Dashnor Kaloçi
Memorie.al publishes an unknown archival document extracted from the fund of the former Central Committee of the ALP that talks about a meeting of the Politburo held on October 10, 1974, where Enver Hoxha has made its conclusions by criticized the main leaders of the Ministry of Defense, from the Chief of General Staff of the Army and Deputy Minister, Petrit Dume, Director of the Political Directorate of the Army, Hito Çako, Director of the Institute for Military Studies and Research, Sadik Bekteshi, Halim Ramohito, etc. ., accusing them of anti-party activities and hostile work in the Army and as close associates of the Minister of Defense, Beqir Balluku, in his hostile activity. Enver Hoxha’s whole speech at that meeting, where the biggest “lightning bolts” fell on the Political Director of the Army, Hito Çako, whom he accuses that when Tuk Jakova’s “hostile activity” was examined, he was aware of all His “hostile work”, but he hid it from the Party. As well as criticism of Sadik Bekteshi, accusing him of being a “megalomaniac” and of weak leadership at the head of the Institute for Military Studies and Research, etc.
Enver Hoxha’s speech at the meeting of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the ALP, with criticism and accusations against Beqir Balluku, Petrit Dumes, Hito Çakos, Sadik Bektesh, Halim Ramohitos, etc.
October 10, 1974
Friends, Now I want to talk a little too. I fully agree with the criticisms and remarks made by the comrades of the Politburo, which have a great value for the Party. We heard the self-criticism of the leading Army cadres invited to the meeting and my opinion is that they, not to mention at all, did not leave much of what they have given in writing. Therefore, I do not agree with these self-criticisms and especially with that of Hito Chako. Are these their own deep self-criticism, are they sincere and open? My opinion is that no. But why is it like this? This is a matter of concepts, unformed Marxist-Leninist concepts, and these people are talking about distorted concepts, self-styled Marxist-Leninist, but they are only revisionists. These are communists, they have fought the National Liberation War, they have been elected to the Central Committee, they have been appointed to leading positions in the Army and yet they have made such serious fundamental mistakes !! But what are these serious mistakes of theirs?
Here is a summary: For them, in practice, the Army is considered a place where they make the law, are masters, and can act as they please. According to them, they can violate the laws, ordinances, norms and no one has the right to interfere. They hide the truth there, keep silent about the flaws, they suppress with their arrogance and arrogance in theory and practice, they do not respect the Party there, they do not take into account and despise the opinions, remarks, and criticisms of subordinates. In fact, they do not even consider the main leadership of the Party, they use slogans, formulas, and even the name of the Party leadership to act crookedly and falsify, to ruin the work of the Party and to impose itself on the Party. and army laws and anti-party norms. All of these that I mentioned and others have been proven, in one way or another, in their work. They may say, “How much you have charged us, Comrade Enver!” No, I’m very moderate, I have to be even tougher. Do I exaggerate when I say: Do all these things resemble the army? Yeah Al that sounds pretty crap to me, Looks like BT ain’t for me either. Then, why did you, as members of the Central Committee, allow them to take place ?!
You have a great and main responsibility for this. None of you can say that you did not see these things in one way or another. Then as communists, as revolutionaries, as people with the right Marxist-Leninist concepts that you are removing, why didn’t you rise up to put these evils in place? You didn’t. One might say, “I have opposed this or that action, I have criticized it.” Well, let’s believe it for a moment, but what came out of it? What hindered you from this evil claim of yours? Was evil forbidden? No, not at all, she got a little fatter !! Someone else may say, “Well, here I am.” Okay, so why did you break up? How does the Party teach you to break or not to break? My order as First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Party and as Commander-in-Chief of the Army is clear in terms of the use of foreign literature. You, since Hito Çakoja, Petrit Dumja, Sadik Bekteshi, you, Ramohito, why didn’t you implement that directive, were you throwing it in the basket? Do you call this the implementation of the Party’s orders? Do you, in the army, call this respect for Party leadership?
Here is the result of your flagrant violation of this directive! Can you tell us who is responsible for this? Shall we not burden you when We make you responsible? Not at all! We are very gentle! When you found contradictions in the line or practice of work by one or the other military, why didn’t you put them in the Party and when the grassroots organizations of the Party committee in the Ministry of Defense failed to bring the issues within the norms, why did you not go to the Politburo and the Central Committee? You cannot claim that you did not know these norms. Then why did you hide these anti-party actions, these quarrels or quarrels with the Party and its leadership? My friends told you the answer, I am also telling you: You did not do that, because you have a revisionist view of the Party, that your familiarity has covered you, megalomania has covered you. You considered that you did not need the help of the Party, the committees and the leadership of the Party, and you thought that you should wash your unwashed things among yourselves, hiding them from the Party.
