FLASH
Shkruar nga Arsim Sinani
Particularly problematic was his stance on key national issues.
Arben Xhaferi remains one of the most complex and contradictory figures in Albanian politics in North Macedonia. Known for his eloquence, philosophical training, and modern discourse, he aimed to elevate Albanian politics from provincialism to European rationality. However, his actions often created a gap between word and practice, precisely where accusations of hypocrisy arise.
He constantly articulated the need for democracy, civic equality, and a functional multiethnic state. But in practice, the parties he led (PPD, PPDSH, and DPSH) often turned into closed instruments of power, with centralized decision-making and little room for internal democracy. Liberal discourse coexisted with an authoritarian culture, where internal criticism was seen as a threat, not a democratic value.
Another dimension of hypocrisy is related to his relationship with the Macedonian system of power. He criticized the state for discriminating against Albanians, but at the same time was an active part of the governing coalitions that reproduced that system. This created the perception that the opposition rhetoric served for public consumption, while real compromises were made at the expense of long-term Albanian interests.
Particularly problematic was his stance on key national issues.
While talking about “rational politics” and avoiding “national romanticism,” this often translated into relativizing fundamental Albanian demands: real equality, the status of the Albanian language, and institutional representation. Here hypocrisy appears as an elitist distance from the daily reality of Albanians.
However, it would be reductive to view Xhaferi only through the prism of hypocrisy. He was a product of a time of transition, where the space for action was limited and international pressure imposed political pragmatism. But this is precisely where the moral dilemma arises: does the context justify the discrepancy between proclaimed principles and concrete actions?
Arben Xhaferi was a player; he knew how to strategize and compromise. He proved this during the Kosovo War, in his relations with Abdyrahman Ali, and later in Prizren, in his relations with Imer Imer and Ali Ahmeti. He acted as a political realist, understanding power as a negotiation process and not as an absolute moral act. Compromise for him was a tool, not a weakness.
The most typical example is that Xhaferi helped establish the University of Tetovo, and then fought against it, establishing the University of Southeast Europe. This shows his ability to strategize and realize his vision, even when paths diverged.
His political legacy is as paradoxical as his figure itself. Xhaferi left behind most of the politicians who are still active today, from Menduh Thaçi, Zijadin Sela, Arben Taravari to Arben Fetahu. Ironically, none of them communicate with each other. Such fragmentation would, without a doubt, be the subject of Arben Xhaferi's own irony: a generation of politicians who inherited his discourse, but not the culture of dialogue.
The conflict between Albanian parties, in reality, began with the appearance of Arben Xhaferi on the scene. He controlled this chaos, but today, in his absence, this chaos has become a political act: one enters the government, another leaves; the other criticizes, the other thinks, the other agrees; the other votes, the other does not vote.
I don't know if Arben Xhaferi has thought about his place in history and has calculated to preserve his legacy. Because there are many controversies in his political actions, especially among Albanians in North Macedonia, where he also raised his philosophy. Often outside he is seen as a hero, but the repeated problems deny it.
However, his philosophy and irony are missing from politics in North Macedonia. Ironically, even today, Albanians need a leader who can lift them out of the irony, hypocrisy, and Machiavellianism we have been mired in for over 30 years.
Lini një Përgjigje