![\"\"](\"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/6ad4f68c22d59-300x202.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
In a private conversation, someone from international circles who knows Albania well<\/p>\n
presented me with a proposal for exiting the crisis. Democracy, he told me, lives on change.<\/p>\n
When a party stays in power for a long time, it may try to offer it through<\/p>\n
a new partner in governance, change of ministers or departure of the leader.<\/p>\n
In Albania, according to this assessment, the first opportunity is almost absent, while the second has been used up. Ministers have been changed so often that citizens can hardly learn their names.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the proposal was for Edi Rama to withdraw from the leadership of the government, remain at the head of the Socialist Party and leave the leadership of the executive to another figure. A change that would reduce tension, while maintaining political continuity.<\/p>\n
I am bringing this opinion anonymously because it was a personal exchange, not an official position. But the argument deserves a response. It touches on a real weakness of long-standing power and, at the same time, proposes a solution about which I have serious reservations.<\/p>\n
I understand the diagnosis. A leader may have changed many things in the country and yet become a symbol of the impossibility of further change. Previous achievements do not preclude the consumption of confidence. Citizens can recognize a government's work and no longer want to be governed in the same way.<\/p>\n
But in the Albanian case, the issue goes beyond tiredness with one face.<\/p>\n
The longevity of power, when accompanied by corruption scandals and clashes between the people who have exercised it together, produces a deeper doubt. The citizen begins to wonder if the problem lies with the person who is leaving or with the way the government works. Criminal liability must be proven for each. While political responsibility is also related to selection, supervision and tolerance.<\/p>\n
This is where the constant change of ministers loses its persuasive power. At first it may seem like correction. When repeated, it creates the impression that the government is changing personnel to avoid changing itself. After each departure comes a new name, but old questions remain unanswered.<\/p>\n
Rama may still have names for the government. But new names are no longer, by themselves, an offer of change.<\/p>\n
In these conversations with international representatives, I was asked another question. Why have some of the media and businesses that Rama has supported so much, turned so strongly against him today? The question makes me think about the nature of the relationship that has been built between them and what happens when the interest that kept them together starts to change.<\/p>\n
So, how is it explained that some of the media and businesses that exponents of the government have supported so much, today have turned their backs on them so forcefully? Have they taken so much that they are tired of asking for it again? The person who helped them may also have become the memory of their addiction. Then his departure may seem like an opportunity to start over with someone else, without the weight of yesterday's demands. The question remains whether they want to change the way power is exercised or just the person they expect to benefit from.<\/p>\n
But this question also goes back to Rama. The help that the people in power have requested does not create an obligation for political loyalty and even less for journalistic silence. A power that confuses the closeness of interest with political conviction, in the day of crisis, can read the departure as betrayal, without asking what sustained that relationship until yesterday.<\/p>\n
However, turning against the government is not in itself proof of independence. Businesses must indicate whether they want equal rules or a new door for favors. The media must maintain the distinction between reporting and turning violence into a spectacle. The live broadcast is information, but the unprofessional broadcast commented directly on TV, presented as fact and the clash treated as entertainment violates it. Rama, not those who benefited in governance, cannot claim gratitude as a political obligation. The public has the right to demand professionalism, while the government must understand that relations with beneficiaries do not replace the trust of citizens.<\/p>\n
Even the clashes within the socialists should be read in this context. In my reading, the public conflict with Arben Ahmetaj, with Belinda Balluk and Erjon Velina is one of the most visible manifestations of a wider problem. When former co-workers begin to accuse each other, the audience sees more than just their current enmity. He returns to yesterday's co-governance and asks what they knew about each other when they shared power.<\/p>\n
Accusations require proof, regardless of who makes them. However, the political fallout of these clashes arises before the conclusion of any court proceedings. They make it more difficult to explain that each failure was an individual deviation, unknown to everyone else.<\/p>\n