Are all these facts that are confirmed by facts in your activity Marxist-Leninist concepts? Isn’t it clear that you considered the Army to be a ‘closed castle’, as a place where you could do as you please, behave as if it were good for you, break the laws and norms and come? new, from what suited you? What do you say to these facts? In reality all these questions, you became tail. How will you respond to the Party and the Army when you return to the analysis? Will you sing this dirty song there too? We are sure that this time the discourses will not be soft, so you, as they have been so far, will be held accountable to one of all those who have made mistakes and made mistakes. Mouths will now open in the Party and in the Army, no matter who is wrong or who has done wrong. In the organizations of the Party in the army, the sick hierarchy will now be crushed, there will be no more ranks and positions, everyone will be a simple member with equal rights.
Be prepared for your job, hold the Party accountable to one degree, set aside false counters, be honest and sincere with it, and be convinced that the Party will not easily let you out of its grip. You, Hito Çako, when I opened the meeting at the beginning, I asked you some precise questions, the friends of the Politburo also asked you very important questions. You turned their backs on them, not that you didn’t get a banal or ordinary answer, but you didn’t reveal the truth of things, lies without shame. First, you did not reveal the real reason: why did you hide the truth about Beqir Balluku’s work from the Party leadership? Because you agreed with Beqir Balluku. He did hostile work on the military side, he did hostile anti-party work on the political-ideological side. Both of these activities were synchronized, coordinated, It was a cunning anti-socialist plot. The goal is clear, weakening, and sabotaging the country’s defense. You were preparing the ground for a Soviet invasion. I make no assumptions here.
The facts themselves confirm this and the facts are stubborn. Secondly, Hito Çako, it turns out that it is not true that you were not aware of what Beqir Balluku was doing, not only in drafting antitheses but also on all his hostile and amoral activity in the army. For all this, you have not only remained silent but also supported him, encouraged Beqir Balluku, agreed with him. The facts prove this. Third, you, Hito Çako, did not trust the leadership of the Party, the Central Committee and its First Secretary, and the Commander-in-Chief of the Army, because you are a revisionist, an anti-party element, that you hide them until in the end the truth, why in time a significant and systematic hostile work was being done by you and Beqir Balluku and you kept this activity secret by all means. These deductions come from facts.
Fourth, you, Hito Çako, when you saw that Beqir Balluku was burning, you put the pine on him, so that the smoke would cover your mistakes and betrayal. You were removed as a staunch opponent of Beqir Balluku, and you were a friend in the conspiracy with him, you were an ardent friend of the Soviet revisionists. What I am doing is not literature, but logical deduction based on facts. Fifth, you, Hito Çako, are a recidivist in deceit and in your anti-party path. More than once you have acted against the Party, against its leadership, and against its First Secretary. When the hostile work of Tuk Jakova’s anti-party was examined, it was revealed that this enemy of the Party, for all his anti-party activities and goals, had talked to you, Hito Çako. And you kept these to the Party in secret. When you were forced to tell her that you were wrong, then do something self-critical and make a solemn commitment that you would never make such a mistake again. The party shook your hand, you spat at it and repeated the same even a more serious and dangerous mistake.
This time you conspired against the Party, against its leadership, against the army. These are facts, nothing is added, nothing is aggravated. I could dwell more on your anti-party work, on your intriguing and arrogant character, on your false modesty, on the servile smiles on the main leaders of the Party and the state, and, on the other hand, do what you have done. I am trying to give a summary and a supplement here in addition to what my friends said, but I will have the opportunity to develop these in a meeting that I can do with Army cadres. I think, Hito Çako, that what was said in your address will serve to speak openly to the Party and the Army cadres, because only in this way can you recover from this serious illness.
You, Petrit, have very serious and reprehensible flaws in your political-ideological views and in your character, which have made you make very serious mistakes. We have a duty to speak openly, as communists, because only in this way are the wrong friends corrected, and in order to achieve this goal, we make every effort. We feel sorry for any friend who is not corrected. With you, Petrit, the Politburo has made a lot of effort in this regard. She has repeatedly pointed out that in your character, there are very pronounced manifestations of arrogance, and these appear at work and in life, not to us, members of the Politburo, but to other friends and especially to those at work. in the Army, the displays of arrogance have been constant. Worst of all, your arrogance and arrogance at work are often overshadowed by a look of “shyness modesty,” which at first glance is mistaken. But these characteristics of your person have their source in your ideological innocence as well; many revisionists, bourgeois concepts have been clothed in your thoughts, and these have played on and played bitter toys in your life and work.
You, Petrit, have greatly overestimated your military past, your military prowess, and your contribution to the organization and modernization of the army. We have not denied these contributions as much as they are, but in the Army, you have not always worked properly and properly, especially on the road and within the norms of the Party. I want to emphasize that the Party, you “loved” and “love” not as it should be and how it should be protected, not according to its ideology. Herein lies your great guilt, this has led you to grave errors. With the wrong ideological views, with arrogant and arrogant characteristics, with the view that you are a good military man, better than everyone else, you had come to the conclusion that you do not make military or political mistakes, not only in thick lines. , but also in that money. These have given you some outstanding features of an old officer and made you forget that our Army is the Army of the Party, of the proletariat, with norms, with laws, and with Marxist-Leninist ideology. You remember and you remember that you know these, but the facts at work tell us that you did not follow these norms and laws. This view of things by you has had detrimental, dangerous effects on military and Party work in the military.
