Prime Minister Edi Rama’s latest attempt to portray the European Parliament’s resolution as an endorsement of his government’s policies on protected areas is yet another exercise in political spin that simply does not survive a sober reading of the text adopted on 17 June. His claim that the European Parliament has somehow “separated the wheat from the chaff” and established that the planned development in Zvërnec has nothing to do with concerns surrounding the Vjosa-Narta protected area is contradicted by Amendment 46a itself. Far from vindicating the government’s position, the amendment represents a significant hardening of the European Parliament’s language towards Albania and a much-needed clarification in response to the fog of propaganda deliberately cultivated in Tirana over recent months.
In its May resolution, the European Parliament expressed “deep regret” over the extension of the 2015 Strategic Investments Law and over the 2024 amendments to the Law on Protected Areas. Only one month later, faced with the deterioration of the situation, diplomatic language has become noticeably sharper. “Deep regret” has given way to “serious concern.” In diplomacy, this is not a semantic nuance but a political signal. Regret may lead to passivity; serious concern calls for action. And the action proposed by the European Parliament is unmistakable: an immediate moratorium on all new permitting procedures, construction works and development interventions within protected areas until the incompatible provisions of the amended Law on Protected Areas are repealed.
This is why the Prime Minister’s claim that the European Parliament has separated Vjosa-Narta from Zvërnec is not only inaccurate but precisely the opposite of what the amendment states. For the first time, the Parliament explicitly identifies the ongoing developments within the Vjosa-Narta protected area as evidence of the practical consequences of these legislative changes and closely follows the peaceful mass protests that have emerged in response. While government propaganda has sought to dismiss protesters as victims of “disinformation” or enemies of development, the European Parliament recognizes them as the legitimate expression of genuine concerns for the protection of an ecosystem of European importance.
In fact, Amendment 46a performs an even more important function. It dispels the clouds of confusion that have been deliberately created in Tirana and amplified through an artificial dichotomy between the European Commission’s Progress Report, the closing benchmarks under Chapter 27 and the recent statements of Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos. For months, the public has been encouraged to believe that there is a contradiction between the Commission’s position and the concerns raised by civil society. The European Parliament has now made it abundantly clear that no such contradiction exists. On the contrary, the amendment aligns the Progress Report, the Chapter 27 closing benchmarks and the requirement for full compliance with EU nature protection standards. In other words, the European Parliament has swept away the fog of propaganda and has truly separated the wheat from the chaff.
This is also where the empty rhetoric that “Zvërnec will be developed according to European standards” collapses. European standards are not political slogans, nor are they a seal of approval for any project. They exist precisely to prevent the irreversible transformation of ecosystems and landscapes of exceptional natural value. To say that “flamingos will be protected no matter what and Zvërnec will be developed” is as infantile as believing that the sun can shine at night. The two propositions simply cannot coexist, because European nature protection standards are designed precisely to draw boundaries around interventions that threaten habitats and protected ecosystems.
The greatest irony is that while the Prime Minister speaks of separating “the wheat from the chaff,” it is the European Parliament that has actually done so. On one side stands the familiar machinery of propaganda, portraying every criticism as disinformation and every environmental concern as an obstacle to development. On the other stand undeniable facts: the increasingly critical language of the European Parliament, the explicit link between developments in Vjosa-Narta and the consequences of Albania’s legislative changes, the recognition of peaceful civic protests, and above all the call for an immediate moratorium on all interventions in protected areas until the problematic provisions of the 2024 amendments are repealed.
This is the real message of the European Parliament. Any attempt to portray an increasingly stern European warning as a domestic political success is nothing more than another effort to turn a clear rebuke into a propaganda victory. The facts, however, are proving more stubborn than the narrative.
EP Resolution adopted on May 11th, 2026
46. Deeply regrets the postponement of the repeal of Albania’s 2015 Law on Strategic Investments, given that its provisions enable accelerated permitting procedures and reduced environmental scrutiny, which risk adversely affecting protected areas and other environmentally sensitive zones; calls for the repeal of the 2024 amendments to the Law on Protected Areas, which allow the development of large-scale tourism infrastructure within protected areas and transfer key governance and decision-making powers to the National Council of Territory, thereby weakening environmental oversight.
Article 46 at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-10-2026-0141_EN.pdf
Amendment to the EP Resolution, adopted on 17 June 2026
46a. Expresses serious concern that the ongoing developments within the Vjosa-Narta protected area demonstrate the practical consequences of these legislative changes and the resulting risks to areas of recognised ecological value; closely follows the ongoing peaceful mass protests in this regard; calls on the Albanian authorities to immediately establish a moratorium on all new permitting procedures, construction works and development interventions within protected areas until the incompatible provisions of the amended Law on Protected Areas have been repealed, on the basis of a long-standing request by the Commission and Parliament and in line with the closing benchmarks of Chapter 27, and until full compliance with EU nature protection standards has been ensured; underlines that any projects in this area must undergo comprehensive environmental impact assessments fully in line with EU standards, including a transparent public participation process involving local communities, scientists and civil society.
Article 46a at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-10-2026-0141-AM-017-017_EN.pdf
