Edi Rama shifted his speech at the UN toward the debate on artificial intelligence, presenting an approach that, according to him, protects freedom, truth and human control over technology. The prime minister’s message came in political and moral tones, at a time when the use of AI is pushing governments to seek greater influence over how information circulates.
The main message: the decision remains with the human being
At the core of his remarks, Rama said that artificial intelligence will not be the one to decide whether this century belongs to freedom or manipulation. According to him, people will decide that, while the machines will obey.
He framed the debate around the question of whom the machines will obey, under which law and in the service of which human purpose, shifting the emphasis to political and institutional responsibility for the use of technology.
“Albania has made its own modest choice”
In his speech, Rama said that Albania has chosen acceleration and innovation, not surrender or abdication in the face of technological developments.
He presented this as a choice to increase human capacity and not weaken it, although he did not give concrete details on how this translates into policies, standards or measurable public guarantees.
Freedom of expression and fear of uncontrolled influence
The prime minister said that Albania has chosen freedom of expression, but not its confusion with what he described as the uncontrolled freedom of machines, money and foreign powers to penetrate anyone, anywhere, without accountability.
This wording suggests a position that seeks limits and rules on how technology and economic or political power affect the public space, although the speech did not specify which mechanisms should be put in place to prevent abuse of this approach.
The appeal for truth and a “shared world”
Rama said the choice must be truth, because without a shared commitment to reality, according to him, there can be no shared public life.
In closing, he took the argument further by saying that without this commitment to reality and without a shared world, the very idea of the United Nations remains undermined. The speech ended on a reflective note, with the prime minister calling it a “sermon from the desert.”
The speech at the UN came as a broad political declaration on technology and power, more than as a presentation of a concrete package of actions.
Beyond the rhetoric about freedom, truth and control over machines, it remains to be seen how these principles will materialize in decision-making, transparency and standards that genuinely protect the public interest.