Dashnor Kaloçi
Memorie.al publishes an unknown document extracted from the fund of the former Central Committee of the ALP, which talks about a meeting held on August 31, 1960, where the Political Bureau has analyzed Koço’s “anti-party activity” Tashkos, former chairman of the Communist Group of Korça and one of the main participants in the founding meeting of the Communist Party of Albania on November 8, 1941, which in the early 1960s, when Enver Hoxha and the senior leadership of the ALP Criticisms and attacks on Nikita Khrushchev and the political line pursued by official Moscow, Tashko, who had served for years as Albania’s ambassador to Moscow, and at the time held the post of Chairman of the Party’s Audit Control, began. only to come out openly in defense of Khrushchev, but asked Enver to take a stand and take action and punish those who had spoken in the plenum against the head of the Soviet Union. After the meeting that Enver held in the presence of Rita Marco on August 3, 1960, where he harshly accused Tashko of “hostile activity” that had violated the party line by talking to two Soviet diplomats, Bespallov and Kozlov, to whom He had asked them to talk to Maurice Torres to mediate the settlement of the dispute between the senior leadership of the ALP and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and asked Koço to reflect and make a written self-criticism. but after he refused to do so, Enver summoned him to the meeting of the Politburo held on August 31 of that year, where the decision to expel him from the Party and all the functions he held were taken.
“You had your doubts and thoughts in your head since you left the Plenum, but you didn’t say a word to us. Tell us, “I, Comrade Enver, am thinking of going to Moscow as soon as possible so that there are no issues left to be discussed in November.” But you, instead of doing this with your Party, have three meetings with the Soviets. As soon as I received your letter, I immediately called Hysni and told him: “Let Koço know that I received the letter and meet with you.” I may not have received this letter at all because I was on vacation. Then you did not ask to come to me before the meeting with the Soviets. That day when you came to see me, the Soviet military attaché, Colonel Rura, came and informed you that Koço Tashko’s wife had told them that they had arrested her husband. How do you explain that? What is your wife looking for in the Soviet embassy? Why are you alarmed? I express my opinion and say that you have the fly under your hat, so you are alarmed; apparently, he also talks to his wife. You ask for an appointment with Enver, he sends you an officer to call you for an appointment while you are alarmed. Your wife also goes to the embassy, and you are unaware of that. Will you throw these at us? But why did you come 3 hours late to the meeting? Be serious, Koço, and talk straight. Why be afraid of being arrested? ” This was stated, among other things, in his speech by Enver Hoxha, at the meeting of the Politburo held on August 31, 1960, which was called to analyze Koço Tashko (former chairman of the Communist Group). of Korça in the period of the Zog Monarchy and one of the main members of the founding meeting of the Albanian Communist Party on November 8, ’41), who after serving for many years in the post of Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and as Albania’s powerful ambassador to Moscow in 1960, when the meeting was taking place, was in the function of Chairman of the Party’s Control and Revision Commission. It was at that time that Koço Tashko not only came out openly against Enver Hoxha and the political line being pursued by the senior leadership of the ALP, regarding the cooling and disruption of official relations with Moscow but asked Enver to take a stand and to punish all those who had spoken out against Khrushchev at the meeting of the Plenum of the Central Committee held in those days. This, Tashkoi submitted to Enver in writing in a long letter, arguing why Khrushchev should not have been hit, after which he “did not err”, and after that, Enver charged Hysni Kapo to wait for Kocho in one meeting, but he refused, even cursing and severely insulting the service officer who had been sent to notify him of the meeting time. This attitude of Tashko, who was three hours late for the meeting with Hysni Kapos, irritated Enver Hoxha immensely, who called him to a meeting held on August 3 (in the presence of Rita Marko), where after strongly accused Koço of “anti-party activity”, urged him to reflect and make a written self-criticism, which would be analyzed at the meeting of the Politburo. But after Tashko refused to make that self-criticism, saying: “what I had to say, I told you”, Enver gave him time to “reflect” once again, calling him to the meeting of the Politburo. held on 31 August of that year. Enver’s speech at that meeting against Tashko, which Memorie.al is publishing in full in this article, gave the final blow to Tashko because after that, he was not only expelled from the party and all posts and party functions who was detained but also interned and imprisoned, spending more than two decades in prison and internment, until he passed away in 1984, in the Adriatic village of the Kruja district, where he was interned with his family.
