[ - Why is there a need of both the EU Special Representative in RM and the EU Delegation in RM, which are the differences in your functions?] - The Lisbon Treaty has instituted a so-called European External Action Service (EEAS). Its formation is under way, so the different external service functions will be defined by this at a later stage. But I can answer why there has been a head of delegation and at the same time an EU Special Representative. The EU member states wanted to contribute to the solution of the frozen Transnistrian conflict according to international norms and international law. They decided to create this function that also exists for 8 other conflict regions or countries of the world. I can also say that our cooperation with Dirk Schuebel, the Head of the EU Delegation in Chisinau is both, excellent and complementary. We particularly work hand-in-hand in helping Moldova to improve the quality of its democratic institutions and culture. For the Transnistrian conflict it is vital that we work very closely as projects to support confidence building can be generated with the help of the European Commission. [ - Your have served as EU Special Representative since 2007. In your opinion, what was the development in perspectives of the European Integration, and possibly of Moldova's joining EU during your mandate?] - During my 3 years we have seen a very dynamic development of the relationship between the EU and the Republic of Moldova. Of course many people have contributed to this both in the EU and in Moldova but undoubtedly with the EUSR the interests and perspectives of Moldova, as a direct neighbor of the EU, have received a strong advocate in Brussels. That is important. We have seen the adoption of the visa facilitation agreement and the setting up of a joint visa application centre, granting of autonomous trade preferences to Moldova, start of negotiations of EU-Moldova Association Agreement, the deployment of EUBAM on Moldova-Ukrainian border, and considerable increase of financial assistance to Moldova. I can safely say that the understanding of the Republic of Moldova in Brussels now is noticeably stronger now than it was 3 years ago when I started my current mission. Many EU officials and politicians have said and I can repeat that the question of Moldova’s full integration in the European Union is not if but when. [ - There was much discussed and is still being discussed the insincerity of former RM authorities regarding European aspirations of RM and European integration of the country. Do these affirmations represent the truth to any extent, and if so, was the EU leadership aware of this situation?] - I do not want to get involved into issues of domestic political competition – it is good though that all parties want to demonstrate their commitment to the European integration. It means they follow the expectations of their electorate. Moldovans overwhelmingly opt for a European integration path. We had some discussions last year and the year before with the authorities about the Eastern Partnership and not everyone at that time was on board. You also know that we urged the authorities to improve adherence to European norms in the areas of judicial independence, behaviour of police, and other areas of human rights. We continue this and soon a so called Human rights dialogue will start that hopefully will make positive changes in this respect irreversible – leaving behind the long accumulating historical heritage of neglect for human rights. On the other hand, we do not forget that many essential results of European integration happened in the last 3-4 years. We concentrate on the country with its whole political class and particularly with its whole community, people. [ - Are there any differences in the approach towards European Integration policies by the previous and the present RM government?] - Again it is not my task to write comparative analysis about this. We worked with both governments intensively to accelerate what some analysts call the “Europeanization” of Moldova. I take heart from the fact that when member state delegations come to Moldova they often tell me how impressed they are with the European aura of the country – this is the achievements of both, past and present government as well as civil society that in Moldova is particularly vigorous. [ - How has the RM political class evolved during your mandate, if any evolution?] - Good question. The Moldovan political class has together experienced some very testing times. I would like to say that in spite of all the deficiencies, all have adhered to a minimum of democratic norms – which distinguishes the Republic of Moldova from many post-Soviet states. However, challenges are abound. The critical one is that on both radical ends of the political spectrum people are afraid that the other side wants to annihilate them. That in spite of a generally extremely tolerant Moldovan society. Still, it is elementary that parliamentary parties should talk to each other and not to use insulting language to political opponents. This should be stopped and civil society could do much more to consequently and in an unbiased manner monitor this and finally let politicians stop this. This would be a big leap forward. And parliamentary parties should start talking to each other – each of them. On one end, it is totally inappropriate to label the opposition party as Stalinist, on the other, to label part of the