Dashnor Kaloçi
Memorie.al publishes two unknown letters of the former Chief of General Staff of the Albanian Army, at the Ministry of People’s Defense, Petrit Dume, sent to the first secretary of the Central Committee of the ALP, Enver Hoxha, dated 17 June and October 16, 1974, which deals with the deep disagreements and contradictions that the Chief of Staff had with the Minister of Defense, Beqir Balluku, regarding their several years of work at the helm of the Army and their concepts on the theses of the Council of Defense, etc. All the accusations of Duma against Minister Ballluku, the opinions given by other senior military men to the contradictions of their two chiefs, Enver’s response to the letter of Duma, as well as the attitude of Hysni Kapos and Mehmet Shehu to the letter of Petrit Duma, which did Enver send them to ask for their opinions ?!
“In these materials that are defended by Comrade Beqir, there are other distorted and dangerous views, about which both I and Comrade Hito, have constantly raised their voices in front of Comrade Beqir, but he has not heard us and in this way has influenced a large number of cadres to become acquainted with these views. The important thing is that in most cadres the theoretical materials that touch on our concepts, even if elaborate, are rejected. Many times, I have raised the problem before Comrade Beqir that we do not need new theories that do not go, that our theory is complete, clear and appropriate to our conditions, as the Party and Comrade Enver instructed us, work and our task is to bring them to life. He agrees in principle, but continues to retain in himself some concepts that do not match ours and that he occasionally gives these concepts to various cadres and groups to elaborate. This is stated, among other things, in a letter sent to Enver Hoxha, by Petrit Dume, Chief of General Staff of the Albanian Army at the Ministry of Defense, dated June 17, 1974, where he tries to explain to the Commander-in-Chief, regarding the deep disagreements and contradictions he had with the Minister of Defense, Beqir Balluku, which had started years ago. The letter in question of the former Chief of Staff, Petrit Dume, coincides with the period when Enver Hoxha had just started the crackdown on Minister Balluku (who for years also held the post of First Deputy Prime Minister in the government headed by Mehmet Shehu), strike which started in the Army asset that was held in June of that year in the former villa of Zog in the city of Durrës, to then exclude him from all party and state functions in the Plenum of the Central Committee of the ALP that was held on July 25, accusing him of being “the leader of a coup group in the army”, which preceded his arrest on December 7, when he was interned in Selenica, Vlora. And throughout this time period of the Balluk’s strike process in the second half of 1974, so Enver used the two deputies, Petrit Dumen and the Director of the Political Directorate of the Army in the Ministry of Defense, Hito Çako, to “exchange “They first against Balluku and then he would accuse them of being his closest collaborators! In this context, there are two letters of Petrit Dume sent to Enver Hoxha, which bear the dates of June 17 and October 16, 1974, which Memorie.al publishes in full starting from this number, together with the correspondence of Enver with Hysni Kapo and Mehmet Shehu, to whom he “asked for their opinion”, for the sentencing of Balluk, Petrit Dumes and Hito Chako!
Continued from the previous issue
Petrit Dume’s letter to Enver Hoxha
Comrade Enver
I am in a very bad mood because the Party has posed a number of problems for me, which I have to answer.
To answer all these questions correctly, I think we need to answer the problems, both before the betrayal of Beqir Balluku and after his release.
As for the problems that arise today and that the answer is given in the current situation, the issues are more complete and I do not find it difficult, while the problems that arose at the time when Beqir Balluku was minister, are not all known: therefore I find it reasonable to report to you on some very important issues, so that the Party knows its views on the development of problems before the betrayal of Beqir Balluku, so that it can help the Party and advise me.
Assessing the dangerousness of Beqir Balluku’s work and denouncing it before the Party
Before the betrayal of Beqir Balluku came out, I thought that he, as Minister of Defense, could work on developing the theory, without knowing the purpose he had and the wrong working methods he used. He could also consider problems with the content of the Defense Council theses, which he had to discuss with fellow sector members, and if appropriate, he could report to the leadership for a decision.
Many studies that Beqir Balluku allegedly did, he discussed with us, we rejected them, and he formally accepted them and did as we were told, rejected those studies and allegedly gave additional instructions to do them again!
