{IPN analysis} The new round of political rivalries inside the Alliance for European Integration (AEI) is natural and necessary for the nation’s moral health on the one hand, but these rivalries are more pronounced and more dangerous for the same moral health and for the possible destructive consequences at internal and foreign levels on the other hand. [Genesis and forms of expression] The different political interests of the parties of the government coalition lay objectively at the basis of this and other political conflicts in Moldova and outside it. In this respect, we speak about the corporate aspect of the disputes, plus the rivalries between different leaders of different political organizations and this represents the personal aspect of as objective conflicts in a multiparty political system. But the character of ‘Molotov cocktail’ of these relations emerges from the subjective tendency of the parties and leaders to control the public budget and sphere more than the law and the political power won in parliamentary and local elections allow them to. As these tendencies are always active, the ‘supervisors’ of the partners-contenders from the governmental sphere are also active and do not miss the occasions to penalize the ruling allies for their mistakes, surely in their own interests. In this respect, as I said, the coalition government is more beneficial to the moral health of society than a one-party government, also because the political act is like a hunting event, where all the participants are hunters and targets as well. Such a situation obliges everyone to maintain political vigilance. The hunting incident in the Domneasca Forest that resulted in the death of a man served as a pretext for the conflict between the components of the AEI this time. In fact, not the incident caused political altercations, as somebody would prefer to say, but the attempt to hide the killing by representatives of state institutions, who are simultaneously representatives of delegates of certain political parties. If a miracle turned back time, a simple communiqué about this case issued at the opportune moment would prevent any political argument and a lot of politicians would be spared from the nightmare that followed, even if the man who was killed accidentally cannot be revived. Thus, the participants in the hunting broke the law, each of them to a certain extent, while the political figures, instead of dissociating themselves immediately from them, tried to act as lawyers for them. The roles in this conflict were attributed at one’s own risk by each participant in it. [Players: PDM, Lupu, Plahotniuc + PL, Ghimpu] Accidentally or not, that hunting involved more representatives of the Democratic Party (PDM) and the Liberal Party (PL). If believing the lists made public earlier, eight local councilors of the PL and the ex-head of the Agency “Moldsilva” Ion Lupu, who organized the hunting that is thought to be illegal, took part in that event in the Domneasca Forest. The PL and its leader Mihai Ghimpu dissociated themselves from one person for the time being. Thus, the representatives-delegates of the PDM and PL became members of one conspiring group that hid the incident, headed by ex-prosecutor general Valeriu Zubco, who was named to post by the PDM, as well as other prosecutors and judges. That’s why the leaders of the PDM and PL have a similar message. This time, the mistake made by these leaders was the lack of appropriate reaction to an evident violation of the law and the attempt to take counteroffensive steps against the PLDM and Vlad Filat, who are accused of trying to destroy the alliance and of acting in collusion with the PCRM. Mihai Ghimpu has been lately more active and more vehement in this respect, exceeding many limits in respect to the Liberal Democratic Party (PLDM) and Vlad Filat and to the media outlets that do not agree with him in the case of the hunting in the Domneasca Forest. [Players: PLDM, Filat] This time, the PLDM and Prime Minister Vlad Filat caught the leaders of the PDM and PL ‘on the wrong foot’ and did nothing but use their hesitant argument for their own benefit. Meanwhile, it turned out that the great stake of the PLDM-Filat is not the post of prosecutor general, and not the removal of the PDM or PL from power or the destruction of the Alliance, but the removal of the First Deputy Speaker Vlad Plahotniuc, who is the first deputy head of the PDM. It seems that the PLDM and Filat used this occasion to return to the intention of diminishing his influence, announced in the summer of 2011, when Vlad Plahotniiuc was named he ‘puppeteer’. Marian Lupu tried to protect him and the prosecutor general, but found himself in a bad situation, including in the case of the failed