Experts have different opinions about the consequences suffered by the Communists Party (PCRM) after its parliamentary group did not take part in the vote to elect the President of Moldova, Info-Prim Neo reports, quoting Radio Free Europe. A part of the participants in the debate program “Full Stop. From the Very Beginning” said the December 7 act will lead to the dismemberment of the PCRM, which started with the leaving of MP Vladimir Turcan from its parliamentary group as other MPs will follow his example. Another part considers that the non-voting was a logical act in the political battle and that the PCRM will take the resistance test in the early parliamentary elections that could take place next autumn.
[Political expert and press manager Alexandru Petkov, the head of the portal Omega] said it is nor right to speak about the PCRM’s reinvigoration or diminishing of its rating judging by the leaving or coming of several persons. He also rejected the assertions that a number of local organizations withdrew from the PCRM. “Meetings had been held at all the party’s local organizations during the last two months and all of them said they firmly support the PCRM.,” Petkov said.
He also said that Vladimir Turcan’s statement that he leaves the Communist faction because he does not agree with the PCRM’s position on the election of the head of state proves that there is democracy insider the PCRM. “It was Mr Turcan’s opinion and he was not repressed for it. Mr Stepaniuc was neither repressed. Moreover, Stepaniuc voted against the decision of the plenary meeting of the PCRM’s Central Committee and nothing has happened to him.”
According to [analyst Nicolae Negru], even if MP Vladimir Turcanu’s future plans as regards the foundation of a new political organization are not clear, the PCRM is now in an entirely different situation. “In fact, we can say that the PCRM only now enters the real life and encounters the real problems faced by a party in an electoral competition. In 2001, the population voted for the PCRM because they were dissatisfied with the financial collapse in Russia, which evidently affected Moldova as well. In 2005, the PCRM was helped by the West, including Traian Basescu and certain Americans, who came to Moldova and campaigned behind the scenes. Now, the PCRM has neither administrative resources, nor support from the West. Also, the population is not so nostalgic for the past as in 2001.”
[Politician Igor Klipii] said the PCRM had been saved starting with 2003. According to him, the anti-Kozak mass protest was staged after Vladimir Voronin rejected the Kozak Plan. “The goals then were great, but could not be achieved. In 2005, if Vladimir Voronin had not enjoyed the direct support of the West, he would have failed. Turcanu is a calculated and pragmatic man. He leaves the PCRM because he knows very well what’s happening to the party. He knows what he does,” Klipii said. “To my mind, the PCRM entered a splitting phase and will break up in the end. One of the arguments is that the PCRM was created around Vladimir Voronin according to principles of conformity, but Voronin is a ‘fading’ political figure.”
Nicolae Negru said the PCRM will ultimately suffer the consequences of the discrepancy between the political doctrine and the real political behavior. “None of the parties in Moldova deluded the people as the PCRM did. It uses Communist symbols, but is not a Communist party as it accepts privatization, private property.”
Igor Clipii said the PCRM’s prospects will be clearer when it becomes known how many MPs leave its parliamentary group. He considers that the MPs that will leave the PCRM will together form another party and this party will be a serious opponent of the PCRM in the possible early elections. “If more than eight persons leave the PCRM, it would be doomed to failure.”
Alexandru Petkov replied that it is not normal to make a direct connection between the leaving of some persons and the fate of a party like the PCRM. “I want to speak about something else. What are the prospects of those who leave? I cannot explain why these persons did not take part in the vote if they did not agree with the party’s decision. I cannot fully believe them.”
Petkov also said that the PCRM’s prospects will become obvious after the early parliamentary elections. “I think the elections are the only legal test. The surveys are representative, but the situation changes.”
