杜尔斯代表大会表达了阿尔巴尼亚政治的成熟

Lavdosh Ahmetaj
{"title":"杜尔斯代表大会表达了阿尔巴尼亚政治的成熟","authors":"Lavdosh Ahmetaj","doi":"10.53555/eijhss.v4i1.73","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper reflects the political sense of the Albanians who realized that in the conditions of the end of World War I needed political alliances that could not be realized without the formation of a government and the Albanian state on legal and legal grounds, so that to be represented with the proper sovereignty not only in the face of the Great Powers, which would gather at the Peace Conference in Paris in the beginning of 19119, but it was the best opportunity to avoid any representation which did not have the sovereignty of Albanians. \nWhereas, the preparatory stages internally for the organization of the Durrës Congress were accompanied by the initiative for the gathering of a congress in the city of Shkodra. This meeting was held in Lezha on December 9, 1918, organized by Catholic clerics and the mayor of Mirdita Bayribs, Preng Bib Doda as a movement, which included only North Albania, had not found extensive support. Another attempt was that of the city of Tirana, which took place on December 19-20, in which only representatives from some parts of Central Albania participated. These political movements gradually fused to the Durrës Congress, the organizers of the who had previously received Italy's political approval. \nThe Durrës Congress opened on 25 December 1918 with the participation of 53 delegates, who were accompanied by the mandate of the province they represented, although these provinces were under the control of the Italian army. But delegates from the city of Vlora did not attend the congress because the Italian authorities had received instructions from Rome not to be allowed to be delegates from this city. The representatives of the provinces under the Serbian occupation, Peshkopia and Luma, and even those who were under French occupation, such as the city of Korca, were also missing. The delegates initially expressed political trust in the winners of the war, associating this with a special greeting against President Wilson, who had declared the principles of the selfdetermination of peoples.  \nThe Congress also discussed about the policy that should be followed in relations with Italy and the possibility of supporting it, which, from a strategic point of view, could have an interest in supporting Albania's territorial requirements. Through archival sources, it emerges that the most prominent politician of the Albanians, Mehmet Konica, at the Durrës Congress, had presented the Italian proposal for the formation of an \"Enforcement Committee\", which would try to send an Albanian delegation to the Peace Conference and acted to ensure the national and political life of the Albanian people. But, in turn, the sources reflect the political will of another part of the decalogue, which they expressed, for the creation of a provisional government, which should politically accept Roma as well. Seeking that, before this was announced, a response from Rome was taken, in the hope that it would accept its formation. While some other delegates stated that the government was a wish of the Albanian people and it did not matter whether it would be accepted by Italy. The Government, based on the minutes of the Senate parliamentary work, had two tasks: First, to send an Albanian delegation to the Peace Conference, and second, to ensure the national political life of the Albanian people. While the formation of a council or a committee would no longer be a helpless institution, leaving at the same time a free path to foreign intrigues and create free ground for antagonistic opponent Esad Toptani. \nThe analysis also reflects the other side of the discussions, which concerned the view that the Albanian people did not have that degree of maturity to act independently, which would lead Albania to the collapse of relations with the only friend Albania had, which was considered Italy. \nSo the development of discussions in Congress had naturally reflected the formation of two pillar groups, which were different: first, a group of congressmen was of prominent Orienteering who declared that for the decision of the formation of the government the interim was notified and Rome through the Italian command and expected its response; second, while the other group stated that they had not come to the congress to be presented as \"puppets\" to judge and act upon the orders of others, but to think about the will and political will of the people, who was looking for one sounds self-restraint. \nIn fact, the critical spirit of the delegates to the London Underground Treaty of 1915 is considerable in material through three fundamental issues related to Albania. First, on the political plane, through the creation of the government, they were opposed to the Italian protectorate of the Albanian state through the representation of this state from Italy in relations with the world, as envisaged in paragraph VII of the Secret Treaty of London on 26 April 1915. This treaty was also struck from a principled point of view. Congress