Dr. Marsela MUSABELLIU
The need for a small country to be under the good graces of a great power has been justified by researchers mainly in terms of the so-called “Lilliputian’s Dilemma”. The theory, put forward by academic Robert Keohane as early as 1969, argues that great power can provide a small state with much more than access or the right to be consulted. In Keohane’s words, the small country can increase its core influence while expanding and deepening the ties that contribute to the political leverage of the small power by putting its own national interests first.
As far as relations with the “powerful” are concerned, Albanians are aware that some of the best and some of the worst decisions that have ever been made to seal the nation’s destiny have been made by the Great Powers. So it often seems to have become normal that in popular culture this gratitude borderlines servility, while antagonism borderlines fanaticism. Be it for political interests or doctrinal dogmatism, deep approval or disapproval of a particular power is never in the interest of a small nation. Small states must avoid being trapped by unnecessary, premature, and self-fulfilling polarization, says Koehane.
The “powerful” in the 21st century are many, but the polarization in Albania is overwhelmingly one-sided. Almost inexplicably, the current Chinese economic and political weight on the world stage is not properly perceived or portrayed in Albania, so the actions and reactions of the Albanian political institutions (past and present) seem confused when dealing with the People’s Republic of China as a whole, or in relation to Chinese initiatives in particular. At a perceptive level, it is found that China’s involvement in Albania and the region is taken as a threat-opportunity or competition-cooperation paradigm, and in some cases, alarmist voices find strong local bases to support their “theories”. The public discourse is extremely polarized regarding China, throughout the region, not only in Albania, but Albania has some specific characteristics.
Belt and Road Initiative and Albania
Proclaimed by Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2013 as a strategy developed by the Chinese government, the “Belt and Road Initiative” relied on what was an iconic product of China, and over the centuries became part of trade history and world culture, the Silk Road. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is trying to retrace the ancient trade routes of the Silk Road by connecting East and West on land and sea routes. According to the outline of the initiative by China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the BRI is based on five cooperation priorities: Policy coordination: Facilitating interconnectivity: Free or unimpeded trade: Financial integration: and people-to-people connections and exchanges. Like the initiative itself, the priorities are constantly evolving. The support of this initiative at the global level is exceptional, over 150 countries, in more than ¾ of the member countries of the United Nations, are part of it. To focus on our continent, 18 countries of the European Union are members.
Chinese authorities see infrastructure as the best means to reach the so-called “Economic Corridors”. But the economic corridors require financial support, and according to the latest calculations based on the launched projects, if the BRI were a country, it would be ranked as the eighth largest economy in the world, eclipsing Italy, Brazil, Canada, and Russia. BRI plans are very ambitious projects, but for China, this is nothing new. For centuries China was unrivaled in its efficiency, competence, and ability to undertake large-scale projects. This initiative may represent another comprehensive model for international economic and political cooperation and it is viewed as the most ambitious Chinese international policy initiative in history. But it’s not all infrastructure, China has promoted the BRI as a tool for peace, stability, and prosperity. The purpose of the BRI is that of economic integration and the tremendous potential of a new era of global prosperity.
Albania officially becomes part of BRI in 2017
The First BRI Summit held in Beijing in 2017 also marked Albania’s official participation in this initiative. On this occasion, the Minister of Transport and Infrastructure Sokol Dervishaj was present, who signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with He Lifeng, Minister Responsible for the National Development and Reform Commission. The seven-point memorandum focused on further strengthening cooperation in the fields of transport, infrastructure, and finance.
What has happened since that year? – Essentially, the road is paved from the Chinese side, but this road has not yet been stepped on by the Albanian side. The political implications that are often the only description of the BRI have triumphed over pragmatism in cooperation. Never in modern history has a Chinese initiative received as much political, media, and analytical opposition as the BRI. In fact, before the initiative came to Europe, opposing voices came along, with catchphrases such as influence, intervention potential, can impact internal policies, and the most (mis)used “debt trap“… Here we are a decade later, and no none of these have been validated or materialized, and most EU countries have embraced the initiative.