His insistence on the misconceptions he presented from time to time certainly aroused suspicion in some comrades, and these suspicions increased vigilance, but as long as these suspicions were still theoretical, unaccompanied, not officially approved by us, and which had not been presented to the leadership. , they had not become a fait accompli. Beqir Balluku was right to say (as he said) that the study should be continued.
Seeing this activity for the content of these “studies”, we had fixed doubts, while in terms of his actions, we had not yet fixed them.
What were the reasons that I did not report these suspicions as I had them?
At that time, the work was not easy, that I would raise an accusation that had to be based and the basis was only a theoretical basis, which he could refute, saying that I also did not agree with these thoughts yet, or the fault lies with the processors who did not understand me.
Sadopak, but also the aggravated relations that I had with Beqiri, have prevented me from denouncing, out of fear that I would be called quarrelsome and ambitious.
When Beqir Balluku drew up a concrete plan to implement his ideas, ostensibly to strengthen the defense on the coast, I fully confirmed his hostile attempts and considered him as a document that in the practical field openly opposed the approved war plans, broke the principles of the Defense Council theses, (such as the decentralization of tanks, distrust of volunteer forces, fear and dread of enemy tanks, underestimation of our artillery and anti-tank means, etc.).
I presented these facts to Beqir Balluku and asked him to report them up, because I would report my thoughts on this problem to the leadership.
He was frightened by this fact, which happened three or four days before the meeting of the Defense Council, where I finally denounced my objections.
It did not take long for the party to conclude, because it is very wise, it reacted immediately and strictly, while I clumsily and hesitantly delved into the dangerous work of Beqir Balluku, while as for the hostile work, I did not think.
The problem is whether I thought that the leadership of the Party would support Beqir Balluku ?!
I knew and was clear about what the Party leadership thought of Beqir Balluku, as well as of me. I knew the leadership was well aware of his disability and his balance.
I was often given these signs by the leadership, even in 1966 and 1970, in a confrontation I had with Beqir Balluku in the Politburo. In all five of these confrontations, you, Comrade Enver, made the harshest criticism of him and openly told him: ‘you, Beqir Balluku, want to eliminate Petrit’, therefore, Comrade Enver, no matter how naive I was, how would I think that Beqiri is supported by the leadership, recognizing in a special way your strictness and justice in the face of these deviations!
Comrade Enver cannot bear this burden and my conscience does not accept it.
Let Comrade Enver give you an explanation, that there may be a misunderstanding.
After the betrayal of Beqir Balluku, I went to Durrës, where Comrade Shefqet met me and told me that you had told him everything. He asked me for some curiosity and detail about it and I openly told him, trying to show correctness and modesty. Shefqeti told me: ‘when Comrade Enver told me the story of Beqir, I told him, Comrade Enver; he has been incompetent and you have helped him a lot. Shefqeti told me about this, it seems to me as if I made a mistake and I did not sleep at night. I said to him, “You Shefqet, Comrade Enver always understands you correctly, and if you have any hostages left, tell Comrade Enver.” Comrade Shefqet can be asked and if he has received other answers from me, then the Party should be strict and ruthless.
In the report presented to you by the Political Bureau from the commission, it was said about me that I had issued a half voice for the denunciation of Beqir Balluku, I was a valuable cadre for the Party and the Army, but I was also criticized for many shortcomings, which I conscientiously admitted to all, even more so.
In the Politburo you appreciated my discussion, you criticized me and I accepted them wholeheartedly.
In Army Asset at my address, there was talk of merit, but I was also criticized for work and character, which were fair.
In the Party organization I made self-criticism. This self-criticism was read by comrades Mehmet and Hysni and they both told me that you did well to deepen the self-criticism, i.e. appreciated my self-criticism. In the organizations and Committees of the Army Party good words have been spoken about me, especially in those committees where I was, forced to criticize my comrades and make self-criticism, telling them that I may have done a good job, but I have made the Party very bad. I owe them and I want to repay them with work.
There are those who have boasted to me a lot, but I have opposed them, I do not rule out that I did not accept with a word, but conscientiously yes, it may be that the waste has created immunity in me and they made me think differently and act differently.
I have a lot of mistakes in my work and character and I will try to make self-criticism and correct them in life with the help of the Party and yours, I have never been saved from them and I have never been afraid of them and they have never cut me and they will not wait for me to rush to work and trust to fix them.
It may be too late, but the strong, strict and right word of the Party in all moments and situations is encouraging and saving.
