Last “EU Epistle” to Moldovans: triumphal call or voice crying in the wilderness? Info-Prim Neo analysis, part II

The first part of the given analysis {published on October 25} suggested that the European Union indirectly supports the Alliance for European Integration (AEI), including in the election campaign. Though the messages are indirect, the EU's central message can be interpreted as follows: “Moldova and the Moldovans will enjoy full EU support on the Europeans integration path if the reforms initiated during the last year are continued. The reforms can be continued if persons who are able to continue them come to power after the November parliamentary elections. The AEI showed it is able to...” The set of conclusions regarding Moldova adopted by the European Council on Foreign Relations on October 25, including on the liberalization of the visa regime for Moldovans, confirms again this supposition. Such an unprecedented behavior of the EU can be explained by two groups of reasons: 1) The EU accepted indirect responsibility for allowing the Communists to pretend to be implementing internal reforms during eight years and realizes the danger of returning to the previous state of affairs, including to the stability in Moldova as a country that is in the immediate vicinity; 2) The EU is aware that the AEI, for objective and subjective reasons, does not enjoy sufficient support among the population to win the elections and thus resorted to image transfer in the hope that the voters will support what the EU supports. If the election outcome is different, the AEI’s failure will represent a resounding failure of the EU in this region of Europe. These pro-AEI messages are like the Epistles of St Paul for Corintenians, as importance at this turning point. They target three groups: the AEI, the PCRM and the Moldovan voters. The reaction of the power and the Opposition is known, but the reaction of the population is yet unclear. In the previous part of the analysis, the AEI's reaction was described as euphoric and neglecting the psychology of the Moldova voter. [The PCRM's reaction to the “EU Epistles”] The Communists Party's reaction to the EU's messages is prudent-aggressive, in a way normal for the situation in which it is and the style that characterizes this party. The main Opposition party does not directly attack the EU, also because the EU does not give it chances to be 'caught red-handed'. But it cannot refrain from attacking Romania, especially as a EU member state. The PCRM complains to Brussels about the statements made by Romanian President Traian Basescu concerning the support offered to the AEI, describing it as interference in Moldova's internal affairs. But they forget that in 2005, the same Traian Basescu and the President of Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili, as well as the then President of Ukraine Victor Yushchenko, made similar statements and gestures of support, in the same conditions, but in favor of Vladimir Voronin. That support principally ensured the Communist leaders' second term in office as head of state and the maintenance of the PCRM in power as a dominant force. It is rather improbable that the three heads of state, or at least two of them, did not consult Brussels in that pro-Voronin PR action. This double-standard position becomes more evident if we take into account that representatives of other European states also provided support to the AEI. For example, the Czech Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg, who took part in a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Chisinau late last month, said ({see the news story “Moldova's Integration into EU is an achievable objective, foreign ministers” here}) that the Communists Party, which had ruled the country for over eight years, implemented no reforms despite the commitments made. “Unfortunately, the PCRM only stated that it will carry out reforms so that it is up to the Moldovan people to decide what measures to take, but as far as I know, Vladimir Voronin wants an alliance with Russia, rather than the European countries,” he said, adding Europe will be happy to receive Moldova in its family. The PCRM reacted only to Bassescu, who said the same, but in a more diplomatic way and after the Czech Foreign Minister. Supposedly, Basescu yielded to the EU's demands, through the agency of Germany ({see the news story “Moldovan-Romanian border treaty should be signed by elections, Germany” here}), in a very principled matter for him. He accepted to sign the Border Treaty with Moldova and is ready to do it before the elections so as to satisfy in a way the PCRM's wishes. In general, the PCRM does not use much the electoral resources abroad to strengthen its position in this election campaign for two reasons: 1) When it was in power, it did not have very good relations either with the West or the East and cannot count on much support; 2) It seriously and permanently works with the population, especially on the spot, showing it knows how to psychologically manipulate the Moldovan voters. [Great enigma – Moldovans' reaction to the “EU Epistles”] The Moldovans can decipher the EU's messages only in two ways: to vote for the AEI or a similar force or to vote for the PCRM and its possible allies. The motivation in the first case is clear – if we obey Europe we will sooner start to live as in Europe or even in Europe. Moreover, this scenario could contribute to the appearance of a solution to the Transnistrian dispute of a new quality level. The visa-free regime with the EU might stimulate the Transnistrian population to apply for Moldovan nationality. Thus, the communication and movement of people inside the country might intensify from January 1, 2011, when the biometric passports that are obligatory in the EU will start to be issued. The real and irreversible integration of the country into the EU will begin. The EU counts on such a reaction. But another possible decision should also be taken into account. The majority of Moldovans might vote for the PCRM out of habit or nostalgia, because the AEI did not meet their expectations or for other known or less known reasons. It should be noted that while the Communists had been in power, the Moldovans in surveys said they were not satisfied with the path followed by the country, considering it wrong. But they continued to vote for the PCRM, which was the party that determined the country's development course. Now the largest part of the population are in favor of European integration, but are angry with the ruling alliance, which showed it can achieve this objective and, more important, obtained the EU's support. The Moldovans did not go to vote in the September 5 referendum in order to regain their right to choose the President by popular vote though 80-90% said earlier they want this right back. The Moldovans settled abroad also did not take part in the plebiscite though there were established more polling places, as they asked. [In the history's drawer] The EU insistently tells the Moldovans that the November legislative elections are very important. MEP Adrian Severin said in Chisinau: “The forthcoming parliamentary elections will be crucial as Moldova will have to choose between two paths of destiny, “between future and past, between stagnation and development, between a modus vivendi characterized by low levels of dynamism with a future somewhere at the periphery of European history and a model characterized by European modernity” {see the news story “EU suggests Moldovan political forces should group together” here}. The EU says it is the Moldovan people who must make a choice, but they should realize the consequences of their choice. The Head of the European Union Delegation to Moldova Dirk Schuebel refuted the press fears that Moldova might be placed in the history's drawer for a long period of time if the EU would be disappointed by the country's performance on the European integration path. “We will regularly check that drawer and take you out of it,” he said. But he could not answer differently owing to the position he holds, even if he has another opinion. German politician Markus Meckel, the last Foreign Minister of the German Democratic Republic and one of the founders of the Social Democratic Party of Germany, made it clear that Moldova and its population must not return to the internal and foreign policy approaches used by the Communist administration. “I form part of the Moldovan-German Forum and know that effort is made to help Moldova socially and politically. There is also a kind of emotional attachment. We have high hopes of this country and are afraid they will fade away if a new government comes to power,” he stated. {See the news story “Moldova will be clearly told when it is accepted into EU if ...” here }. He also said he would plead for offering Moldova clear admission prospects by the future agreement between Moldova and the EU if .... [Valeriu Vasilica, Info-Prim Neo]