Last year Moldova had a contradictory behavior on the international arena. Info-Prim Neo interview with Victor Chirila, program director at the Foreign Policy Association

[ - How did Moldova present itself on the international arena in 2008?] - Moldova was present enough at regional level. It held the presidency of five regional organizations. Evidently, Moldova tried to use these levers to improve its status in the relations with the European Union. It tries to demonstrate that being present in practically all the regional cooperation initiatives in Southeastern Europe it is ahead of such countries as Ukraine and Georgia in their plans to join the EU. This fact is an advantage indeed, but this advantage can be efficiently used when closely connected with the internal reforms carried out in Moldova in different areas. The regional integration will not propel us to the EU if we are not ready to fulfill at home the conditions imposed by the EU. Moldova was also present in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Discussions on the compatibility or incompatibility of being present in the CIS with the wish to join the EU are more frequently held in Chisinau. More and more politicians and experts understand that the European aspirations and the membership of the CIS will come in a more serious contradiction while Moldova will make progress on the path to European integration and the time will come for the authorities to decide what direction to follow. For the time being, the authorities try to convince us that there is no such contradiction. I think that these statements are connected with the wish to make Russia more flexible in the Transnistrian issue. But the attempt to manage with Russia’s susceptibilities does not produce the expected results. The package proposals for solving the conflict proposed by President Vladimir Voronin to Vladimir Putin in 2006 have not yet been answered. On the contrary, the attempt to directly negotiate with Russia failed. The last meeting between Vladimir Voronin and Igor Smirnov showed that Russia tries to persuade Moldova to discuss with Transnistria on equal terms. But this is against Moldova’s interests and the attempt to initiate consultations in the 2+1 format that can be regarded as talks shows that Tiraspol and Moscow want to undermine the 5+2 format. In conclusion, we can say that in 2008 Moldova had a contradictory behavior. [ - What are the distinctive signs of Moldova’s behavior towards its major foreign partners?] - In the relations with Russia, we had a more active dialogue at the level of central authorities. This is explicable: Vladimir Voronin promised that the Transnistrian dispute would be solved before the 2009 parliamentary elections. In a move to achieve this objective, the relations with Russia have been improved, Voronin and Putin and then Voronin and Medvedev had a more active dialogue. At political level, we saw that Russia was more open to the Moldovan authorities, but the final result was not achieved. The official Chisinau insists on a package solution to the Transnistrian conflict that envisions the pull-out of the Russian troops in exchange for keeping the status of neutrality, recognizing the Russian property, granting a broad autonomy for Transnistria, but no right of veto in the future Parliament. Such a solution is not backed by Russia because it does not guarantee that Moldova will remain faithful to it. The neutrality status provided in the Constitution does not guarantee that Moldova will not renounce it when geopolitical changes take place in the region. That’s why, Russia insisted that the neutrality be recognized internationally, namely by those that respect it. In the end, the authorities abandoned this unrealistic objective and decided to try to offer Russia some other kinds of guarantees. It is encouraging that the authorities did not hurry to reach an understanding with Russia at any cost. The authorities should now understand that the country can be reunified if Moldova draws closer to the EU and creates conditions to convince our citizens living in Transnistria that Moldova offers more advantages to them than Russia and that they will benefit from more social and economic guarantees if they are in Moldova. A phased strategy and time are needed for this. The relations with Ukraine deteriorated. A number of problems that create inconvenience remain unsolved. These include the Power Plant in Novodnestrovsk, the demarcation of the border on certain segments, Moldova’s wish to set up joint customs posts on the Transnistrian border, where the Ukrainian authorities still have reserves etc. Ukraine’s position on the renewal of the mandate of the EUBAM Mission after 2009 is not clear. Here, we must take into account the GUAM, where Ukraine considers itself an important partner and a powerful regional player, but Moldova continues to have an uncertain attitude. The fact that the Moldovan authorities ignored the plan for settling the Transnistrian conflict proposed by President Viktor Yushchenko caused consequences. Therefore, Ukraine felt neglected by the official Chisinau, which tried to discuss with Moscow avoiding Kiev. I think that Moldova will have to modify its strategy