The Balkans Project

Ditmir Bushati Member of parliament, Tirana, Albania

November 2009

I have been the director of a think tank here in Albania, European Movement, which I chaired until a few months ago. The focus of the think tank is to improve the quality of debate on the European integration process. It analyzes different aspects of European integration from a critical viewpoint in order to bring new ideas into the market for policymakers so that Albania can benefit as much as possible from the accession process. Our aim has been to demystify this European integration process from a purely visa liberalization or financial assistance oriented process.

In the elections of June 28, I was elected member of parliament for the Socialist Party, the main opposition party, the only opposition party in parliament. I studied law – specialized public international law and European law at Leiden University in The Netherlands. I also received a master’s degree there. I have been working for a few institutions in Albania. At the beginning, I worked for the office of the president on the legal advisory team. I was also legal advisor to the Constitutional Court. I was also one the key negotiators for Albania in the stabilization process with the EU, being a director of the Legal Approximation Department in the Ministry of European Integration.

Later, I decided to leave public administration and establish a think tank with some other colleagues who share more or less similar experiences with European issues and international relations. I like writing, researching, participating in various workshops and conferences. Honestly, I don’t know if I like politics or not. We will see. I left civil society for a while because I thought I could play a different role either in parliament or in the government. I didn’t work in civil society in order to jump into politics. People like me, who entered for the first time in the parliament know that it will be a tough job, because it’s quite difficult to change radically the rules of the game.

Electoral Standoff

Albania does not have a very vibrant civil society sector. You have a few people who have access to the media or who are known in public for certain ideas. Fortunately or unfortunately, I am one of those people. For the last two years, that brought me in contact with legislators – that’s one of the jobs of a think tank, to work with policymakers. You know, we use the same word in Albanian for “politics” and for “policies.” This also explains my hesitation to enter politics. When “politics” equals “policies,” it indicates that we do not have a mature policy-making process. Sometimes politics here is understood as: “You go to parliament and say something, you accuse someone, and you’ve done a really great job.” We see fewer and fewer skilled politicians, people who are able to learn, to read and analyze, and to make some important decisions.

I cannot change all of Albania. But when I decided to run for the Socialist Party, I thought I could change a piece of Albania, with colleagues I could improve sectors where I have certain expertise. It was surprising to me that in my first campaign that I spent 80 percent of my time explaining to people that the election would not be fraudulent, that their votes wouldn’t be stolen, instead of spending time with political competitors discussing different scenarios or alternatives for the socio-economic development of the country. We were now rallying against the state, and the whole state machinery was against us. In this country, the line between state and power, between state and political party, has blurred.

Now we have ended up in a situation where we have some doubts about the legitimacy of the current government and parliament. According to the electoral code, if two members of the central electoral committee ask for a recount or to open the ballot boxes, the committee is bound to do so. Two members proposed by the Socialist Party asked to open the ballot boxes in three regions. The committee refused. But if you read the electoral code, this is not debatable. It is obligatory. The rule was agreed to by both sides, in order to give guarantees to both sides.

So, we asked for parliamentary investigation. We did not want to overthrow the final result. Legally we are bound to accept the results. But by having a parliamentary investigation into not only the ballot boxes but all the documents connected to the process such as voters’ lists, we hope to shed some light on a very basic question: how many Ditmr Bushatis voted on Election Day? But the committee refused to open the ballot boxes.

The Socialist Party (SP) got 11,000 more votes than the Democratic Party (DP). But, as a coalition, the DP received 23,000 more votes than the SP coalition. This is a small amount. It could be a swing vote. But we are not asking to change the results of the election but to draw lessons for the next election. And set a precedent. There are precedents in Western countries – in the United States, in Greece recently, in the Italian elections of 2006. There is also Afghanistan, which I don’t like to mention.

People say that this election was a step further than the previous one. But this is not the question. Albania should be judged according to international standards and also in light of standards among NATO countries, of which Albania is a member. We saw here a very unpleasant situation during the electoral campaign. The DP used the whole state machinery for electoral purposes. The central electoral committee decided not to respect the will of the citizens – because it would have changed the balance of power. There were 3,000 people demonstrating in the streets in Fier, in the southern part of the country, which made possible a count of votes there. Not a recount, but a count! The central electoral committee knew that Fier is a stronghold of the left, so they decided not to count all the votes. Fier has 16 seats in parliament. It’s the second region after Tirana. The count there changed the result in our favor. We won 9 out of 16 seats in Fier.

We in the SP didn’t talk about boycott, although our current action is widely understood as a boycott. Instead, we speak of a “conditional relationship” with parliament. We have set some criteria, or conditions, which could allow us to enter into parliament. So the final objective is to enter into parliament and develop political life within institutions. We are being moderate. The parliamentary investigation that we call for should take place not in contradiction with the constitution but in conformity with it.

