How Moldova Is Losing Its Sea-Gate

Romania can get another crucial strategic asset of Moldova

Semen ALBU, RTA: Independent post-Soviet Moldova was born not only with severe birth traumas like Transnistria and Gagauzia, but also with several obvious weaknesses. One of them was the lack of access to the sea. This meant that we were instantly deprived of part of our potential in terms of trade and economic development, losing easier access to international markets and money for the use of transit capacities of neighboring states. It is not surprising that rather quickly our statesmen were concerned about how Moldova could get access to the sea and build its own port. And they found a solution - by concluding an agreement with Ukraine on the exchange of territories, as a result of which we acquired half a kilometer of coastline on the Danube. God only knows how we persuaded the Ukrainians to let us into the Black Sea and actually make another competitor in its waters - albeit an insignificant one - with their own hands. In any case, it was a success, proving that if you do not only listen spellbound to your partners and endlessly talk about solidarity and support “no matter what”, then sometimes it is even possible to protect national interests. Of course, such things are strange to the current government, but these are the times and rulers we have come to. But that’s not the point right now. So, there is access to the sea, the port was built, investors were attracted, and we handed over it to them for private management. At first everything was going well: the port infrastructure was expanding; the volume of cargo transshipment was growing. However, as time went on, the facility became the subject of endless litigation between the owners and some murky deals. How about, for example, selling 80% of the shares of a port operator company for 344 dollars? Or the acquisition of a 100% stake through an offshore firm by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development for 1,000 euros? The EBRD has been the owner of the Giurgiulesti International Free Port since 2021. It should be said that the bank has been involved in the processes around the port from the very beginning and has stood out for its sometimes strange and, at first glance, illogical behavior, turning a blind eye either to the dilution of its share in the ownership or to the non-payment of dividends. The authorities, by the way, ignored all scandals and courts and did not try to interfere in, as they said, “the squabbles of economic agents” until the harbor’s operation was threatened. In the meantime, it was working quietly and peacefully, and with the outbreak of the war in Ukraine and the maritime blockade of that country, it began to flourish. Cargo transshipment volumes have doubled compared to what they were a few years ago. Given that the conflict is ongoing, and after it is expected to start a massive reconstruction of the destroyed Ukrainian regions, a bright future awaits it, in theoretical terms. In fact, however, such a tidbit has naturally attracted the attention of investors to whom the EBRD wants to sell the asset in a profitable way. And who would that be? Romania, of course. Last year, Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu expressed his country’s interest in the purchase of Giurgiulesti port and negotiations with the EBRD on this issue. Our authorities, as you understand, decide nothing, although under the terms of the concession they have the opportunity to vote in case of a change of ownership. But who will oppose Bucharest among the current ruling elite? On the contrary, the latter only welcomes and in every possible way condones the purchase of our strategic assets by our neighbors, without giving much thought to the consequences. And they will follow. Let me remind you that after our gas transport system was taken over by Romanian operators, gas transport tariffs increased several times over, which itself affected utility bills. Well, but the commercial owner made a good profit. Now they are discussing the transfer of the power grid to Bucharest. And then the port. Instead of trying to return to state ownership this crucial facility, which is currently generating significant profits, we close our eyes to its transfer to a country that has always regarded our Danube port as a competitor. Now, due to the increased maritime traffic, its capacities will certainly come in handy in order to move all the necessary cargoes to and from Ukraine. But when the excitement subsides and the volume of cargo will not be enough for everyone again, what do you think Bucharest will rather do - sacrifice the well-being of its port in Constanta or ours? The Moldovan authorities, faced with a sharp public reaction to the news about the sale of the port to Romanians, immediately launched a turnaround programme saying that there are two ports in Giurgiulesti: the international free port and the state port, and that nobody is going to give up the latter. Well, it is true that there is a cargo-passenger terminal there, managed by the state through ‘Portul Fluvial Ungheni’ Ltd. Judging by reports, things are going well there too, but the volume of cargo handled by it is not comparable to what goes through the port owned by the EBRD. Of course, the government, represented by Andrei Spinu, announced last year ambitious plans to develop the infrastructure of the state port in order to “export 800 thousand tons of grain”. There are plans to build grain storage facilities with a capacity of about 80 thousand tons, a new 150-metre long quay, railway and truck unloading stations, a port terminal and much more. This is all scheduled to be done by 2028. It is hard to believe, frankly speaking. It is enough to remember the airports in Balti and Chisinau, one of which will never “take off”, and the second one is obviously being prepared for resale to a private company. Besides, the approximate cost of the project on modernization of the port is about 34 million dollars, and where to get such money? Right, from investors. In whose hands the object will eventually end up over time. After all, the state is a “bad manager”, the same government says. And I wouldn’t be surprised if investors for the state port also come from the western neighbor.... So, the sale of official assets is in full swing. Now it is the turn of our sea gates, once a symbol of the country’s prospects and future prosperity. I think that if they do end up in Romanian hands, there will be no prospects of getting them back. And the fate of the port itself does not look rosy. But the high ranking officials in Chisinau, who have no state thinking, obviously see nothing wrong in this.