The office where you need to apply to become an ambassador

2026-06-10 09:33:00, Opinione Luan Rama

The testimony of the Prime Minister of Albania that Mustafa Nano went to his office and, after lying down "there in the armchair," asked him to take him to the ambassador of the Republic of Albania, is not an episode told in passing under the allure of a bunch of miserable applause.

It has been proven with voice and image by the Prime Minister himself, so that one can understand how the law is respected in Albania and how much career, professionalism, and meritocracy are valued.

In a not so inexplicable situation, he, that is, the Prime Minister himself, while wanting to mock and denounce a free citizen of the country who has every right to have such an opinion against the Prime Minister, in the fact that he did not reveal how power is (mis)used, can do and does in violation of the law and should not.

By requesting to be appointed ambassador (even "lying on the Prime Minister's official chair"), the citizen slandered by the Prime Minister has not committed any sin, has not committed any crime. In the final analysis, everyone has the right to aspire and, if necessary, to become an ambassador.

In this case, the only problem is the Prime Minister.

First, because he is above the law.

The appointment of ambassadors, in any system that claims institutional normality, must be the product of clear procedures, professional criteria, and standards of diplomatic requirements. Any deviation from this logic, or any public perception that appointments are associated with “lying in the Prime Minister’s official chair,” undermines the very idea of ??duties and meritocracy in diplomas.

Secondly, because the messages conveyed to those in the Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs and throughout the foreign service are deeply fixed.

Dozens of diplomats who over the years build their activity on professionalism, skills and institutional discipline, the appointment of ambassador "after being placed in the Prime Minister's official colleges" is directly related to the integrity of the diplomatic service.

Thirdly, because this case, publicly acknowledged by the Prime Minister himself, may be a one-off.

Everyone has the right to think that to be appointed to a state position, not only as an ambassador, but also as a director, deputy, or minister, one must know how to "lie in the chair of the Prime Minister's officials."

The fact that this message comes from the Prime Minister himself makes it much more weighty in its public impact.

Fourth, because an element that is often neglected, but which is in the functioning of the state, has been violated: the confidentiality of communication in the Prime Minister's office.

A person who meets the Prime Minister, even to ask for a favor or a job, has the right to believe that the conversation remains between them. And that for whatever reason, it cannot be used later in public and political use by the Prime Minister, as a means of irony or as an instrument of humiliation.

And finally, a question: why was this story told now?

Would he have shown his Prime Minister Mustafa Nano if the latter had not publicly held critical positions against the Prime Minister?

I'm afraid not.

The Prime Minister wanted to give a message. And in fact he did: ungrateful, shut up and don't forget who made you an ambassador!

It is here that the greatest deformation of the concept of the state occurs.

The issue no longer remains about the episode of "lying on the Prime Minister's officials' couch", but about the institutional image since that episode.

Because in diplomacy, image is not a secondary detail; it is part of the very power of the state.

And in the destruction of the image, the Prime Minister is not alone. The others who are like blank slates also have it: the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Assembly's commission and the President of the Republic.

Because, apparently, they too are "lying in that armchair" in the Prime Minister's office.