Full Interview

Question:
Mr. Minister, the idea of establishing a General Consulate of Albania in the Presheva Valley has been widely discussed recently. Is this an improvised idea, the product of a recent conversation between the two ministers?

Minister Hoxha:
Frankly, for me, the controversy that emerged came like a bolt from the blue. Nevertheless, considering where the reactions came from, and setting aside some expressions of genuine concern, I cannot say that I was surprised.

For some time now, a ready-made chorus has been created, determined to monitor every move of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, to maximize its exposure in public debate, to obstruct his work and, above all, to minimize or discredit every initiative or achievement.

It is a group that has assumed the role of unnamed referees, sitting on the sidelines observing, with a yellow card in hand, and in some cases immediately showing the red card as well, displaying it with the satisfaction that such occasions give them, solely to become part of the noise. For many, what matters is the noise, not the substance.

Fortunately, there have also been many others who, with composure and without prejudice, have properly analyzed not only the historical context but also the geopolitical one, by raising the only question that truly matters: does this step serve Albania’s national interest or not?

It is deeply regrettable, and I feel genuine disappointment, that in Albania almost every issue is interpreted through the lens of a black-and-white divide. This is a reflex that impoverishes public debate and makes it increasingly difficult to develop a serious discussion, even when there is disagreement, but one that is based on facts and on the national interest.

Often, the desire to criticize exceeds the willingness to understand. The rush to insult and condemn in advance suppresses the readiness to listen, analyze and debate calmly. In such an environment, noise replaces argument, while prejudice precedes judgment.

Regarding the substance of the issue, I chose to be clear from the very beginning. I have publicly explained, although briefly, our approach and our interests, while recalling some basic principles upon which diplomatic relations are built and which, unfortunately, some choose to forget precisely when those principles do not fit their arguments.

It is important to emphasize that Albania’s request for the opening of a General Consulate in the Presheva Valley is neither a new idea nor a reaction of the moment. It is a long-standing objective of our foreign policy, articulated for years by the political representatives of Albanians in Serbia itself and consistently pursued by Albanian institutions.

If there is any criticism that could legitimately be made, it is only this: that it has been undertaken much later than it should have been.

Question:
If it has been an objective for such a long time, why has it not been achieved earlier?

Minister Hoxha:
According to international law and established diplomatic practice, a consulate cannot be opened on the territory of another state without the explicit consent of that state. Neither Albania, nor Serbia, nor any other country can unilaterally establish a General Consulate on the territory of another country.

The opening of a diplomatic mission is always the result of a negotiation process that requires dialogue, mutual understanding and agreement between the parties. For years, Albania’s request to open a General Consulate in the Presheva Valley has been rejected, postponed or left without a concrete response by the Serbian authorities.

From the very first day of assuming office, I made this one of my priorities. It has been my first request in all contacts with representatives of Serbia, including with the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

In fact, from our very first meeting in April, in Antalya, which took place at my request, the main topic of discussion was precisely the opening of the General Consulate of Albania in Bujanovac. I made this public after the meeting.

I did not encounter direct opposition, but neither did I encounter any particular enthusiasm. Precisely on this basis, I have continued to work with persistence and without interruption to build the necessary understanding.

Anyone with even basic knowledge of diplomacy knows that understanding cannot be imposed; it is built through dialogue, based on interests and, almost always, materialized through reciprocity.

Diplomacy is not the art of imposing one’s will, but rather the ability to create the conditions in which one’s interests can advance within an environment where the other side also pursues its own interests.

Precisely for this reason, reciprocity should not be viewed as a concession, nor necessarily as any kind of asymmetry, and even less as a mechanical balancing of interests.

It is the mechanism through which states achieve their objectives. Every serious diplomat seeks to advance, to the greatest possible extent, the interests of the country they represent, while never forgetting that they are dealing with another state that acts according to the same logic.

