From Maoism to Trump, Albania Has Travelled a Long and Crooked Road

 

By Henry Srebrnik, Saint John Telegraph-Journal

A friend recently joked that he never thought he’d ever see the words “Albania” and “democracy” in the same sentence. What a long ideological journey that poor Balkan country has travelled over the past 40 years.

Since May 31, protesters have been setting off every single day from Skanderbeg Square in Tirana to take part in what has been dubbed the “Flamingo Revolution.” They complain that their government is selling the country out to foreign investors and luxury developers. They accuse Prime Minister Edi Rama and his government of cronyism and corruption, with many claiming that for a long time now, the Albanian government has been making decisions against the interests of Albanian citizens.

It’s the first time in his nearly 13 years in power that Rama, leader of the Socialist Party, has been under serious pressure. But he has made light of the protests as a problem, insisting, rather, that they are “a beautiful example of freedom, of democracy in action.”

So what’s this all about? The demonstrations were first sparked by anger at the planned construction of luxury resorts in a stretch of the Adriatic coast home to rare animals like flamingoes and the Mediterranean monk seal. This has become Albania’s largest civic protest movement since the fall of communism.

The development project was first announced in 2024 and initially drew complaints mostly from environmentalists. The controversy only gained international visibility after it became associated with Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law, whose company, Affinity Partners, along with investors from the Gulf states, announced plans to invest more than US$4.6 billion into developing a luxury resort near the city of Vlore on the Narta Lagoon and protected wildlands in Zvernec. 

Kushner and Ivanka Trump also want to turn Sazan Island, which belongs to a national park, into a smaller coastal enclave for the wealthy. Tourism has become an increasingly important part of Albania’s national income.

The protestors assert that Albania has been ruled since the collapse of Communism 35 years ago by self-serving politicians who give state contracts to their friends in business and pay little attention to the economic and other grievances of ordinary citizens.

Olsi Nika, who heads the environmental group EcoAlbania, maintains that the current political system has alienated Gen Z-ers. “The majority of the protesters are young people who were raised with a progressive European mentality,” he explained.

Protesters have chanted, “Rama to jail, Berisha to jail.” Rama has been in and out of government since 1998, while Sali Berisha, who leads the Democratic Party, the main opposition group, was president of Albania from 1992 to 1997 and prime minister rom 2005 to 2013. Berisha was until last November under house arrest because of corruption charges. In last year’s parliamentary elections, Rama’s Socialists beat Berisha’s Democrats, winning 83 seats to his 50.

“At the core of this protest is not just environmental issues,” according to Gresa Hasa, a doctoral researcher at the University of Graz. “This is a fight for freedom and democracy, and a future where the resources and the state works for all of us and where we are not excluded from our own beaches and public spaces.”

Rama stated at a meeting of his Socialist Party’s parliamentary group on June 20 that the opposition has come from a broad constellation of external actors, including Trump opponents, anti-Israel groups and what he calls state-sponsored “digital mercenaries, including those from Iran.”

Iran, he suggested, has been stoking the protests to get back at Albania for sheltering an Iranian opposition group, the Mujahadeen Khalq. Officials have also contended that the tourist industry in neighboring Greece, eager to avoid competition from Albania, has egged on and even funded the protesters.

To call all this a sea change is an understatement. Under its extreme Maoist version of Communism, the People’s Socialist Republic of Albania was hermetically sealed off from the outside world. It was ruled from 1944 to 1985 by Enver Hoxha, who broke with the Soviet Union after 1956 over what he saw as Nikita Khrushchev’s insufficient commitment to Stalinism.

The paranoid Hoxha even built pillboxes all over the country – more than six hundred thousand dome-roofed foxholes were installed literally everywhere. They were less a genuine attempt to fortify the country against invasion and more about permeating Albanian society with a siege mentality. Albania’s increasing isolation, from neighboring Yugoslavia, the USSR, and eventually China, led to mounting economic difficulties and the collapse of the Communist state in 1991.

Albanians, totally naive politically and economically as a result, saw a period of rapid, chaotic privatization of state-owned industries as part of a transition to capitalism, marked by graft, speculation, and disastrous pyramid schemes. Hoxha had confiscated all private property after he took power. When Communism ended, this left Albanian courts forced to adjudicate rival property claims by former owners and their descendants, causing immense problems.

These legal gray areas have made it easier for Rama to court “strategic investors” like Kushner with the promise of both cheap land and cheap workers. But the European Parliament on June 17 urged Albania to suspend construction in the protected area. This is important, since Albania hopes to join the European Union. Might the words “Albania” and “democracy” eventually belong together? Hard to tell.