sitting of Parliament, where the dismissal of the Speaker was to be discussed. Probably, this time the PLDM and Vlad Filat will use more levers to achieve their goals, while the PDM and Vlad Plahotniuc will respond with all the means they have. It should be noted that the levers of both of the camps are rather powerful. [Players: parliamentary opposition] In this conflict, the Communist Party (PCRM) is put in the situation to choose from ‘two evils’: Vlad Filat and Vlad Plahotniuc. The Communists made this choice rather clearly. They have demanded the dismissal of Vlad Plahotniuc directly, while the economic expert of the Communist faction Oleg Reidman denied indirectly the accusations that Vlad Filat plans the bankruptcy of Banca de Economii, though he could not do it. The position of the PCRM and other MPs from outside the AEI is important as the dismissal of the First Deputy Speaker may be brought up again. A precedent in this respect is the dismissal of the former SIS head, who was delegated by the PL, with the votes of the PLDM and PCRM, without affecting the position of the AEI on the whole. [Players: Europeans, Americans] The Head of the EU Delegation to Moldova Dirk Schuebel and the U.S. Ambassador William Moser expressed trenchantly their positions in favor of the stances of the PLDM and Vlad Filat in this conflict. It’s true that they didn’t say what’s going on in their countries with the political leaders who cover a prosecutor general in a similar situation, but they said clearly that their prosecutors and the other functionaries would resign obligatorily the next day, immediately after such a situation appears. Actually, it seems that the representatives of the two great development partners of Moldova commented in no way on the proposals for remedying the situation submitted by Mihai Ghimpu in the meetings with tem – the leaders of the AIE, including Vlad Plahotniuc, should withdraw from the Council of the Alliance, and it’s clear why they didn’t. From now on, the Europeans and Americans will be faithful to the position that the AEI should be maintained in the current format, or, in the worst case, in another format, on condition that the European integration course of Moldova is kept. It is as clear that they will continue to use the whole set of levers, based on the massive financing pf the processes to modernize Moldovan society. Nobody from the current composition of the ruling alliance is ready to give up the financing and the country’s European course, without major risk to the political fate of the parties and their leaders. [Variants of solutions] There are number of solutions to the current situation, namely: 1. The struggle of positions of the components of the AEI will end with the maintenance of the status quo of every party and every leader. In fact, this will mean the conclusion of an armistice, until a new round of political hostilities. The image of the PLDM, PDM and PL separately and as entities of the coalition will be seriously damaged and this fact will be evident in the next early or ordinary parliamentary elections; 2. Vlad Plahotniuc will leave the presidium of Parliament following an amiable agreement between the PLDM and PDM, Filat and Plahotniuc, while the interests of the sides will be mediated by the Europeans and Americans. The AEI and the country’s European course will be maintained; 3. The PCRM and Vladimir Voronin will help Vlad Filat and the PLDM to remove partially Vlad Plahotniuc, contributing to the maintenance of the AEI and the country’s European course; 4. The PCRM, Mihai Ghimpu and the PL will help Filat and PLDM to remove Vlad Plahotniuc, contributing to the maintenance of the AEI and the country’s European course; 5. The PDM, with or without Vlad Plahotniuc, plus the Dodon-Misin-Godea group, will help Filat and the PLDM to remove Mihai Ghimpu and the PL, contributing to the reformation of the AEI and the maintenance of the country’s European course. In this case, it will not be necessary to dismiss the Government or to call early elections as Igor Dodon will not be interested in taking part in governance as this will affect his image. Increased, he will achieve his goal of taking Mihai Ghimpu and the PL out of the political highway. 6. The PCRM will help the PDM and PL to dismiss the Filat Government, as the separate dismissal of the Prime Minister is not stipulated in the Constitution. There will be held early parliamentary elections with unpredictable consequences for all the political parties present in the current legislative body and for country’s geopolitical course. Moreover, the foreign players mentioned above and those not mentioned do not want early elections in the near future, each for their own reasons. [Valeriu Vasilica, IPN]