Enver’s speech at the meeting of the Politburo on August 31, 1961
“Discussion at the meeting of the Political Bureau of K.Q. of the ALP on the actions of Koço Tashko in contradiction with the Party line ”
August 31, 1960
Through the relevant minutes, you, comrades of the Politburo, are aware of the conversation that I and Comrade Rita Marko had with Koço Tashko. We have now gathered to discuss this issue. In my opinion, Koço Tashkoja has fallen, first of all, into very serious anti-party mistakes, which put him in open opposition to the leadership of the Party; secondly, he has broken all the organizational rules of the Party by managing to discuss, outside it, with the Soviet ambassador, the decisions of the last Plenum of the Central Committee. From the conversation we had with Koço Tashko, we can say that he, not only did not recognize his serious mistakes, he was calling his attitudes fair and, as you have noticed, reading the minutes, the tone of his during the meeting was arrogant, although we tried to help him reflect on these mistakes, to look at them directly, through the eyes of the Party. Many days have passed since we met and talked with Koço Tashko. Now I believe he has reflected more on his mistakes and will come out properly before the Politburo, which will help him as much as possible to recognize the serious mistakes he has made. Now, Koço, we want you to speak here, in front of the Politburo, and tell us how you view your mistakes and the attitudes we have talked about.
Koço Tashkoja again did not react correctly. He did not reflect on his mistakes and did not self-criticize. Friends of the Politburo tried patiently to help him understand his anti-party stance, but instead of deepening it, he sought to reduce his mistakes and not speak openly.
COMRADE ENVER: We, Koço, have nothing personal with you. Here we are talking about line issues, the Party line must be defended by all. So don’t make a theory, but get to the heart of the matter, which we’ve talked about together. As the Plenum was mentioned, we have expressed our views on the Yugoslav and other revisionists, and the Plenum has heard them, so you have heard them. We have also told Khrushchev, who is worried about you, our position, but he does not agree with the fight we are waging against Yugoslav revisionism. While our position is clear, then why did you become so obsessed ?! The issues we raised about the leadership of the Soviet Union, the mistakes that we criticize Khrushchev, do not come out today, these have been around for a long time, and yet Khrushchev has no mistakes for you. Koço is still not telling us anything, although you say that “I will express myself from the inner soul”. We want this too, and we will judge you as you speak, but we ask you to respect the Politburo. If it was the Political Bureau, as you think, Albania would have been taken over by the river in time. Therefore, I have more respect for the friends of the Politburo and do not hold megalomaniacal attitudes. Speak straight, sincerely, and calmly, say, “What is in your inner soul,” that so far we have seen this very dark soul of yours. In your opinion, Torezi should have arranged for us to reach an agreement with Khrushchev. But why didn’t we talk to Khrushchev about the issues between us? That meant putting another man in the middle. Torezi is the general secretary of another party, what does he have to do to regulate us with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union? We have said that issues between the ALP and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union should not go beyond the offices of the Central Committee; to continue friendship, love, and cooperation with the Soviet peoples as before. This has been and is the line of our Party, and you act differently, do whatever you want, discuss issues with others, and think of making Torez a “mediator to reconcile us with Khrushchev!” Why didn’t you come to me and tell me about the “big plans” you had in mind to implement? You did not say this in the Plenum, because you have no respect for him, and you were against his conclusions, with Enver you say that you would talk, and in fact, you went and talked to the Soviets. Now it is not good to say that you do not trust the Plenum of the Central Committee