coalition fascists etc. Moldova, thanks God, does not have Stalinists and does not have fascists. It is a tolerant polity and politicians should not bewilder them. They need to talk and, again, civil society should demand this strongly. I should say that in this respect I would expect from an otherwise very vigorous and very European civil society also a bit more. [ - Will RM have early parliamentary elections in 2010?] - Moldova is in dire need of reforms, and has been haunted by failed elections throughout 2009 which paralyzed such efforts. Now, Moldova needs to live up to its international commitments. Therefore, this is a question that has to be solved by the Moldovan Parliament according to its constitutional norms and in line with international democratic commitments. It is difficult to see how elections could be avoided but when it will happen is naturally still an open question. Moldova is experiencing a challenge of not being able to elect a President. That may require constitutional change of the famous and odd article 78 – this on the other hand requires dialogue among the parties. I would like to praise the Alliance for European Integration for their decision to invite the Venice Commission to assist in finding a suitable solution to this challenge, as this is the centre of expertise on constitutional matters in Europe. I am also heartened by the fact that the majority of parliamentary parties have expressed converging views on this issue, including the opposition. It is a common responsibility of the political elite to solve this problem in a civilized, European manner – through constructive negotiations. I should also say that changing a constitution is a serious matter that should happen in a dignified manner, with due consideration of the democratic nature of the process. Otherwise the long term interests of Moldovan democracy will inevitably suffer. Changing the constitution should not happen each time someone comes to power and wants to comfort themselves and get some short term gains. Then you end up with the kind of constitutional flaws that you have now. [ - Did April 2009 events happened accidentally or it was a regular development of the situation in RM?] - If it was not so tragic I would find the question outright funny. Of course it is not a regular event that unfolded after the April 5 parliamentary elections. And we advocated as full as possible investigation of the chain of events by the Parliament, with the involvement of experts from other European countries. The aim of this investigation should not be witch hunting and not be used for narrow purposes of political propaganda, but for the purposes of the political class to come together to avoid such dramatic clashes that occurred and that ultimately also resulted in a loss of life. [ - Why do you think that the investigation results of April 2009 events are late?] - I don’t think the results are late. You had a very intense period of political fight and it is good that the State Committee in the previous political cycle did not rush with conclusions. You know we urged at that time President Voronin to be inclusive, hence our idea of a parliamentary commission. The current commission, in our strong view, should work on the basis of the principles I articulated above and instead of rushing into results should be very considerate in its analysis and be led by the general purpose of political reconciliation. What I find good is that two such consummate party warriors as Mr. Nagachevschi and Mr. Mishin have visibly found common sense and common language in the way they are managing the process. However, the difficulties are coming when they will have to present results, particularly if those will be premature. I am also worried by the fact that rush has caused that European experts have not yet participated – though I also need to admit that the international community should also be a bit more agile in its responses to Moldova’s needs, including for foreign experts in this case. As you know I urged this participation as early as mid-April last year! There is one area, where the commission needs to be particularly thorough and that is the human rights abuses in the detention centers after April 7. Torturing many young people there is something that should never happen again. We need to understand how it happened, all the institutional and personal responsibilities and Moldova needs to reform the system in the way that it guarantees that people in this country will never again be tortured or killed. This is an elementary European humanitarian norm and no compromise can soften or politicize the finding of the parliamentary Commission in this area. [ - Can EU help to speed up things in RM? Has RM asked for this involvement before and in which way?] - As I said we discussed first with Mr. Voronin while he was the President and he asked us to offer international expertise. Our position is that both, the events on and after April 7 deserve careful analysis. The European Commission has earmarked financial resources for the purposes of supporting the work of the parliamentary commission and asked the Council of Europe to implement this support. A delegation is going to arrive from the Council of Europe this month and this issue then could be discussed. But I know that the idea of the parliamentary commission is to finish its deliberation soon, so there may not be room for this help now. We shall see the results; if the