The first part
Memorie.al/publishes some archival documents extracted from the Central State Archive in Tirana, (the fund of the former Central Committee of the ALP), where the political diary of the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Labor Party of Albania is also located. Enver Hoxha, for the period 1973-1980, where he kept notes and made analyzes and conclusions about various meetings and conversations that he had at that time, mainly with the former prime minister Mehmet Shehu, with the secretary of the Central Committee of PPSh- of, Hysni Kapo, with the deputy prime minister and member of the Political Bureau, Spiro Koleka, etc., with whom he has discussed issues of Albania’s foreign policy and mainly the relations with the People’s Republic of China, as well as the influence it had that in the international arena, etc.. But in addition to these, also with the reports of official Tirana’s relations with a number of other countries of the Communist East and the West, mainly in trade relations, such as: Yugoslavia, Poland, the Czech Republic Slovakia, Soviet Union, Greece, Austria, Italy, France, Switzerland, West Germany, Canada, etc.
In the archival documents in question, where his political diary is located, Enver Hoxha also took note of several conversations he had with Mehmet Shehu, such as the one on July 15, 1973, who suggested that they take some steps in foreign policy, holding talks first with France, Switzerland or any Scandinavian country, which Enver did not approve, saying that he was looking forward to it, the USA, the Soviet Union, etc. Regarding this, in his political diary, among other things, he writes: “I was in our club with Mehmet Shehu and Spiro Koleka. Talking about the development of events in the world, Mehmeti expressed his opinion: “If we were to receive official contacts for political talks, to present our views, first with France, then with Switzerland and with some Scandinavian countries, etc. This should be done by sending our Minister of Foreign Affairs and they should mutually send theirs”.
He finds this moment reasonable due to the fact that France is currently dissatisfied with the Brezhnev-Pompidu agreements. I did not support this proposal, because we do not win anything, we only lose in the international arena, and I explained why. It is true that in these conjunctures, France is unhappy and tries to split, and we must help to deepen these contradictions”.
Archival document with the political diary of Enver Hoxha for the period 1973-1980
DURRES, SUNDAY JULY 15, 1973
THE LITTLE ONES HAVE TO BUILD THEIR OWN POLICY
I was in our club with Mehmet Shehu and Spiro Koleka. Talking about the development of events in the world, Mehmeti expressed the opinion: “if we get official contacts for political talks, to present our views, first with France, then with Switzerland and with some Scandinavian countries”, etc. This should be done by sending our Minister of Foreign Affairs and they should mutually send theirs.
He finds this moment reasonable due to the fact that France is currently dissatisfied with the Brezhnev-Pompidu agreements. I did not support this proposal, because we do not win anything, we only lose in the international arena, and I explained why. It is true that in these conjunctures, France is unhappy and trying to split, and we must help to deepen these contradictions.
But the question arises: do we help more by staying in our current positions towards France, that is, by unmasking the Soviet-American alliance with our propaganda and with talks through mutual ambassadors, with the Foreign Ministries of both countries, or should we go further? I think we should go no further.
We must observe the further development of events, see further whether the situation between France and the Soviet Union will escalate with the United States of America, in what direction and to what extent? We are not like China, but we are a small country, which does not play a role in the development of French politics, if we will receive official contacts. Our influence in the international arena is what it is, but it is related to our revolutionary attitudes.
We are listened to by the opponents of capitalism and the governments and cliques in its service, they understand us, they support us, because we express their thoughts and feelings and fight for their rights. Bourgeois diplomacy has entered a big, dirty quagmire. She tries to drag us into this scum too. We must avoid this stinking contact.
All these capitalist countries, from the United States of America and the Soviet Union, call us for contacts and they are ready, if we give them the slightest sign. Capitalist states want us to lower the flag we are holding high.
It is the only reason why they “smile” at us in order to trap us and tell the world, through a deafening propaganda: “Here, Albania also joined our dance”, despite the fact that we do not join that dance.
In this political carousel, where thousands and thousands of politicians exchange visits among themselves, weave intrigues and sell to each other the interests of their countries and peoples, etc., they want to include us as well. We must never be wrong, we must not rush. This does not mean that we will tie our hands. No, we also have to get contacts, but by choosing the moments, so that we have profits and not them.
But before we think of making contact with France, we must also make contact, through our Foreign Minister, with his colleagues in China, in Korea, in Vietnam, so that they can come and go. We need to ignite contacts here rather than from the West. We need to be more careful with the West.