 

American-Israeli Relationship Comes Under Fire

 

By Henry Srebrnik, Saint John Tlegraph-Journal

Criticism of Israel’s war in Gaza, anger over the Iran war, and primary election results in New York and Colorado all suggest Israel’s solid support from Washington may be on borrowed time.

Three pro-Palestinian candidates backed by New York mayor Zohran Mamdani, an ardent critic of Israel, defeated moderates in Democratic congressional primaries in the city June 23. A fierce opponent of Israel won a Democratic primary in Denver a week later.

In New York, Brad Lander defeated Congressman Dan Goldman, one of Congress’s strongest defenders of Israel. Darializa Avila Chevalier unseated veteran Congressman Adriano Espaillat. Claire Valdez won her nomination while advocating a reassessment of U.S. military assistance to Israel.

In Denver, Melat Kiros defeated 15-term incumbent Diana DeGette on June 30. She has justified the 2023 Hamas attack on Israel as the “inevitable consequence of apartheid” and “decades of occupation.”  Her stance on Israel is that it should be eliminated in favor of a one-state solution.

These victories and the growing support for the left-wing Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which supports the Palestinian cause, suggest that positions once considered fringe within the Democratic Party are gaining traction and highlight how criticism of Israel has become an increasingly potent force in Democratic Party politics.

It should be remembered that the day after the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, the New York City chapter of the DSA held a gathering in Times Square to show their support for the Palestinian cause, marching under the banner “by any means necessary.” This was the start of a season of protest that featured encampments and demonstrations at many New York universities.

Candidates endorsed by the DSA have scored victories in 35 primary elections so far this year, including upsets against entrenched incumbents. The DSA has backed 150 candidates this cycle: 35 advanced from their primaries or were unopposed, while 34 have lost.

This may ultimately be remembered as a watershed moment in American politics. Israel may not be able to count on solid support from Washington in the future, whether in concrete assistance like billions of dollars in yearly military aid, in symbolic backing like reliable vetoes of anti-Israel resolutions at the United Nations, or even in tax exemptions for U.S. charities benefiting Israeli causes.

Pro-Israel groups like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) poured money into defending incumbents in many of these contests. Their defeats were described by some House Democrats as an “earthquake” and a setback for the party establishment.

“This is a massive win for the progressive movement against the establishment in New York City, which is the epicenter of power for the Democratic Party,” Congressman Ro Khanna, a progressive California Democrat plotting a 2028 presidential run, said in an interview.

A survey published June 24 by Quinnipiac University found that 48 per cent of voters think the U.S. is too supportive of Israel. This is the highest percentage since Quinnipiac University first asked this question of registered voters in January 2017.

Ironically, many of AIPAC’s efforts to combat the rise of antisemitism on the left appear to have deepened Democratic hostility toward the organization. During a campaign rally with Senator Bernie Sanders in Vermont prior to the vote, Mamdani denounced AIPAC as “monsters” who “move millions in dark money to accomplish a single goal: To preserve their power so that they can turn us against one another instead of our leaders turning towards the moral change we all know to be necessary.”

Anti-AIPAC outside spending kept the DSA candidates competitive. That included Justice Democrats and American Priorities, the new PAC designed to counter AIPAC in Democratic primaries. American Priorities spent $2.1 million in the Valdez and Chevalier primaries. 

Republicans have witnessed the ideological drift of their opponents firsthand. “The Democratic Party is being hijacked by the DSA via Zohran Mamdani,” Joseph Hernandez, the Republican nominee for New York state comptroller, remarked. “I think these people could not be more anti-American.” Stated National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Mike Marinella, “Americans should be terrified by where the Democrat Party is headed.”

Support for Israel was one of the least controversial positions in Democratic Party politics. That consensus has not merely weakened; it has collapsed. Opposition to Israel is now the litmus test in Democratic Party politics. “There’s a cliff, and we’re heading towards it,” warned Daniel C. Kurtzer, a Princeton University professor who was ambassador to Israel under President George W. Bush.

In the past, Congressional support was bipartisan, a reflection of pro-Israel public sentiment. That is no longer the case. Since the start of the Gaza war Israel is no longer the public’s favourite. Within the Democratic Party, a growing majority no longer sees Israel as reflecting American values. Among Republicans, the ground is also shifting. A rising faction on the far right argue that Israel’s actions are entangling the United States in costly wars.

“After 40 years of Israel calling itself a strategic asset to the U.S., there’s a legitimate question: Is Israel an asset or is it becoming a liability?” asked Alon Pinkas, who was Israel’s consul general in New York in the early 2000s. However the Iran war concludes, Israelis and Americans are entering into a new era for their relationship. It may be one less beneficial for the Jewish state.