through the majority managed to consider the decisions of 1913 untouched, coupled with the full independence of the Albanian state already formed. Secondly, Congress could not bypass those decisions of the Treaty of London that heavily affected the territory of Albania. The delegates expressed their sternness about the VIth paragraph of the Treaty through which Italy was recognized sovereignty over Vlora, as well as for Point VII, according to which Italy would not object to the passage of southern Albania to Greece and to the north of Serbia and Montenegro Black, under the conditions that this would require other Treaty firms, such as France and England. Thirdly, Congress reiterated its critical stance on Vth of the Treaty of London, which expressed the existence of a \"Muslim\" Albanian state in Middle East. \nWhile reflecting on the criticism of Italy's attitude to the obstacles it had created for the representation of Vlora in Congress, which made it possible to sensitize even the question of the city of Vlora, which according to the Secret Treaty of London was in the protectorate of Italy. \nBy the time the material was refreshed on the morning of December 26th, the main representatives of Congress presented a reminder to Italy's political representative, bringing arguments on the formation of the government to devalue the possible efforts of France and the Balkan states to call delegates of Esad Toptani at the Peace Conference. \nThe analysis also raises the issue of the Albanian state's legal status and political affiliation to one or the other winning power, for which there were disagreements, they acted silently and in a compromise with each other. While the essence of the subject we are presenting is the political program that underpinned: First, the rights of the Peace Conference by the Government of Durres; Second, the search for Albania's ethnic boundaries; thirdly, maintaining public order and peace in the Albanian political territory. \nThe material also includes the political support that Albanian Diaspora organizations provided to the congressional work as \"Vatra\", which saw political compromise with Italy over the formation of the Government of Durres an essential point because it envisioned the anatonomic diversity of the Albanian political streams that would to be presented at the Peace Conference in Paris. But by making a careful study of the period in which this agreement was reached, this attitude seems to be fair. This agreement came about as a result of the change of Albania's historical circumstances at the end of the war, such as: the collapse of political balances in the Balkans as a result of the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the loss of war from it.","PeriodicalId":109852,"journal":{"name":"EPH - International Journal of Humanities and Social Science","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DURRES CONGRESS EXPRESSION OF ALBANIA'S POLITICAL MATURITY\",\"authors\":\"Lavdosh Ahmetaj\",\"doi\":\"10.53555/eijhss.v4i1.73\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper reflects the political sense of the Albanians who realized that in the conditions of the end of World War I needed political alliances that could not be realized without the formation of a government and the Albanian state on legal and legal grounds, so that to be represented with the proper sovereignty not only in the face of the Great Powers, which would gather at the Peace Conference in Paris in the beginning of 19119, but it was the best opportunity to avoid any representation which did not have the sovereignty of Albanians. \\nWhereas, the preparatory stages internally for the organization of the Durrës Congress were accompanied by the initiative for the gathering of a congress in the city of Shkodra. This meeting was held in Lezha on December 9, 1918, organized by Catholic clerics and the mayor of Mirdita Bayribs, Preng Bib Doda as a movement, which included only North Albania, had not found extensive support. Another attempt was that of the city of Tirana, which took place on December 19-20, in which only representatives from some parts of Central Albania participated. These political movements gradually fused to the Durrës Congress, the organizers of the who had previously received Italy's political approval. \\nThe Durrës Congress opened on 25 December 1918 with the participation of 53 delegates, who were accompanied by the mandate of the province they represented, although these provinces were under the control of the Italian army. But delegates from the city of Vlora did not attend the congress because the Italian authorities had received instructions from Rome not to be allowed to be delegates from this city. The representatives of the provinces under the Serbian occupation, Peshkopia and Luma, and even those who were under French occupation, such as the city of Korca, were also missing. The delegates initially expressed political trust in the winners of the war, associating this with a special greeting against President Wilson, who had declared the principles of the selfdetermination of peoples.  \\nThe Congress also discussed about the policy that should be followed in relations with Italy and the possibility of supporting it, which, from a strategic point of view, could have an interest in supporting Albania's territorial requirements. Through archival sources, it emerges that the most prominent politician of the Albanians, Mehmet Konica, at the Durrës Congress, had presented the Italian proposal for the formation of an \\\"Enforcement Committee\\\", which would try to send an Albanian delegation to the Peace Conference and acted to ensure the national and political life of the Albanian people. But, in turn, the sources reflect the political will of another part of the decalogue, which they expressed, for the creation of a provisional government, which should politically accept Roma as well. Seeking that, before this was announced, a response from Rome was taken, in the hope that it would accept its formation. While some other delegates stated that the government was a wish of the Albanian people and it did not matter whether it would be accepted by Italy. The Government, based on the minutes of the Senate parliamentary work, had two tasks: First, to send an Albanian delegation to the Peace Conference, and second, to ensure the national political life of the Albanian people. While the formation of a council or a committee would no longer be a helpless institution, leaving at the same time a free path to foreign intrigues and create free ground for antagonistic opponent Esad Toptani. \\nThe analysis also reflects the other side of the discussions, which concerned the view that the Albanian people did not have that degree of maturity to act independently, which would lead Albania to the collapse of relations with the only friend Albania had, which was considered Italy. \\nSo the development of discussions in Congress had naturally reflected the formation of two pillar groups, which were different: first, a group of congressmen was of prominent Orienteering who declared that for the decision of the formation of the government the interim was notified and Rome through the Italian command and expected its response; second, while the other group stated that they had not come to the congress to be presented as \\\"puppets\\\" to judge and act upon the orders of others, but to think about the will and political will of the people, who was looking for one sounds self-restraint. \\nIn fact, the critical spirit of the delegates to the London Underground Treaty of 1915 is considerable in material through three fundamental issues related to Albania. First, on the political plane, through the creation of the government, they were opposed to the Italian protectorate of the Albanian state through the representation of this state from Italy in relations with the world, as envisaged in paragraph VII of the Secret Treaty of London on 26 April 1915. This treaty was also struck from a principled point of view. Congress through the majority managed to consider the decisions of 1913 untouched, coupled with the full independence of the Albanian state already formed. Secondly, Congress could not bypass those decisions of the Treaty of London that heavily affected the territory of Albania. The delegates expressed their sternness about the VIth paragraph of the Treaty through which Italy was recognized sovereignty over Vlora, as well as for Point VII, according to which Italy would not object to the passage of southern Albania to Greece and to the north of Serbia and Montenegro Black, under the conditions that this would require other Treaty firms, such as France and England. Thirdly, Congress reiterated its critical stance on Vth of the Treaty of London, which expressed the existence of a \\\"Muslim\\\" Albanian state in Middle East. \\nWhile reflecting on the criticism of Italy's attitude to the obstacles it had created for the representation of Vlora in Congress, which made it possible to sensitize even the question of the city of Vlora, which according to the Secret Treaty of London was in the protectorate of Italy. \\nBy the time the material was refreshed on the morning of December 26th, the main representatives of Congress presented a reminder to Italy's political representative, bringing arguments on the formation of the government to devalue the possible efforts of France and the Balkan states to call delegates of Esad Toptani at the Peace Conference. \\nThe analysis also raises the issue of the Albanian state's legal status and political affiliation to one or the other winning power, for which there were disagreements, they acted silently and in a compromise with each other. While the essence of the subject we are presenting is the political program that underpinned: First, the rights of the Peace Conference by the Government of Durres; Second, the search for Albania's ethnic boundaries; thirdly, maintaining public order and peace in the Albanian political territory. \\nThe material also includes the political support that Albanian Diaspora organizations provided to the congressional work as \\\"Vatra\\\", which saw political compromise with Italy over the formation of the Government of Durres an essential point because it envisioned the anatonomic diversity of the Albanian political streams that would to be presented at the Peace Conference in Paris. But by making a careful study of the period in which this agreement was reached, this attitude seems to be fair. This agreement came about as a result of the change of Albania's historical circumstances at the end of the war, such as: the collapse of political balances in the Balkans as a result of the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the loss of war from it.