 |
|
| Dionis Cenuşa | |
The quality of reforms is a crucial element for really coming closer to the European state functioning standards. But the acceleration of reforms is a major challenge for such countries as Moldova, where confidence in the sincerity of government is very low both among the local public and among the foreign partners, including the European Union. The usually justified perception that the authorities are concentrated rather on the identification of solutions for immunizing themselves against reforms, adjusting them according to the own political interests rather than generating radical reforms that are fully implemented, persists.
Currently, together with the European institutions, the Moldovan authorities finalize a new Association Agenda with the EU. In parallel, the national institutions (with the coordination of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration) are involved in the working out of the plan for implementing the Association Agreement for 2017-2019, which must reflect the strategic objectives of the new Association Agenda.
In 2017 already, new documents for monitoring the implementation of reforms will be used. This is yet insufficient for stimulating and, respectively, producing the planned reforms. Among the European factors that encourage reforms in Moldova, being physically in the country, are the EU Delegation to Moldova, the EU High Level Policy Advise Mission (EUHLPAM) and EUBAM. Though the existence of these factors contributed to keeping Moldova on a reformation path, this is not sufficient for doing the reform up to the level when it produces effects. Besides the conditions imposed by the EU, we need a fully new model to stimulate reforms. The keeping of the status-quo will maintain a difficult reformation pace. Some of the representatives of civil society propose targeted instruments, such as an EU Mission for supporting the rule of law in Moldova. But there are also other models, such as the Ukrainian one, which contains a series of ingredients needed for the reforms to gain more visibility, intensity and public support.
What is the status-quo?
The intensification of the reforms deriving from the Association Agreement with the EU in Moldova depends greatly on the activity of three European entities that are in Chisinau, both permanent and temporary – the EU Delegation, the High Level Policy Advise Mission and the EU Border Assistance Mission to Moldova and Ukraine (EUBAM).
The EU Delegation to Moldova is a diplomatic representative office that managed to contribute to the exercise of public pressure on the authorities on different occasions (ex: antidiscrimination law). But the Delegation wasn’t projected to provide technical assistance and, respectively, expertise in the reform process and many areas of the Association Agreement go beyond its expertise capacities. Anyway, with the assistance of the European partners present in Moldova (member states, financial institutions and other states close to the EU), the Delegation manages to combine forces to produce systemic assessments of the areas subject to reformation (EU Joint Analysis Paper on Programming for Moldova until 2020), including with the support provided by the Europeans.
The Policy Advise Mission (EUHLPAM) has been extended three times already (2010, 2012, 2013). This counsels institutions and their employees and plans specific actions (public polices) requested by the counseled institutions (ministries, other institutions). Usually, the representatives of the Mission and, respectively, the counseling activity have reduced visibility and this hampers the realization of the potential of European expertise possessed by this. At the same time, there are no incisive approaches on the part of representatives of the Mission to the problems in the counseled sectors. Ultimately, the Mission’s potential is much greater than the mandate offered now.
The EUBAM is considered one of the EU measures with the biggest output and results, visibility and recognition on the part of the local public. But this Mission has very limited areas of activity (counseling, technical assistance) and is rather focused on the work of the customs service and border management, including the DCFTA measures, indirectly contributing to the efforts to resolve the Transnistrian conflict rather than on the promotion of reforms on the vertical and horizontal.
Sector instruments
There is major interest within Moldovan civil society in the idea of a EU Mission for the support of the rule of law. This initiative was put forward by the Moldova authorities in 2014 and is now promoted actively within the nongovernmental sector. The motivation for such a mission results from the stagnation of reforms in the justice sector and the inefficiency of anticorruption policies. This approach is a punctual one and is aimed at supporting the rule of law. The idea in itself is innovatory and provides particular advantages as an instrument for promoting reforms in the justice segment.
The initiative is inspired by the missions deployed by the EU in Albania (candidate country for EU membership) or Kosovo (entity helped by the EU in the state building process). These countries can no way be compared with Moldova. That’s why an eventual mission for strengthening the rule of law will have to be anchored in the Moldovan realities and to reflect all the local constraints. The authors of the idea envision for this mission both monitoring and counseling duties and technical assistance for the rule of law institutions, including in the process of planning strategic reforms in the field. This idea combines the particularities of the Policy Advise Mission (EUHLPAM) and of the EUBAM, but only thought the angle of the situation in the justice sector.
