Three questions to the Secretary General of PRSH, Dr. ÇERÇIZ MINGOMATAJ 1. From the outset, the Republican Party has sought a genuine alliance of democratic parties in Albania. More than once, efforts have been made to hold face-to-face talks, and even close consultations. Most recently, a meeting was held between the chairmen of PD and PSD, and it was agreed that PR should also be invited, in order to institutionalize meetings between the parties in the governing coalition. How do you assess this new situation? 2. PD has viewed PR as a helpful factor at certain moments, but without giving it due importance. What does PR have left to offer the party in power now? 3. As is known, at PSD’s request, a meeting was held at the PRSH leadership. Does this represent an initiative toward better relations between the two parties, or is the matter broader in scope? 1. You are right when you say that PR has sought a genuine alliance of democratic parties in our country from the outset. The Republican Party, as an anti-communist party that supports the market economy and private initiative, that strongly supports the recognition of ownership and of the lawful owners expropriated under communist laws; as a party that seeks and demands the repeal of communist laws and the establishment of a state governed by the rule of law; as a party opposed to monopolization and the concentration of the economy in the hands of the state, and therefore one that calls for rapid privatization; as a party that vigorously fights old or new corruption, wherever it comes from; as a party that is wholly opposed to the law adopted for dividing land according to the number of people in a household—we have supported democracy and will support the democratic state, because only a democratic society can create the conditions for this country to live with greater dignity and to draw closer to the countries of Western democracy. It is true that PR has been in an alliance with PD and PSD since before the last elections. It is true that this alliance also had many problems, which weighed especially heavily on PR. From the beginning, we valued our democratic friends in PD, and friends should listen to one another, discuss and assess matters, and even reflect together. As events unfolded, after the last elections PR disagreed with many of the decisions and actions of PD and the Government. The Republican Party has made its positions known in its press, on TV (very limited access), and at meetings with the public. These criticisms and suggestions, or firm objections—as in the case of the petition with 240,000 signatures against the communist law on land division, a law unfortunately also defended by the Democratic Government—were made by PR and regarded as a significant contribution to democracy and as an opportunity for PD to correct its actions and positions. At the same time, many meetings have been held with all the party’s senior levels, and matters of national concern have been raised, such as the serious problems in the South, or modern Greek aggression (read the newspaper “Republika”); the country’s foreign policy; economic policy; instances of corruption; privatization issues; the pressing problems in the functioning of local government; Parliament’s activities; personnel policy; and other matters which, taken together, were recognized by PD as legitimate, but nothing was done. This has not gone unanswered; the party’s response has been severe. We believe that our struggle by democratic means serves democracy. Answering your question directly about the PD–PSD meeting, I would like to tell you that we too heard about such a meeting, requested by the latter. We also heard about an invitation from their side. Meetings between parties are entirely normal, depending on needs, circumstances and issues. But that “invitation” was somewhat laughable. Why? Because we are in Government, we are in Parliament with one deputy, we are on the side

Nexhmije Hoxha in good health The widow of the dictator Hoxha, who is still being held in Tirana Prison while awaiting the Court of Cassation’s decision following her appeal, is in very good health. Nexhmije Hoxha, 73, is alone in one of the rooms of the capital’s prison. Her health has experienced no complications, internal sources told the newspaper, a fact also confirmed by a correspondent of the newspaper “Liria”, published in Boston, and a journalist from “Corriere della Sera”, who met Mrs. Hoxha two days ago. The reports circulating in Tirana that her health had changed are entirely untrue. Mrs. Hoxha’s prison room is large, has a wooden floor, is not damp, and has all the facilities allowed by the limits of the “laws”.

“I never thought they could have gone this far...” A macabre sight: the body was completely skinned, and marks from gunshot wounds could be seen on the back of the head. “There are no words to describe the sight I saw,” says the brother of the young man from Vlora, Sulejman Kadria, who was executed in 1975, accused of attempting to escape. The body of the young man from Vlora was found in the morgue after 18 years, following efforts by his family. Dozens and dozens of experiments had been performed on the victim’s body by medical students in Tirana, after the torture and experiments carried out on his body before he was executed. “The accusation was never proven; they did not notify us so that we could attend our brother’s trial,” the victim’s brother says. Gazeta Shqiptare, which has also reported on this tragic event, further states that after Sulejman Kadria’s body, another person was identified in the Tirana morgue: Bajtar Avduli, a friend of Sulejman, who was also executed.

