[Info-Prim Neo analysis] The Communist Party of Moldova (PCRM), which is in the opposition, prepares an event that may be called the Great Socialist Revolution of ... Autumn”. It is not a figure of speech, and it does not have an ironic meaning. The PCRM repeatedly promised there will be serious ‘surprises’ this autumn. Their warning was ignored even if it was later seriously substantiated. Thus, “The introduction of the PCRM head Vladimir Voronin in the summing up news conference of July 13, 2011” can be named “The PCRM’s manifesto for the period until autumn”. The warning was also neglected by the ruling Alliance for European Integration (AEI), which has been concerned mainly about the internal disputes, and by society, which has had to follow the related developments. Undoubtedly, the signal given by the Communists deserves full attention, also because it points to changes in the behavior of the largest opposition party and because it warns about major risks and even dangers. [Good signs, new signs] The PCRM is not only the largest opposition party, but also the largest and most influential political force in Moldova, if we do not take into account the overall weight of the parties of the AEI that are now in power. Moreover, the PCRM can compete with the AEI from equal positions and the elections of the last few years proved this. During many years, there have been made forecasts that the PCRM will disband, disappear, die. However, the PCRM is and will remain at least for several years more a powerful party with strict internal discipline, team spirit, mobility, advanced political technologies, calculated, dynamic and attractive acts, etc. It’s a pity that these qualities had mainly negative implications and transformed the Communist regime into an authoritarian, almost totalitarian one. Instead, in the opposition, whose aim everywhere is to keep the government awake, the given qualities make the PCRM a rather efficient and useful political organization up to a certain limit, which divides the party’s actions into constructive and destructive. The PCRM’s ‘manifesto’ of July 13, 2011 confirms these political features of the party. Another sign pointing to the newly acquired positive features of the PCRM is the fact that the party’s policies for the near future were made public in the most transparent way possible. It is a step forward compared with the earlier behavior, when the information about the real plans did not leave the places where the executive bodies held forums, where the unaffiliated press did not have access, and, even worse, where the decisions, including about the dismissal of the governments in general and the ministers in particular were taken by one person – the party’s head. This reveals a new praiseworthy quality of the PCRM – its political predictability. But... [Insincerity and fake targets] The ‘manifesto’ criticizes harshly the present government and has reasons to do so. The PCRM thus aims to oust the AEI by specific actions and hopes to obtain the people’s understanding and support in this respect, surely for the society’s benefit. But the noble goal announced is compromised by insincerity and fake targets. The PCRM expresses great concern about the fate of democracy in Moldova. “Analyzing all the recent events, we reached the conclusion that Moldova is no more a democratic state,” said Vladimir Voronin, giving as example his party’s behavior. “The PCRM came to power and left democratically, without flouting the legislation and the Constitution, without liquidating media outlets and disputing in court the results of the local elections, when the then opposition won most of the votes, without rigging the elections and buying votes, without closing the opposition in a cage in the Great National Assembly Square, without holding dubious referendums,” he said. It is excluded that Vladimir Voronin forgot for example about the rise in the election threshold and the ban on forming election blocs as instruments of repression used against the then opposition. He certainly did not forget about the adoption of a new Broadcasting Code for political and group if not personal interests. The ’Communist-frontist’ Code allowed destroying the municipal press institutions, a large part of which were later ‘privatized’ at derisory prices, and building its own super media holding, which enabled the Communist regime to have full control over the mass media and to maximally limit the freedom of the press, the freedom of expression and other values by which the democracy of a country is judged. Nobody can forget the ‘black Fridays’ when the inconvenient persons were arrested, and the detention places that will remain in history as the ‘house of father and son’. There are many other relevant examples. The PCRM’s contribution to initiating Moldova’s integration into the EU in 2002 sounds as insincere. In reality, they only pretended to be promoting that process. The Moldovan society gained nothing as no progress was made on the path to European integration. The European, American and Russian organizations no more wanted to be partners of the Moldovan Communist government. A partial truth can also be regarded as insincerity. “Both in Europe and in Asia, the Communists played the main role in installing Democratic governments,” says the PCRM’s ‘manifesto’, giving as example the events that took place during the Italian and French resistance, in Spain, Greece, Portugal and Chile. “The Communists were the force able to fight for democracy, even when the most ordinary and primitive fascists were the opponents.” This is true, but there is a slight divergence. Whenever and wherever the Communists won the power, they instituted dictatorship and generated genocide at internal and foreign levels, like ‘the most ordinary and primitive fascists’. It is not exactly the case of the PCRM of the 21st century, but the insincere statements arouse distrust and fear and point to fake goals. What are the real goals then? [Moldova’s Bolshevization through Sovietization] Moldova’s