REFLECTIONS By doc. ADEM MEZINI The result of the elections of 22 March is now known, and the Socialist Party will have to act in opposition. The tally, according to which 26 percent of the electorate voted in its favor, was by no means what the members and sympathizers of the Socialist Party of Albania (PSSH) expected. To be truthful, it must be acknowledged that within the party there are, and are almost openly expressed, two apparent views. First is the opinion of some party and non-party officials that victory was indisputable; in many respects, they have become detached from reality, lack a genuine feel for the times, preserve old ways of working, and judge the Albanian electorate through the old Laborist lens. The voting results showed that this category of party bureaucrats has not freed itself from Laborist attitudes. They were swept up in euphoria about winning, at least in certain regions, and consequently worked little and superficially, failing to focus as much as they should, and in the right way, on the interests of the social groups they represent. Any one of the PSSH governing committees in a district can and should ask itself: What did we do before and during the campaign, especially since, as early as June last year, you knew that early elections would be held? Do you know the pulse of the masses, and how and how much have you communicated with them? The judgment of some parliamentary candidates was superficial and wholly unrealistic, too: they considered victory certain, made little effort to visit voters, and failed to convince them that they were the most suitable candidates to represent them in the highest state body. Even less acceptable is the position of some who, during the runoff, did little more than stay in Tirana, when they should have been in the districts, alongside the people. And what those who considered themselves safe because of the party list failed to do, the multi-member candidates did very well; the leaders and activists of the Democratic Party did it very well. It is time to analyze these areas in detail. Sincerity and diligence are the most powerful weapons in pluralist political life. The judgment that PSSH represents around 40 percent of the Albanian electorate is closer to the truth. But even that prediction did not come true. The intimidation by opposition parties, foreign interference, the chief anti-socialist campaign in the field of propaganda, violations of the election law, the passivity of the government and the president and, moreover, the passive stance of PSSH representatives at polling stations all left their mark on the final tally. All of these matters must be analyzed carefully and separately and must serve as lessons for the future. Regardless of the percentages, reality is what it is, and it must be accepted that the majority of the people are not with PSSH. In the complex political, economic, and social context that currently exists in Albania, the fundamental issue is how to revitalize the Party so that it can meet the political challenges of the present and the future. [continues beyond the fragment] The questions many members raise about the party’s actions, its passivity and retreats, are directly connected to understanding the party’s position and role in pluralist society. In a pluralist environment there are no, and cannot be, permanent advantages in political life. The masses have the right to choose the alternative that, in given circumstances, convinces them it best serves their interests. In Albania, as in other European states, alternatives will replace one another. In the current political landscape, the PSSH alternative has not managed to secure the support of the majority of the people. Party members must be aware that the PSSH alternative is relatively new. Broad sections of the people in towns and villages confused the line and concepts of PSSH with those of PPSH. Not only workers and peasants, but also some intellectuals equated totalitarian socialism with democratic socialism, and de facto PSSH paid the price for the policies and line of PPSH. We must courageously fight the image of the past, the favorite weapon of the parties that oppose PSSH. PSSH did not hold itself accountable for the past. Its line and concepts are inspired by the ideas of democratic socialism. Let those who accuse us of crypto-communism look for it in their own ranks. PSSH aims at the uninterrupted progress of Albanian society, progress that can and must be achieved only by democratic means, through continuous reforms. This position is clearly expressed in its programmatic documents. But, however closely related they may be, it is a fact that many people think socialism means leveling and social poverty. This was also the source of the attitude of many ordinary voters who say, “Enough socialism; let’s try the others for once.” There are entire social groups that still do not understand clearly not only how PSSH came into being, but, moreover, portray the socialists as being against property. In fact, they suffer from Laborist atavism. PSSH, guided by the principles of European socialist thought, has never been, and is not, opposed to wealth acquired honestly and legally. Enough of totalitarian poverty. The Socialists seek to raise living standards not for one particular category or social stratum, but for all “strata of the population. In this context, they support the true valuation of the work and knowledge of every member of society. The PSSH social program, which unfortunately is known only superficially within the party and has still not been published for the wider public, sets out unequivocally the PSSH vision for the future of society [continues on page 2] … in line with everyone? PSSH aims at the uninterrupted progress of Albanian society, an invincible