There are certain reforms that need a 3/5 majority of parliament. They have 74 seats. We have 66. There is a very slim difference in parliament. We don’t want to change the results of the election. We want to sit together with the DP as part of a national responsibility to move the country forward, not only in terms of European integration but also democratization. We need to attain certain standards. We need to close this chapter, but we shouldn’t close our eyes either. In a few years, there won’t be any more elections. I mean: the elections will be more beautiful in terms of shape but worse in terms of substance.

Culture of Impunity

Two days ago, an investigatory journalist was beaten up by a so-called tycoon of business who has connections with the current prime minister. The government privatized the only state refinery in Albania. One year after the privatization took place the tax inspectors suspended the activity of the refinery. For more than a year, the refinery didn’t pay any taxes to the government. After the suspension, the police confronted the tax inspectors. As you see, there are conflicts of interest among different clans of the current government.

According to the EU, we need to uproot the culture of impunity in Albania. Our country has made some progress on petty corruption. But we have not captured the big fish. For example, the former minister of defense Fatmir Mediu, now the minister of environment, escaped justice because of immunity. The prosecutor’s office implicated him, when he was minister of defense, in the explosion of the depot armory in Gerdec, an explosion that killed 26 people and destroyed several houses. The courts are trying 20 people, but not the minister. The prosecutor started prosecution against him. But he was reelected, and so he enjoys immunity.

When the advisor to the prime minister or the deputy of minister of economy talk with private investors from Italy, if they are talking legal business, why should that conversation take place in the bar of a hotel? This should take place in offices, in institutions. Here, the distribution of public goods takes place in a closed cycle, a vicious cycle. There are only a few hands who manage Albania. And when you talk about these few hands, you often hear the names of the daughter or son of the prime minister. Sali Berisha, the prime minister, was involved in the pyramid scheme of the 1990s, he was discredited in 97. But he ended up elected again in 2005 because of the split in the left when the Socialist Movement for Integration split from the Socialist Party in 2003, early 2004. The former prime minister Ilir Meta formed the new party because he had some differences of opinion with Fatos Nano, who chaired the SP at the time and was also prime minister. They were considered political enemies. This split allowed Berisha to be elected. In 2009, paradoxically, Meta joined with Berisha, and they are now running the country together. During the electoral campaign, Meta accused us of being too soft with Berisha, too Scandinavian. His main motto was to get Berisha out of power. But after the electoral results, he decided to join the government and became deputy prime minister and the minister of foreign affairs. It is difficult to speak of a moral ground in politics here. If you ask for some kind of consistency or coherence, you are considered a little stupid, a little naïve.

Outside Concerns

We are a small country. We have a strategic position in terms of the impact we could have on Albanians in Macedonia and Kosovo. The governments in Albania from the 1990s until now have been playing a moderate role. And the concerns of Washington and Brussels about Albania are mainly linked to the moderate role Albania can play in Macedonia and Kosovo. We attract the attention of internationals only during a crisis situation in the Balkans where Albanians are involved. Or when there is civil unrest in this country, as there was in 1997-98. But if you do not see people in the street – if we are only suffering from a shortage of electricity or running water – this is not a concern for internationals. And indeed it should not be!

European Standards

What we need to avoid – here in Albania but also in the western Balkans – is not to lower our standards in terms of Europe. We are knocking on Europe’s door. They are not knocking on ours.

Look, you are pregnant or you are not pregnant. In the same way, you cannot say that the elections meet some standards but not the highest standards. We are not Sweden or Denmark; we can’t aim to be either one. But we have to judge ourselves as meeting at least Croatian standards. Croatia is a NATO member; it will join the EU in 2011 or 2012. So, we have to compare ourselves with better standards in the region. For instance, you say that we have economic growth here. But you have to see this economic growth linked to quality of life.

Let’s suppose that the EU says, “Please join us. You are 3 million people. For us, it is peanuts having you in the EU.” But do we really need that? Yes, our politicians need it to sell as success story. But what will be the future of our farmers? We need to modernize drastically our agricultural sector. Agriculture is the largest part of our GDP. It’s the highest proportion in the region. So, we have to think about rural development. There will be a trend of people coming from rural areas to the cities. But we also have to secure real life in rural areas. We have to combine tourism with agriculture and agricultural processing. We have to build an educational system. We need drastic health care reforms.

Sometimes I say, cynically, that Europe lived without us for 550 years. There were five centuries when we lived under the Ottoman Empire. Then there were 40 years under the communist regime. Europe has lived without us in peace and harmony! Okay, I am a frequent visitor to Brussels, and we have some advantages over Brussels. We have more sun than they have. This is an advantage. But do we have an alternative to the EU? I don’t think so. I teach EU law at the university. I ask students if they could choose between being Swiss or Romanian in terms of economic and democratization standards, what would they prefer? You know the answer. All of them choose Switzerland. We have to see the EU from the perspective of development as well as sharing the same values. We need free and fair elections because we believe in this system not because the EU is asking us to hold elections that are free and fair.

