“Moldova’s Strained Path with the Trump Administration”

Attempts by the ruling regime to convince everyone that relations with the United States have been restored conceal efforts to manipulate public opinion and signal a continued policy of resistance toward the current White House administration

Over the past week, our media space has been filled with the long-awaited image of a supposed diplomatic “breakthrough” in relations with the United States. On February 13, we learned that on the sidelines of the annual Munich Security Conference, Maia Sandu held a series of contacts with high-ranking officials and world-level politicians. Among them was none other than U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Moreover, the meeting was allegedly requested by the Americans themselves, through the U.S. Embassy. A well-chosen camera angle creates the impression of a warm and friendly conversation between Rubio and Sandu, in the presence of Foreign Minister Mihai Popsoi. According to the presidential office, the discussion focused on strengthening Moldova’s resilience and security, as well as its accession to the European Union. Just four days later, an American delegation of four senators arrived in Moldova. They were received by the president, and once again the key themes centered on the country’s efforts to “strengthen resilience and advance along the European path”, the “need to tighten economic restrictive measures against Russia to end the war in Ukraine”, and “support for Moldova through investments in national security and the energy sector”. Our prime minister also met with the visiting American senators, although only half of them. In addition to general issues of partnership and regional security, specific topics were also discussed, such as joint projects, including the construction of the Straseni-Gutinas power line and the expansion of American presence in the republic’s economy. The message directed at the domestic audience is clear: the authorities have secured U.S. support for Moldova’s course toward European integration and for its role in countering Russia. Moreover, this was the message insistently promoted by our ambassador to the US, Vladislav Kulminski, who said that the diplomatic breakthrough from the meeting with Marco Rubio “will help open a new chapter in our relations”: “This meeting will be followed by a series of visits at the ministerial and departmental levels in the energy, economic, and other sectors. Thanks to this meeting, we will be able to accelerate and advance many things...” And what we have in fact? The media has already mentioned that Maia Sandu’s meeting with Marco Rubio in Munich was limited to a quick handshake and lasted less than half a minute. There was no discussion or even exchange of views. However, Chisinau was determined to get a status photo. It is reported that our ambassador in Washington requested an official bilateral meeting at the Munich Security Conference, but was refused by the State Department with the standard wording that “the Secretary of State’s agenda is full”. In other words, Rubio’s office made it clear that the US currently has no political interest in close communication with the Moldovan leadership. However, later, through Nick Pietrowicz, the US chargé d’affaires in Chisinau, a request was made to organize at least a brief informal meeting. The Americans agreed to this symbolic contact, and initially did not even plan to take any official photographs. Whatever Kulminski said about a “full-scale meeting”, “prepared in advance and requested by the American side”, members of our delegation simply photographed the interlocutors from the lobby, causing confusion and, possibly, irritation among the Americans, as evidenced by Marco Rubio’s unwillingness to turn toward the photographers. Of course, neither the State Department nor the Secretary of State himself published any press release “about the meeting with Maia Sandu”. The news about it appeared on the US Embassy in Chisinau’s website only three days later, in response to numerous inquiries from the agitated Moldovan media. And what could Rubio and Sandu have discussed? In Munich, the Secretary of State gave another rebuke to European politicians, calling on them to “shed the shackles of shame and self-doubt” and “halt their decline”. His department had just pointed out the manipulation and interference in democratic procedures in Moldova and Romania. What kind of support for our country’s efforts on the path to the EU, what kind of recognition of its role in regional security could be discussed at such a meeting? However, for the sake of another PR stunt, the authorities were willing to take a risk, provoke a diplomatic scandal, and complicate the already difficult relationship with their former strategic partner. This was done by those who had previously ridiculed former President Igor Dodon for taking photos with international leaders in corridors and “waiting outside toilets for someone to come out”. It is worth noting that the scenario prepared by our creative team also included the visit of a group of US senators. However, if you look closely at the visitors (Jeanne Shaheen, Richard Blumenthal, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Chris Coons), they are all from the Democratic Party and have been to Chisinau many times before. Two years ago, the same Jeanne Shaheen, a senator from New Hampshire, which is smaller than Moldova in terms of area, was received by Prime Minister Dorin Recean. At that time, they discussed “the consequences of the hybrid war that Russia is waging in our country and the ways in which the US can help promote Moldova on the European agenda”. Chris Coons, a Democratic senator from Delaware, which is five times smaller than our country, visited us and met with Maia Sandu in December 2024. It is easy to see that the two remaining senators, Richard Blumenthal and Sheldon Whitehouse, also represent the smallest states: Connecticut and Rhode Island. On September 5 last year, they called on Facebook and Google to help Moldova “combat disinformation ahead of the parliamentary elections”, demanding that the head of Meta and the CEO of Alphabet “counter disinformation from Moscow”. On September 19, just before the elections, they issued an official statement on the risks of Russian interference, noting “Chisinau’s achievements in strengthening democracy and developing partnerships with the US and the European Union”, calling Moldova “an important element of the transatlantic community”. In short, they voiced the same narratives of the ruling party that have long been hackneyed. It is also noteworthy that Jeanne Shaheen did not come to Moldova specifically for a visit, as our authorities claim. It was a stopover during her visit to Romania. There, American Democratic senators needed to encourage the local media, which had previously been heavily dependent on USAID grants, to make it clear that they had not been forgotten, that visa issues for Romanian citizens would be resolved, and that Romania would continue to play a leading role in military preparations to counter Russia. She also stated in Bucharest that the critical report by Congress questioning the annulment of elections in Romania and Moldova was an “ideological and erroneous document”. In other words, these visitors, hired by lobbyists, are direct opponents of the current US administration. And while Bucharest realizes the need to establish normal communication with Donald Trump’s team (as evidenced by the announcement of Nicusor Dan’s participation in the upcoming first meeting of the Peace Board in Washington), our authorities seem intent on continuing their confrontational course toward the US administration.