A whole section of the Albanian press has a history of blackening everything, everywhere and everyone. Opposition, criticism, dissent, diversity and new alternatives are, of course, in the nature of every opposition. Even speculation seems to be tolerated (at least in Albania). An opposition will fight using both truth and falsehood, but there are limits. The supposedly independent newspaper “Shqip” offers the worst and most unprecedented example of common fraud and disinformation. The interview published by this newspaper, “obtained especially by its correspondent” from former German foreign minister Gensher, with the “truly shocking” statement that “Albania is being torn apart”, naturally shook the realistic Albanian public when it was taken at face value. It was certainly very serious and very troubling, particularly in light of the grave current developments in the region, in Albania and the Balkans. This concern was expressed by some Albanian politicians and MPs, as well as by ordinary people with no political involvement. But what is the truth? The common fraudsters at the newspaper “Shqip” had unbelievably fabricated an interview with such a prominent statesman as Gensher. This is undoubtedly one of the most unprecedented cases in the history of the mass media: a press outlet deceiving the public by invoking a very public figure such as the esteemed Mr. Gensher. Opinions have certainly been altered and placed in entirely different contexts for sensationalism, and even for diversion, but we do not know of a case in which an interview was simply invented or fabricated, then published and promoted. This blatant abuse of the image of a politician such as Gensher is as unbelievable as it is ridiculous, wretched, cynical and immoral. It is also the most blatant abuse of the freedom and authority of the press. Of course, you may wish for Albania’s isolation, displacement and separation. This is nothing new; the former servants of their master Ramiz Alia did it too. But, in any case, inventing an interview with such a foreign public figure so coolly merits nothing but shame and pity for the position into which the newspaper’s editors have fallen—and punishment under the law. As if the game with the so-called Gensher interview were not enough, the little craftsmen—the servants of their powerful masters—cooked up another exclusive interview just a week later, this time with NATO chief Vërner. This second “miracle” of the newspaper “Shqip” nearly made it into print, but was immediately withdrawn after it became known that Gensher had never given this newspaper any interview whatsoever. What a disgrace, friends at the newspaper “Shqip”—how low can you sink!

ATSH reported this following a statement by one of the members of a special commission for identifying those killed at the border. According to a study, still unofficial, the largest number of killings took place during 1945–1965 and 1985–1991, after the death of dictator Hoxha, when Ramiz Alia came to power. The commission also determined that the graves of 13 victims, mostly killed during the second period, are located just beyond the border with Serbia and Greece. THE EDITOR

“The President put Shkodra’s indirect killers in prison, while he put the direct killers in power” Invited as an expert journalist, I stated: If Idajet Beqiri can produce facts and evidence for this statement, Mr. Berisha is a criminal and a murderer. Otherwise, this is not merely slander. The journalist of “Zëri i popullit” who followed Idajet Beqiri’s trial closely at second instance published a summary, with words culled to suit the interests and wishes of that newspaper. This may be in the nature of that newspaper, but I cannot allow my name and my words to be manipulated in such a crude, almost irresponsible way. I want to clarify from the outset that Mr. Ilir Tzerri and I were summoned by the Tirana Court as expert journalists in the criminal case against Idajet Beqiri. As soon as we entered the courtroom, we faced psychological pressure the likes of which I do not believe has ever occurred in a courtroom. Idajet Beqiri’s people insulted us, cursed at us and threatened us with burial and the burning of our houses. To tell the truth, the latter did not frighten me, because I myself do not have a house; nevertheless, I was shaken by the fact that in a trial where the accused was in the dock, we were subjected to the same kind of attack and abuse. The “ZP” journalist was there in line with me and, strangely, wrote not a single word about it in the newspaper. This stance is explained by the tendentious selection made from my statements. At the beginning I stated my difficult position because of the clashes I had had with Idajet Beqiri in the newspaper. The words “I would not have wanted to meet, under such circumstances, a person with whom I have clashed in the newspaper” (the position of the accused did not suggest equal conditions). “Zëri i Popullit” deliberately omitted them, while it printed the words “persistent plea”; I had used those words in the context of Albanian defamation cases, not in reference to particular newspapers. As for the second question, which in my opinion

