Will Kosovo become part of the initiatives for disconnection from the legacy of the Yugoslav communist period? Or will it still preserve these monuments, which will serve as a dark memory for a segment of the population, namely as architectural, historical, ideological monuments
Written by: Mentor Hasani
A few days ago, the American daily "The New York Times" published the moment of the demolition of a much-discussed architectural and historical monument in the capital of Latvia, which belonged to the era of the Soviet Union and communist ideology. It was said that the demolition of the 260-meter-tall Obelisk was part of the government's efforts to remove symbols of the Soviet era in the country and to show solidarity with Ukraine.
With the demolition of this monument, Latvia claims to have closed one of the darkest periods of its history: that of totalitarianism-communism. Although many Latvians are pro-Russian, the decision to demolish the Obelisk was categorical and irreversible. Perhaps, in addition to the war and Russian aggression in Ukraine, another reason was the inspiration from the removal of a number of symbols in several other countries. Although these actions have caused quite a few public reactions, a number of European countries, once part of the former USSR, have warned against the demolition of monuments or symbols belonging to the period of Soviet communism, which attacks collective memory, from which socio-cultural and political confrontations in those countries may then derive.
It is worth noting that the movements to remove the traces of communism in the countries of the USSR, which are now part of the EU, began as a feeling of dissatisfaction with the current regime in Moscow, which, through the military attack on Ukraine, is aiming to restore the former territories of the USSR. After three decades of the collapse of the communist system and the dissolution of the USSR, Russia's political philosophy is based on the reconstruction of the expansion of the Russian state into the former territories of the Soviet Union, thus militarily violating the state borders of states that have already established democratic systems of government. Through this hegemonic policy, the Russians justify their efforts to destabilize and then invade states such as: Ukraine, Georgia, Latvia, Estonia, etc. Even countries that have never been part of the USSR, such as Finland, Sweden, etc., are feeling less and less secure, as a result of the constant threats of official Moscow.
Regardless of the great ambitions for expansionist wars, the strong resistance of the Ukrainians, supported by the West, has given signals that Russia is having difficulty achieving its goals. In fact, the diplomacy of the above-mentioned countries, but also the various civic movements and numerous initiatives, such as the demolition of Soviet symbols and monuments, have intensified, always in an effort to prevent not only the occupation of these countries by the Russian army, but also the spread of Russian socio-cultural and economic influence.
What is truly striking today is the fact that in democratic states, cultural heritage, including the dark heritage, has been preserved and special care has been taken of it. All this, to enable future generations to learn about the past of their countries and the vicissitudes that their respective societies have gone through.
But, the question that is being raised for discussion is whether monuments built by occupiers or communist regimes should really be preserved, conserved and restored? What are the benefits and or feelings that new generations can learn or receive from them? Will these monuments serve more in bringing peoples and countries closer together, or will they influence the further deepening of relations between peoples who had the relationship: oppressors-oppressed?
These and other questions are not infrequently raised by Albanian society in Kosovo, because even here we still have monuments that belong to the communist period of Yugoslavia. Monuments such as the one of “Vllaznim Baksimi”, near the Municipal Assembly of Pristina, or the monument of “Boro Ramizi” (now “Palace of Youth”) in the center of the capital of Kosovo, are just some of the monuments that have sparked quite a few discussions among professionals, the intellectual elite and Albanian society in general “for and against”, the functioning or demolition of these monuments of dark heritage. Although there has been much discussion and the architectural, aesthetic and symbolic values have been highlighted, they continue to perform their former functions and thus be an inseparable part of the architectural, urban and cultural heritage of Pristina, accompanied by political or ideological messages. It seems that the message they carry to the generations that were born after the fall of communism and the dissolution of Yugoslavia has not yet been deciphered. Because, for the Albanian population, which has lived for quite some time under the Yugoslav system and in the 90s under the Serbian one, the monuments belonging to that period and ideology have entered the memory of the vast majority of society as a "dark legacy". This is because these monuments remind them of the injustices they experienced under the Serbian-Yugoslav colonial rule.
We should stop at the “Trekëndëshi”, near the Municipality of Prishtina, which symbolizes “Brotherhood-Unity”, a communist motto that is not only outdated, but in fact, has never been valid for Albanians. This is because since the end of World War II, when Kosovo and other Albanian areas were reoccupied by Serbia (1945), Albanians within the Yugoslav Federation have not only not been treated with dignity, but have also been subjected to systematic state violence and terror. During and after World War II, dozens of massacres took place in Kosovo and in Albanian areas in Macedonia and Montenegro against the Albanian civilian population. It is enough to offer examples of massacres such as: the massacre of Tivar, Gjilan, Drenica, the forced deportation of thousands of Albanians to Turkey (remember the Turkish-Yugoslav agreements), then the arrests and political imprisonments, the violent suppression of demonstrations organized in 1968, 1981, 1989, 1997, etc. These and many other forms of violation of the national and civil rights of Albanians in Yugoslavia, according to a significant part of society, are sufficient evidence to overthrow the symbol of an artificial monument that promoted "Brotherhood-Unity", in a country where injustices against the Albanian population were so pronounced. It is surprising how this "Triangle" monument was not demolished even by the regime of Slobodan Milosevic, who was not careful to this extent and form towards dozens of other architectural and historical monuments and especially towards the artifacts of Kosovo which have not been returned to our country to this day.
Regardless of what was said above, it should be noted that since the end of the last war in Kosovo (1999), the “Triangle” has changed colors several times, but has never changed its shape or its message. Then, the question rightly arises: why do the institutions of the Republic of Kosovo have difficulty making the decision to remove it and similar monuments throughout Kosovo and thus definitively break away from that dark heritage. Or, perhaps this heritage is not perceived as such by the political and civic elites today in Kosovo.
Perhaps, the great influence that the Kosovar society that was once an integral part of the communist system (read the Yugonostalgians) still has has influenced that despite numerous efforts and initiatives, even after two decades, not a single monument from the Yugoslav communist period has been demolished (except for a few in one or two small municipalities). Whereas, unlike Kosovo, Latvia, which despite the tensions and pronounced pro-Russianism within Latvian society, managed to finally demolish the Soviet monument.
European, democratic states and their political elites have made decisions in recent years that may have affected the memory of a part of their society, but nevertheless, not a few states have completely disconnected from the dark architectural heritage. In fact, in some states, such monuments do not exist today, while in many countries efforts are being made to remove them. The question arises: will Kosovo also become part of these initiatives to disconnect from the legacy of the Yugoslav communist period? Or will Kosovo still preserve these monuments, which will serve as a dark memory for a layer of the population, namely as architectural, historical, ideological monuments. This, in particular, applies to the other layer of Albanian society, to which these monuments can also give a certain feeling, which comes mainly from the artistic, ideological taste, which has not infrequently dominated political views and beliefs.
edition
t7 live
