Dr. Ermir I. Hajdini
Legal Advisor & University Lecturer
In the contemporary theater of international relations, two seemingly incompatible forces are redesigning the map of global power: the pure materiality of energy resources and the invisible weight of digital structures. The former belongs to the past century—the geopolitics of pipelines, shipyards, and the control of finite resources; the latter represents the New World Order—that of artificial intelligence, computational capacities, and the algorithmic prediction of crises. At this crossroads between “Gas” and “Algorithms,” traditional alliances are undergoing asymmetric fractures, forcing even small actors on the periphery, like official Tirana, to navigate between old ideological dogmas and a cold, stripped-down Realpolitik[^1].
Act I: The Transatlantic Rift and Europe’s Epistemic Dependence
For a long time, the diplomacy of the Balkan peripheries has fed on the naive premise that the “geopolitical West” functions as a monolithic body, where the interests of Washington and those of Brussels automatically align. Today, this assumption is not merely incorrect; it is dangerous. The United States is increasingly operating as a self-sufficient “Continental Island”[^2]—a fortress possessing aggressive capital, energy independence, and, above all, a monopoly over the new technological “super-muscles.”
In Washington, the integration of Artificial Intelligence into strategic decision-making is no longer a future scenario. The classic analysis of diplomatic cabinets is being replaced by advanced predictive intelligence systems developed by the private giants of Silicon Valley[^3]. For the US, this is a pure tool of dominance. However, what is welcomed in Washington is proving counterproductive for Europe.
Lacking sovereign computational capacities and an independent infrastructure of codes, Europe has fallen into what strategic theory terms epistemic dependence (cognitive dependence)[^4]. Brussels is forced to read the global stage, predict risks, and assess threats through foreign analytical “lenses” and algorithms. Unable to generate a genuine and autonomous geopolitical analysis, Europe is losing its role as a protagonist, transforming into a passive actor that merely reacts to scenarios modeled across the Atlantic.
Act II: The Baku Antithesis and the Capitulation of the Velvet Dogma
In this vacuum of European strategic will and analysis, a third actor emerges, representing the complete inversion of bureaucratic doctrine: Azerbaijan. Official Baku does not engage in value-based diplomacy, does not deliver moralistic lectures, and does not submit to the logic of rigid blocs. It operates as a pure “Transactional State,” pragmatically using its geography and resources on the altar of its own sovereign interest[^5].
Here explodes the most poignant paradox of modern Realpolitik. Under the influence of transatlantic narratives, Brussels engaged in successive waves of economic sanctions, cutting off cheap energy sources and self-amputating its own industrial organs—with Germany serving as the most flagrant example of this self-inflicted goal[^6]. However, when “velvet” principles collide with the laws of physics and economics, the result is predictable: the very same Europe that preaches the regulation of technology through stifling frameworks like the AI Act is today forced to line up as a suitor at the gates of Ilham Aliyev to purchase gas.
Azeri gas proves that when a power loses the material means of sovereignty and cheap energy, it also loses the right to dictate the rules of the game. At the gates of Baku, Brussels’ moralizing rhetoric capitulates before the elementary need for industrial survival.
Act III: The Nuances of Official Tirana—The Silent Breaking of the Taboo
In this complex arena, where the “European Teacher” increasingly appears without a compass, the nuances of official Tirana’s foreign policy come into view. For three consecutive decades, Albanian diplomacy has practiced a form of “squared passivity”[^7]: a mechanical and unconditional alignment with every resolution or statement emanating from Brussels, naively believing this to be the sole formula for international legitimacy.
Nevertheless, Tirana’s recent maneuvers demonstrate a pragmatic dualism that merits sharp analysis. While public pledges toward “European values” and formal integration continue, a silent but de facto breaking of this European taboo is occurring on the ground. The intensification of strategic relations with Azerbaijan, joint plans for the gasification of the country, and an openness to infrastructural investments outside standard EU frameworks demonstrate that Tirana is beginning to speak—perhaps driven by the pure material instinct of survival—the language of naked self-interest.