However, such a mission will restrain again the operational area of the EU. The constraints of time and resources, dictated by the complexity of the Association Agreement, require another approach – comprehensive, strategic and dynamic for a number of important sectors coordinated concomitantly, including the justice one. The Ukrainian model suits best an emergency approach to the reform agenda envisioned also by the large number of commitments incorporated into the Association Agreement and the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement between the EU and Moldova.
“Ukrainian model”
The reforms in Ukraine also meet with obstacles, but the presence of the EU there is so diverse and intense that the pressure exerted on the authorities brings about particular results. But things move anyway slow, partially owing to the resistance of the old bodies of the central and regional institutions. Evidently, the field of maneuvering and, respectively, of opposing reforms of the Ukrainian authorities and Ukrainian oligarchs is reduced to a maximum owing to Russia’s actions in Donbas and Crimea.
Many of the results achieved in Ukraine in terms of reforms, inspired from the Association Agreement, are attributed to the Support Group for Ukraine. This was constituted by Brussels in April 2014 in reaction to the crisis in Ukraine. This Group is a unique initiative of the EU in its relations with a third country.
The Group’s role is to support Ukraine in the process of implementing the Association Agreement (counseling, expertise, financial cooperation) and covers nine sectors (justice, political sphere, financial and economic reform, financial cooperation, energy and environment, transport and infrastructure, agriculture etc.). The group consists of functionaries of the European Commission and of representatives of the EU member states. This works in close cooperation with the European Commission, the European External Action Service and, respectively, the EU Delegation in Kiev and other Missions of the EU (EUBAM and EU Assistance Mission).
The major objectives of the Group are to strategically program the priorities of the EU member states, including the assistance, with a view to maximizing the impact of the EU actions (First Report by the Group, October 28, 2016). Essential attention is devoted to the visibility of the Group by which they aim to strengthen confidence in the reform agenda in Ukraine, including that of donors and investors.
Owing to the success achieved by the Support Group, the initiative could be extended after the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement takes effect following its ratification by the Netherlands.
A similar Support Group for Moldova could be a solution to many problems. Firstly, such a Group would be the key player that mobilizes, coordinates and strategically plans all the resources and energies (priorities, programs, financial and technical assistance) of the European players (EU Delegation, EUBAM, Policy Advise Mission, member states, etc.).
Secondly, the Group would represent an additional communication channel with the European Commission, including owing to its presence in Brussels.
Least but not last, the representatives of the Support Croup, as dynamic, visible representatives ready for communication of Brussels, would be able to increase confidence in the initiated reforms, labeled as pro-European. At the same time, this will enable to multiply the pressure on the authorities, which is now most often reduced to the positions taken by the Head of the EU Delegation in Chisinau (Pirkka Tapiola).
Instead of conclusion...
The reform agenda in Moldova must regain the confidence of the European players and, principally, of the general public. The authorities’ reform ‘roadmaps’, the plan of action for implementing the Association Agreement and other similar mechanisms must be complemented with innovative, visible and incisive European instruments.
A comprehensive approach is needed in order to accelerate reforms in a number of essential areas for facto implementing the Association Agreement. Stagnation is witnessed in a number of areas, including the justice sector. From this viewpoint, the idea of a Support Group for Moldova, close as conception to that implemented in Ukraine, would be a major investment in advancing reforms in the country.
The EU Delegation does not have the expertise needed to become involved in very technical areas of the AA/DCFTA. The Policy Advise Mission (EUHLPAM) has limited powers and is less visible, while the EUBAM is a purely sector one. The idea of a Mission for the rule of law in Moldova meets the necessities, but deals only with the challenges in the justice sector. Consequently, a Support Group for Moldova could be the most suitable solution for the Moldovan context, which, in many aspects, is similar to the Ukrainian one.
Finally, the implementation of reforms and their deepness depend first of all on the political will of the authorities. But the implementation of the Association Agreement is also a commitment assumed by the EU. That’s why this should resort to innovative, more visible and incisive instruments so as to put the planned reforms into practice, while a Support Group for Moldova could become a feasible solution.
IPN publishes in the Op-Ed rubric opinion pieces submitted by authors not affiliated with our editorial board. The opinions expressed in these articles do not necessarily coincide with the opinions of our editorial board.