Weekly Briefing, Vol. 50. No. 4 (Al) April 2022
For the self-determination of nations (or not)
Summary
The principle of self-determination is prominently embodied in Article I of the Charter of the United Nations (UN). All peoples have the right to self-determination. According to the UN, by virtue of that right, they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. In Albania, the concept of self-determination is rarely evoked by political circles in the past decades. It is tacitly accepted amongst Albanians that a small country is always in need of support from major global powers. However, for the first time, some in the country are questioning, how much interference is too much interference. This briefing analyzes an online petition accusing a foreign ambassador of interference in the internal affairs of Albania, the first of its kind since the system change in 1991.
Introduction
In Albania throughout the last century, self-determination has been the center of historic events in the Balkan Wars, World War I, and World War II. When the war ended and there was the establishment of the People’s Republic of Albania in 1945, and the People’s Socialist Republic of Albania in 1967, self-determination and self-reliance were the pride of the political establishment of the country. In 1991, however, all was accepted beside the idea of self-determination. Albania became heavily reliant on foreign aid, presence, and influences. In April 2022, internal dissatisfactions within a political party were translated into a call for action in the foreign affairs domain.
Self-determination and non-interference: conceptually
The concept of self-determination is a very powerful one. As Wolfgang Danspeckgruber put it: “No other concept is as powerful, visceral, emotional, unruly, and as steep in creating aspirations and hopes as self-determination.”[1] The self-determination of nations is closely linked to the principle of non-interference. According to the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States, the principle of non-intervention means the use of economic, political, or any other type of measures to coerce another State in order to obtain from it subordination is prohibited. The International Court of Justice related to the case Nicaragua v. the United States (US) on 27 June 1986 also confirms this. Its judgment stated that no such general right of intervention, in support of an opposition within another State, exists in contemporary international law and it constitutes a breach of the customary principle of non-intervention.[2]
A petition to the US Ambassador – “Enough is enough”
Since the designation of former Prime Minister (PM) leader of the Democratic Party (PD) Sali Berisha as a non-grata to the US State Department in September 2021, his supporters have widely anathematized the American ambassador Yuri Kim on social networks. The situation has been escalating for months because the ambassador has publicly denounced Berisha several times. The ambassador has been accused of interference in internal, judicial, and electoral affairs. For almost a year, former PM Sali Berisha has been involved in a fierce fight against US Ambassador Kim, calling her even the “governor” of Albania; however, it is the first time that during their contention such a virtual organization occurs.
On April 25th an online petition started circulating online with three hashtags (#) added to the text: “Enough Is enough”, “Hands Off Justice” and “Yuri Kim Not Above Law”.
Amongst others, the petition stated: “We are extremely concerned by the undiplomatic and unprecedented interference of the US Ambassador, Ms. Yuri Kim, in the work of Albanian institutions, thereby threatening their fragile equilibrium. Ambassador Kim has publicly exerted pressure on opposition forces, she has continuously intimidated and interfered with the opposition’s internal voting process. Moreover, she has explicitly sought to influence the related judicial process. This is of great concern as it undermines democracy and threatens national stability. Ambassador Kim’s actions, which are in breach of her diplomatic status and Article 41 of the Vienna Convention, have severely affected the country’s ability to maintain a serious opposition to a government that the US State Department has described in its reports as deeply corrupt. In this centenary year of Albanian-American diplomatic relations, we note with disappointment that the reputation of the United States of America has reached an unprecedented low point in Albania, because of the undiplomatic interference of Ambassador Kim in the internal issues of Albanian politics. Therefore, we now call upon all Albanians, at home and abroad, who believe that democracy is secured with the free vote, the verdict of the majority, and not through intrigues or manipulation, to sign the petition”.[3] Soon later, a former Minister of Justice agreed with the petition by publicly signing it stating that he is fully convinced that Ms. Kim’s behavior is legally unacceptable, even if it comes with the permission of the State Department. While the majority of politicians publicly name the petitions as ridiculous, of poor level, a consequence of a depressing opposition, futile, and much more. Beyond the media reports close to the government on the futility of the petition, other public figures have gone so far as to see this initiative as linked to the Russians.