Health and long life
(Petrit Dume)
Dated, 16. 10. 1974
Enver’s letter to Hysni Kapo with the self-criticism of Petrit Dume
October 17, 1974
Comrade Hysni
Carefully reread another self-criticism of Comrade Petrit Dume. To cover up the guilt, he is inventing in his head how to find a reason “valid that he has never lost faith in the leadership and in me.”
He is getting more and more confused trying to justify himself. With this letter he sends me, he means in addition to the thesis that I did not come to denounce Beqir Balluku, why he had not come to conclusions, etc., but also when he came to conclusions, why he did not come, this is what we ask him to say, then Petriti he wants to convince me that “it did not come in vain”, in a word, why did you, comrade Enver, have seen how you hit Beqir Balluku hard, who was trying to hit me in the neck, etc. By this he means to me that “You Enver have always been against Beqir and for me, Petrit”, therefore, in other words, “How could I lose faith in you, I was determined to come to you, but not in vain I’m coming”!
Namely: “This is supposed to have lost faith in you, it does not stand”, so he advises me to withdraw it in other words.
The second issue he found to prove that: “The issue of loss of trust, I cannot accept, is that the self-criticism he has made on this issue, ‘found good by us’, even he has admitted mistakes and more more “.
“Then how is it that now I, Petrit, am being accused of this disbelief” and for this he has found a reason that he allegedly dismisses as harmless, but that it is nothing but an intrigue fabrication against Shefqet Peçi! This is even worse and worse for him. He implies, “Comrade Enver, see that Shefqet did not confuse you and led you to a wrong opinion towards me, why is it Shefqet who told me that he (Shefqet) did not sleep all night, or after saying me when I informed him about the case of Beqir Balluku, that Beqir Balluku is nothing, and you helped him “. “I – Petrit continues, – did not say anything to
Shefqet, ask, etc.” In other words, he means: “Shefqeti did not come to you and report, or rather slander me, and to whom he (Shefqeti) said himself, I put in my mouth (Petrit)”.
But why did he manage to invent such a thing about Shefqet? I think, first: instead of reflecting on his mistakes, he imagines how to find something to hide his guilt. And secondly, you know the incident that happened between Shefqet and Petrit in the military game, where Mehmet rightly criticized Petrit severely. Then Petrit thought that Shefqet was angry and to take revenge, he came to me and slandered Petrit and I ate him and fell inside, so the charge of “disbelief” is reduced to “disagreement”. Here lies the intrigue of Petrit, who seeks to confuse Comrade Shefqet, who is a jewel and completely washed of these things, we know Shefqet, he often tells me: “You have done all these good things for us, Comrade Enver, etc. “.
What Petrit says that Shefqet told him may also be true, why Shefqet’s case has dropped like a bomb on Beqir Balluku and that he “fell asleep at night”. This is probably for the betrayal of Beqir Balluku and not because he told me that “I helped him”, that he “was nothing”. But Petrit is interested in this interpretation and therefore reports it to us. It is not good for Petrit to try to think in vain excuses, instead of asserting the truth. So, I noted these things and advised him to put his head in his hands and read deeply over every word, in the speeches of the Bureau comrades and mine. Otherwise we have no way to help him, when he does not help himself and the Party.
Enver
Hysni Kapos’s response to the letter that Enver gave to Petrit Dumen
Comrade Petrit was called and we openly told him our thoughts on the letter he was making. It is not self-criticism, but an attempt not to be self-critical, even as it is expressed in the letter, he invents to hide the truth and what is worse, for him with those fabrications he reaches very wrong conclusions about the leadership of the Party and Comrade Enver that influenced by Comrade…. I have remarked to Petrit on the very erroneous concepts he expresses in the letter on the Party and its other problems and norms, and as always advised Comrade Enver to carefully study every word of Comrade Enver’s teachings and the criticisms made by the Bureau comrades. and make open self-criticism before the Party to look at the causes and connections why he has made such grave faults and mistakes. Petrit appreciates the call made to him as an order and promised that it will deepen.
Hysni Kapo
18.X.1974
Petrit’s letter from prison to Mehmet Shehu, to spare his life!
CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS OF RPSH TIRANA
With our hostile work we have done in the army for a long time, we have brought great damage to the army and the Party. I cannot pay this debt to her, not only with my head and my life, but also with my toads, even if I hung myself five times, it is not enough.
