IPN analysis: Maybe acting Premier Iurie Leanca is not the most suitable candidate for the post of Prime Minister of Moldova in this very tumultuous period both inside and outside the country. Maybe in these conditions we need a much more powerful driving force that would be able to pull stronger and safer Moldova’s rasping train up to a more satisfactory ‘station’ of life. Maybe those who say that we now need a businessman-technocrat not a political-diplomat by profession in this period of economic crisis as head of Government are right. Or maybe those who say that only a person who can impose his views on the future Cabinet so that all the ministers and deputy ministers as well as their assistants are honest, professional and with integrity, should hold such a post are right. But as true is the fact that in the current political, economic, social, local, regional and international conditions, Iurie Leanca meets the mentioned requirements or even other, more important requirements, more than any other Moldovan public figure. At present, Iurie Leanca represents a kind of symbol of Moldova’s capacity to go on and a symbol of a possible compromise, even if a frail one, among the main political forces, on the one hand, and between these political forces and society, on the other hand. He is one of the few ‘symbols’ of the yet possible political stability in Moldova.
---
What really counted until now, during and after the November 30, 2014 parliamentary elections, was the possibility of continuing and deepening the European integration process in Moldova, with all its ‘rasps’. This is the stake of the political parties and their voters with really pro-European views. But the really important stake of the other camp – non- or anti-European – referred and continues to refer to the same course, but is aimed at destroying it so as to be able to build another model of organizing the social life. The intention can be also to even ‘rebuild’ the old model or to take revenge, but this is another issue already. The appropriate issue is that at this historical stage, Moldova needs the European integration because it is the only possibility of modernizing the country according to models that worked during many decades and will yet work and with the existing finances and means for achieving these goals. There is no other possible way in this part of the world, or even in the whole world, at this historical stage of development. Maybe there will be one, but it does not exist now, at least for Moldova. The rejection of Leanca means causing early elections and allowing the non- or anti-European forces to win, which would mean losing the chance to change our lives and life in Moldova, in general, for decades on. This would be an unjust solution for us all, but also an unordinary solution for the major political forces involved in the process of forming the new Government, including for:
PLDM + PDM = Political Alliance for European Moldova
The rejection of Iurie Leanca by the PCRM would compromise the new ruling alliance from the very beginning and would show that those saying that the PCRM actually takes part in governance and actually controls the Political Alliance for European Moldova (PAEM) in its key policies are right. How else can we describe the new alliance’s inability to install its own government at a time when the naming of the Prime Minister means the appointment of the Cabinet and the approval of the government program, which is not only of the Cabinet, but also of the administration? Society can easily imagine what the fate of the other objectives of the PAEM will be, especially of those concerning reforms, modernization and Europeanization, which are the most important. That’s why the moment when early elections will be caused must be considered the right time for starting to look for another candidate for premiership than Leanca, also because the legitimacy of this government will decrease considerably. This will happen if the PL will also not support the Leanca Government. By the way, what if both of the components of the PAEM really want a European Moldova, not something else…
PLDM, separately
With all the speculations on the issue, some of which main contain particular truths, the PLDM is really interested in having Iurie Leanca as head of the new Government and in having him voted in by the first round of voting. A part of the reasons were stated above. This party would have a lower score in the possible early elections and will thus have a reduced presence in Parliament, with such a downward trend continuing. This trend could become more powerful if the early elections were avoided by constituting an alliance of a different color, possibly the PCRM+PDM or even the PCRM+PDM+PSRM. The PLDM is indeed the most determined to continue the European integration process and it will have to assume the possible failure of this course. If the European course disappears as governmental policy, it’s easy to anticipate what will happen to a party lacking the instruments by which it could promote the only goal of its existence.
Another argument in favor of the sincerity of this position of the PLDM is the behavior after the nomination of Iurie Leanca as a candidate for premiership. This behavior shows that Leanca definitely supports his party. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have consented to being nominated by President Timoftior or would have had another kind of behavior. The scope of the consultations he initiated last week shows that he definitely didn’t accept to become involved in a public sacrifice process, as many speculate.
Therefore, the appeal of the PLDM leader Vlad Filat by which he urged the PL to vote for Leanca seems rather sincere. Maybe the chairman of the PL Mihai Ghimpu is right and has the right to be angry with the form and place where this appeal was made, but Ghimpu is also not the person who takes care of the form and places where he promotes his messages. On the other hand, there are not many other forms and communication places left after the formal political communication that lasted for almost two months ended in failure. No matter what the leaders of the three pro-European parties say now, the responsibility for the failure is borne by each of them, probably to different degrees, but this does not really count now.