It is precisely these positions of ours that make the West and the East “respect us”, of course by chance, if they respect us! With our right attitudes, we fight freely and we don’t respect anyone’s hand, but even those around us have found a way out of our attitudes.
If we act hastily, the enemies will inflate our “contacts”, they will intrigue, they will harass us. Our interest is not to move from the positions we have taken, even on the formal side. We don’t know yet what path China will take. It swings; it has opened the way to the United States of America. The big ones have considerations for the little ones, that’s why the little ones have to build their own policy and I think ours is right, because it is always based on Marxist-Leninist analysis.
Note: Referring to these actions of Mehmet Shehu, Comrade Enver said: “Mehmet Shehu had been assigned tasks by the masters, so that our country would open up to the West economically, politically and diplomatically, and he raised these issues as if by chance, even even while walking on the street, he would ostensibly raise them for discussion, as related to the situation, to the needs.
We defended the line, held a straight position, and he retreated, according to his familiar tactic, so as not to be compromised. He carefully moved the stones in his directions, taxing the pulse, if he achieved his goal well, otherwise he withdrew. (7th Plenum of the Central Committee of the Party, September 20-21, 1983.)
SATURDAY NOVEMBER 20, 1976
A LETTER NOT TO BE DONE
Today Mehmet Shehu, who has just returned from Vlora, because he was in Sazan, proposed to me to write a letter to Hua Kuo Fen where he would say: “Comrade Enver Hoxha had sent a message to Mao Zedong and had not received a reply, that we have sent two official letters from the Government, where we said that we were unhappy that we were not granted the loans we requested, so please reconsider our requests”, etc.
To tell the truth, I did not expect such a proposal and I told him: “In no way should we not only do such a thing, but not even think about it, because this action will be a serious mistake for us. If we do this, we lower the dignity of our state and accept the theses of Hua Kuo Fen’s group, according to which “it is the four” that caused these things and that it is this same “four” that “severely sabotaged the Chinese economy” .
If we do this, then we admit that Chu En Lai, Ten Hsiao Pini, Li Hsien Nien and Hua Kuo Fen are good men, while our opinion is quite the opposite, that these are revisionists and our enemies, that they are these and no one else others who did not grant us the requested loans and who also did other things to us.
Personally, we at work do not know the four, but, until they are accused by these wicked people whom we know well, this means that: “the four were in cleaner waters”. What do we gain, – I asked Mehmet Shehu, – if we do this letter from your side?
What do you think, will they give us credit? – No, – he answered, – we have this document as well. – Why have we filed so few documents in Beijing? Let them open them, if they want to and let them read them, they are the ones who threw them in the basket. Therefore, – I continued to say to Mehmet, – we should not respect our hand and with this letter give the right to the masters of the putschists to say that we changed our minds and to answer us as they conveyed to us with the words that: later, when we have fixed our Chinese economy that has been sabotaged by the “four-, we will review your demands”.
In no way should we put our Party on this path. They can do whatever they want, give us or not what they have agreed to, postpone it, or add it to us (which will not be the same) and this is their business.
We will protest if we are pushed by what they have given us, we will accept if they revise our demands, but in no case should we seek and accept their anti-Marxist theses and views. Mehmeti, as he has done other times, admitted that he had thought wrong.
POGRADEC, SUNDAY, AUGUST 7, 1977
A THOUGHLESS PROPOSAL
Mehmet Shehu took me on the phone yesterday and, among other things, said to me: “If we were to tell our colleagues in the agitation and propaganda sector to collect everything that the Chinese have said against Tito, from Mao, Cu En Lai and others in a row and we will publish these when Tito arrives in Beijing”. I did not agree with this proposal, so I told him that we can order these sayings of the Chinese to be collected, but as to the publication, I am not of that opinion and we must discuss it. However, I think that from our side it is not appropriate to bring out and point out, now that Tito is in China, what the Chinese have said against him.
Such a thing from our side will not have a good effect abroad, because the world opinion knows very well, as we also know what campaign the Chinese themselves have made against the traitor Tito. Therefore, it seems to me that in this case there is no need to do such a thing.
The Chinese, of course, would not like it if we did this, and not only that, but it would be a direct attack on us and it would destroy the few threads that bind us together with them. The Chinese have turned their policy 180 degrees towards the United States of America, towards Tito and the revisionists.