path toward pluralism. So far, 22 parties have been formed, and it is difficult to predict how many more may be created. Under these circumstances, another fundamental problem has also arisen: how the party’s work will be organized, and how it will establish its relations with the individual, whether or not that person is a party member. PSSH has no privileges whatsoever in Albanian political life and, consequently, everything will depend on the principles that guide it in its work with people. We must not forget that under monism and the party-state system, it was people who knocked on the party’s door. You cannot lump them all together. There were individuals who did so for ideals. But time showed that there were quite a few who saw the party’s appeal as a certificate of trust that would open the way to a career, positions, becoming ministers, and going abroad. The question each person had to answer on their personal questionnaire—whether or not they were a member of PPSH—was anarchic and utterly undignified. Their answer determined their rank, position, and political credibility. Now everything has changed. Broadly speaking, the ranks of PSSH have been cleansed of fanatics who fetishize the past, of arri- [Continued on page 2] their own criticism. Our society has now entered the path of pluralism irreversibly. is a party member. In Albania, the judgment about people who knock on the party’s door has been familiar and often repeated. [Continued on page 2] … the tale of the evils of their superpowers. This is a great victory, particularly for our country. This is a great victory, our own decision, after nearly 50 years of multi-layered censorship, which began right in the square and extended all the way into the family (please be careful, Father, or you’ll ruin us), the word, everyone writes what they think and want, criticizing anyone and everyone. Amid the abundance of newspapers now being published, it is not difficult for anyone to find a place for their byline. The press has a huge appetite. But is everything being written truly valuable—both educational and informative? I think not. The past is being put on trial harshly, and rightly so. But we see few serious studies of why socialism here, and not only here, degenerated into an anti-popular regime. This is a great victory… [the text at the top is partially cut off]

It is 2 April. But not 2 April 1991, the day when the Democrats, together with Albanians, were attacked with bullets from behind. It is one year later. Nevertheless, 2 April 1991 still accuses. It demands accountability, demands justice, demands punishment for the Albanian. The four martyrs of the Shkodran mothers, the four martyrs of democracy, and all our honest public opinion await the punishment prescribed by law; they await the truth. The image of that day, the fear that the tragic 2 April might happen again, preoccupied us throughout the pre-election period. For the pain of the wound of Shkodra’s 2 April was felt throughout Albania. And all Albania would never tolerate a repetition of that tragedy. This was also one of the reasons why the Socialist Party prepared its members and sympathizers, and its entire electorate, in good time to abide by the will of the majority, whatever the election results. The Socialists had prepared themselves to accept the people’s verdict without prejudging either defeat or victory. The outcome of the 22 March elections proved this very well. The Socialists did not win; nevertheless, they did not hold an illegal rally, did not protest, did not trade insults, did not burn or break things. Because their concept of democracy does not accept such things. The killing of the four martyrs of democracy in Shkodra on 2 April last year stayed with us throughout the entire year. And it will not leave us until their souls find an answer. But for this to happen, resentments must be set aside. The people, the citizens of Shkodra, must help uncover the truth. Meanwhile, politicians must not use the misfortune of those four young men as a currency for political speculation and credibility. Discovering the killers and punishing them according to the legal norms of a state governed by law is the best tribute that can be paid to the martyrs of democracy. This also serves the consolidation and development of civilized democracy in Albania, and this great cause of national reconciliation and unity. But this requires real commitment, honesty, and not political sophistry. LUAN M. RAMA

OPINIONS An Appeal for Understanding In a pluralist system, under conditions of a free press, the struggle among newspapers and the different opinions and positions that find space in their pages on the country’s pressing development issues are entirely normal. Never during the past 50 years has the press had such a powerful role, such an extreme influence on people’s troubled consciences. It is no coincidence, therefore, that even amid the severe crisis the country is going through, the newspaper industry is the only one working today above its normal capacity. It is clear why this is happening: people rejoice in the freedom of speech, in its magic. Besides this, newspapers, together with RTV, have naturally taken on the task of explaining party programs; they also put the past on trial, outline prospects for future developments, reveal new political mindsets, and so on. “I can do without bread, but not without a newspaper!” an elderly man told me the other day. And he spoke with the utmost seriousness. This new, unfamiliar role of the press, a consequence of political pluralism, comes more clearly to the fore, as it did, during election campaigns. But it is regrettable to see the press assume functions that do not belong to it—it turns into the most powerful arena of political struggle, where analyses of different alternatives are often displaced by resentment and slander, insinuations and even psychological terror. This happened on the eve of last 31 March, and it happened again this year before 22 March. When will this situation end, when will civilized language, convincing analyses and a friendly spirit replace passions? When will facts, analysis and conclusions—the sacred professional triad—come to prevail in newspapers? Unable to answer these questions, I am trying to analyze what drives this “newspaper war” to absurd extremes. 