for discussing directly with Russia. The disadvantages will be larger in number than the benefits if we ignore Ukraine. As to Romania, the relations with this country did not improve and no new period of pragmatism started despite hopes that appeared after Foreign Minister Lazar Comanescu visited Chisinau. This cannot happen because there are major impediments inside this unrealized partnership. Discussions and consultations were held over opening two Romanian consulates, but the Moldovan authorities maintain that the consulates would be opened and the Convention on Small-Scale Border Traffic would be signed only after the signing of the Border Agreement and then of the Basic Treaty. The Moldovan-Romanian relations are marked by different approaches adopted by the authorities. The official Bucharest insists on the idea that there are two Romanian states with separate destines and political systems, while the official Chisinau maintains that Moldova and Romania have different peoples and histories. It insists on what separates us rather than on what can unite us. The authorities continue to be dominated by the stereotypes of the past, by the Soviet ideology regarding the differences between Moldova and Romania. Until the authorities base on the past rather than on the future, the bilateral relations will remain unclear and there will be reasons for anger and groundless disputes. [ - What progress did Moldova make on the path to European integration last year and what can we expect in 2009?] - The objective of the year was to open talks over the future legal agreement with the EU, which would replace the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with the EU. The European Union initiated the evaluation period. The draft mandate has been already approved and is now considered by the EU member states. If the things go well, the mandate could be approved by the member states in February. But there are a number of problems concerning the real democracy in Moldova. It is known that the observance of the democratic principles and the human rights and freedoms is an obligatory condition for starting talks over a new agreement. It seems that the European capital cities become more doubtful. The case of PRO TV channel showed the diplomats that the situation of the press worsens in Moldova. It is hard to say how the 2009 elections will influence Moldova’s integration into the EU. Everything depends on the composition of the future Parliament. The authorities insist that the European integration will remain the major objective if the Communist Party continues to hold most of the seats in the legislative. But the rhetoric is not enough. The words should materialize into actions. Every time we come closer to elections, the democratic environment gets worse. The elections are in fact the litmus test that shows that the authorities are not fully sincere as regards the European integration and consider their party and group interests more important. In 2009, the European Union will have to make a decision about the mandate of talks. Let’s hope that the mandate will be granted to the European Commission because the presidency of the EU will be held in turn by the Czech Republic and Sweden, which are closer to Moldova and we should use this opportunity. Let’s hope that the talks will start before this summer. They could be shorter than in the case of Ukraine, which opened them in 2007 and has not yet finished them, because the way will be already paved. The agreement that will be signed with Ukraine will serve as a model for the agreement with Moldova. We will be able to accept certain conditions of the agreement, but in general the political and legal framework will be the same: it will be a political association agreement similar to those signed by the EU with the Western Balkan countries. This agreement will mainly focus on such areas as economy, trade, justice, internal affairs as well as the political dialogue, but to a small extent. Yet, there will be no clear European integration prospects, which we will have to gain through domestic reforms. [ - Did Moldova manage to assert itself on the international arena. Where are we now when the eight-year government of the PCRM comes to an end?] - I think that most of the people understood that the EU is a reality that cannot be neglected anymore. We are more and more attracted, even unwillingly, by this economic and political power established in the region. In a not too distant future, it will also be a military power. It is a player that offers us opportunities for developing and modernizing the country, but we will have to use these opportunities. I think that many politicians realize that the CIS will have to be abandoned some day, but this thing is postponed so as not to anger Russia. The political elite in Moldova feels yet closer to Russia because it was educated in other times and it is psychologically hard for it to give up that amorphous connection with the CIS. So, we are in the process of withdrawing from the CIS and coming closer to the EU. I believe we are at a turning point. 2009 could mean a decision. Moldova can no longer afford staying at this point. It will have to decide and choose its way.