Even in this case, we are fully aware of the complexity of relations with Serbia. We have no illusions, no naivety and no unrealistic expectations. We know very well that the other side will seek to advance its own interests, just as we do.

But diplomacy is not built on wishes, and this applies to every state.

We have carefully analyzed all aspects, implications and possible consequences. A permanent Albanian diplomatic and institutional presence in the Presheva Valley, as well as the bilateral agreement that makes it possible, are legitimate instruments of foreign policy and an expression of the constitutional responsibility of the Albanian state.

Article 8 of the Constitution of the Republic of Albania obliges the state to protect the national rights of Albanians living outside its borders.

This initiative aims precisely at that: bringing the Albanian state closer to those who need it, better protecting their rights and interests, and transforming Albania’s presence and care for the Presheva Valley from an aspiration into a daily institutional reality.

Therefore, anyone who claims that Albania should open its consulate in Serbia but refuses to accept that Serbia should have the same opportunity in Albania is not proposing a realistic solution and is simply speaking in the air.

Such an approach may sound patriotic in television debates, Facebook posts, podcasts or generally across social networks, and certainly in spaces where narratives are created solely to serve individual political interests, but it produces no concrete results for the Albanians of the Presheva Valley.

At best, it demonstrates a profound lack of understanding of how diplomacy and relations between states function. At worst, it represents a conscious attempt to obstruct an objective that directly serves the national interest, merely to fuel political controversy.

The Albanians of the Presheva Valley do not need rhetorical patriotism; they need a state that does everything possible to be close to them, engaged and effective. This is precisely what this initiative seeks to achieve.

Question:
What would a General Consulate in Bujanovac concretely provide to the Albanians living there?

Minister Hoxha:
If there had been a need for a serious debate – although, in fact, initiatives of this nature should never require justification – this would have been the right and only question: Why does Albania need a General Consulate in the Presheva Valley? What national interest does it serve? Why should public funds be invested for this purpose, and so on?

Instead, the exact opposite happened. Almost all critics and opponents deliberately ignored what is essential: the interest and care for Albanians in the Presheva Valley.

The focus was not placed on the more than 60,000 Albanians living in Presheva, Bujanovac and Medvegjë, but almost exclusively on the question of what Serbia could gain from having one of its consulates in Albania.

There is no greater disregard for the national interest than mocking the very act of claiming to defend it. There is no greater dismissal of the legitimate expectations and demands of the Albanians of the Presheva Valley than effectively telling them that their need for a permanent presence of the Albanian state matters less than a debate driven by fear, symbolism or the calculations of day-to-day politics.

For the sake of transparency, and due to the circumstances created by the scale of the hostility surrounding this issue, I find myself compelled to do something that does not often happen: publicly explain why we have requested and worked for the establishment of an Albanian General Consulate in the Valley.

Not because the other side does not know or cannot imagine these reasons, but because such matters are never fully disclosed publicly, as negotiations are not conducted on Facebook or TikTok.

However, since we have reached this point, perhaps it is better to clarify them. The Consulate, if established, and beyond all attempts to undermine it:

• would create permanent and direct communication with the community and provide the full range of consular services closer to citizens;
• would ensure a stable institutional presence of the Albanian state alongside the Albanian community;
• would significantly facilitate, in a much more organized manner, cooperation in the fields of education, culture, economy and local development;
• would enable much closer follow-up of issues related to the use of the Albanian language, the provision of school textbooks, support for representation in public institutions, and the preservation of national and cultural identity;
• would make possible more direct monitoring, documentation and reporting of problems affecting Albanians, including address deregistration practices and other forms of discrimination;
• would create a permanent channel of dialogue with Serbian local and central authorities, enabling faster and more effective addressing of the concerns of the Albanian community.

In other words, it would make the Albanian state genuinely present, in implementation of the Constitution of the Republic of Albania, which, through Article 8, assigns us the responsibility to care for Albanians living outside our borders.