This is clear and the whole world knows it, but it seems to me that at present we must continue to defend Marxism-Leninism, defend our Party, defend the Marxist-Leninist parties and unmask modern Soviet, Chinese, Polish revisionism and all others in a row.
We have the opportunity to publish in our newspapers old and new articles to do this work and let the whole world understand that they are attacking the modern revisionist line in general, American imperialism, Soviet social-imperialism and, in particular, Chinese revisionism. Let’s leave it to the Chinese to attack us first by name, and then we ourselves know that we have something to say about them.
Therefore, let’s “speed up slowly”, because the time will come for the statements of the Chinese against Tito, to be published and used by our propaganda. Currently, I think that the article “Khrushchev on his knees before Tito”, reprinted in the newspaper “Voice of the People” and distributed by ATSH all over the world, will have the right effect and the world will make the analogy between Khrushchev and the Union Soviet and China’s Nikita Khrushchev.
In this way, we have killed three birds with one shot, we have unmasked Soviet social-imperialism, we have unmasked Titism, we have also unmasked the new Chinese Khrushchevs. This article, reprinted at the right moment, exposes the Chinese revisionists who kiss Tito and kneel to him. So the Chinese have nothing to say. If they want it, let them say it and let them talk, but then the way opens up for us to talk more.
I discussed with Hysniu that we should publish the conversation we had with Chu En Lai in 1965 after the death of Vance, the American secretary of state, in China and before Tito’s departure. This conversation seems to me to be very topical, for the reason that the strategy and tactics of our Party are determined there in connection with the fierce and unceasing struggle against American imperialism, as well as against Soviet social-imperialism.
There the situation and situations as they were are mentioned, the contradictions in both camps, the goals of one camp and what should be the policy of the two parties and our two countries, Albania and China. At the same time, on this occasion, we define in straight lines the help we should give to the international communist movement in the world, the people’s struggle for liberation, etc. In a word, in this conversation I had with Chu En Lain, all the problems are laid out and I think that, although it is an analysis made since 1965, it is proven to be right even today, except that China has turned the page.
And it is precisely for this reason that we must publish it; to point out that China has been in other positions; had a different strategy at that time and currently has shaved its shirt and strategy towards friendship with the Americans and capitalist countries.
On the other hand, I think that the publication of this conversation with Chu En Lai points out to the outside world that either the revisionist camp or the imperialist camp was wrong when they thought that we were China’s tails and did what it told us. The conversation with Chu En Lai shows quite clearly those we were independent and told Chu En Lai openly our thoughts not only about our domestic affairs, but also about international affairs and China’s own attitudes.
The outside world now has the opportunity to think about Albania and the Albanian Labor Party correctly and not as it thought before, which considered us as a satellite of China. Both of these materials are like knives for the Chinese, who have nothing to do, they have nothing to say even about the article “Khrushchev on his knees before Tito”, and they also have nothing to say about the conversation I had me with Çu En Lai, because they know that this conversation exists, that it is true, because they have the minutes themselves, just like we do.
The Chinese also have the conversation that Chu En Lai had after my conversation, they know what he said. On the other hand, we also have the conclusions of the two delegations stenographed. This is how we do our work. Will these two materials be able to attract the attention of world opinion? Let’s look at it. Our goal is that these two articles have the same echo that the article “Theory and practice of the revolution” had.
If this success is achieved, then it is a great thing for the Party of Labor of Albania and for the unmasking of modern revisionism. We distributed both of these materials to the friends of the Political Bureau and they all fully agreed on their publication. Now we have to think and decide when we should publish them. I think we will publish the article “Khrushchev on his knees before Tito” after the ceremonies has been held in Beijing and the speeches have been made.
Regarding the conversation with Chu En Lain, I think it should be published a little before Vance arrives in Beijing, because the time between Vance’s departure and Tito’s arrival in Beijing is very short, so the publication of our article during this time interval it may not create the echo we want.
Therefore, if we publish it a few days before Vance’s departure, then the time will be extended a bit more and the article will echo more and thus will expose Vance’s departure, the negotiations that the Chinese will make with him in Beijing, etc. I will discuss all these tactics with the Bureau colleagues when I return to Tirana the day after tomorrow, however, during this time other situations may arise. Memorie.al
The next issue follows