The role of the foreign factor in forming the parliamentary majority is important probably because, at societal level, the citizens of the Republic of Moldova wouldn’t have put up resistance to the Democratic Party that ramified so much that it controlled very well almost all the things in the country. Moreover, particular promises promoted by the PDM, at least in the short term, started to enjoy the support of a part of the population, political commentator Ion Tăbîrță stated in a public debate entitled “Peaceful transfer of power: reasons, conditions and consequences – the foreign factor” that was staged by IPN News Agency and Radio Moldova.
According to him, all the programs initiated by the PDM the past year and the provided allowances generated electoral results, primarily in poorer rural areas. “However, this compromise of the geopolitical players was produced. We saw that the Russian Federation became rather actively involved through the person of Mister Kozak. We had some direct messages and this was a new aspect on the part of the Russian Federation. Russia, which was always regarded as something antidemocratic, now appeared as a factor that contributes to the democratization of the Republic of Moldova through the removal of this oligarchic regime. The EU also came with a clear message practically from the start. And we witnessed a pause on the part of the U.S., but the situation was ultimately clarified by the conversation of the U.S. Ambassador Dereck J. Hogan with Vladimir Plahotniuc, while the Constitutional Court, which earlier passed judgements on the dissolution of Parliament, recognized the legislative body and the newly formed Government,” stated the commentator.
Ion Tăbârță said that there is a permanent debate as to what foreign policy means in the theory of international relations. This debate didn’t yet produce a result. “We have two basic approaches. The first approach is that the foreign policy is nothing else but an extension of the domestic policy. The second approach is that the foreign policy is determined by the foreign policy of other states. If we resort to a compromise solution, we can say that the foreign policy for the great powers is an extension of the domestic policy, while for small states such as the Republic of Moldova the foreign policy, besides aspects of domestic interest, is determined rather by the behavior of the big players and the interests of the big players,” stated the commentator.
According to him, it should be taken into account the fact that the Republic of Moldova is a state with a specific geographical and geopolitical situation. “It is a state with only two neighbors, situated at the confluency of geopolitical areas and that derived from neo-Latin people, but had been connected to the Slavic area for a long period of time. “For the Republic of Moldova, the foreign factor counts a lot and the geopolitical cleavage in determining what the right and what the left mean in the position of Moldovan political parties derives from here. As to the foreign platers, we have the Russian Federation that has always been a geopolitical player, at least during the past 200-300 years. In particular, geopolitics returned to Russia’s foreign policy after 2000, after Vladimir Putin took over in the Russian Federation. The post-Soviet area, the area in southeastern Europe is of interest to the Russian foreign policy,” stated the commentator, adding that the EU is probably a newer player, but it is not a geopolitical player or this does not understand what geopolitics means. According to him, the EU tried to launch an institutional project at its Eastern border – the Eastern Partnership – to which Russia reacted geopolitically.
Ion Tăbârță said the U.S. is the third player in this region, but this does not show increased or special interest in the Republic of Moldova, but expresses interest in the context of the policy and approach it adopted with respect to the northern coastline of the Black Sea. Besides these three big plays, there are also two regional players – Ukraine, which does not know how to act in the context of the events taking place in Moldova, and Romania which, as many say, is the big loser of these events.
Speaking about the involvement of foreign players, the commentator referred to the reported meeting of the U.S. ambassador with the already former leader of the Democratic Party. “When you are told that you are not supported by no anyone and risk turning into an usurper of the state power, volens-nolens you have to concede. We saw that they conceded after the symbolic, emblematic15-minute long meeting of Vladimir Plahotniuc and the U.S. ambassador. We can somehow draw a parallel here with Mister Voronin and the Kozak memorandum of 2003. A rather short discussion with the U.S. ambassador made then Vladimir Voronin, who controlled the destinies in the Republic of Moldova, to yield, as in the case of Mister Plahotniuc, who was not disposed to yield, but yielded,” he said.
As to the internal consequences of the involvement of the foreign factor in the transfer of power, Ion Tăbârță said everyone realizes that the current parliamentary alliance is a temporary one. “They already anticipate existence periods, like until the next presidential campaign, when it will be that crossroads. Others make more pessimistic forecasts, like until this autumn’s local elections. Either we want it or not, everything here depends on the Democratic Party and Vladimir Plahotniuc, namely how strong his resistance is, how successful that liberation of the state institutions is and how much this party declines. If the PDM continues to be powerful, this atypical and unnatural collation has the chance of resisting for even four years. If they manage to swiftly dismantle what the PDM built and this party is weakened, the geopolitical aspects and, respectively, the divergences between the components of the parliamentary alliance will be shortly revived,” stated the commentator.
According to him, President Igor Dodon himself is interested in seeing this coalition lasting long because, if Vladimir Plahotniuc returns to power in Moldova one way or another, his fury and revenge will be aimed namely at Igor Dodon and less at the Bloc ACUM.
The public debate “Peaceful transfer of power: reasons, conditions and consequences – the foreign factor” is the 112th installment of the series of debates “Developing political culture through public debates” that are held with support from the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
