A Prime Minister that, according to the head of state, successfully achieved the set objectives during seven years of government, agreed to resign. Vasile Tarlev followed obediently the scenario. The Prime Minister with the longest term in office said that he made the decision himself and that he resigned because it is time to let the young persons from the Government assert themselves and achieve the new aims dictated by the changing times. It is mainly a declaration for the public, especially for the electorate that will go to the polls in about a year. [What happened?] What circumstances have led to the Government’s resignation? Could it do so when the economy started to show signs of tiredness and the industry fell into decline, when one of the most prosperous industries, the wine industry, was on the verge of collapse and the Government proved incapable of remedying the situation, or when it was ‘reprimanded’ after failing to implement certain stipulations of the EU-Moldova Action Plan. The personnel policy could be also blamed on the Prime Minister as the head of the state orchestrated numerous dismissals of ministers and the Premier unquestioningly accepted them. The first Tarlev Cabinet had, one after another, three Ministers of Economy, of Foreign Affairs, of Education, of Transport and Communication, of Justice etc. The second Tarlev Cabinet was more stable, but was also affected by dismissals. A Government that resigned can be accused of leaving the country in the same state it was when it came to power – the poorest in Europe. But the poverty cannot be overcome in a year or two. The events that happened at the start of 2008 did not offer serious reasons for resigning, too. On the contrary, the Government could anytime invoke the foreign shocks coming in the wake of the rise in natural gas prices. [Why did it happen?] The economic aspect is probably the least present in the Government’s motivation for resignation. This is an arrangement for the election campaign. It seems that the elections in the Gagauz autonomous unit were the last drop that filled the glass almost full of grieves of a Government with a deteriorating image. Any party in power would have been concerned over the diminishing support of the electorate. In February 2001, the Communist Party came to power with an overwhelming majority of 71 seats in the Parliament, winning 50.07% of the vote. Four years later, PCRM lost a part of the support offered by a poor people that was longing for the “developed socialism”. In March 2005, the Communist Party gained 45.98% of the ballots and 56 seats. The local elections of June 2007 were a new failure as the ruling party polled 41.44% of the vote for district and municipal councils, 39.7% of the vote for town and village councils and 37.35% of the vote for the posts of mayor. The coalitions formed in most of the districts transformed the Communists into Opposition. Representatives of the Communist Party clearly lost the elections in the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia to independent candidates. “If this tendency persists, the Communists would garner 25-27% of the vote at the 2009 elections,” analysts consider. And their conclusions seem to have certain logic as the Communists are losing ground. PCRM gets less and less support from the electorate and the Premier’s resignation resulted from this. It seems that this was the real reason of the resignation, not the program approved by the ruling party at a recent congress and the wish to make changes. The scenario was written not by PM Vasile Tarlev. He only obediently fulfilled the “collective” wish. This is also proven by the rapidity with which the Premier resigned, by the “consultations” with the parliamentary groups, by the way in which the designate Premier was presented and was approved by the vote of the Communist MPs. The program and composition of the new Government could be presented as soon as this week. [How did it happen?] The resignation was presented nicely. The Prime Minister was awarded the Order of the Republic. President Vladimir Voronin praised the departing Cabinet, saying that Vasile Tarlev’s team successfully carried out the tasks set during the seven years of government. But he stressed that the time dictates new conditions and changes are needed, including new people that would stimulate the European integration process, the process of solving the Transnistrian dispute and the development of the country in general. The leaving Prime Minister argued that he wanted to give new people the possibility of achieving the goals dictated by the changing times. But Tarlev’s successor is far from being a new person. Specialists say that Zinaida Greceanai is a good professional and a competent person. She was Minister of Finance and Deputy Prime Minister. She proved qualities of a good negotiator in the relations with the foreign donors and creditors. She is a Prime Minister designate that will be liked by the development partners. But she is not a new person in the Government that the head of state “wanted”. We will see if the new Government includes new people. In fact, more old names than new are rumored behind the scenes. [What should we expect?] The real reasons for the resignation could become clear after the new composition of the Government and its program of activity are made known. The Premier designate is to present them by the start of April. We will see then if the resignation was really dictated by the new reforming political program adopted at the recent congress of the governing party or it is only an attempt to improve the image of the party. It is clear that the Greceanai Cabinet will have little space for maneuvers. First of all, it will be a temporary government that will complete its mission after the parliamentary elections of next spring, when a new Government will be formed. In addition, the economic and financial policies for this year have been adopted. The financial program also. The arrangements with the foreign development partners are in place. The changes that the new executive will want to make will take time, owing also to the legal procedures. It is rather improbable that they will take populist actions in a pre-electoral year, though the current government proved that everything is possible if the power is at stake. We will not have to wait long to find certain answers, at least to the most evident questions. The next months will show what the Government’s resignation was meant for.