You, Petrit, as well as Beqir Balluku, when the Political Bureau criticized them for their poor work, you understood and came to the conclusion that what they were going to join the army was due to personal quarrels between Beqir and you, like these were matters of style, method, and competence. At least that’s what you gave us. We have also criticized you for these because they were shows that hindered the work. It is now clear why it was good for Beqir Balluku to stay in these waters because that was how they lost track of the real hostile work you were preparing. He sought to reduce the issue to “style, method, and competence”. At the Politburo, none of you helped us to see more clearly. You just said one word at the end that “you do not agree on principled issues with Beqir Balluku” and the whole issue was resolved. You didn’t do that before. This is one of your biggest mistakes. You did not agree in time with Beqir Balluku, but he also did not agree with you. Why didn’t he agree? Why did you work the way he did, he “didn’t work”, you “didn’t lie”, “he lied”, “he conspired”, you “no”, “he showed no skill in military matters and bluffed”, but you see that he was bluffing, instead of following the right path to cut off Beqir Balluku’s rush, that is, to use the path of criticism in the Politburo and the Party Committee, you only chose the path of quarrels, you acted, as it were, on the subjective platform, you tried to come to terms with it and close the case. Thus, you went to the field he wanted, you yourself entered the path of error and betrayal.
You say that the cloud was in principle contrary to Beqir Balluku, then in time, since 1971 and before you had seen that Beqir Balluku was wronging and betraying the line of the Party and the Army, but you did not put us in the current, he kept us secret. But why did he keep them secret from us? That you had lost faith in the main leadership of the Party and its First Secretary. You managed to think that we supported Beqir Balluku in his criminal activity that we did not even know and that all of you kept it a secret from us. Here are your ambiguous views as a communist. Not only did you not make the Party’s norms and principles clear, but you did not apply them as crookedly as you knew them. Although you were “in constant conflict” with Beqir, even though you dictated that “he was betraying the line,” he tried to cover up these things to the end. This seems contradictory, but it is logical for a friend who is not clear about the proletarian Marxist-Leninist principles of our Party. What you say, that “I did not speak to the leadership before”, why I thought that it would not hurt me and said that “Petrit continues to quarrel with Beqiri, despite the criticism that has been made”, has been logical according to you. But again this logic led you to the great and grave matter; to lose faith in the leadership, in the Party, and for a traitor at the head of the Party and the Army was silent about his activity. The other reason you raised in the Bureau that you could not conclude, reject that it does not stand!
You, Sadik Bekteshi, are removed up and down like a learned man, a friend who possesses Marxism-Leninism well and beautifully, you are removed as if you possess military science at your fingertips and not only that, but you get such impermissible poses. punishable, which instilled fear in subordinates, uses against them the manner of a bayraktar, of a man who speaks from the top of science. But the facts show the opposite of what you do. You have far less value in these areas. With the poses of a sick highlander and hiding under communist slogans, when the personality is violated, he immediately comes to my office and asks me to put in place the offer to have Beqir Balluku. But when he conspires and undermines the Party and the Army, it never occurs to you to take the trouble and come to me to denounce it. Can you tell us that you did not dictate this ?! Then, when you dictated, just as you came quickly and offended your person, why did you not come to inform me? Of course, personal matters were very important to you, while those of the Party did not matter. You now say you made a mistake, but why did you make that mistake? This is exactly what you need to discover to be healed. It is easy to say that “I did not dictate the hostile work of Beqir Balluku” etc., etc. What about the work you did inside the institute you ran and turned into an army supplier of dirty revisionist materials of the party and the Soviet army, didn’t you see that it had revisionist features? Where did you get this permission and this order to do so? There was communism there? Your work was very responsible, it was a political and ideological work. You proved too weak as a communist in this regard and you have a heavy responsibility. Party and friends to demand accountability. You are crying and you are crying that you were not given capable cadres, etc., but still, those who were given to you, you did not know how to direct them, you broke them, because, as it turns out, you yourself and the first, you were spoiled, you were wrong with the Party, with its line. These are very serious issues, they are vital issues for the Party, for the army, and for the people. No one can be allowed to joke, drop a bomb, and hide their hand with these issues. That is why we need to get rid of the garbage and get rid of the revisionist ideology, otherwise these bitter, harsh, but fair and fully deserved criticisms that we are making of you are not rightly understood. Everything is viewed out of the high interest of the Party and of socialism. There is no exaggeration in the statements of the comrades of the Politburo, no intention of insulting or discriminating against anyone. I even think that the longer we lasted, the better it would be for the Party and its comrades. But I propose to the Politburo not to give conclusions about this problem today. Let the comrades of the Army reflect deeply on what was said here, for the good of the Party and theirs./Memorie.al