PDM, separately
The PDM is the only party that achieved a part of its goals as it took over the administration of Parliament and is the last that would renounce it. It should renounce it in case of early elections caused by the non-voting in of Iurie Leanca or if the ruling alliance is re-formed together with other partners. The PDM would have to lose even more in this case because it would be in a position of minority against two partners – the PCRM, with or without the PSRM, to which it will offer the administrative instruments that this party allegedly does not have now, if the non-voting in of Leanca does not prove the opposite. For these reasons as well, the PDM will not have greater chances in early elections than in the November 30, 2014 elections. On the contrary, it can be lower. For the PDM, Iurie Leanca is a known, predictable and even somehow allied political player, if we take into consideration the support he offered to Victor Ponta in the Romanian presidential elections, at a time when the PDM and Ponta’s PSD had a formalized partnership, while the PLDM and the European People’s Party supported current President Klaus Iohannis. The PDM’s clear interest is for Leanca to be named Prime Minister as the attitude of another political figure will have to be yet tested.
PCRM
As a political party, the PCRM will win the most if the current minority government is maintained, while the non-voting for Leanca by this party will hasten the destruction of the alliance and would lead to early elections. If the PCRM is in Parliament for a longer period, it will be able to ‘heal’ its wounds caused the spectacular decline of the last few years. The early elections would hasten the dramatic decline of the PCRM. In a new formula of government, possibly with the PDM and PSRM, it will lose more than will win because the PSRM is expected to advance namely by profiting from the PCRM’s situation. Thus, if it’s not a ‘suicide’, the PCRM should vote for Leanca. The previous anti-Leanca statements are probably intended more for the PCRM’s voters, designed to prevent accusations that this party supports a government whose declared essence is the European integration of Moldova. These statements could also prepare the land for seeking other concessions for it from the PAEM.
The PCRM’s preference for a businessman like Vasile Tarlev instead of politician Leanca for the post of Prime Minister can be false for a number of reasons. First of all, Prime Minister Tarlev, as other former Premiers and high-ranking officials of the Communist government, ruled Moldova only nominally because the Government and the whole Moldova were actually governed by one person - Vladimir Voronin. The situation now is different. It’s not possible now and should never be possible for one person to manage all things. In fact, these changes form part of the modernization and Europeanization process. Secondly, the PCRM’s explanation that a businessman, not a politician is needed for the post of Premier in a period of economic crisis is not relevant as in a ‘normal’ country things are not managed by one person only, but by a system and politics. However, given that the economic processes are only a component of the general processes, and these could be beneficial to the general modernization of the country within the European integration process only, the ‘politician’ Iurie Leanca is a good and recognized expert in this field.
PL
The PL doesn’t form part of the government and has the right not to play the game of those who didn’t come to power. But it is in its interest to vote for Leanca, if the declared goal of European integration remains valid. Namely this way will the PL be able to support and even control and strengthen the modernization and Europeanization process in Moldova, not because it would establish good relations with Leanca and would promote certain policies through him. The idea formulated by the People’s Movement “Antimafie” in a news conference at IPN over a week ago seems more consistent. Its leader Sergiu Mocanu said the PL would prefer to act in opposition to the PLDM and PDM and would offer support to the minority government in exchange for instruments for controlling the reform in the justice sector and other processes related to the European integration. “Take these instruments you and don’t give them to the Communists,” Mocanu urged the Liberals. It happened in the morning of January 23, while the announcement on the formation of the PAEM was made in over five hours. Why didn’t the PL react during those five hours and until now? Will it do it now by imposing conditions for voting for Leanca? Do the PL and its leaders maintain the interest in the European integration and is this interest real? We may find out the answers soon.
Most probably, the PL is not afraid of early elections because they could strengthen somehow their position and get a better score, but surely not as much as to be able to govern alone and it’s not clear with what party it can form an alliance at a time when it could not do it until now. The question is rather – does the PL want early elections and is ready to cause them even if these will be won by the pro-Eastern parties? What will the PL and its leader gain in this case?
A version is that the PL and Mihai Ghimpu hope to remove the ‘bad boys’ with whom he cannot come to terms from power. In the election period, for instance, he got on well with both of them. In fact, he cannot come to terms with one of the two “Vlads” because he calls him by name in a negative context only. With the second one he formed undeclared partnerships almost all the time, mainly against the other “Vlad”. Let’s assume that he is now angry with both of the “Vlads” and that these are indeed ‘bad boys’. But in this case we should assume that he is ready to set fire to the ‘Temple’, which is the European integration. He is now offered the possibility of not touching the ‘Temple’ by voting for Leanca in exchange for instruments for controlling the ‘bad boys’. It is risky to postpone the European integration until 2026, as the leader of the PL proposed, because ‘either the shah or the donkey can die until then’.
Valeriu Vasilică, IPN