of our Marxist-Leninist Party, but let the Plenum judge this. If you had come to me 10-15 days before you went to the Soviets, things could have been different. You have had your doubts and thoughts in your head since you left the Plenum, but you did not say a word to us. Tell us, “I, Comrade Enver, am thinking of going to Moscow as soon as possible so that there are no issues left to be discussed in November.” But you, instead of doing this with your Party, have three meetings with the Soviets. As soon as I received your letter, I immediately called Hysni and told him: “Let Koço know that I received the letter and meet with you.” I may not have received this letter at all because I was on vacation. Then you did not ask to come to me before the meeting with the Soviets. That day when you came to see me, the Soviet military attaché, Colonel Rura, came and informed you that Koço Tashko’s wife had told them that they had arrested her husband. How do you explain that? What is your wife looking for in the Soviet embassy? Why are you alarmed? I express my opinion and say that you have the fly under your hat, so you are alarmed; apparently, he also talks to his wife. You ask for an appointment with Enver, he sends you an officer to call you for an appointment while you are alarmed. Your wife also goes to the embassy, and you are unaware of that. Will you throw these at us? But why did you come 3 hours late to the meeting? Be serious, Koço, and talk straight. Why be afraid of being arrested? We enforce the laws properly, but he who has the fly under his hat and does not trust the Party reaches conclusions and wrong actions. This whole issue shows complete distrust of the Party, while what you are telling us is a fairy tale. According to you, we are against the Soviet Union, and you are its “protector”. You have no notion of Marxism-Leninism. When a party member errs, the party has the right to criticize him, whoever he is. Lenin wrote this with so much fire. Khrushchev has the right to criticize Stalin after his death, and we have no right to criticize Khrushchev who is alive and well! In your view, one should not be criticized for making a mistake. Do you agree with what was said in the Plenum and with the fair criticism we made of Khrushchev, who wanted, among other things, to keep us away from the ideological war against the Yugoslav revisionists? What other criticism did we make against Khrushchev, that you were alarmed? Nothing else was said in the Plenum to raise the issue that we allegedly spoke out against the Soviet Union. These are born of your imagination. No comrade regretted saying that I did not like this or that expression of Khrushchev in his speeches; such remarks were made only in the Plenum. So why confuse issues, Koço Tashko, why not open your heart to the Party that seeks to help you? You are telling us here things that no one eats. Therefore, speak properly before the Party. How can the Politburo help you? You need to convince yourself that you need help and to give the right answers to the natural and disturbing questions of your friends who want to help you. It is not nice for you, as a communist, to tell your Party that you have not talked to Ivanov at a time when he and his comrades have stood as hawks against our people by diversifying. They have done their best to teach you something, while you have not been asked not to be “compromised”, as you said yourself! What kind of compromise would you make when we were all on good terms with our Soviet friends and joking with them? Wouldn’t it be better if they found a weak point in you and caught you than to say “they didn’t ask me for anything because they didn’t want to compromise me” ?! So who didn’t want to be compromised? Why were you opposed to the Party not compromising you? You have to be in opposition to the Party for the other to act in secret and be careful not to compromise you. In November we will meet in Moscow at the Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties of the World. Until then, what more can we do? If the camp is in danger of splitting, how can this be avoided? This danger is avoided by clarifying the issue on the Marxist-Leninist path, discussing who is right and who is wrong. This discussion will take place at the Moscow Meeting.
