be G.M uco and R. Permeti. There was not a third person. Quite by chance, Vangjush Gambeta joined this group. This is verified by a signature at the margins of the document of the RP fundamental act.

To our surprise, the representative of the justice department J.V. came to my house in the evening of the same day and invited me to go for a walk. We walked to the center of the city. When we were parting, he said to me: “Well, I almost forgot … give this telephone number to Vangjush. Take care, it is the telephone number of Sofokli Lazri!” I kept the promise. I did it.

I should also say something else. At the Ministry of Justice at J.V.’s office, we met the journalist V. Zoto, who would write a short article about the RP to be published in Bashkimi on January 12, 1991, but surprisingly it was not published. After several days, the same newspaper published an announcement about RP and its organizing commission consisting of P. Marko, S. Godo, V. Gambeta, H. Cobani, A. Zeka, ect., who had nothing to do with us.

The discussion with Sofokli Lazri, the involvement of S. Godo, and the non-publication of the first article at Bashkimi made things change profoundly. The leadership slipped from our hands. We have a guilty conscience, as we invited V.G. to RP. “The second Republican,” S. Godo, has never been a Republican, not even formally. S. Godo was placed at the top of the RP pyramid, due to the elbows given and the external interventions.

The difference between us and the usurpers of the RP leadership became increasingly evident. Vangjush took information from us and Sabri neutralized our activities. The first moved, the second stayed by us.

Other facts. On January 15 I represented the RP in a meeting with the governmental commission regarding the requests of the Valias miners. We were also on TV. But the following day in the meeting with Ramiz Alia, Sabri Godo – a person who had nothing to do with us and what is more, who used G. Muco’s invitation, which was given to him by V.Gambeta without our authorization – took part. Now the question is: Why was the protocol not respected? Who authorized him to send to the president somebody else, whose name was different from the one written on the invitation? It is not difficult to understand. The meeting with Sofokli had opened the way for those two people.

This step alarmed us. Something was done in a secret way and deliberately, so that this political force be led by someone else, reliable for the Party of Labor. None more reliable than Sabri Godo could have been found. We were convinced about that, as all our requests for financing and materials were immediately passed to the hands of the last ones.

To bring an end to this, we asked V. Gambeta to give some explanations for everything that was happening and especially the discussion with Sofokli Lazri. He tried to refuse any fact and vowed that he spoke only about family problems, as he knew his wife. His attitude made us further convinced that we were dealing with a well prepared plan and trick. Then we decided to have a meeting with the organizing commission, to consider the activity of V. Gambeta, who though informed did not show up. The organizing commission after having discussed V. Gambeta’s stance, and evaluating his activity as malicious, decided unanimously to expel him from the RP. The activity of Sabri Godo was considered illegal and had nothing to do with the RP. We asked to do this public, but we were stopped. The boss of the press and information, Sofokli Lazri, who was the friend of “the Republicans,” decided on that.

We informed V. Gambeta officially about our decision to expel him, but V. Gambeta and S. Godo continue their activity. Due to the pressure exerted on us, phone threats etc., we were forced to withdraw. In that period of troubles and being also depressed I had two meetings with S. Godo, where I asked him to give up that dishonest initiative.

After that attempt failed and our situation became increasingly critical, on February 18, 1991 we decided to address an official letter to the Ministry of Justice, where we explained our situation and we returned the decision on the founding of the RP. The Ministry of Justice did not answer, but on February 28, 1991, it sent to “the true” RP, headed by S. Godo and V. Gambeta, a copy of the decision given to us on January 10, 1991, signed by Dashamir Kore, as Enver Halili was no any longer at the position of minister.

Please read the newspapers of January 11, 1991, which announced that Enver Halili ordered the registration of the Republican Party. On February 28 another order signed by Dashamir Kore was sent; it was not published…, could such a scenario be informed?

We pose the question: who gave the right to this ministry, which based on a social group gave the right of political activity to another social group, which had nothing to do with us and which had submitted nothing to the Ministry of Justice? Instead of suspending their activity immediately and giving the right to the people to whom it belonged, it was strangely given to usurpers.

Isn’t that political business, a fifth column of the Party of Labor of Albania within the opposition? Isn’t that an imitation of Enverism in founding the Communist Party of Albania?!

The RP has hundreds and thousands of honest members.

We believe that these honest republicans should distance themselves from them.

Until When Will Albanians Astonish the World?

By Ilir Keko

Alternativa Social Demokrate

September 29, 1993

Roland Bimo, the Albanian Ambassador in the USA, has been seen for several days walking the streets of Tirana. This fact makes an impression, when at least half of the state’s senior government officials (Deputy Prime Minister Kopliku, Minister of Foreign Affairs Serreqi, Minister of Finance and Economy Ruli, and Deputy Minister of Finance and Economy Konda), top leaders of the ruling party (head of the Democratic Party and Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Commission Selami, Chairman of the DP Parliamentary Group Spahia) and several senior officials (Governor of the Bank of Albania Hoti, Director of the Bank Xhyheri, Director of the International Relations Department Fullani) are visiting the USA these days. So, it sounds strange, and is a diplomatic act not frequently practiced. The ambassador, responsible for accompanying senior Albanian officials and participating in official meetings as a member of the delegation, is actually in Albania, while they are accompanied…

Who is accompanying the Albanian senior officials these days in Washington and New York?

An employee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who accepted “to speak” with the condition of not mentioning his name, because he is married and has a wife and children to care for, said that … Idriz Konjari went to the USA one week ago …

That is all he could say. Pushed by the curiosity of a journalist, we managed to identify who Idriz Konjari is and the reason for his trip. We decided to make these facts public not for the sake of this case but as a work principle…

Idriz Konjari – a mechanical engineer, who worked the past two years as a driver at the American Embassy in Tirana (the second driver for Ambassador Ryerson), was recently appointed in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and assigned to study South Korea…  But the study didn’t last long. Another assignment of special importance made him leave South Korea for America. His mission: “Be in charge of the embassy until a second order.”

And that Idriz Konjari, who had listened of America only in the American embassy, is actually the head of the Albanian embassy in the super-state of the world and at the center of world politics. He organizes the visits and meetings of Albanian officials and authorities with American officials and authorities; advocates for Albania’s foreign policy at the high American institutions and exchanges ideas about the possibility to develop relations and collaborations of mutual interest with diplomats having a consolidated career in Washington!

Misters of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs do not put in a bad position the people (your employees), who with their limited knowledge of diplomacy cannot even go to Djibouti.

America is not a place to organize guide trips to learn diplomacy …

And remember! Albania is perceived through these people. Are they the adequate representatives of Albania? And should Albania develop its image through them? Mr. Serreqi can provide an answer to that, when he comes back to Albania, if he considers it appropriate.

The spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs cannot deny the fact that on September 29, 1993, the Albanian Ambassador to the USA, Roland Bimo, walks the streets of Tirana. While the person in charge of the Albanian embassy in the USA, newly assigned by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Tirana, walks the streets of Washington.

In addition, Albanians already used to abnormal appointments, are not impressed by such matters. However, we would kindly advise the officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to try not to reveal the ignorance of the institution they represent to foreigners. It is not fair that because of one person’s or several persons’ wish, foreigners laugh at Albania. For those who behave in a way to be laughed at and don’t feel ashamed, then let them be like that (i.e. a clown). But they should leave Albania in peace because Albania owes them nothing. On the contrary, it is these people who owe Albania a lot and who can never pay it back, because of their frequent misbehavior.