This situation has been escalating since mid-February, but the highlight came before the local elections of March 6th, where supporters of Berisha were outraged when the US ambassador called almost explicitly not to vote for his candidates. She wrote: “Questions for candidates: If your main sponsor is someone designated by the US for significant corruption, what exactly are you promising voters? Who will own you if you win and what will you owe them? What should Albanians expect? What should the US expect?”[4] Never before in Albania, there has been such a public statement from a representative of a foreign nation to vote on one side or the other. However, the bubble burst after the US Ambassador decided not to recognize a court decision in favor of Berisha, but another one in favor of the pro-American wing of the PD in mid-April. Then the clash became fierce, and Berisha was fighting with all possible “weapons” and creating pretexts for the battles to come.[5]
Potential ramifications and viewpoints
As it usually happens, the overwhelming majority of Albanian politicians and analysts did not agree with this petition and most of them condemned it as far as to call it a national shame. However, it is well known for all that for anyone needing to achieve or stay in power in Albania, the United States’ support is crucial. It was very much expected that they will react this way. However, to some others, this should be also a moment of reflection. Some argue that Albania has been “suffering” from the tutelage of foreign institutions and diplomats for years. Nevertheless, this tutelage has been beneficial to Albanian politicians several times throughout the past decades. When Albanian politicians could not agree on a given issue, they asked for foreign diplomats to act as arbiters. For years, foreign embassies have enjoyed more credibility than the country’s institutions, starting with the government, parliament, and courts. For any irregularities in the elections, the losing party has addressed a thousand ways and channels to the foreign embassies in Tirana.[6]
To others, it is unacceptable for any ambassador to interfere in the decisions of the Albanian courts and internal affairs; they call it a “stain on the honor of the state”. But beyond this deafening noise, which stems both from the interest in hiding behind the shadow of a superpower, as well as from the inherited atavism to be servile, what is being trumpeted the most is articulated with pathos, is the increasingly present accusation of anti-Americanism. Albanians have indeed admitted to violating sovereignty with conviction when saying yes to the design and financing of the justice reform by the US. However, an Albanian political analyst argues: “[T]that does not mean that for the sake of it, we should close our eyes when any diplomat wants to be both the judge and the prosecutor. The failure or success of the new justice reform cannot be achieved by decisions dictated by former or present American ambassadors.”[7]
The main issue remains, how can a foreign diplomat have more power than the popular vote or the judicial institution of a country? – This happens because all the political conjunctures in Albania are closely linked to the US, thus their representative in the country is the embodiment of what they are dependent on. The other element is the fulcrum of this petition, namely Sali Berisha, thus many political opponents argue that he and his followers do not have the moral standing for an action of this type. Yet another question arises (highlighting the message, not the messenger). Can a fight be fair without the fighter being one? – By all consideration, yes, but the lack of moral standing of the messenger can sometimes taint the entirety of the message. Former PM Sali Berisha is not taking this course of action because of the nation’s core interests; he needs popular support on a personal issue.
Conclusion
How much interference is too much interference? – In Albania, the spectrum of responses to this question will depend on the day, the person, the situation, and most importantly, the interests involved. When Albanian politicians like the outcome of a situation, they cite foreign emissaries; when they do not like what the foreigners have to say, they dismiss them as irrelevant. Consistency has never been a strong suit for Albanian politicians, and many times the same can be said for foreign diplomats in Albania. They have used the value of self-determination as a tool when needed and disposed of it when it became a burden.
[1] UNPO (2017 September 21). The Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization. Self-determination. Available at https://unpo.org/article/4957
[2] UN. General Assembly (25th sess.: 1970). Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. Available at https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/202170?ln=en
[3] Change.org (2022 April 22). “Ambasadorja Kim, Mjaft eshte Mjaft!”. Availble at https://www.change.org/p/ambasador-kim-enough-is-enough
[4] Twitter (2022 February 21). Post available at https://twitter.com/USAmbAlbania/status/1495679184697540610
[5] Gogo, V. (2022 April 26). Luftë me peticion ndaj yuri kimit – Sali Berisha në betejë të re ligjore. Available at https://gogo.al/lufte-me-peticion-ndaj-yuri-kimit-sali-berisha-ne-beteje-te-re-ligjore/?fbclid=IwAR1Qi26hEzHh-ou1vwkLjmz WQUdYCBj_Y2TXdsiQUJYima25JGw_NmaDu4o
[6] Kikia, M. (2022 April 26). Po sikur në vend të Ambasadores Kim të largojmë Berishën dhe Ramën?. Available at https://abcnews.al/po-sikur-ne-vend-te-ambasadores-kim-te-largojme-berishen-dhe-ramen/
[7] Bushati, A. (2022 April 26). Tre manipulime me peticionin kundër Yuri Kim. Available at https://lapsi.al/2022/04/26/andi-bushati-tre-manipulime-me-peticionin-kunder-yuri-kim/?fbclid=IwAR1YEeJXoGuxJNefXCTK30cDQMVcG_7W_Prxw_ sFPsYCm5Uh4qAHqCg_L2k