After the discussions (held by the comrades of the Politburo, who unanimously condemned the attitude and anti-party activity of Koço Tashko, he took the floor again
COMRADE ENVER: I agree with all the discussions of the comrades of the Politburo and I think that Koço Tashko should be judged fairly and harshly. He continues to hold anti-party and hostile attitudes towards the Party, the Central Committee and the Politburo. As his friends said, with his interventions and reluctance, to tell the truth, Koço Tashkoja stands by his grave mistakes. Of course, his mistakes should be assessed as they are, we are not allowed to rely on considerations such as “he is an old friend” and so on. Party comrades, all without exception, must be consistent and loyal defenders of the Party line, especially the old communists who have a long experience. But when someone, whoever they are, maintains a hostile attitude, we must be fair and harsh. In the meeting I had with Koço, I told him to speak openly, without waiting for us to ask him questions. However, with his attitudes, he not only forced us to ask him questions, but even today in front of the Politburo, Koço Tashkoja, is still not on the right track, so I agree with the opinions of friends, that he is lying to the Party with all the meaning of the word. We are convinced that you, Koço, have told Ivanov all the issues, thus violating the directives of the Central Committee, the Statute of the Party. The Plenum said in Albanian that the issues we discussed should remain in the Central Committee and that if Ivanov or the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union were to be told, the Central Committee would make a decision and authorize people to tell them. Nobody authorized you, but you did it with your head. This is a big mistake that is not allowed. It is known that when there is a disagreement between the two parties, they come to an agreement, discuss, debate, so it is done in accordance with the known organizational norms. And you have violated all these norms. Why did you do that? I am fully convinced that you, being in opposition to the Party line and the Central Committee, thought that the time had come for these people, “worthless” at the head of the Party, who are isolating and endangering Albania, to be fired, therefore, according to you, new leadership had to be prepared, where the opportunists and Trotskyists of Albania would go to ruin. We do not obey your words. The facts themselves show that you are 100 percent against the Party line, its leadership, the decisions of the Central Committee, and the ball does not play that. This is best confirmed by your own words. As Comrade Pilo Peristeri said, you cannot go to the end with the Party. Your attitude is not accidental. Your activity is anti-party, you are not a communist, your concepts of communism are not fair. You are an opportunist, a careerist, a man with a lot of pronounced micro-bourgeois waste, you are also a coward. Difficult situations frightened you. We say this openly and not behind our backs, we say it not to offend you, but to correct it. The party tries not to let people fall into the abyss. If you do not recognize your mistakes, feel sorry for yourself. We say this because they have appeared in your life more than once. In these difficult moments that our socialist camp is going through, we need patience, maturity, honesty. You did not have these qualities, so you chose the opportunistic, revisionist, anti-party path, to deepen these contradictions, to damage the Party, to throw mud at the leadership of our Party. You did this with full conviction and with your head sick. Stupidity throughout your life we have ascertained before. We have tried to help you, to treat you well, but you have no idea what party you are dealing with. By acting against the Party, you cannot claim to be with the Party. Being with the Party and plotting against it cannot happen. You are for the policy of reconciling with Khrushchev’s very serious mistakes, and you have always been that way against enemies. Your principle that during the National Liberation War was “with little blood, or no blood at all”. Therefore, upon hearing fair criticism of Khrushchev, who accuses China of inciting war, you, without judging at all, thought that “China is for blood”, therefore “far from China” and it seemed to you that the comrades of the Plenum of the Central Committee of the ALP They are on the wrong path. You take the Critique of the Plenum for Khrushchev as if we are now against the Soviet Union. It was made clear in the Plenum that our position on the Chinese comrades would be determined after their speech was heard, and not just the word of the Soviet leaders, and, after carefully studying the matter to the end in the Central Committee of the Party, we would say our opinion at the meeting of representatives of the communist and workers’ parties that will take place in November in Moscow. The fact is that this attitude has found unanimous approval throughout our Party, which was expressed on the occasion of the last paper in all grassroots organizations. This attitude has been enthusiastically, resolutely, and proudly acknowledged for the maturity of our Party, for its bravery in defense of Marxism-Leninism. With this attitude that is the decisive compass and with this bravery we will come to the Moscow Meeting and, judging rightly, we will have our say there. If our Central Committee is convinced that China is wrong, it will not hesitate to tell it wrong, but if there are no mistakes, then we will defend China. Of course, others will talk too. If it turns out that our Central Committee has made mistakes, we will not be afraid to be self-critical. In this way, this will be a Marxist-Leninist meeting and not like the one in Bucharest, which