China-CEEC Platform, Albania has been part of it since its creation
Albania is one of the co-signatory, founding countries of the China-Central and Eastern Countries (China-CEEC) platform in 2012 in Poland. In that year, in Poland, it was the then-deputy Prime Minister Edmond Haxhinasto who signed with Chinese Premier of the time Wen Jiabao. From the beginning of this platform, the expectations in Albania were high, but also perhaps somewhat misconstrued. In its beginnings, this platform relied heavily on the trade potential between China and Albania. In fact, China remains one of its main trade partners in Albania and within the framework of the China-CEE agreement there has been progress at the level of communication, but there is still a great untapped potential.
High-level government engagement has been central. The Albanian Prime Minister has participated in 7 out of 9 meetings [Bucharest 2013, Belgrade 2014, Suzhou 2015, Riga 2016, Sofia 2018, Dubrovnik 2019, virtual Beijing 2021]. Only in two cases did the deputy prime minister participate [Warsaw 2012, Budapest 2017]. Thus, this created another opportunity for respective leaders to exchange ideas and coordinate policies. In continuation of facilitating the connectivity between the countries, since March 2023, Albanians can travel to China without visas, and vice versa, and this was initiated years ago, in a meeting of the China-CEEC platform.
This type of cooperation is creating the foundations for intensifying relations in the future based on mutual recognition. Intensified contacts make us more inclined to understand and accept each other’s realities. The importance of bilateral dialogue lies beyond the political element, and China-CEEC seems to have ensured this. The intergovernmental culture/trade/investment dialogue and especially the signing of agreements open a window of communication and create a kind of common history for mutual exchange in the present and future. There is no reason why it should not be supported.
China’s efforts at the diplomatic level have been numerous and vested with “state capital” by giving assurances as to what can be done on the ground with human and economic capital. It should be emphasized that the PRC’s Embassy in Albania has been extremely proactive in encouraging and promoting any kind of cooperation and communication between countries within the BRI, China-CEEC, and beyond.
But not only that, on October 29, 2021, Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi arrived in Albania for an official state visit. There were three high-level meetings on the minister’s agenda, and one of the key words he used in this meeting with the Albanian authorities was “double engine”. China will widely support the driving effects of the BRI and the China-CEEC platform to serve the countries of the region to achieve what they want most. And Minister Wang emphasized that we must work together to translate the potential for cooperation into tangible results. This “double engine” is the most efficient way to achieve the desired results. From a small country perspective and a developing country perspective, what these initiatives offer should be enticing for economists and policymakers.
Citing the former Albanian ambassador to China, Mr. Hajdar Muneka, the participation of relatively poor countries, such as Albania, in Chinese initiatives is a golden opportunity for their development, but this also requires serious commitment. As the initiator of these initiatives, China offers a lot, but all parties should be invested seriously and with full capacity for the development of their country.
As an excellent connoisseur of China, the rhythms of Chinese diplomacy and projects, Muneka suggests insightfully and lucidly for his country’s policymakers: “The Chinese train is moving at a tremendous speed. The winner is the country that manages to build a station for this train in its country.”
The mechanical analogies of the engine and trains to the rhythms of the Chinese road are not accidental. Anyone who knows China knows that there is neither any waste of time, nither loss of willingness, much less a slowdown in action. Chinese projects and initiatives are an unstoppable machine toward modernization that should be attractive to developing countries.
Finally, the perception, approach, and reasoning towards any large country in a small country must be done on valid analytical bases and without biases, because it does not allow a country to make the proper decisions in relation to others. There is a trend for several years, not only in Albania but in the entire Western Balkans, where the dichotomy in the public discourse of presence vs. influence is clear.
When talking about Euro-Atlantic countries, the word used is “presence”, when talking about China, the most used word is “influence”. This is neither correct, nor productive, nor necessary. If there is an opportune time when pragmatism should triumph over dogmatism, that time is today.
© 2023 Argumentum