I am not afraid of death, because dogs like me deserve this conclusion, but when I heard today the cries of my children begging the Prime Minister for the forgiveness of my life, I thought of asking the Party to give me the opportunity to live for those voices. horrible of children, to be able to see and breastfeed their picture.
The party has done a lot for me, please, please, please her once again before death, to make as always, the heart wide. In this situation that I and my family are in, today just going out in the yard like the other defendants, would be a great joy and encouragement for us (both for the children and for me).
The variant for the process specifically after five months of working with investigators in my reflections I have drawn the following conclusions: – From a young age until today my character has remained what it was and somewhere has taken steps back, especially arrogance, arrogance and arrogance , this as a consequence of my cult that in all functions has grown and developed.
– The attitude I held towards the anti-theses by not denouncing them, ranked me with my supporters and my participation in the hostile work, so in this regard it became active and not more passive.
– The military literature that I have said I have small ideological doses and mitigates its dangerousness, is right. Indeed, it has fewer ideological doses, but its amount dispersed, in the Army is much greater than the ideological literature, so I line up on the front of hostile work alongside Rrahman and Sadiq.
– In the open letter, that among many problems, the central place was occupied by committees and ranks, I appeared with two faces in appearance, I agree, but inside I kept a series of reservations, so here I rank with Beqiri and Hito and in all other problems of the Revolutionization of the Army.
– I was not a cadre who only allowed privileges to others, but I myself was predisposed and looked at the expense of the economy, so I detached myself from the circle of work and they, imitating me, detached themselves from the masses, so with the exception of Beqir, the most privileged and most damaging of the mass line, I was.
– The Soviet regulations had made me for myself and I was so familiar with them, that it seems to me as if we had done everything ourselves and for our conditions, so the work was dragged out by me in the first place and so not only did I the main culprit, but also their defender.
– Unique command has had deep roots in me and this view has brought to my conscience many other evils such as hierarchy, arrogance and arrogance. These are clearly reflected in the orders I have issued to the Party Committees. The remarks made by me in Hito’s report on the cadre, both in form and content, show naked the unique Petrit, in the hierarchy over the Party, and arrogant in seeking to solve problems with the authority of a man without the Party in the circle.
– I damaged the Party school and together with others we bear heavy responsibility, the findings that the Party makes today put me in front of the facts that it has been sabotaged, it has been partially resolved only organizationally or mechanically leaving the ideological and political side neglected, this shows the technocratism of me and other comrades. Today it is a fact that we have beaten water in the air, while the Party has to start all over again. This is a crime that I understand deeply and gravely.
– I emphasize these conclusions in some main problems today, because in the processes I have drawn them faintly (not claiming that these are all good). This dull work and reluctance often come before investigators that there are so many shortcomings in me and in my conscience that even a simple cadre is not allowed. The Supreme Commander in his speeches has strongly emphasized that I loved the Party at will and not as I should love it ideologically and that I was not deep. These criticisms are confirmed once again by my attitudes in various processes.
– I have been severely accused of carrying out hostile and coup work, I have not admitted this. It seems to me that the path I have followed and other key cadres here leads you, despite the fact that I did not have a hostile plan or purpose, but omissions in anti-theses, concealment of the situation by the leadership, meeting of Plenum members in a factional manner (in if we cannot call it a coup) lead to the conclusions of the Party, that if the problem was not caught by it, we gentle gentlemen were going to the abyss. For ourselves, yes, yes, but we are also leading the army where the generals led the Soviet army.
Prison, May 9, 1975
Petrit Dume
Mehmet’s letter to Enver for the mercy that Petrit Dume asked for
Comrade Enver
For information, I am sending you this letter and a material of Petrit Dume that Kadriu sent me. Through the letter Petrit Dumja asks for mercy, while in the other material, he formulates his conclusions on the hostile work he has done.
12.V.1975
Mehmet Shehu
Enver’s response to Mehmet Shehu’s letter
No mercy for these sworn enemies of the Party and the socialist homeland.
05/12/1975
Enver
Hysni Kapos’ letter approving Enver’s decision to sentence Petrit Dume to death
I very much agree with Comrade Enver’s note.
No mercy for traitors.
Hysni Kapo
05/12/1975
Comrade Enver and comrade Mehmet saw him on 10.X.1974./Memorie.al
