Moldova to Stay at the Forefront of the EU’s Anti-Russian Policy

Christian RUSSU

The European Union is ready to turn a blind eye to any deviations from democracy in Moldova in order to preserve the loyal political regime following the results of the parliamentary elections

Our authorities and the Brussels bureaucracy that supervises them actively oppose the ongoing geopolitical transformations. Maintaining control over Eastern European satellites like Moldova, which are not yet in the crosshairs of the new Russian-American “reset”, is becoming an obsessive and irrational idea. Such manifestations are called “predominant ideas” in psychiatry, in which the affected subjects have no vestiges of critical thinking, their consciousness is narrowed, and affective attitudes dominate. It is easy to guess to what consequences impulsive attempts to achieve what is desired without regard for the consequences can lead to for the patient and others. In the case of Moldova’s European integration at the current stage, we can speak about the complete perversion of the process of implementation of those very “true democratic values”, about which we have been told for more than a decade. The bureaucrats from the former Soviet suburbs, like Janis Mazeiks, who were raised in the halls of modern Europe, are now cynically telling us that they are ready to defend the gains of Brussels at any cost and to preserve the ruling power, even if they have to ignore the will of the people. The other day, the public on both banks of the Prut River witnessed suppression of dissent. In the center of Bucharest, this was reflected in the most banal form in history - through the public lynching and arrest of inconvenient politicians and their supporters, to the cheers of European capitals. And in Chisinau, the European ambassador in a rather unapologetic manner conveyed his leadership’s position on Moldovan prospects. “Somoza may be a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bitch” - this saying of the American establishment almost a century later was exactly reproduced by the European bureaucracy in relation to the regime ruling in Moldova. The absolute loyalty of Maia Sandu and PAS, as well as the investments made (political, financial, etc.), make them irreplaceable and alternative-free in the eyes of Brussels. That is why the plans of the ruling party to change the electoral legislation again right before the elections (which is considered a deviation from democratic norms and is highly discouraged by the European institutions themselves), i.e. “the rules of the game during the game itself”, suddenly find full approval and support in the EU. Although in fact it should have been the first to criticize them. Moreover, the European Chancellery frankly states that it will not assess the authorities’ adherence to the standards of democracy in preparing and holding parliamentary elections, but the result of the vote. Which should be the same - the preservation of power accountable to Brussels. In other words, without any allusions we are told that they do not intend to allow another Georgian scenario, when after so many years of investment they can get a pointblank refusal. If we ask ourselves who is the addressee of such humiliating rhetoric for the Moldovan statehood, only one answer comes to mind - the entire political elite of the country. This gives the regime carte blanche to continue its arbitrary behavior, while the opposition is deprived of basic arguments for criticism. In the cleared political field of the republic there are already no forces that promote fundamentally different development programmes. The slogans of the opposition formations do not suggest an alternative to the course of European integration and the modernization of Moldova associated with it. And since the content of this process is shaped and interpreted by the European Union itself, how can we then dissociate ourselves from its derivatives, which directly contradict the fundamental foundations of democratic principles and freedoms? There is only one way out, and it consists of a policy of agreement both at the stage of pre-election battles and during the division of responsibilities in the exercise of power after the elections. The upcoming coalition parliamentary majority should be predictable for the EU, for which the ground has been prepared. Instruments to encourage the opposition to engage in dialogue through the channels of the European Parliament have already been funded and moderating roles have been assigned to figures such as Siegfried Muresan. The justice issue has always been one of the lifesavers in the election campaign of any Moldovan politician. Criticism of reforms, demonstration of legal arbitrariness of the authorities, references to the opinion of authoritative European officials. However, now these very officials assure us that the justice reform is going according to plan and meets the EU expectations. Moreover, the simple truth that the failure of the candidate countries to fulfil their obligations under the rule of law section leads to the suspension of negotiations simply does not work in the case of Moldova. According to the head of the EU Delegation, the negotiations always start and often end with the rule of law issues, but this does not mean stalling in other areas. According to Brussels, the scandal around the prosecutor’s office and another violation of the constitutional foundations by the authorities are not such issues at all. What is happening is allegedly commonplace in determining the optimal model for the functioning of the judicial authorities, which may vary from one EU member state to another. Of course, we can understand Mr Mazeiks. The reform of justice in Moldova, including the external evaluation of prosecutors, will no longer be financed by the American government through USAID. Brussels will have to oversee this toxic issue on its own, and this will require both time and money. Another painful issue concerning the unification of the country will not, thanks to the Brussels bureaucracy, become a priority in the near future. The Cypriot scenario of years of separation is clearly labelled as acceptable. We are told that the processes of European integration and reintegration are now officially separated, but they recognize that discussion of a Russian military presence can only be expected at a late stage of EU accession negotiations. In the meantime, the right bank, as European officials admit, is yet to develop a proper military potential. Apparently, they keep in mind a strategy to change the balance of power on the banks of the Dniester, which means that rattling weapons, stirring up geopolitical hysteria and raising the stakes in a military confrontation with Russia are our medium-term prospects. At least, this is how one of our strategic partners sees it. Apart from tying Moldova to itself militarily, the EU will continue to do so economically. The deplorable financial situation of the country with a deficit budget, rising prices for energy resources, and a sharp increase in public debt makes it almost completely dependent on support from Brussels, which, of course, will not provide it out of kindness, but will continue to impose increasingly stringent political requirements. Including in terms of being disciplined in the front line of the “fight against Russia”.