To sit, to wait, to see what will happen, what will become of us, who will care for us, how and how much; how our fate will change when someone lends us a hand, when my diploma will cut a path, when my talent will be valued for what it is worth, when my lot will finally lead me home, when my efforts will be noticed and rewarded. This is the bitter philosophy of passivity, in whose whirlpool a still-large mass of people continues to spin—a thoughtless atavism that seems to need to be cast off as soon as possible. The whirlpool of passivity will hold us unless we find something to protect us and learn how to break free of it. To wait means to die while waiting. No effort, not a single step—only someone else to take charge and help me, while I remain at the very bottom of this passivity. If you get used to it, if you do the work, if you take part in the action. Will you be a human being? To take a path, to be someone, to be there, doing and making things happen? JANI DURI They refuse. Well, since such a morality does not exist, what will you do, gentlemen? Won’t you tell your people to spring into action? Then why don’t you say this to yourselves? Why aren’t you freed from this absurd fear, which does nothing but drag us deeper and deeper down? They have crushed our will, made our souls sick with the obsession of waiting, and we have become passive—people who think a lot and act little, if at all. Look at those who were least indoctrinated, the undisciplined former pupils, the un-subdued, the unbending, the nonconformists, the “naughty” boys who never stopped doing good for the sake of others: they broke through the walls of the embassies, boarded the ships (some were ready to swim, even at the risk of drowning), and returned by force and violence to the land of emigration ... Meanwhile, those who stayed behind—those who could not, or did not want to go, but who were not of the passive sort—rushed into the market, poor as they were, some in debt and some with a little “pallik,” but they provided for their families and today cross the Balkans’ foggy roads without sleeping, bringing us goods from far away. Until now, some “street people,” some “pirates,” some “uncultured” people, some “unemployed” people have been met with disdain in freedom. Gentlemen, they are the nation’s first saviors; they are its honor and glory, because they are people of action. “Who thinks too much, gets little done,” says a wise man. And another says: “While the wise man is still thinking, the fool has finished the job.” And in our time, fools turn out to be the wise ones. It is a paradox, it is irony, it is unfair—but call it what you will, this is reality. In this case, in the philosophy of the inactive person left behind, to leave a mark on freedom, let us point to two of the characters who remained behind—the ones who were not of the passive sort: they rushed because they are people of action. Like Oblomov, one is bored by all those who read. The problem is that they have explained us as victims of anti-popular systems, social phenomena that disappear through revolutionary upheavals, because supposedly a person is a product of historical circumstances and their victim. These Marxist judgments now seem like fairy tales to us. A human being is a biological being who must struggle every day, with determination and imagination, for their own existence. Otherwise, they must live parasitically on the healthy tissue of those who strive. Once, private, individual, personal initiative was obstructed by law. And this very initiative, just like an unused organ, is gradually becoming a rudiment, a non-functioning part. A bird kept in a cage for a long time cannot fly. And yet it has wings. At first it will hop, then it will leap and, finally, it will fly—yes, it will fly. The main thing is to break open the cage door so it cannot be shut again. Here too, the economic foundation of socialism has been destroyed, one way or another; in other words, the cage door is finally being broken open. Rich people, hardworking people, honest people have a rare opportunity to become the true masters of their own lives, rather than remain prisoners of hope. Who has predetermined your fate, sir? Who said that you would never become the owner of a powerful trading or manufacturing company? Who said you would never become a banker, entrepreneur, publisher, politician, member of parliament, minister, or even president? Even if a hundred, even a thousand people stand in our way, we will overcome them, because we are more numerous than they are. And even if just as many try to trip us up, we will outwit them, because we are wiser and more cunning than they are. The new society opens the way for everyone, not just a few, and this democracy has been forgotten by those who do not know how to value it.

N., the madwoman from Tirana, was stopped by unknown people on Monday morning and threatened. “I’ll write to the BBC,” the madwoman shouted. “They’ve threatened me, they’ve even taken away my telephone. They want to silence me. They want to attack the intelligence, they want to attack writers. They want to form alliances with me. I don’t form alliances. They want to abolish the prisons too. You don’t know that in a few months Albania’s prisons will be put up for auction. They want to leave Albania without prisons. The law that is a miner is not fair. Once they said there would be an auction and the prisons would be bought by whoever had millions; now they want to leave them to those who have lived in them. They want to leave the prisons to those who have worked them. Under this law, former political prisoners will take them back. But there are so many of them, and each gets only one fifth of a cell. Why isn’t the auction held? These properties must be fully restored to their owners. The Republican Party wants the prisons returned to their true owners, the real prison landlords: former generals, former ministers, former directors. The Democratic Party, as a centre-right party, supports compromise. The prisons cannot be given only to the landlords; they should get a larger share there, but not all of it. The Social Democratic Party and the Socialist Party want the social question to be taken into account in the division of the prisons. Those thousands and thousands of convicts, the underprivileged and the new owners, cannot be thrown out of prison and left without them. At the same time, the prison work departments will be established. The prisoners have asked for lawyer Aranit Çela. Only he can defend them. The prison question has reached as far as Shkrapër and New York. Shkrapan will take it to New York, then to the White House. The North will take it to the south of Albania. The winners will be those who signed for the release from prison of the chairman of the Socialist Party. The Party of National Unity supports the unity of the prisons. The Liberals support their liberalization. They didn’t give me any goods at first either, even though I signed the petition. I signed it several times. But they gave me nothing. They promised me that if I signed to attack America they would give me 100,000 dollars, mainly marmalade and fruit juices.”

The report that spread in Tirana last week, according to which Ramiz Alia is under house arrest, is entirely false. The competent authorities in Tirana confirmed to our correspondent that former president Ramiz Alia continues to be under house arrest. Meanwhile, other highly reliable sources confirm that Alia continues to write his memoirs. It is not clear whether former president Alia is putting on paper memoirs concerning the work published in 1990 and thereafter, the period during which the Albanian border was being guarded; many Albanian young men were brutally killed and massacred while attempting to cross the border.

You can play with words taken out of context however you like

The “Mitsotakis statement” cannot be considered a closed matter