\",\"PeriodicalId\":109852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EPH - International Journal of Humanities and Social Science\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EPH - International Journal of Humanities and Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53555/eijhss.v4i1.73\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EPH - International Journal of Humanities and Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53555/eijhss.v4i1.73","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇论文反映了阿尔巴尼亚人的政治意识,他们意识到在第一次世界大战结束的情况下,需要政治联盟,如果没有合法的政府和阿尔巴尼亚国家的成立,政治联盟是不可能实现的,这样他们就有了适当的主权,不仅要面对列强,这些列强将在1919年初的巴黎和平会议上聚集,但这是避免任何没有阿尔巴尼亚主权的代表的最好机会。鉴于在组织Durrës大会的内部筹备阶段,同时提出了在斯库德拉市召开大会的倡议。这次会议于1918年12月9日在列扎举行,由天主教神职人员和米迪塔·贝里奥斯市市长Preng Bib Doda组织,作为一个运动,它只包括北阿尔巴尼亚,没有得到广泛的支持。另一次尝试是12月19日至20日在地拉那市举行的会议,只有阿尔巴尼亚中部一些地区的代表参加了会议。这些政治运动逐渐融合为Durrës国会,其组织者先前获得了意大利的政治认可。Durrës代表大会于1918年12月25日开幕,共有53名代表参加,他们都有他们所代表的省的授权,尽管这些省处于意大利军队的控制之下。但是,来自弗拉纳市的代表没有参加这次会议,因为意大利当局接到罗马的指示,不允许来自弗拉纳市的代表参加会议。塞族占领下的省份Peshkopia和Luma的代表,甚至那些被法国占领的省份,例如Korca市的代表也失踪了。代表们最初表达了对战争胜利者的政治信任,并将此与对宣布了人民自决原则的威尔逊总统的特别问候联系在一起。大会还讨论了在与意大利的关系中应遵循的政策以及支持意大利的可能性,从战略角度来看,支持阿尔巴尼亚的领土要求可能对意大利有好处。通过档案资料得知,阿尔巴尼亚最著名的政治家Mehmet Konica在Durrës大会上提出了意大利关于成立一个“执行委员会”的建议,该委员会将设法派遣一个阿尔巴尼亚代表团参加和平会议,并采取行动确保阿尔巴尼亚人民的民族和政治生活。但反过来,这些资料也反映了十诫另一部分的政治意愿,即建立一个临时政府,在政治上也应接受罗姆人。在宣布之前,罗马作出了回应,希望它能接受它的成立。而其他一些代表则说,政府是阿尔巴尼亚人民的愿望,意大利是否接受并不重要。根据参议院议会工作的记录,政府有两项任务:第一,派遣一个阿尔巴尼亚代表团参加和平会议;第二,确保阿尔巴尼亚人民的国家政治生活。虽然成立一个理事会或委员会将不再是一个无助的机构,但同时也为外国阴谋留下了自由的道路,并为敌对的对手埃萨德·托普塔尼创造了自由的空间。分析也反映了讨论的另一方面,即认为阿尔巴尼亚人民没有独立行动的成熟程度,这将导致阿尔巴尼亚与被认为是阿尔巴尼亚唯一的朋友的意大利的关系崩溃。因此国会讨论的发展自然反映了两大支柱集团的形成,这两大支柱集团是不同的首先,一群国会议员是著名的定向运动家他们宣布临时政府的组建是通过意大利指挥部通知罗马的并期待其回应;第二,另一组人表示,他们来代表大会不是为了充当“傀儡”,根据别人的命令来判断和行动,而是为了考虑人民的意愿和政治意愿,他们正在寻找一个这样的人,这听起来很克制。事实上,1915年《伦敦地下条约》的代表们的批判精神在与阿尔巴尼亚有关的三个基本问题上是相当重要的。首先,在政治层面上,通过建立政府,他们反对意大利对阿尔巴尼亚国家的保护国,通过意大利在与世界的关系中代表阿尔巴尼亚国家,正如1915年4月26日《伦敦秘密条约》第七段所设想的那样。这个条约也是从原则性的观点出发的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
DURRES CONGRESS EXPRESSION OF ALBANIA'S POLITICAL MATURITY
The paper reflects the political sense of the Albanians who realized that in the conditions of the end of World War I needed political alliances that could not be realized without the formation of a government and the Albanian state on legal and legal grounds, so that to be represented with the proper sovereignty not only in the face of the Great Powers, which would gather at the Peace Conference in Paris in the beginning of 19119, but it was the best opportunity to avoid any representation which did not have the sovereignty of Albanians. Whereas, the preparatory stages internally for the organization of the Durrës Congress were accompanied by the initiative for the gathering of a congress in the city of Shkodra. This meeting was held in Lezha on December 9, 1918, organized by Catholic clerics and the mayor of Mirdita Bayribs, Preng Bib Doda as a movement, which included only North Albania, had not found extensive support. Another attempt was that of the city of Tirana, which took place on December 19-20, in which only representatives from some parts of Central Albania participated. These political movements gradually fused to the Durrës Congress, the organizers of the who had previously received Italy's political approval. The Durrës Congress opened on 25 December 1918 with the participation of 53 delegates, who were accompanied by the mandate of the province they represented, although these provinces were under the control of the Italian army. But delegates from the city of Vlora did not attend the congress because the Italian authorities had received instructions from Rome not to be allowed to be delegates from this city. The representatives of the provinces under the Serbian occupation, Peshkopia and Luma, and even those who were under French occupation, such as the city of Korca, were also missing. The delegates initially expressed political trust in the winners of the war, associating this with a special greeting against President Wilson, who had declared the principles of the selfdetermination of peoples.  