The governments that ruled since 2009 until now tended to develop the country by the European model. However, in different periods, Europeanism was understood differently by the government and society. Some wanted reforms that they didn’t manage to fully implement, while others wanted a better life that they could not obtain. Such opinions were stated in the public debate “Europeanism of Moldovan government and society: responsibilities, affinities and dissimilarities in different periods of pro-European government” that was staged by IPN News Agency and Radio Moldova.
Director of the Institute for Public Policy Arcadie Barbarosie said that when we speak about European integration, a lot of people imagine a model according to which the decisions are taken in Brussels. “This is wrong because the European integration means profound changes and new institutions that would bring that European model here, at home. How important for the ordinary people is to form part of the EU and have a representative on behalf of the Republic of Moldova on the European Commission? For me, as an ordinary citizen, this is not important. The people are much more interested in seeing the European model being implemented here, on the spot. The people want their basis rights to be guaranteed, the country to be governed by their will and the voted party to keep its promises. I think this is Europeanism in the broader meaning of the word. It’s not so important to have representatives in the European Parliament or on the European Commission,” he stated.
Democratic MP Sergiu Sarbu noted that European integration means not immediate accession to the EU, but modernization of the country and implementation of projects with the support of the European partners. “Five-six years ago, the European integration course went smooth in parts and not so smooth in other parts owing to the interminable political struggles typical of any state. We are glad that relative stability was established and we witnessed 100 days during which the current Government assumed commitments related to the European agenda,” he said, adding that Europeanism means safety, stability and living standards close to those existing in Europe.
Unaffiliated MP Valeriu Giletski, ex-Liberal-Democratic MP, said most of the citizens perceive Europeanism as a better life. “If we look back, we can see that life improved in some areas, but not in all. Europeanism is a very complex notion. I don’t know if there is profound understanding of what Europeanism means. I don’t think there is very clear understanding in the European countries either. There are Euro-skeptics there too. I personally think the governments we had after 2009 were European. They mainly focused on European principles of government. Yes, we didn’t manage to improve things everywhere, but the tendency to Europeanize the country is evident. I saw the wish of many leaders to make effort to bring the country on the path of European integration,” he stated.
Former Liberal-Reformist MP Valeriu Saharneanu said that after so many years of European governance, democracy in Moldova can be now measured by the finger. “I travelled to villages and saw the Europeanization level of our state. An elderly woman bought bread from the shop on credit. Here, in the capital city, in the offices of Parliament, we are satisfied. But Europeanism is measured by the people’s welfare and by the transparency ensured by the free media. These things are absent. This was established by us, the people, and by the development partners that refused to finance the country until real reforms are not done,” said the politician.
The public debate entitled “Europeanism of Moldovan government and society: responsibilities, affinities and dissimilarities in different periods of pro-European government” is the 54th installment of the series of debates “Developing political culture by public debates”. These are organized with the support of the German Foundation “Hanns Seidel”. The administration of the Liberal Democratic Party and of its parliamentary group was also invited to the debate.