Sovietization, or more exactly Bolshevization through Sovietization, for gaining complete control in the country may be one of the real aims of the PCRM. It is not a figure of speech either. Let’s follow the logic of these actions according to the original: “In the created situation, the Communist Party announces a new program for the political struggle... the democratic system can no more be built from above. It must be erected only from the lower level, basing on the town and village councils where the majority is or will soon be interested in the real modernization of the country. It can be built only by bringing together these local self-administration bodies into unitary and legitimate institutions united by their resistance to the central administration... We must unite these local, town and village councils into a common organization that may be called the People’s Congress, which can be an alternative to this degradation,” says the ‘manifesto’. Where does this powerful {deja vu} impression come from? Things become clearer if we use the old word {“Soviet(s)”} instead of {“council”}, which is new in the political language. But Moldova’s Sovietization is regarded more not like a final goal, but rather like an instrument for taking over power in Bolshevik spirit. This suspicion is fueled by the PCRM’s unwillingness and incapacity to cooperate with other left and right political forces while in power and while in the opposition. It seems that the PCRM needs power only if it’s complete, even if there are no models worth being followed in the world. In order to obtain such a kind of power, the PCRM is ready to follow a new orbit in the process of radicalizing society. [Recurrences, risks and dangers] In the announced political battle formula, the PCRM can count on the local councils where the Communist councilors form a majority and even on the Communist councilors who are in minority on other local councils, or some of the sympathizers. Given that the contemporary society in Moldova is divided, including according to political and ideological criteria, the People’s Congress will mean nothing but a parallel organization controlled by the PCRM because the current PCRM cannot become a center of attraction for people with different views. If something like this happens, it won’t be the current PCRM. It is true that this People’s Congress and its local subdivisions will be new, combative bodies ready to confuse as many people as possible according to a principle that is typical of the Communists of all the times. According to this principle, the masses are regarded as subject and object of the party actions. They said they aim to create unitary institutions united by their resistance to the central administration. This process implies the attraction of the masses. In the countries with true democratic traditions, where the living standards are high, the masses are usually objects of political actions, which are involved only in electoral processes. As a rule, the politicians – the party leaders and members – deal with ‘pure’ politics between elections. The masses typically take an active part in trade union activities. One of the great problems of contemporary Moldovan society is that the trade union movement is still a ‘school of communism’. This subject was developed in the Info-Prim Neo analysis “Trade union movement ceded to political parties” that was {published on May 3, 2010}. The new ‘program for the political struggle’ is marked by recurrences aimed at radicalizing the international relations, especially those with the western neighbor Romania, which is a EU member and a partner of the U.S. Thus, the current PCRM did not abandon the ‘look of enemy in the internal and external relations. Moreover, the ‘manifesto’ does not leave room for interpretation. The PCRM does not need and will not modernize. It will not wear ‘pink underpants’, says the document. What results from this is that Vladimir Voronin chose between Igor Dodon, who, by his more conciliatory spirit, showed he can attract other voters than the traditional supporters of the Communists, and the old, radical guard that is also called “Taliban in the Moldovan politics”. The greatest danger of the ‘new’ project of the PCRM resides in the continuous radicalization of society. The fact that the PCRM becomes younger, which was mentioned in the ‘manifesto’ as well, is a sign that this radicalization extends and becomes permanent. According to the document, 70% of the members of the parties of the AEI Represent former members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, while the average age of the Moldovan Communists today is 40 years. [About prospects, politicians and people] The PCRM has enough chances to mount the Great Socialist Revolution of Autumn and radicalize the Moldovan society. The PCRM has sufficient force for this. It feeds itself mainly from the weakness of the member parties of the AEI. Thus, the next possible revolution has at least two players – the PCRM and the AEI. The PCRM will play in accordance with the AEI’s wish if the parties of the ruling alliance, especially their leaders, are able to understand that not only their own political fate, but the fate of every person in this country is at stake in the game. In general, the parties and politicians are worth of attention only when they deserve a place in the social memory by deeds that affect the fate of ordinary people. Others, there will be another {deja vu}: in 2001, the PCRM came to power amid similar conflicts that shook the Alliance for Democracy and Reforms. ...For those who did not know or forgot: the revolution whereby the Bolshevik came to power in the Tsarist Russia in 1917 has been long called the Great October Socialist Revolution. October is a month of autumn. The Bolsheviks conquered power by taking over control over the Soviets (councils). Many people, except perhaps for the young generation, know what happened in Russia and the world after those metamorphoses. [Valeriu Vasilica, Info-Prim Neo]