{Analysis by Kalman Mizsei, former EU Special Representative for Moldova, for IPN} Moldova is facing a political crisis but it can be solved in a way that strengthens the country’s democracy and European integration. The question is what politicians should do to make it happen? When proposing certain solutions, I focus on two values that politicians, in my view, need to respect and protect: first, democratic principles need to be maintained. Second, of similar importance, is not only not to change Moldova’s European course but to finish successfully the work the now stepping down government has successfully started. As to the first principle, we all remember the dubious solutions proposed since early 2010 to elect the President of the Republic. This light-minded approach to the Constitution undermined the democratic discipline of the country; now the President needs to keep the standards of the Moldovan Constitution high – he should be the main protector of the rules of the game. What happens now is, to some limited extent, the consequence of that attitude. Hopefully everyone should approach the crisis more responsibly this time in the legal sense. But clearly, the main challenge now is political. Will the parties represented in the current parliament find a formula that keeps the European process intact? First of all, I want to emphasize that this is the responsibility of the Moldovan political class; from outside one may argue but clearly, cannot decide. For many reasons, I think that it is by far the best if members of the current coalition try to restructure their coalition government. I am one of those who has always emphasized that the rest should not try to put the Party of Communists into quarantine. However, in the current situation I do not think that it is among the safe solutions for any of the parties to invite them into coalition talks. For this to materialize, they need to make a commitment to each other at the beginning of the negotiations that they will keep the current coalition together. Both, the Liberal Democrats – and particularly the Prime Minister – and then the Democrats have violated the elementary rules of coalition solidarity during the last weeks. If they want to re-establish the coalition, the first thing they have to do is to make a big confidence building step towards each other by this commitment that should be made public by all of them at the same time. Huge scars have been cut on each other – the first sign of statesmanship is if they make this joint declaration. I do not think this is feasible though without changing the Prime Minister. Some “analysts” speak to the contrary but I do not see that any of the main protagonists of the conflict – Prime Minister Filat and Mr. Plahotniuc – can be put into a leading role in the government. This seems elementary. Moreover, they simultaneously should make generous commitments. On Mr. Filat’s side this is revoking the role of Prime Minister; this should be a relatively low price for him, given the intensity of the controversy he got himself into and the fact that Moldova will anyway have to hold parliamentary elections in one-and-a-half years’ time. He will hold obviously the role of the Chairman of the Liberal Democratic Party and lead the party to elections. Mr. Plahotniuc’s commitment, on the other hand, should be towards keeping his business and political roles much more prudently separated, particularly when it comes to using his media holdings for obvious political purposes. This arrangement would be beneficial for the Democratic Party which would lose ground if it was forced to go parliamentary elections now. When it comes to building the new government, the LDPM clearly has a justified claim to keep the role of Prime Minister as it has the largest number of seats in Parliament among the coalition partners. I find calls for technocratic government naïve and unnecessary: the 3 parties should try to form a government again, with the role of PM going to the LDPM. However, the other two parties clearly expect to get a guarantee that the overpower of the Prime Minister, that characterized the last three years, will not repeat itself. At the same time, the LDPM Prime Minister needs a guarantee that the government will go in the right direction – since the party invested most in the European agenda. For this they could agree on a detailed coalition agreement that specifies the legislative agenda, further goals and coalition mechanisms better than it has happened now. Examples in Europe are plenty. They should also make binding commitments towards government unity relating public pronouncements. Available technical assistance towards such coalition building is easily available in Europe. In the core of the agreement should be the European agenda. Moldova needs to do in the next half year what it takes to get through the hurdle of the Association Agreement, visa-free regime and to advance towards the free trade agreement – this is a huge long term national interest. The parties also need to make serious commitments towards each other and the public in safeguarding against ministerial level corruption. They should only nominate ministers and deputy ministers of high professional, managerial and ethical standards. If needed, they can resort to people outside their party circles but as party nominees. What is their interest in this? The common need to fight successfully in the next elections. People with strong suspicion of imprudent behavior should be kept away from government. More than with the abstract - albeit objectively very important – values of European integration, people will be concerned at the elections with corruption of politicians. Then, the nomination of the Prime Minister. I am not the first who writes that if the question is asked who in or close to the LDPM, besides Mr. Filat, has shown a credible ability to navigate the government towards the European integration, it is very obviously Iurie Leanca. It would be wise for the coalition parties to also acknowledge this. Mr. Leanca’s government performance has been, in fact, nothing short of exceptional in the history of the Republic of Moldova – in its professional, managerial, ethical dimensions and also in simple human terms. In fact, his nomination would be a big recognition of the professional needs in government without the illusion of nominating a purely technocratic government in a political democracy. However, his role should be less dominant than the Prime Minister’s has been previously. Hopefully, the governing parties now have rich experience to guarantee appropriate coalition mechanisms for this in an agreement. Mr. Lupu has declared his willingness to step down as Speaker together with the Prime Minister. The Democratic Party has obvious candidates to nominate to this position whose loyalty is beyond question and can also serve as reconciliator. Finally, the coalition agreement needs to recognize and reward the positive role the Liberal party played during the crisis by never undermining the goal to keep a pro-European coalition alive. Finally, the parties should make a credible commitment to refrain from fighting each other, including in the public, until the end of the year, with the hope that this time can be spent with finalizing the current round of the European agenda. The Socialist Party has, in the person of Igor Dodon, a very strong governmental manager; however, their inclusion in the coalition should be conditioned on a very firm, credible long term commitment to European integration. The case of the Party of Communists is a bit similar but also somewhat different. They are still the largest Moldovan party which, however, in its rhetoric, has gone far from the European agenda. In their case even a strong commitment – that now is unlikely – would leave the problem of accommodating such a large, and in its style quite uncompromising, party in the coalition extremely difficult. Instead, the PCRM should get firm positions in the controlling functions of government and be content with the role of a very strong opposition that may well exploit the mistakes of the governing coalition in the next elections. They need also continue to improve their credentials as a democratic, constructive opposition – now that their isolation during this crisis has ended. The European institutions also should identify their dialogue with the PCRM. This is what is needed, in my view. Civil society actors may contribute to this positively. They should not be hostages to one or the other vested political interest; instead they should advocate for political solutions that are necessary if Moldova does not want to lose its European dream, now so tangible and close. The chance should be seized and deeds of politicians should be measured against the imperative of European integration. The Moldovan society, quite rightly, also expects an agile role by the President; Mr. Timofti may usefully contribute to solving the crisis by unequivocal moral drive, always based on the constitution, towards a democratic and wise solution. Why do I think that this solution is far better than any other? Quite simply because of Moldova’s needs of European integration. Politicians should in this moment remember, in my view, of those many who invested their highest hope in them in 2009: this is high time to show statesmanship – or at least political maturity. [Kalman Mizsei, ex-EU Special Representative for Moldova, for IPN]