Moldova’s Involvement in Internal Political Squabbles in Ukraine

Christian RUSSU

The allegedly successful escape of Ukrainian MP Artem Dmytruk, who illegally left the country by transit through Moldova, suspiciously looks like a joint operation by security forces of the two states

On 24 August, the Ukrainian media started running a story that one of the former people’s elected representatives from the presidential party Servant of the People (now an extra-fractional MP), Artem Dmytruk, had escaped from criminal prosecution and allegedly received help from our authorities. Given the numerous stories about the use of Moldovan territory for illegal traffic and the participation of local officials in related corruption schemes, the first reaction to this news was predictable: “Again?”. After all, the scandal with the murder of the leader of a foreign criminal group in the center of the capital, who stayed semi-legally in Moldova, subsided only recently. As a result, several officials from the migration department were punished. Now nothing is heard about the head of the Interpol representative office in Chisinau Viorel Centiu, and the inspection visit from the central office of this international police organization was cancelled as unnecessary. As for the Ukrainian MP, there is no doubt that he paid heavily for travelling with his family through Moldova with the subsequent hurried flight to Italy. However, I think that the financial issue was not the main motive in the behavior of our law enforcers. At the instigation of the presidential office, Artem Dmytruk has been actively badmouthed and defamed by the Ukrainian media in recent months. He was accused of disagreeing with the decision to ban the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (UOC), although he was by no means the only MP who publicly warned against it and voted against it. The MP was also accused of “pro-Russian” views, although it is difficult to find real evidence of this. And in terms of criticizing the AFU actions, including in the Kursk oblast, Artem Dmytruk was not in the vanguard either. There are much more prominent figures among the obvious public opinion leaders who scold the government for mistakes at the front and in the rear. Consider, for example, Maryana Bezuhla. She is also the MP from Zelensky’s Servant of the People. In February, she left the party, and last month she also left the “servants” faction, switching to open criticism of the president himself. Noteworthy, a vilification campaign in the media was launched against Bezuhla earlier. Parliamentarians even tried to oust her from her post as a defense committee member, but her colleagues in the former faction disrupted the vote by a majority. It can be said that Bezuhla won the next round of the fight against Bankova, gaining political weight, and fermentation and division in the motley Servants of the People faction reached a new level. It can be assumed that a split awaits the faction in the near future, since there is no ground at all to talk about the bright prospects of the party in the next convocation of the Rada. New leaders have long grown there who want to be independent in their further political path, and the best option for gaining a rating in the current context is to truthfully inform about the situation at the front and criticize the authorities. In this regard, Artem Dmytruk was not in the pool of leaders potentially able to rally presidential party people around him. On the other hand, he is still young and promising. The President’s Office is well aware of the dynamics that centrifugal processes have gained in the Verkhovna Rada and is striving to eliminate emerging hotbeds of resistance. While it is possible to come to terms quietly with one deputy, then it is almost an impossible task to carry behind-the–scenes games with several breakaway groups of MPs at once. It is cheaper and easier to dissolve the Rada, but this path is fraught for Zelensky himself. His legitimacy is now lower than that of the legislature: their mandates have both expired, but the Constitution stipulates the extension of the term of office during martial law only for parliament. The Western allies may not understand such a drastic and, obviously, undemocratic step. Given these circumstances, it is possible to deal with undesirable parliamentarians, especially those who left their own party, only using a time-tested method – through information and propaganda measures and pressure from law enforcement agencies. Moreover, the main purpose is to oust the unwanted out of Ukraine (which is politically more profitable than sending to prison, as it will give reasons to accuse the authorities of repression) in order to deprive them of the opportunity to engage in full–fledged political activity in the country. The same method was applied, for instance, to Anatoly Shariy. A demonstrative act of intimidation, destroying the political prospects of opposition-minded deputies, is now most opportune for the President’s Office and, apparently, Artem Dmytruk turned out to be the best candidate for the role of victim. At first, he was intimidated by criminal prosecution, then accused of pro-Russian views and forced to flee with his family, and then law enforcement agencies and special services like a pack of hounds pushed the deputy towards the border with Moldova. At the same time, he was miraculously given the opportunity to illegally cross the border – seemingly to build real grounds for criminal prosecution. The Ukrainian deputy did not violate anything in our country, moreover, as the internal ministry assured, Dmytruk performed all the necessary procedures: he immediately reported the fact of illegal entry and asked for asylum. There were no grounds for his detention and prohibition to leave the country, at least legal. It is not surprising that Adrian Efros says with a poker face that “they did everything right”, we can even believe him. The reports that quickly appeared in the media about almost minute-by-minute actions of a foreign citizen, photo and video confirmation of passing control at the airport and departure (from the Border Police database) are a clear confirmation of this. If the Ukrainian authorities had the task to detain Dmytruk, it would have been done on the territory of Moldova. There are enough precedents, take the same Nikolai Chaus. I would not be surprised if our security forces have other recorded evidence about the short-term stay of a Ukrainian deputy, let’s say, of a corrupt nature, which will serve as insurance and “pop up” if the MP decides to continue his political activities. This is how Moldovan and Ukrainian security forces conducted the joint operation. In this situation, we were given the role of those who can be used to vent the steam of public discontent in Ukraine because of the “successful” (especially for official Kyiv) escape of Dmytruk. Everyone already knows that Ukrainians of military age are fleeing en masse through our country and even criminal elements are finding shelter. Thus, it will hardly affect Moldova’s image – one story more or less matters little. But we have pleased Kyiv and this may be credited to our leadership in the future.