This alignment with Baku is not merely a commercial maneuver or an expansion of an energy portfolio. It is an act of Realpolitik that acknowledges a cold truth: when Europe is no longer capable of guaranteeing its own stability or generating genuine analysis for the region, countries on the periphery must find bilateral transactional axes to secure their future, without waiting for permission from the suffocating bureaucracy of Brussels.
Conclusion: Survival in the Era of Naked Interest
In the New World Order, sovereignty is not a legal status gifted or guaranteed by velvet treaties; it is a muscle that must be exercised in the cold terrain of resources and technology. “The Diplomacy of Gas and Algorithms” is witnessing the collapse of the illusion of a shared transatlantic interest and the de-industrialization of a Europe that believed it could rule the world with regulations, without needing code or energy.
For official Tirana, the nuances of this historical moment demand intellectual courage. Continuing to blindly follow a passive actor on the global stage condemns one to irrelevance. The new path cleared toward Baku shows that Albanian diplomacy is beginning to comprehend the new rules of the game[^8]. Whether this marks the beginning of a strategic emancipation or is simply a tactical move forced by circumstances remains to be seen. But one thing is already certain: in an era where the world order is written in algorithms and fueled by gas, remaining hostage to doctrinal naivety is the final luxury a small state cannot afford.
Footnotes
[^1]: For an in-depth analysis of the shift from classical geopolitics (Heartland/Rimland) toward the “geopolitics of codes” and algorithmic dominance, see: Zuboff, S. (The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, 2019). For the concept of the interaction between critical infrastructure and digital sovereignty, see also the critique on the codification of technological monopolies: Hajdini, E. I., “The Digital Protectorate: How the EU AI Act Codified Silicon Valley’s Monopoly”, The Journal of Digital Diplomacy, May 2026.
[^2]: The concept of the US as a “Continental Island” refers to the modern revision of Nicholas Spykman’s theses regarding the geostrategic self-sufficiency of North America, reinforced by the shale gas revolution and the monopoly over artificial intelligence infrastructure (cloud computing and semiconductor design).
[^3]: On the use of predictive algorithmic systems in foreign policy formulation by the State Department and the Pentagon, see the reports of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI), https://www.dwt.com/-/media/files/blogs/artificial-intelligence-law-advisor/2021/03/nscai-final-report–2021.pdf
[^4]: Epistemic dependence in international relations implies an actor’s inability to produce independent strategic information and analysis, relying entirely on the intelligence structures and data models of another power. In the European context, this concept is linked to the failure of the Gaia-X project for a sovereign European cloud and the complete dependence of EU agencies on Silicon Valley firms for Big Data analysis.
[^5]: On the concept of the “Transactional State” in the post-liberal era, see: Bremmer, I., Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World (2012). The case of Azerbaijan represents the paradigm of European re-orientation: the Memorandum of Understanding on a Strategic Partnership in the Field of Energy, signed between the European Commission and Baku, proved that the bloc’s industrial needs prevail over Brussels’ normative agenda.
[^6]: The de-industrialization of Germany, driven by the loss of cheap Russian gas and the high cost of the energy transition, has brought an inevitable decline in Berlin’s diplomatic weight on the international stage. This decline in relative power was clearly manifested in Germany’s recent loss in the race for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council in the June 2026 votes. See the expanded analysis: Hajdini, E. I., “The Fall of Berlin and the New Order at the UN”, Realpolitika, June 2026.
[^7]: The term “squared passivity” refers to the doctrine of Albanian foreign policy post-1992, characterized by the principle of unconditional bandwagoning with the official line of the US and the EU, often without calculating local economic costs. Tirana’s strategic rapprochement with Baku through projects such as the gasification of Korçë and potential investments in distribution infrastructure via TAP marks a pragmatic deviation from this rigid line.
[^8]: For an analysis of how small states can develop “asymmetric strategic autonomy” in a fragmented world, see: Keohane, R. O., “Lilliputians’ Dilemmas: Small States in International Politics.” In today’s era, this exercising of the muscle of sovereignty requires abandoning “Westphalian naivety” (the belief that sovereignty is automatically respected by international law) and shifting toward the material defense of national interest.
© 2026 Argumentum