1. The new spaces for freedom of expression, right up to their abuse. This is a great victory, the first opening toward democratization in our country after nearly 50 years of censorship at several levels, beginning with the immediate boss and extending to the family (“please be careful, father, or you’ll get us into trouble”), alongside the famous self-censorship. Today, in the fullest sense of the word, everyone writes what they think and what interests them, while someone else, without any rules, writes whatever they… But why did the dictatorship manage to gag an entire people? How did it come about that a handful of people lived in luxury while the masses were reduced to poverty? Instead of personal stories, often deeply painful and not without meaning, it would be more useful here to focus on analyses in the press. The press has “read” only the first page of the past, but I am not saying that we should use criticism of it to conceal the mess we are in today in many areas, while proclaiming that we have entered the age of democracy. So, now that democracy has triumphed, it would be more useful for the future to take its place in the press. Nothing can be built by merely chewing over memories. Let us use the spaces for freedom of expression today to revive through the press the optimism the people so badly need, to tell them where we are going, to show them both the difficulties and the ways out. I appreciated the concern of a colleague at a former opposition newspaper when he told me: “Now it’s very difficult for us; we don’t know what to write, how to get people back to work.” These words express his civic responsibility: he feels that the party he belongs to has come to power not to put make-up on this country, but to rebuild it. Thus one of democracy’s greatest achievements, freedom of expression, can become a fiction if it is not accompanied by work, if it does not strike at a childish mentality that the world will help us with everything and even keep us fed. 2. In the varied chorus of newspapers, several wholly unprofessional practices, outside journalistic ethics, currently ring false: endless attacks on one another dominate, extending to personal insults and digging through biographies. We are all witnesses to the fact that newspapers are attacked more than anyone else—even more than party leaders. In these cases, undeservedly, they take on the role of a hero, without being one. Are they really responsible for all the evils of the past, or for the difficulties encountered by the democratization process? I do not believe anyone thinks so. Nevertheless, the fact is that newspapers are pitted against one another, so to speak, on behalf of third parties. It seems to me that political forces and their leaders are interested in this climate in the press, because on the one hand it diverts direct criticism

The streets of the city of Elbasan are filled every day with “idle” passersby, as if it were a day off. At the bus stops for routes serving the industrial zone, there are very few people. In front of the city’s executive committee and bank branch, hundreds of people gather every day, just as you find them in the numerous cafés. It seems as though the residents of this city live comfortably solely on the interest from large bank deposits. But no! The residents of this city, like people everywhere in Albania, live on the income provided by their work. Ah, work! It is nowhere to be seen; it has been imprisoned! No one knows when a cure will be found for the “80-percent epidemic.” Some workers have been “suffering” from it for a year and a half, others for a year, and others for two or three months. At present, almost no enterprise in Elbasan has escaped the “epidemic.” Even those said to be operating have departments and sections working at 80 percent. The huge metallurgical complex has practically fallen silent. Of its more than 11,000 employees, only about 2,000 are working, in the coke plant (which is operating at low production capacity), the oxygen plant (only to fill cylinders for hospitals), and the transport enterprise. The coke plant, too, is expected to operate only until the end of April during this period, because after that there will be no more coal. But what will happen? Work must begin, many specialists at the combine tell you. “At the very least, the steel combine must not be closed, and that is not just my opinion,” says the director of the combine, Bukurosh Stafa, adding that the national economy urgently needs iron and steel. At least, to get work started in some plants of the metallurgical complex, gas produced at the coke plant is needed. But coal supplies there are very small. That is why the plant operates at minimum capacity. Foreign currency is needed to secure coal. Whenever the word foreign currency is mentioned, the state gives the signal: “Stop!”… Meanwhile, at Plant 12, the steel plant, the energy combine and elsewhere, “invisible hands” are causing damage and stealing equipment, small electric motors, electrical parts from panels and other equipment. This destruction poses a serious threat, because even after the new government is established and raw materials are secured for the metallurgical complex, they will be useless. [Continues on page 2]