“The ideological and organizational mess inside the PSRM , which is the most influential, for now, political party in the Republic of Moldova, should make the country’s citizens extremely tough, while the members of the party very curious to the causes of the more pronounced involutions of the party and should thus wonder: Quo vadis, PSRM?…”
---
Ideological chaos inside the PSRM
The leader of the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM), Igor Dodon, does not omit any occasion to note that the party he heads is the most powerful and representative in the country. If so, the requirements towards the PSRM should be corresponding. Recently, the leader of the PSRM informed public opinion about the approval by the PSRM’s National Council of a new political program, without yet referring to the way the previous political program, which was adopted at the party’s congress of 2014, was implemented. The problem probably resides in the fact that the implementation of the previous program failed and the tasks that the party set and stipulated in strategic documents, which it later abandoned without explaining the reasons, are a proof of this. This way:
- The medium-term socioeconomic development program of the Republic of Moldova envisioned the introduction of the progressive tax, but, as President, Igor Dodon renounced the programmatic provisions of the PSRM, eulogizing the bill of the Democratic Party of Moldova (PDM) to introduce the common income tax rate of 12% and promulgating the given law, even if the Socialist parliamentary groups protested;
- The programmatic provision concerning Moldova’s entry into the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) was discredited by the unexpected speech given by Igor Dodon in June 2018 at the Crans Montana forum, in favor of Moldova’s entry into the European Union (EU): “We are to work out a strategic reform plan so that when the subject of the Republic of Moldova’s entry into the European Union is raised, the country is ready from all viewpoints”;
- The conception of the basic principles of Federal Moldova, which was thought up in 2013 and which the leader of the PSRM tried subtly in 2019 to present as indulgence to the executive coordinator for solving the penal problems of Vlad Plahotniuc in the Russian Federation, was repudiated by Igor Dodon one year later, when he said that “the federalization of the Republic of Moldova is not possible”, etc.
The given examples are just some of the most resonant ones and are designed to prove the ideological inconsistency of the PSRM and its leader. They show that the causes for Igor Dodon’s defeat in the presidential elections of November 2020 are much more profound than the ones disseminated by the propagandists of the PSRM. In fact, the leader of the PSRM admitted that he managed to do almost nothing of what he aimed to do while holding office of President, during four years, except for the 600 visits paid to localities in the county and 70 visits made aboard.
Violation of PSRM’s statutory norms and establishment of secrecy
It has been over a month since Igor Dodon took over the administration of the PSRM, on December 30, 2020. In the period, the party’s management remained as precarious or even worsened. First of all, there are clear indicators that the administration of the PSRM is inclined to violate the statutory norms and procedures of the party. This way, Article 4.20 of the Statutes of the PSRM provides that the adoption and modification of the party’s program is the prerogative of the congress and deviations from this norm are possible only if the legislation on parties is amended between congresses. However, the leader of the PSRM informed public opinion that the new program of the party was approved in a month of the congress, in the January 30, 2020 meeting of the National Council. We can only guess why the statutory norm was violated. Probably because the party’s leader Igor Dodon didn’t want to explain to the congress why he failed to implement the program adopted in 2014.
It should be noted that this is not the first time that the administration of the PSRM violates the statutory norms. This way, the 16th congress held on December 30, 2020 was convoked by the National Council on June 16, 2018 and was to take place before the ordinary parliamentary elections of 2019. At that congress, in accordance with the statutory provisions, there was to be adopted the new political program. Inexplicably, the congress wasn’t held in 2018, while the planned political program was adopted in two years and a half, but not by the congress, as the statutes provide, but by the National Council.
Moreover, public opinion and the members of the PSRM do not know the content of the party’s new political program as this wasn’t published. Only what Igor Dodon reported to the Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China in the Republic of Moldova in a meeting on January 21 is known about it: “The Party of Socialists will adopt a new political program whose chapter on foreign policy will stipulate the course to the East as a priority. This will imply the development of much closer relations with Russia, other member states of the Eurasian Economic Union and with China”. So, the manipulation about a balanced foreign policy is over! From these assertions, we can deduce that the new political program of the PSRM can be eventually aimed at accepting the most recent democratic norms in the EEU, which have been implemented in the Russian Federation together with the development of the Navalny case and in Belarus after the presidential elections of August 2020. On the other hand, the closer relations with China could refer to the prospect of undertaking policies concerning the social credit system that envisions the installation of 5G antenna with possible consequences that were broadly discussed in society. Evidently, these priorities of the PSRM should be widely discussed in society.
Conclusions
The approval by the National Council of the PSRM, in breach of the statutory norms, of the party’s new political program is a serious reason for concern. The keeping of the PSRM’s new program secret generates even greater concern for the reason that this could contain provisions aimed at extending cleavages in Moldovan society.
The fact that the foreign diplomatic service is informed about the priorities of the largest party in the Republic of Moldova before informing the own citizens and even members of the given party makes us think that the leaders of the PSRM are real foreign agents of influence. Therefore, the country’s citizens should demand to urgently make public the new political program of the PSRM.
The ideological and organizational mess inside the PSRM , which is the most influential, for now, political party in the Republic of Moldova, should make the country’s citizens extremely tough, while the members of the party very curious to the causes of the more pronounced involutions of the party and should thus wonder: Quo vadis, PSRM?