Unfortunately, this was not the debate that took place.

Instead of discussing the interests and needs of Albanians in the Presheva Valley, many of those who took up the banner and proclaimed themselves defenders of the national interest chose to analyze, and even argue, the reasons why Serbia might want the same arrangement in Albania.

In the most absurd way, while excluding every reasonable voice, the debate was conducted more in the name of Serbia’s presumed interests than in the name of the concrete interests of Albanians.

This is not only paradoxical; it is deeply troubling.

Because patriotism is not measured by automatically rejecting every action of the other side. It is measured by the ability to advance the interests of your own country with prudence, professionalism and concrete results.

Everything else is day-to-day politics, not foreign policy.

Question:
Let us return once again to what you have described as the “approach”, the principle of “reciprocity”, and how it functions and is justified in this case. There have been criticisms that this implies that the two communities – the Albanians of the Presheva Valley and the Serbs of Shkodër – are equal?

Minister Hoxha:
I have explained this before and I would like to repeat it: reciprocity is a fundamental principle in diplomacy. It is an approach, but it does not in any way imply automatic equality in any aspect, except with regard to the manner and level of action undertaken.

It is the mechanism through which states reach agreements, establish understandings and resolve issues of mutual interest. It is never a mathematical formula that equalizes interests, needs, numbers, benefits or the weight of each side.

The attempt to reduce this issue to a numerical comparison, as some rushed to do, is, at best, a misunderstanding of how diplomacy functions; at worst, it is simply a lack of knowledge.

In diplomacy, every state has a fundamental obligation: to think, act and protect its own national interests.

I have the duty to protect the interests of Albania. Serbia, like every other state, does the same for its own interests. Serbia does not determine our interests, just as we do not determine theirs.

It is precisely on this reality that serious diplomacy is built. Each side has its own measure, its own assessment of interests and its own evaluation of the expected outcome.

Allow me to emphasize this, because I believe it needs to be made clear: we are not establishing any equation of equality between the Albanians of the Presheva Valley and Serbian citizens of Albanian ethnicity living in the Shkodër region.

On the contrary, the numerical disparity itself clearly demonstrates where the practical and real interest lies.

Those who rush to compare such figures should also answer questions about what these figures actually prove and what, according to them, would be the “appropriate” number that would justify the opening of a consulate.

Who determines such a threshold? And with what right would we impose on another state how it should organize its consular network?

The connection between consulates and national communities living outside their borders is certainly an important factor, but it is by no means the only criterion.

Consulates are also opened for many other reasons, such as economic, commercial, administrative, cultural and tourism-related considerations, due to the intensity of bilateral relations, or in order to support strategic interests.

Albania itself is an example of this practice. We have General Consulates in Ulcinj and Struga, as well as in Thessaloniki, Ioannina, Milan, Bari and Munich, along with a consulate in New York.

Our presence in all these locations is naturally related to the number of citizens, but in reality it goes beyond that, as it also extends to promoting economic and trade relations within the consular jurisdiction, facilitating the movement of people and advancing other national interests.

On the other hand, General Consulates of neighboring countries already operate in Albania, in Gjirokastër, Korçë and Vlora.

Anyone who conducts even minimal research can establish that the presence or absence of a minority community is by no means the sole criterion upon which consulates have been established.

The state receiving a request for the opening of a diplomatic or consular mission has only one sovereign decision to make: to accept or reject it.

All other aspects – the location, the rationale, the interests intended to be protected and the manner in which the consular presence is organized – remain within the discretion of the requesting state.

This has been the case for Albanian consulates abroad, and this is how it works for every state.

I apologize for extending the explanation and making it sound like a lecture, but this is the reality.

Question:
Does the opening of a Serbian consulate in Shkodër threaten Albanian sovereignty?

Minister Hoxha:
No, under no circumstances.

The opening of a consulate – just as the presence of an embassy in a capital city – does not grant the sending state any form of authority, and even less any kind of sovereignty over the city, territory or population where it is established.