commission is able to produce something that both, helps society to understand what happened in those days and also helps healing the wounds and create a more united political elite then all the better. If not, perhaps it would be best if the commission was still to resort to European expertise. It would be too bad if this opportunity to improve the quality of Moldovan democracy was wasted. Many things happened there that should not repeat themselves. Here the quality of the findings is much more important than rushing to results that may only be motivated by the expectation to make short term propaganda gains. [ - Some media outlets and analysts consider that the EU is taking into account Moscow's position in an exaggerated way while forming up its policies towards RM. How often do you play the role of a "mediator" or a "courier" between Brussels and Moscow in RM related issues?] - This is a weird question if you allow me to say this. I am representing an agreed position of the EU member states and I work under the guidance of the European Union High Representative, Javier Solana until recently and Lady Ashton now. How can I mediate between myself and someone else? Perhaps you should think hard when calling “analysts” those who come up with these weird ideas. We are very proud of the role we have been playing both, in the Transnistrian settlement process as well as in protecting democratic values in right bank Moldova. This place would be different without our very intensive engagement in the last period, particularly last year. Some people expect from us to make bombastic one-sided statements rather than what we did which is acting relentlessly for democratic procedures in Moldova. But what we do is called following democratic values. We should not pick the winners of the democratic process but care for the quality of Moldovan democracy. [ - What do you think about affirmations of some analysts about "Hungarian mandate" of the EU in RM and the end of it?] - Again, this question is such that you better think about the label analyst when asking this. In the European Union we have largely overcome these kinds of limited national stereotypes so you should very seriously doubt the European values of those “analysts” who think this way. This is the heritage of Soviet type socialism where the propaganda was all about internationalism and the reality was this kind of primitive nationalism that those “experts” still expose, who believe that my nationality matters in the way I perform my job or that Hungary would have some kind of hidden agenda here. In the European integration nations learn the benefit of living together and solving their problems through dialogue, mutual compromises – all the values that we also advocate here for you. I am a European official who spent large part of his career in international services and whose professional mission has happened to be reforming Eastern Europe, from the economy up to the kind of issues your question involves. Those people who make you believe that my nationality is important here want to take you back to the dark ages when everything was only seen through the prism of nationalistic prejudices and distrusts. Better avoid the advise of those “experts”. Speaking of Hungary, you should also notice that the relationship between Hungary and its neighbor, Romania, has never been as good as now, in the environment of joint integration in the European Union. Their whole governments regularly meet to advance their integration, their bilateral deep cooperation. They also act in the European Union in a coordinated manner on many issues, incidentally also ones that relate to Moldova. [ - You didn't know Romanian when you came to RM, what is your knowledge of Romanian now, and where does this knowledge help you?] - Romanian is both, a beautiful and the language of the country I perform a European mission for. In my official talks I use English or, if my interlocutors suggest, I can use Russian since my Romanian is not yet proficient enough to use it in official communication. I do not learn your language to “help me” but for three reasons: first, since it is a beautiful language, second, because of respect to the country and for the purpose of deeper understanding of its culture and third, it is also the language of Romania, my neighbor where I have many friends and where I like to go also beyond my professional duties today. I find it fascinating to learn a 7th language that I can also use long after I finish my mandate as EU Special Representative for Moldova. As I told you, the main professional mission of my entire life has been to help reforming Eastern Europe, from the age of 21 when I learnt Polish in the period of the birth of the Solidarity movement. I am glad for learning Romanian; I treat it also as a deep cultural journey and just like my love of Poland did not stop when I stopped working on Polish reforms, I am sure my love for Moldova and my commitment for its Europeanization will not stop when at one day I will finish my EU mandate here. The same applies for my interest and passion for Romania. And you asked me about Russia a moment ago – again, I am full of ideas of how to facilitate deeper integration of Russia with the European Union in a more cooperational manner than it has been the case in the last few years. So, languages for me is, among other things, a tool to work for a better Eastern Europe and through this for a better Europe.