Anti-Romanian hysteria caused by frustration or hypocrisy?

[Info-Prim Neo analysis] The new wave of resounding messages addressed to Romania by certain Moldovan political players on the occasion of the joint meeting of the Moldovan and Romanian governments derived either from frustration or hypocrisy or from both of them. But in all the cases, the effect of the given messages is harmful both at internal and foreign levels, being related mainly to the European integration process of Moldova. [False precondition] A Moldovan political organization described the meeting held in Iasi as initiation of the first stage of open obedience of the Government headed by Filat to the Government of Romania. Another party said that it was another act of betrayal that represents unprecedented humiliation for any independent state and symbolizes openly... the return to the sad practice of March 1918. The third party reiterated the threats against the government that it will be tried for betrayal of the country and crimes against the public authorities and state security. The mentioned political players asserted that the joint meeting of the two executives was a local invention, with hidden and evil intents. “It is a global novelty in the contemporary period, when a joint meeting of governments representing two foreign states is held,” reads a communiqué. It would be shocking for the political players who play or pretend to play important roles in the life of the Moldovan society not to know that the intergovernmental summits are instruments used rather often and efficiently in the contemporary world. Romania for example had about ten such summits, including with non-EU member states such as Israel. If Romania is not a relevant example for its opponents in Moldova, they should know about the joint meetings of the governments of Russia and Italy and the about 15 joint meetings of the governments of the most influential European states – Germany and France. These meetings proved their efficiency as platforms for identifying important problems and successful solutions in the cooperation relations between two states. This false precondition used by the Moldovan politicians is formulated rather for internal use. They count on the low information level of many Moldovans whom they would like to keep uninformed and to manipulate. But the major goals pursued by the authors of such resounding statements are related mainly to Moldova’s geopolitical orientation and aim to compromise the country’s European integration course. On the one hand, it is a rather normal political behavior because the given political parties plead for another foreign orientation, towards East. On the other hand, the messages derive from political insincerity, frustration and hypocrisy, being aimed at building the ‘appearance of the enemy’, as in other cases involving Romania, the EU and NATO. [Real chances of practical integration] Judging by the still insufficient information about the results of the intergovernmental meeting held in Iasi, we can yet say that they open the first real opportunities for the practical European integration of Moldova. These results can ensure real effects for strengthening the energy, economic and political independence of the country. This means nothing else but real strengthening of Moldova’s statehood about which many of the abovementioned political players expressed concern. But these new opportunities may not be taken, as it happened in other similar cases, because of the fault of the governments and society in general. But the chance to connect Moldova to Romania’s gas pipelines and its gas reserves and to the European transport infrastructure cannot be ignored. The fact that this chance cannot be used without the cooperation of Romania, which is the only neighboring EU member state, is also evident for everyone, even if somebody may not have sympathy towards certain neighbors that cannot be chosen. That’s why the action plan for implementing the joint statement on the strategic partnership between Romania and Moldova for Moldova’s European integration that was signed in Iasi could not be signed in Moscow, Saint-Petersburg, Kiev, Minsk, Astana, Beijing, or Washington. It could have been signed in Paris, Berlin, Rome and other European capitals. [Moldova’s European integration is the target of attacks] Anyway, it is a partnership for [something], not [against] something or somebody. The Moldovan and Romanian Premiers may have made that gesture of courtesy towards Russia owing to the internal situation in Moldova. Russia is an important economic partner both for Moldova and Romania and each of the two states aims to have relations with the Russians in the future. The statements were made in Iasi during a new conference given by the two Premiers after the joint meeting. “Moldova needs to correctly administer its partnership relations with Russia, which is an important economic partner of Moldova and a participant in the Transnistrian conflict settlement talks,” said Vlad Filat. The statements made by the opponents of the joint meeting make us think that they had hidden, undeclared goals that run counter to the country’s interests. Do they want Moldova to be permanently dependent on Russia’s energy resources? Is the dependence on Romania, the EU, which they suspect, better? Do they want Moldovan society to maintain the state of division according to a lot of criteria and the country to remain in the zone of geopolitical uncertainty for good? Do they aspire to the role of Herostrates to set fire to the future European future of the country for the sake of their hostility towards Romania? There is hope that this illogical behavior is caused by the frustrations of a large part of the leaders and ideologists of the involved police parties. They don’t know or slightly know the Romanian language and, respectively, many things about the Romanians and Romania and sometimes about Moldova and the Moldovans. The unknown things frighten. Judging by certain signs, all these parties write their party documents in the language of another state and only translate them into the official language of the state, whose interests they say they defend. One of these parties, which in its name includes the words “patriot” and “Moldova”, not even translate them into the official language of Moldova. Such an explanation of the political behavior gives hope that Moldova is indeed perceived as the motherland. [Reproaches and dangers] It is true that the opponents of the Iasi intergovernmental summit and not only they are entitled to have reproaches to the Moldovan authorities in connection with its holding. For example: 1. Why was such a platform for discussion used so late if it is so efficient? Why it took a year to organize such a meeting? Why aren’t there action plans for holding such meetings with Ukraine, Russia, the Baltic Countries that have a similar Soviet past, with Hungary or Poland the relations with whom, as our authorities say, are very good, or with Sweden, which is one of the most active EU member states as regards bilateral support? Is the current government unable to manage the country’s affairs in such a format? Does it have the necessary credibility outside? 2. Why the Iasi summit was prepared in nontransparent conditions if so much was said about it during a year? The concerns derive not from possible secrecy, but rather from the uncertainty that the current government has will and ability to take serious opportunities so as to advance. During the week before the meeting, Info-Prim Neo’s reporters could not obtain clarity as regards the agenda of the summit. The coordination of the documents that were to be signed could be a possible explanation, but nobody invoked it. The reporters received only such answers as ‘we don’t know’, ‘we don’t deal with the agenda’ and others. It seems that other national media outlets did not obtain more information. Therefore, there is a danger that the projects to connect Moldova to the European transport infrastructure and gas pipelines and to build railroad segments with European gauges will not be implemented. Maybe the warplanes and military helicopters are not so necessary now if there is not enough money for top priorities. Or everything is about political will and institutional ability? [Valeriu Vasilica, Info-Prim Neo]