If you are prime minister, you have many challenges. There are continual requests from the opposition for transparency of the electoral process. Why not open the boxes and make the process transparent? The government has this responsibility. The job of the opposition in all countries is to criticize. But the government has the main responsibility, to offer economic alternatives to people – tourism, environmental reform. Maybe, when we make all of these reforms, we won’t need to use the EU rhetoric that much. However, right now, we must use accession as an incentive for the economic and political transformation of the country.

Accession Process

We applied for EU membership, on April 28 of this year, and the EU has not yet considered our application. This is because of the pre-electoral period. Now, it appears that Netherlands and the United Kingdom are skeptical of our application because of the election. Germany says it first must discuss this issue in the Bundestag. Italy says this should be considered technical not political. Italy wants to avoid discussion in the Council of Ministers and to give the green light to the European Commission in order to start preparing the avis.

I ask myself, what will happen if the Council gives the green light to the Commission? The Commission will send a questionnaire with thousands of questions. How would we cope with the political criteria? Major concerns have remained the same – with elections, property issues, corruption, organized crime, the judiciary, administrative capacity. Compare the progress reports from 2003 to 2009. Corruption remains a serious problem, there is still political interference in the judiciary where the executive curtails the judiciary’s independence. Basically, we are not moving from the appetizers to the real menu of discussion with the EU. Compare the situation with Croatia. There, the two sides speak about fisheries, environment, tourism. Here in Albania, you might think that the EU integration process is only linked to free and fair elections, corruption, the fight against organized crime. But this is just the appetizers menu. The stabilization and accession process for Western Balkans is a little different from what the Central and East European countries experienced. Here, the focus is on stabilization and then accession. The strategy is to stabilize political life, the judiciary, ethnic relations, and then we might have what is known as a transformative agenda. For the moment, the concerns are connected to security, home affairs, corruption, and organized crime. If we do not deal in an appropriate fashion with these elements, it’s very difficult for us to move to the transformative agenda of the country, the capacities that will allow Albania to develop tourism, forestry, and other sectors. I am more than sure that the judiciary challenge will remain until we join EU. These are complex reforms, and they need not only political consensus but also political vision. The same applies to educational reforms.

The problem is that we need to have systemic preparation of different sectors in order to cope with European integration. For instance, on the issue of occupational safety and health, five years after the Stabilization and Association Agreement enters into force, we need to align our legislation with EU standards. So it is very important that we start a campaign now to work with small- and medium-sized enterprises and also with factories to prepare for these challenges. Or else, in five years, we may end up in the same situation we’re in now.

We are often very quick to join international organizations – NATO, the WTO. But we have a poor record of implementation.

If you analyze the EU’s financial assistance to Albania, the bulk goes to justice and home affairs (borders, detainee centers). My question is: will Albania be a country of tourism, of modern agriculture, or will it be only a country of justice and home affairs?

Europhoria

We are still far from a situation in which we think about the negative aspects of European integration. The different polls conducted in Albania suggest that we are living in a situation of Europhoria. This is explained by two factors. Albanians are frustrated when they come up against the Shengen wall when they apply for visas. So, most Albanians link EU integration, unfortunately, with visa liberalization. The second reason why Albanians are pro-European or pro-NATO: they believe, again unfortunately, that many problems can only be solved by the EU or NATO since they do not trust political actors in this country. They think that this frustration can be addressed at the international level.

Few Albanians link this integration process to economic prosperity. Politicians in this country talk less and less about consumer protections or competition versus state aid: these are brand new areas for a country that is only two decades removed from dictatorship. Once we start having the economic discussions with the EU, then I’m sure that Albanians will start to think also about the negative aspects, in order to address them properly.

Socialist Identity

What does it means to be socialist in Albania? This is a very difficult question.

The democratic transition here was dominated by former communists. Berisha himself was secretary of the Communist Party for universities for more than 25 years. Then, in the 1990s, he is playing up an anti-communist rhetoric. On the other side, the leader of the Socialist Party was somehow a soft dissident and now he is leading the SP. So, it is very difficult to speak of a clear political identity. In the past, in some cases the SP government supported right-wing actions such as privatization and economic liberalization. And the DP government, which pretends to be right wing, played some leftwing strategies – on government subsidies or in support of people who have built illegal construction on private property.

Political identity, or membership of political party, is mostly seen as a result of some personal link or cultural affiliation rather than an ideological link.

Take me, for example. I come from one of the biggest princedom families in Albania, from the north (Shkodra). They had been large land owners, but most of their assets were confiscated during the communist era. Some people in my family, like my father, were members of the Communist Party. Others were politically prosecuted. When I wanted to study in the 1990s, I had to apply for scholarships because my parents didn’t have money to invest in foreign education.

Albania is still facing some existential questions. If there is a problem with running water or power shortage, it is difficult to speak of left and right in this situation. But if I’m serving in a left-wing government, we should be focusing on certain categories. For instance, we should focus on public universities rather than private. We cannot abandon private universities, but our focus should be on public universities. The same holds true for health-care reform. We should focus on small- and medium-sized enterprises. This is a small country, and you can develop the economy and create jobs through these enterprises.