There is a shortage of information from the government, especially on security topics. This leaves room for interpretation and increases the phenomenon of propaganda, security expert Pavel Horea stated in a public debate hosted by IPN News Agency. According to him, the government didn’t sufficiently inform society about the decision to suspend the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and about the reasons for such a decision.
Recently, the Government informed about Moldova’s intention to suspend the obligations under the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE), which was signed in Paris in 1990. According to the procedure, the decision is to be adopted by the Parliament and the President of the Republic of Moldova. The suspension of the Treaty was generated by Russia’s withdrawal from this agreement.
“The Russian Federation successfully used this narrative that some of the NATO states haven’t ratified this Treaty and so it can be suspended, as if the Baltic states were the main military force in Europe. The signatories of this treaty are the Western European states that have a much larger military force contingent than several states of the former USSR, which for various reasons, probably security ones, refused to ratify this agreement. Russia used this pretext to suspend this Treaty because it was clear that Russia had already embarked on a track of confrontation with the West. From threats and pressure, we see that Russia moved to a full-scale invasion like no other in Europe after World War II,” said WatchDog security expert Pavel Horea.
According to the expert, the Moldovan authorities’ intention made Russia accuse Moldova of engaging in an armament process given that the treaty imposed restrictions in this regard.
“Under the provisions of this Treaty, signed in 1990, each State has the right to leave this Treaty. Respectively, if it is a state-level decision, this Treaty can be suspended and subsequently denounced. The States wishing to denounce this Agreement must notify the Parties and the depositary State of this Treaty – the Netherlands. Russia, in its characteristic style, criticized the Republic of Moldova for suspending this Treaty, trying to accuse us of following the path of armament or escalation. Regarding the NATO bloc, practically all the States have announced the suspension. Here we see a reaction of conciliation and understanding of this decision, which is a political one, and an attempt by the Republic of Moldova to align itself with the position of the Western states,” explained Pavel Horea.
He noted that topics related to the security of the Republic of Moldova must be communicated much more intensively in order to correctly inform the citizens and leave no room for interpretation. The myths about NATO should be debunked in order to reduce the number of citizens who are skeptical about Moldova’ entry into the North Atlantic Alliance.
“In the public space, there is a shortage of information from the government, government officials about particular actions and what were the reasons for these actions. When there is room for interpretation, divergences arise and propaganda appears. This Treaty suspension aspect has not been discussed. We see that political forces that openly or indirectly support the Russian Federation have become inflamed. It is a failure of the government that should discuss more with society through officials, media and must find the right channels to reach the population and transmit this information correctly. We are in a hybrid war and sensitive topics, such as neutrality, minor army equipment programs must be communicated. In terms of security, we see that society is quite divided. The number of those who support the entry into the Euro-Atlantic union is extremely small. The false reports that particular military blocs are detrimental to the Republic of Moldova and the so-called neutrality will defend us in any way must be combated,” the expert pointed out.
The public debate entitled “Why is the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces suspended?” was the 302nd instalment of IPN’s project “Developing political culture through public debates”, which is carried out with the support of the German Hanns Seidel Foundation.
