After the egg incident in New York, Edi Rama chose to respond with harsh language toward his critics, while linking his reaction to the government’s narrative on the fight against corruption and the path toward the European Union.
Strong reaction after the incident
In his statement, Rama attacked those who, according to him, “wrap themselves in the national flag” and protest in the streets, using insulting labels toward his opponents.
He claimed that he has raised the Albanian flag “higher than ever before in the eyes of the world,” while saying he would not be stopped by “mud, eggs and spittle” in his political mission.
Political defense of the government’s record
In the same reaction, the prime minister presented as an achievement what he called an “institutional system that shows an ability to cleanse itself,” linking this to the direction of his government.
According to Rama’s version, this development did not come by chance, but as a result of the political project he represents.
Corruption at the center of the statement
Rama rejected repeated accusations of corruption, saying that in a country truly drowned in corruption there would be neither open clashes nor concrete results against it.
He claimed that change came after, according to him, his government and party “turned the wheel of justice” toward equality before the law. The statement remains part of the political line that the majority has often used to defend its record in relation to justice.
The EU used as political proof
At the end of the reaction, Rama said that Albania is now being increasingly valued by the European Union for the fight against corruption.
But his reaction did not stop at the political argument: he accompanied the message with a series of insults and denigrating comparisons about his critics, turning the incident into a direct verbal confrontation.
The prime minister’s reaction did not provide new clarifications about the incident itself in New York, but shifted attention to political language and to the effort to present criticism of the government as an attack on a larger state project.
In essence, his message was more of a political counterattack than a response to the event that put him at the center of attention.