Unachievable politics

Unachievable politics

IBNA Op-Ed/Is politics the art of the achievable? This saying, which belongs to diplomacy more than politics, has turned into a justification: compared to art it’s not achievable and given that it’s unachievable, there’s no reason to make art out of it, or not? But, those who consider it unachievable are not unachievable.


By Albin Kurti


The ideas and projects which are immediately thought as realizable, are easily discredited in Kosovo. They say that this is not possible and this is where the discussion ends. Such dialogues are executed by the monologues of will. When two or more persons talk, more important than the start is the conclusion: the ideas and projects imagined for any changes.

Thus, the changes and premeditated transformations are assessed first of all by the likelihood of their finalization. The thought for any initiative leaves room for the thought of likelihood for that incentive. This second thought over the probability of implementing the incentive has immediate effect: the suppression of the first thought. Therefore, the thought over the likelihood has turned into a killing thought over the incentive which aims particular political, social, economic, cultural and other changes.

And if someone proposes several times in a row plans for change, then that person is declared an idealist! The logic of probability turns the term “idealist” in a stigma which aspires the definition of idealist. Like a defendant is found guilty in court, even the idealist is given his social and public verdict (prior to being isolated).

At the probability in question, there’s nothing scientific or arithmetic. It relates to perceptions, impressions and subjective senses of people who offer stances about quality on the inability to achieve a proposed undertaking. There is no preliminary quality analysis of the factors and conditions which precede a particular stance. This is also proven by the typical approach: the starting point is that of the achievable and non achievable, of the inability of avoiding and lack of likelihood. Probabilities are used as a model and not about possibilities.

There are certain motives that have led our society to this state. I’m trying to list several of them by not pretending that this is the definite list. First of all it’s the history of failure, namely the bitter period of the people in the years after the war. There are many cases when people citizens have seen examples of the failure of good undertakings. They have become skeptic because it’s easy for things to go bad while the state is being consolidated. We live in an environment where on a daily basis we see individuals and clans more powerful than the state and the law.

Secondly we have the history of success, which consists on the examples of individual achievements without work and knowledge, but through ties. In the Kosovo media we often see personalities whose personal achievements are not attributed to the untiring work, high virtues or extensive knowledge, but the numerous tricks that they use. If one wants to be successful, it’s sufficient to combine well and not work hard: success is in the form of financial speculation and not in the performance of agriculture of industrial productivity.

Thirdly, our society suffers from what has been done with politics and what has remained out of it. Thus, the damage doesn’t only consist on what the political class did to the post war society, but also what happened with politics itself. Perhaps we can say that politics has changed (for the worse) in its form and content more than the changes (for better) that politics has brought, for example in education, economy and health.

Throughout these 14 years we’ve had a systematic degradation of politics. It has been emptied out of its substance, by degenerating in technicalities. Politics moved away from society and citizens to seclude itself in institutions and then it also left institutions to find shelter in the media. Politics left the different domains of the citizens’ life, while political parties expanded their impact. We gained many parties, but we lost politics. Political parties have lost their political essence.

Instead of politics to be a concept, will and action, it has fallen into another category: intermediacy, representation and negotiation. There are no understandings that organize stances, criticism and ideas, that feed courage, dedication and loyalty, that encourage actions, activities and work. There are only tactics and intrigues, bargaining and compromises, posts and money. Above all, there are no ideas because there is no ideal. Equality, freedom, justice, etc, are not ideals of politicians and are cannot turn into ideas in politics.

Lack of ideals in politics has turned into technicalities in the domain of institutional politics. The grave situation in Kosovo is not a result of the followed ideals, but of their absence. Even states throughout the world cannot make steps forward without idealism, let alone states like Kosovo.

Will and possibility are not that separate from each other. Possibilities do not represent the space that remains when all obstacles are discounted from reality. Obstacles are generally other wills of the others and there cannot be a will of ours, when our starting point is the will of others embodied and accepted as facts by us.

Although it’s being insisted that something like that is not possible, in the worst scenario this is valid at the time being. To conclude, what we cannot achieve now, we cannot say that we don’t need it now. For example, the unification of Mitrovica and the integration of the north. The Federal Republic of Germany has never given up on Eastern Germany for more than 4 decades in its official documents and in its institutional and social policies.


*Leader of Self Determination Party, Pristina, Kosovo