Prime Minister Edi Rama has brought January 21 back into focus through a Facebook reaction, where he drew a parallel between that event and the latest protests in the capital. In his version, the main difference lies in the level of violence against the police, while the political message is clear: to delegitimize violent protesters by comparing them with one of the heaviest episodes of the transition period.
Rama’s comparison between January 21 and the latest protests
Rama said the memories of January 21 are still fresh for him, when, according to him, there were some sporadic fires on the perimeter of the protest, but no institution was touched, no Molotov cocktail was thrown, and no member of the law enforcement forces was injured or burned.
He recalled that four protesters were shot dead that day and dozens of others were wounded. In the same reaction, he used this event to contrast it with the latest protests in Tirana, where, according to him, there have been attempts to seriously attack the police.
Direct accusations against those who attack police officers
In the statement published on social media, Rama described as criminals those who, according to his version, try to gouge out police officers’ eyes or kill them. He added that material damage can be repaired, but claimed that objects thrown at officers can turn into deadly weapons.
To support this narrative, the prime minister also referred to footage broadcast on television, claiming that a “fire group” is operating on the ground which, according to him, has no connection to the students.
Political message on the protest and control over the public narrative
Rama’s reaction does not come simply as a historical reminder of January 21, but also as a direct intervention in the way violence in the latest protests is being interpreted. By placing on the same plane an event with four people killed and the latest episodes of clashes with the police, the prime minister is attempting to draw the dividing line between protest and violence according to the government’s interpretation.
However, this kind of comparison remains politically charged, as January 21 remains an open wound in terms of state accountability and not simply a rhetorical reference for the debate of the day.
Through this reaction, January 21 has once again returned to the center of the political clash, this time as an instrument of comparison for the latest protests and for the relationship between power, the police, and citizens in the streets.