The Congress also discussed about the policy that should be followed in relations with Italy and the possibility of supporting it, which, from a strategic point of view, could have an interest in supporting Albania's territorial requirements. Through archival sources, it emerges that the most prominent politician of the Albanians, Mehmet Konica, at the Durrës Congress, had presented the Italian proposal for the formation of an "Enforcement Committee", which would try to send an Albanian delegation to the Peace Conference and acted to ensure the national and political life of the Albanian people. But, in turn, the sources reflect the political will of another part of the decalogue, which they expressed, for the creation of a provisional government, which should politically accept Roma as well. Seeking that, before this was announced, a response from Rome was taken, in the hope that it would accept its formation. While some other delegates stated that the government was a wish of the Albanian people and it did not matter whether it would be accepted by Italy. The Government, based on the minutes of the Senate parliamentary work, had two tasks: First, to send an Albanian delegation to the Peace Conference, and second, to ensure the national political life of the Albanian people. While the formation of a council or a committee would no longer be a helpless institution, leaving at the same time a free path to foreign intrigues and create free ground for antagonistic opponent Esad Toptani. The analysis also reflects the other side of the discussions, which concerned the view that the Albanian people did not have that degree of maturity to act independently, which would lead Albania to the collapse of relations with the only friend Albania had, which was considered Italy. So the development of discussions in Congress had naturally reflected the formation of two pillar groups, which were different: first, a group of congressmen was of prominent Orienteering who declared that for the decision of the formation of the government the interim was notified and Rome through the Italian command and expected its response; second, while the other group stated that they had not come to the congress to be presented as "puppets" to judge and act upon the orders of others, but to think about the will and political will of the people, who was looking for one sounds self-restraint. In fact, the critical spirit of the delegates to the London Underground Treaty of 1915 is considerable in material through three fundamental issues related to Albania. First, on the political plane, through the creation of the government, they were opposed to the Italian protectorate of the Albanian state through the representation of this state from Italy in relations with the world, as envisaged in paragraph VII of the Secret Treaty of London on 26 April 1915. This treaty was also struck from a principled point of view. Congress through the majority managed to consider the decisions of 1913 untouched, coupled with the full independence of the Albanian state already formed. Secondly, Congress could not bypass those decisions of the Treaty of London that heavily affected the territory of Albania. The delegates expressed their sternness about the VIth paragraph of the Treaty through which Italy was recognized sovereignty over Vlora, as well as for Point VII, according to which Italy would not object to the passage of southern Albania to Greece and to the north of Serbia and Montenegro Black, under the conditions that this would require other Treaty firms, such as France and England. Thirdly, Congress reiterated its critical stance on Vth of the Treaty of London, which expressed the existence of a "Muslim" Albanian state in Middle East. While reflecting on the criticism of Italy's attitude to the obstacles it had created for the representation of Vlora in Congress, which made it possible to sensitize even the question of the city of Vlora, which according to the Secret Treaty of London was in the protectorate of Italy. By the time the material was refreshed on the morning of December 26th, the main representatives of Congress presented a reminder to Italy's political representative, bringing arguments on the formation of the government to devalue the possible efforts of France and the Balkan states to call delegates of Esad Toptani at the Peace Conference. The analysis also raises the issue of the Albanian state's legal status and political affiliation to one or the other winning power, for which there were disagreements, they acted silently and in a compromise with each other. While the essence of the subject we are presenting is the political program that underpinned: First, the rights of the Peace Conference by the Government of Durres; Second, the search for Albania's ethnic boundaries; thirdly, maintaining public order and peace in the Albanian political territory. The material also includes the political support that Albanian Diaspora organizations provided to the congressional work as "Vatra", which saw political compromise with Italy over the formation of the Government of Durres an essential point because it envisioned the anatonomic diversity of the Albanian political streams that would to be presented at the Peace Conference in Paris. But by making a careful study of the period in which this agreement was reached, this attitude seems to be fair. This agreement came about as a result of the change of Albania's historical circumstances at the end of the war, such as: the collapse of political balances in the Balkans as a result of the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the loss of war from it.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信