Civil discontent requires a political response. Violence requires investigation and individual responsibility. While suspicions of external interference must be proven, so that the defense of the state does not turn into an accusation against the protest.
By Arianit Shehu
The images of violence in Tirana raise a question that security institutions should seriously consider. Are we dealing with the actions of individuals who have exploited the protest, with organized groups or with a combination of interests seeking to deepen the clash? The answer requires an investigation. Before naming the order-givers, the perpetrators, their connections and intentions must be identified.
My experience in international programs and missions in countries affected by conflict, extremism, and institutional weakness has taught me that real discontent can be exploited for purposes unrelated to citizens’ demands. But it has also taught me that the similarity between the two situations is not enough to give them the same explanation. In Albania, concerns about education, corruption, the cost of living, and the future of young people need to be heard. Students have the right to object, demand accountability, and insist on change. A government that treats these demands only as a security issue risks deepening the distrust that has brought people to the streets.
Meanwhile, the burning of institutions and attacks on police, banks, or private property harm the cause of the protest. They endanger lives, drive away citizens who could support the demands, and shift the debate from problems that require solutions to street clashes.
It is precisely in this shift that the possibility of political exploitation arises. Various groups may try to fuel anger, direct it against institutions, and use the images of chaos to portray the state as incompetent. This is a risk that deserves attention, without first turning to the sole explanation of the events. In my assessment, the possibility that actors linked to Russian or Serbian interests could exploit this crisis should be part of the security analysis. A destabilized Albania and a Kosovo with weakened institutions would serve those who oppose our Euro-Atlantic orientation. However, profiting from an event does not prove its authorship. To speak of ordering or financing, concrete connections, communications, money movements, and verifiable evidence are needed.
Therefore, it is the responsibility of institutions to investigate this possibility with professionalism. Any unsubstantiated accusation can also damage the credibility of true revelations. If there is foreign interference, it must be documented. If the violence stems from internal organizations or individual actions, this must also be clearly stated.
Equally important is the distinction between protest organizers, peaceful participants, and perpetrators of violence. Opposing the government is not opposing Albania. Anger at corruption does not make a citizen a servant of foreign interests. Such labeling of people weakens debate and may give the authorities a reason not to listen.
The protection of institutions requires the same clarity for the police. They must prevent attacks, protect life and property, and stop those who commit violent acts. At the same time, any excessive use of force must be investigated. The authority of the state is strengthened when accountability is also applied to those who act on its behalf. The government must open a direct dialogue with student representatives and make public the demands, responses, and deadlines for implementation. General promises are not enough in a situation of distrust. Where the demands are feasible, decisions and resources are needed. Where they are not, an honest explanation is needed.
Organizers also have a responsibility to clearly define their demands and distance themselves from actions that endanger people. This protects their independence and makes it more difficult for their cause to be used by groups with other goals.
The opposition, for its part, must transform support for discontent into credible alternatives. Inciting conflict may bring temporary gains, but it leaves behind weaker institutions and a society less able to come to terms. Albania’s achievements do not discount its problems. Likewise, corruption, lack of transparency, and inequality do not justify destruction. Tackling these problems is part of protecting the state and strengthening its Western orientation. Albania needs institutions that investigate without prejudice, a government that is accountable, and an opposition that offers solutions. Peaceful protest must remain protected, while perpetrators of violence must face the law, regardless of their affiliation.
Power is gained and changed through free voting. To defend this principle, we must also defend the belief that citizens can be heard, object, and influence without resorting to violence. This is also the strongest response to any attempt to destabilize the country.