Didn’t anyone try to find out afterwards why all this happened? Isn’t there anything about it in the records of your unit?
No. The records just say the order was incorrect and the incident was regarded as closed. There was a rumour later on that a group of tank officers were at the root of it all
What does that mean? Can you explain it more clearly?
It isn’t clear to me either. The tank officers were eventually arrested, which made people think they’d deliberately caused the incident. But that was only a guess, and, as you know, the officers were soon set free again. After that no one has bothered about the affair…
Extracts from the autocritique of the head of personnel, motorized division: As regards the inquiries into the backgrounds of the tank officers, they were ordered by higher authorities^ and I wish to make it plain from the start that although the instructions were issued by my superiors, much of the responsibility in this matter is mine. I don’t deserve to be forgiven: I acted spinelessly, and my weakness made possible a deliberate mystification. I suspected from the outset (what head of personnel wouldn’t have smelled a rat?) that the request to investigate the backgrounds of the tank officers was not based on genuine suspicion but on anger and resentment. I realized that the object was not to discover the origins of an offence, but to find a pretext — class origin, for example — for finding the officers guilty. In short, although the request to examine their backgrounds with a microscope was festooned in a lot of revolutionary phraseology (they’d even taken the trouble to include a couple of quotations from the classic texts of Marxism-Leninism), it was obvious that the real motive was revenge. Î admit I never had a moment’s doubt about that. Nevertheless, though I knew I was collaborating indirectly in a procedure inconsistent with communist morality, instead of opposing my superiors and fearlessly expressing my opinion as a good communist should,! not only turned a Mind eye to the falsification of the truth, bet I knowingly helped to make it more plausible, So I agreed to delve into the officers’ pasts, and even though I didn’t find anything of any moment^ the mere fact of having done it in aid of personal vindictiveness is reprehensible …Especially as… Especially as I went so far as to interfere incertain aspects of people’s private lives, aspects I’m ashamed to mention here …
Consider yourself authorized to do so.
Well, for example, as regards the officer called Arian Krasniqi, I tried to cast aspersions on him because of rumours that circulated once about one of his sisters and her relationship with Skënder Bermema, the writer. Î meant to show that Krasniqi’s whole circle was morally “liberal”, obviously in the negative sense in which we usually use the term. I also exploited the fact that Skënder Bermema took an interest in Krasniqi’s case when he was arrested. I tried to cast grave suspicions on Krasniqi. I even…I even…I’m sorry, but I'm very upset…
Go on.
I even went so far ie my search for compromising facts that I bought a prose text by Bermema called Forgetting a Woman. It’s said to have been dedicated to one of Kraseiqi’s sisters. So, as there wasn’t much else to go on, I tried to make use of the book in this sordid affair.
How?
I sent it to a well-known critic —! can evee tell you his name…it was C–V—.! asked him to vet it for ideological errors, and he slammed it so energetically I must admit I could hardly believe my eyes.
Why did you choose C–V—?
He has a brother who works for us, and the brother had asked to be transferred to Tirana…But Pd like to point out that C–V— agreed to denounce Krasniqi without asking for anything ie return. That’s why I was so surprised,…
Anything else?
Eh? No, nothing…No, comrade, except that I don’t deserve to be a member of the Party, and I hope you’ll inflict the harshest possible punishment on me. But if the leadership will give me one last chance of coming back to life again, and do me the honour of letting me be a candidate for readmittance, I promise faithfully to do my utmost to deserve to be allowed back into the Party as one completely regenerated. That’s all I had to say.
Are you sure the officers were sent to jail simply out of personal revenge?
Yes. No principles were involved at all Only the desire for vengeance.
Extracts from the autocritique of the head of military intelligence: 1 admit my guilt. Although I knew perfectly well, because I had access to all personal records^ that there was no real reason for placing the tank officers under surveillance — they were under no genuine suspicion, the only motive was revenge, as the previous witness said — I agreed to get mixed up in this nasty affair. Why? Out of servility, that wretched survival of bourgeois society! I knew what my superiors wanted, so I did what was necessary to please them. Nothing easier than to dig up a few things the tank men had said about staff in moments of anger, and present them as evidence of rebellion against army leadership, if not against authority in general
Is that all?
It’s the main thing. The rest is secondary. I'm ready to accept any punishment you care to impose.
Since you organized the surveillance of the officers, as if they really were suspected of treason, presumably you were in a unique position to find out what their real intentions were, and consequently to say whether they were innocent or not?
That is so.
And the bad weather, and the lightning, which have so often been mentioned recently, didn’t prevent you from hearing quite clearly what they said?
No.
So what did you conclude from what they said?
That they had absolutely nothing to reproach themselves with.
Is that all?
Yes. What else could I have concluded? The purity of their intentions was as plain as could be. Their motives were clear as crystal. And to think I agreed to cover them with obloquy! I haven’t been able to sleep for months!
Is that all?
I don’t know what else you want of me,
Notes by delegate: Neither the head of personnel nor the head of military intelligence is being sincere, They’re both hiding something. I think the head of personnel is prevaricating when he says he thought that when his superiors asked him to investigate the tank officers” backgrounds they were acting out of a desire for revenge. I think he knew they were motivated first and foremost by fear. As for the head of military intelligence, he’s lying even more outrageously, because he knew, even better than the head of personnel, about the fears to which the tank officers’ attitude had given rise. The officers under surveillance had very probably often used such phrases as “It’s not done to encircle a Party committee…” “We’ve explained it to them, but they wouldn’t listen…” “We’re not living in China!”…“If we want to prove it, we can ask the Central Committee…”