Expert: Maia Sandu&PAS Are to Blame for Souring Relations with the US

Sergiu CEBAN

The rash decisions, hasty political statements and weird diplomatic maneuvers of the Moldovan leadership are clearly not helpful to finding a common ground with the new White House administration

Maia Sandu will start the week in Paris at the invitation of Emmanuel Macron. Their joint meeting will focus on bilateral cooperation, security and support for Moldova’s European path. In addition, Sandu will have meetings with representatives of the National Assembly and Senate, the French Development Agency and UNESCO. A Moldovan-French business forum and, of course, communication with the diaspora, which coincides with the official launch of the PAS election campaign, are scheduled separately as part of our president’s visit. Why this trip is necessary right now is obvious - strategic uncertainty and the desire to act in concert with external partners in a completely new global environment. Many experts have noticed that in the current circumstances Paris is trying to be the “leader of the free world”, which is why it is trying to carefully patronize loyal liberal regimes in Eastern European countries, mainly in Romania and Moldova. While Germany is still dealing with the consequences of the internal political crisis, and the traditional distance between Great Britain and Chisinau remains, our authorities really have only France as their closest ally. At the same time, the current political regime in Moldova is a project of the previous American administration and therefore does not enjoy the favor of the new White House residents. The first warning sign that relations with the United States were heading downwards was the closure of various American programmes worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Against the background of the reduction of the regime’s vital financial support, the so-called “protective dome” formed by the private media and non-governmental organizations, which for many years had provided a safe and comfortable environment for the ruling group, also weakened. All this will eventually have not only internal political but also strategic consequences for the state. This is especially true in the energy sector, as important projects to create alternative energy supply lines, as well as cogeneration and energy storage, will be put on pause. The willingness of the US to resume sponsorship of such programmes from other sources will obviously depend on whether bilateral relations can be re-established. In this regard, the efficiency of diplomatic channels through which there should be a constant exchange of official positions and draft decisions, discussion of visits for direct working and political contacts, is of particular importance. And to put it bluntly, there are no reasons for positivity. The State Department is conducting a personnel audit and does not indicate its position on Moldova in any way. The impression is that the dialogue between the two countries, if not in a deep freeze, is at least “silenced” by the USA “until further notice”. One of the reasons for this may be our ambassador in Washington. This person is not only a personal henchman of the current Moldovan authorities, but also, judging by his biography, a figure closely connected with globalist structures from the close entourage of the US Democratic Party. If the head of the diplomatic mission Viorel Ursu is not favored by the new American authorities, then an obvious personnel decision is required. We do not know how serious it is, but, according to some signs, the struggle for the post of ambassador to the United States has already begun. So far, everything depends on whether our leadership will be ready to respond to the Americans’ insistent recommendation to replace Viorel Ursu. I think that PAS understands that the acceptance of this condition may be followed by others. And this is already fraught with a dangerous and unpredictable political game, which was only confirmed by the experience of Ukraine. The authorities hardly want to be under direct pressure from Donald Trump and his associates. Perhaps because of this situation, the issue of the American ambassador to Moldova has been put on pause. The appointment of Kelly Adams Smith, who was nominated during the last White House administration and who has ties with the top of the Democratic Party, will obviously be cancelled in favor of a candidate loyal to the Trump team. In addition, the revision of plans to build an expensive regional US embassy in Chisinau cannot be ruled out. It is obvious both the new administration’s desire to optimize foreign policy expenditures (an example of which is the cancellation of 82% of USAID programmes) and the decline in military and political interest not only in Eastern European affairs, but in Europe as a whole. Therefore, a large embassy complex may turn out to be simply irrelevant. The strategic mistake of Maia Sandu, who openly supported Volodymyr Zelensky after an altercation in the Oval Office, was, in our opinion, a turning point in relations between the USA and Moldova. By the way, one of Trump’s advisers revealed the Ukrainian leader having already apologized in writing for this episode. Meanwhile, Moldova through its president and her entourage opted to stick to its firm pro-Kyiv stance and protest to the White House. As for now, all these facts are carefully piled into the “Moldovan Portfolio”, which is so far of no interest at all. The hardest test will still come when the regional geopolitical reshuffle will foster the United States to finally cast its eyes on Moldova, or, more precisely, on Maia Sandu and PAS. The fact is that apart from the already impressive loud statements, in fact neither Paris, nor Berlin, nor Brussels will be able to offer Moldova anything when it comes to really serious matters. It’s even clear to everyone that Emmanuel Macron’s threats to land a French contingent in Odesa are meaningless without corresponding US military guarantees. What should our ruling regime do in such circumstances, what can it offer to the new US leadership? Swear allegiance? One could have done it earlier, or at least taken a detached, neutral position. Instead, Maia Sandu is floundering between European capitals, looking for an answer on how to go on living, how to cope with the Trump team and not incur their wrath. And there is a reason for that. After all, if Washington switches on turbo mode and seriously undertakes to change the political system in Moldova in order to ensure unimpeded realization of its interests and foreign policy plans, we are likely to see a similar tactic that the US has been using in Ukraine quite successfully. With changes rapidly approaching, the desperate state of Moldovan-American relations is an inexcusable political mistake of the entire Moldovan leadership and the personal responsibility of Maia Sandu. Ill-considered decisions, hasty political statements and weird diplomatic maneuvers can easily drag Moldova into absolutely disastrous geopolitical scenarios and deals, for which we’ll have to pay with our national interests.