I mentioned earlier our diplomatic presence in neighboring countries. No one has felt threatened because there is no reason to do so. Neither Albania nor any other country would ever allow a diplomatic presence that undermines its interests or sovereignty.

The location, status, jurisdiction and functioning of any diplomatic presence operating on the territory of the Republic of Albania are carried out in accordance with international law, as well as with Albanian laws and regulations.

The first instruction given to our diplomats before they assume their duties is to respect the laws of the country where they will serve. I believe this principle applies equally to every country.

Question:
Does this engagement with Serbia in any way alter Albania’s position towards Kosovo?

Minister Hoxha:
I believe this question has already received a complete and exhaustive answer many times, not only through our public positions and statements, but above all through the reality of what Albania has done and continues to do.

The answer is straightforward: Absolutely not.

Diplomatic engagement with Serbia does not, under any circumstances, imply insensitivity toward Kosovo, and even less so any relativization of Belgrade’s policies toward it.

Albania’s position regarding Kosovo’s independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, statehood, development, Euro-Atlantic perspective and the unwavering support provided by the Albanian state has been, and remains, clear, consistent and unchanged.

Something entirely different are displays of bravado and demonstrations of verbal patriotism, whether individual or encouraged by others, by people who never tire of distributing certificates of patriotism from all sides of the border.

Patriotism is not proven through declarations or media noise.

Diplomacy is not a competition of slogans, nor a contest of clicks or reactions on social networks. Diplomacy is measured by concrete results, by the ability to protect and advance national interests, to stand close to citizens and to achieve objectives that serve the state and the nation.

History does not remember those who shouted the loudest, but those who managed to deliver results.

Dialogue and relations with Serbia are not a certificate of approval for its policies toward Kosovo. However, diplomacy does not function according to a logic of isolation; it functions through the ability to communicate, negotiate and advance the interests of one’s country even in difficult environments.

Black-and-white diplomacy belonged to the communist era, and we all know where it led Albania, Kosovo and the entire Albanian world.

Any such approach today can only lead to failure.

 

Question:
How do you respond to those who see this agreement simply as a symbolic concession to Serbia, because of the historical sensitivity associated with the word “Serbia” being present in Shkodër?

Minister Hoxha:
Any historical and political sensitivity must be understood and respected, not mocked or minimized. We have taken all these considerations into account and have assessed them with the seriousness they deserve.

However, once again, if we allow only history and the past to determine every decision of the present, then we risk losing our ability to look clearly and with vision toward the future.

History must neither be forgotten nor erased. It teaches us, reminds us of and guides us. But the responsibility of state institutions is to assess the national interest by looking toward the future, based on the concrete results that decisions bring for citizens and for the country, not solely on the symbolism or emotional weight of an issue.

The fundamental question in this case is not only what Serbia seeks. Serbia knows this, and it is within its right to define and defend its own interests.

The question that we must answer is: what do we seek and what do we aim to achieve?

For the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs, the answer is clear, because it is guided by the responsibility to deliver results.

If someone believes that Albania should not seek a permanent consular presence in the Presheva Valley, if someone believes that Albanians there should not have an Albanian institution closer to them, then this should be stated openly and clearly.

Because the real debate is not whether Serbia has interests of its own. Every state has them and defines them independently.

The debate is whether Albania should or should not use the diplomatic instruments available to it in order to protect its own interests and serve its citizens.

One final word: patriotism and the protection of the national interest are not measured by the volume of noise generated in public, nor by irresponsible accusations that have become a kind of “common currency” in political debate, and even less by the pseudo-patriotism of those seeking to benefit from the moment, especially those who have adopted such positions at the last hour.

They are measured by the ability to produce concrete results, create new opportunities and genuinely advance the interests of the country and of Albanians.

This is what I have done and what I will continue to do, until the very last minute in this duty and in this profession.