Therefore the proposal for another prime minister has a fundamental weakness. If Rama continues to take decisions from the party leadership, while someone else holds public responsibility as prime minister, the change risks producing even less clarity. Citizens will demand accountability from a man who may not have the power to answer.<\/p>\n
A successor only makes sense if he has real authority to govern. Otherwise, after the ministers who are replaced without changing the way of decision-making, we would also have a prime minister replaced with the same logic.<\/p>\n
However, from this crisis of confidence it does not follow that Rama should resign because stones are thrown on the streets or buildings are burned.<\/p>\n
I have more than thirty years of experience with protesting and confronting the police. This experience has made me sensitive to the violence of the state, but also to the moment when a conflict begins to live by the escalation itself. Demands then risk getting lost behind the scenes of violence, and a victim can make it much more difficult to return to politics.<\/p>\n
I don't see this as an inevitable end. Precisely because it can be prevented, the responsibility to act is today.<\/p>\n
The protest has the right to demand the departure of the government. She does not need permission from the government to make this request. But arson cannot be used as an instrument to determine his successor. Business on fire is not a political abstraction. It is the work, property and livelihood of people who cannot bear the cost of angering others.<\/p>\n
At the same time, the police cannot treat the entire protest as the perpetrator of the violence. The state must protect institutions, property and citizens who protest peacefully. Any police abuse undermines the very authority it purports to protect.<\/p>\n
When I say that Rama should not resign, I am not saying that the state does not function without him. A state that depends on one man staying in office has a much bigger problem than a government crisis. Resignation can be a legitimate act of responsibility. What I object to is the idea that the intensity of violence should determine the removal of a government.<\/p>\n
But this objection does not give Rama the right to continue as if nothing had happened.<\/p>\n
This is the reason why I think it is necessary to move towards early elections. The street can show the extent and intensity of discontent, but it cannot count the will of the whole society. Also, a parliamentary majority does not make the response to a deep crisis of confidence unnecessary.<\/p>\n
The vote returns the decision to those who do not come out, to those who protest, and to those who continue to support the government. It forces the opposition to turn opposition into an alternative and the government to defend its balance sheet before the citizens.<\/p>\n
The weakness of the opposition is a problem of Albanian democracy. It cannot be used endlessly as a reason for the government not to face its own consumption. But even anger towards the government cannot give the opposition a mandate that it has not yet won.<\/p>\n
Of course, elections do not solve the crisis just because a date is announced. They require a constitutional path, sufficient time for preparation and reliable guarantees for competition. They demand that state resources are not used as party property and that the result can be accepted as a decision of the citizens. Otherwise, distrust would only move from the street to the ballot box.<\/p>\n
Therefore the title does not contain two positions that exclude each other. He defends the same principle in two directions. Violence should not give a mandate to anyone, while the government should accept a democratic path to prove trust again.<\/p>\n
Rama has changed enough people to know that the crisis is not always solved by another name. Now he must show that he can lead the way out of it while also accepting the possibility of defeat.<\/p>\n
He is not asked to leave to leave the victory to those who exercise violence. He is asked to pave the way for the citizens to decide whether he should stay.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
N\u00eb nj\u00eb bised\u00eb private, dikush nga rrethet nd\u00ebrkomb\u00ebtare q\u00eb e njeh mir\u00eb Shqip\u00ebrin\u00eb m\u00eb parashtroi nj\u00eb propozim p\u00ebr daljen nga kriza. Demokracia, m\u00eb tha, jeton nga ndryshimi. Kur nj\u00eb parti q\u00ebndron gjat\u00eb n\u00eb pushtet, mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrpiqet ta ofroj\u00eb at\u00eb p\u00ebrmes nj\u00eb partneri t\u00eb ri n\u00eb qeverisje, nd\u00ebrrimit t\u00eb ministrave ose largimit t\u00eb udh\u00ebheq\u00ebsit. N\u00eb…<\/p>","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":9956,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-9955","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lajme"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9955","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9955"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9955\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9957,"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9955\/revisions\/9957"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9956"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9955"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9955"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shqiperiaimeunike.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9955"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}