Përparim Rama moving toward a bid for LDK leader, Lirim Gashi: The party needs deep reform

The mayor of Pristina, Përparim Rama, is increasingly leaving open the possibility that he will run for the leadership of the Democratic League of Kosovo.

During a television appearance on Monday, he said that he had continuously contributed to the party and intended to continue helping it emerge from its current situation.

Rama stressed that his support for the LDK had been consistent, also mentioning that after 12 years, the party had come first in the capital. He added that he had been, was and would remain alongside the LDK.

However, the mayor of Pristina has still not made a final decision on whether he will run in the party’s internal elections. Asked about this possibility, he said: “I haven’t made the decision yet, but I believe I will.”

Rama had commented on the same issue earlier, while today, when asked how the party had received his possible candidacy for LDK leader, he referred to the democratic process of elections within the political entity.

“Here, I know that we have democracy, right? Democratic elections,” he declared.

Rama revealed that the possibility of his candidacy had been discussed with the party structures as early as January.

Analyst Lirim Gashi says that Përparim Rama’s ambition should not be treated as an ordinary media statement. According to him, this is a political goal that is taking shape and could become an opportunity for change within the LDK.

Gashi says that Rama has made it clear that he believes he will run, even though he has not yet officially confirmed his decision. He has also indicated that he expressed his willingness to lead the party to Lumir Abdixhiku, Lutfi Haziri and Avdullah Hoti.

According to the analyst, this shows that Rama’s ambition did not emerge recently, but is part of a discussion related to the LDK’s future. However, Gashi distinguishes between the seriousness of an ambition and the possibility of achieving it.

“Aspiring to become leader of the LDK is one thing, while having the vision, team, legitimacy and courage to reform the party is something entirely different,” he told Bota sot.

Gashi believes that Rama’s candidacy could offer a new alternative, particularly if he manages to distance himself from clan-based politics and present a political platform that is not limited by individual interests.

However, the analyst emphasizes that the LDK needs more than just a new figure at the helm. According to him, the main challenge is restoring the party’s political identity.

Rama, Gashi says, can be part of the solution only if he builds his candidacy around a reform project, rather than an aim to replace one name with another.

“Changing the captain does not by itself save the ship if the problem remains with the compass, the crew and the destination,” Gashi emphasizes.

He warns that the LDK could end up changing only the figure at the top, without addressing the way it functions and conducts politics.

The LDK’s return as the leading force in Pristina after 12 years is, according to Gashi, a result that should be analyzed carefully. But he stresses that victory in the capital is not equivalent to winning over the electorate across Kosovo.

“The result in Pristina is a weighty political argument, but it cannot be considered a blank check for leading the party at the central level,” he says.

The analyst considers the capital an important electoral arena and evidence of the ability to win citizens’ trust. However, according to him, the result cannot be attributed to one person alone, as it is influenced by the candidate, party organization, grassroots work, political circumstances and voters.

Gashi emphasizes that Pristina has its own characteristics, electorate and expectations. For this reason, a candidate for the LDK leadership must prove that they can also build trust in other municipalities, understand the country’s social and economic differences, and turn local success into a credible national platform.

He sees Rama’s result in Pristina as important political capital, but not as a certificate that automatically gives him the right to lead the LDK.

“Rama should have the opportunity to be heard, present his program and face the other candidates. But the post cannot be reserved for him in advance solely because of a local victory,” Gashi says.

According to him, internal party democracy requires competition, debate and a free vote. Winning a local battle does not mean that a candidate has automatically won the political contest at the national level as well.

Gashi stresses that running a municipality requires an urban program, better services and efficient management, while leading a national party requires answers on the economy, education, healthcare, justice, foreign policy and the country’s future.

For this reason, Rama’s success in Pristina should be taken into consideration, but it should not be treated as a guarantee that he will take over the leadership of the LDK.

Asked whether Rama’s possible candidacy would bring a new spirit and restore the electorate’s trust, Gashi said that the party needed not only a generational change, but a change in political culture.

“The new spirit Përparim Rama could bring will depend not only on his name, but on how he would use the opportunity to lead the party,” the analyst says.

He argues that changing the leaders, deputy leaders and spokespersons is not enough if the way decisions are made, internal opponents are treated and people are selected for public responsibilities remains unchanged.

If Rama wants to be seen as a symbol of a new beginning, he must present a clear reform plan. According to Gashi, this means opening the party to professionals and younger generations, selecting candidates on the basis of merit, establishing genuine democracy within party structures and moving away from the idea that loyalty to the leadership matters more than ability.

Another important issue is defining the LDK’s political identity. The party must tell citizens what alternative it represents, which problems it aims to solve and how it differs concretely from other political entities.

“The LDK cannot rely indefinitely on memories of the past, regardless of the importance of its history. History can serve as a foundation, but it cannot replace a governing program,” Gashi says.

According to him, Rama’s challenge is not to present himself merely as the candidate seeking to remove a party leader, but as a candidate who knows what he wants to build afterward.

Gashi says that the LDK should hold an open discussion about its political responsibilities, past mistakes and the reasons why part of the electorate has moved away or no longer considers the party its first choice.

Without such reflection, he warns, calls for unity may remain merely formal statements, with demands to change everything while leaving existing interests untouched.

“Rama could be an opportunity for change, but this opportunity should not be confused with a guarantee. He must be judged on his program, team and ability to reform the party’s institutions,” the analyst emphasizes.

Gashi adds that the LDK does not need a savior promising to rescue it from the crisis. It needs leadership that builds mechanisms so that the party no longer depends on waiting for a savior figure.

Finally, the analyst also discussed the possibility that Rama’s candidacy could trigger clashes within the LDK.

According to him, competition between two or more candidates is not necessarily the main risk. The problem would arise if the winner treated the party as personal property, while the losers used the result as a reason to leave, sabotage the new leadership or wait for an opportunity to take revenge.

Gashi considers the possibility of tensions to be real, since any contest for the leadership of a party in crisis affects not only the program but also internal power relations. However, he stresses that competition should not automatically be characterized as conflict.

“A clash of ideas is part of democracy. The problem arises when the contest turns into an effort to eliminate the opponent,” he says.

If Rama decides to run, he will face questions about the team he will bring, how he will treat the existing structure, which mistakes he aims to correct and how he will preserve the LDK’s institutional continuity without leaving the party hostage to the past.

According to Gashi, potential opponents must also understand that a democratic party cannot seek citizens’ trust if it views internal competition as a threat. If a new candidacy is deemed unacceptable, then the problem also concerns how democracy is understood within the party.

A well-managed contest could strengthen the LDK, mobilize its membership and restore public attention. Conversely, an uncontrolled confrontation could weaken the party further and convince the electorate that it is more concerned with its own positions than with citizens’ problems.

Gashi says that Përparim Rama should have the opportunity to compete if he formalizes his candidacy, while the LDK should judge him on merit. However, responsibility for the political entity’s future cannot be left to one person alone.

“The LDK will not be saved simply by changing its leader. Its revival will begin when it changes how it chooses its leader, how it treats its own people and how it responds to citizens,” Gashi concludes.