TIRANA TIMES EDITORIAL
Lack of details, elusive language and failure to properly communicate with the Albanian public and media on a proposal to destroy Syria’s chemical weapons in Albania has turned into an international PR disaster for the Albanian government and its relations with key partners like the United States.
Two weeks ago, Albanians learned from foreign media that Albania – thanks to some experience in the field and its geographic location נwas in a short list of countries being recruited in a UN effort driven by Washington and Moscow to help the world get rid of some dangerous Syrian weapons. There would financial support and international respect involved, and the process would be done under the strictest international standards.
It is now clear the Albanian government’s first reaction, possibly at the request of Washington, had been warm, if not outright positive. The problem is that the government clearly failed is to take into account Albanian public opinion – and the image that the phrase “destroying chemical weapons” conjures on men and women in the street in a country the size of Albania – which is to say tiny by international standards.
The backlash has been huge and even for those with the best intentions it now does more harm than good to have Albania participate in the destruction of the Syria’s chemical weapons.
Details are trickling in on what such action would entail, and even if we take for granted guarantees that there would be little risk from destroying the weapons in proper facilities, there is the issue of image, which Albania’s government clearly failed to take into account.
Worries made public in Albanian media ranged from tourism-related businesses who were afraid visitors would avoid Albania to a strong fear that a deadly accident would happen mirroring the 2008 explosion at Gerdec where many Albanians lost their lives after the explosion at a weapons decommission plant outside Tirana. In places like Norway or Belgium – other countries on the discussion list – these fears might be unfounded, but in Albania recent history shows they are not.
The other issue to deal with is that these protests also marked rare public pressure on the government in this staunchly pro-American country to place limits in what requests it will accept from the international community in general and the United States in particular, after the government confirmed that Washington and other allies had requested Tirana’s assistance with the program.
In weighing in the financial support and other benefits that would come to Albania as the country tried to do Washington, Moscow and the rest of the world a favor, perhaps proponents of the program failed to take into account the costs to the image of Albania and the relations with its key allies and neighboring countries. Officials in Greece, Italy and Macedonia told Albanian media they would want to be consulted. The European Union indicated it wanted to weigh in too. Some Kosovo Albanians joined street protests and others vowed to boycott Albania’s beaches should the program be allowed to go on. In essence, this potato looks too hot for tiny Albania, even if it could hold it if it tried hard enough.