did not take place according to Leninist organizational norms but was organized quickly and with the aim of punishing China. We did not accept and condemn such an anti-Marxist practice, because we have a responsibility before the Party and our people, before international communism. The efforts of the Politburo are intended to keep you out of the way and out of your anti-party views, but you fill the cup yourself. You did not love our party properly with deeds, but only with words. Everyone loves the Party, but they also make sacrifices to protect it at all times and not to harm it. You cannot be a faction in the Central Committee because no one is following you. With these views in mind, one or two people are unlikely to follow. You know that very well. So you thought the time had come and found a way to go to the Soviet embassy. We strongly condemn the methods you use. You don’t trust the Party at all, so you fantasize about saying “they protect me”, etc. All of this is completely in your head, it’s your imagination, your stupidity. We have respect for people, but only in party ways. This shows once again the justice of our leadership. It is logical that as long as you are on the right path, we have respect for you, while when you fight against the Party, then the respect is over, there is no more respect. The interest of the Party and the people is over blood ties or friendship. But you don’t understand that, because you have micro-bourgeois concepts, you invent views that are foreign. In the meeting we had together, I advised you to understand your mistakes correctly and to speak honestly here today. But you didn’t. What you say will come to talk to me is sewn with white thread. Neither the letter you sent me, nor its data, nor its purpose proves that you will come to me. You will come to me after Ivanov’s widow. Before you suggest that Enver go to Moscow, suggest this to me. Since you did not do so, then we have every right to say that Ivanov suggested it in vain. However, it does not matter to you whether you give it to him or he tells him to bring Enver to Moscow. What matters is that all these anti-party plans, you have made on the back of the Party, therefore they should be punished. I fully agree with the comrades of the Politburo, that such shaky, anti-party communists, who have no respect for the Marxist-Leninist line of the Party, for the revolutionary attitudes and its sacrifices, do not deserve to be in the Party. So, you also remember being outside the Party. We advise you not to go deeper than you went. The party even outside of it will help you because we still have hope to fix it. The facts show that your path is not right. Remember that even Ivanov and Bespallov have no way to protect you. They also understood what they had done and now they have shut their mouths because their actions are not Marxist. And against whom did these actions take place? Against a party that has wholeheartedly loved the Soviet Union, its glorious people, who have always listened to the remarks, criticisms, and advice of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. But let the Soviet leaders hear our fair criticism once and for all. Before Marxism-Leninism, there are no big or small. Marxism-Leninism is the compass that shows the straight line of a party. Criticizing Khrushchev does not mean you are anti-Soviet, as you accuse us. We have consistently demonstrated our love for the Soviet Union through evidence. In fact, we say that you are anti-Marxist and against the Soviet Union. The cabbages you have on your head prove it. Your views will be judged by the Central Committee, which you fear. You demanded that the issues be settled in a social-democratic way. You have always judged to talk about things in a “friendly” way. Even the support we have given you, you have judged subjectively, non-Marxist. Why did we support you? Because you are the chairman of the Central Audit Commission, for which the Central Committee has great respect because it is a body that has been elected by the Party Congress. And you had the opinion that as chairman of the Commission, you should control everything and escape the control of the Party yourself. Even members of the Central Audit Commission, when they violate the Party’s rules, cannot escape its justice. You remember the rights of the Party members, you know, but if you had them clear, then as chairman of the Central Audit Commission you would not go with Bespallov’s invitation to Novikov’s house to ‘met with the Soviet ambassador. If the ambassador called me through another man and he ate bread with him at a third party, I would not accept it. That is why your departure in this way is very mysterious, outside the rules of the Party and outside the friendly diplomatic and Marxist-Leninist ties. Soviet embassy officials are also to blame. The Soviet ambassador, Ivanov, requested a meeting with me and I received him as usual. But when he asked me about the Plenum issue, I told him “I told you.” We had very sincere and friendly relations with him, but he himself ruined this situation. After the Bucharest Meeting, he began to speak arrogantly. Then we had to show him the place. But why did Ivanov do all these things, outside the rules of friendship and organization? It was hard for him to do all this out of his own head, however, his goal was to divide the leadership and put the leadership of our Party in conflict with the Party. So you, Koço, who is a 60-year-old man, where is your brain, standing or head? Do you think before you go to Ivanov? No one is stopping you from spending time playing billiards or eating dinners with friends, but it is not allowed for bad purposes. These issues need to be deeply judged, especially at the present time. Your actions lead to anti-Marxist, anti-partyism.Memorie.al
