The results of the June 14 local elections reveal three possible variants of a majority parliamentary coalition and it depends on the leaders of the political parties what variant will be chosen. The responsibilities and dangers related to each of these are presented in an analysis by the IPN director Valeriu Vasilica, entitled “National importance of local elections”, which was published today, June 22, 2014.
According to the author, the formation of a clear pro-European majority coalition is now the top condition. Of the three possible variants, one must be implemented very quickly and the interest is not only to stabilize the situation in the country, but to also secure the safety of the pro-European parties, including their leaders.
The first variant is to form a broad coalition involving the PLDM, PDM, PCRM and PL. This would bring maximum political stability in the country and would extend the social base of the pro-European option, would exclude the monopolization of power by the parties with many seats and the blackmail on the part of parties with few seats.
For this variant to be implemented, the PCRM must openly support the country’s European course, while the PL must stop saying that it will not form coalitions with the PCRM.
“The PCRM hasn’t yet declared its open support for the European support and it’s not known if it does it and when, even if it has the capacity and interest to do it. But the leader of the PCRM Vladimir Voronin already expressed his readiness to have broad discussions, ‘with everyone’s involvement’, going along this path the furthest and admitting that the PCRM could vote for amending the Constitution. Supposedly, Voronin refers also to the most difficult problem generated by the supreme law – the method of electing the head of state. If this problem is solved now, the tensions related to the election of the President in about a year would be diminished and early parliamentary elections would definitely be avoided. Everything depends on the price that Vladimir Voronin can ask. This may not be exaggeratedly high if he understands that after early legislative elections, the problem of the election of the President and the fate of the PCRM and its leader could be dealt with by its great rivals – the ‘traitors’ from the PSRM and the PPPN,” said the author.
It is expected that the PL will not change its position about the formation of an alliance involving the PCRM until June 28, as it will risk losing the mayoralty in Chisinau. “The historical experience shows that there are slim chances for the PL will change its position even after it wins the mayoralty. But in this case, this party will have to assume a greater dose of responsibility for not forming the coalition and, respectively, for compromising the European course. In politics, one should not always behave like the ‘gardener’s dog’,” says the analysis.
The second variant is to forma a smaller coalition with the involvement of the PLDM, PDM and PL. Here, everything depends on Liberals’ demands, which are known. But the previous answers of the potential partners concerning the European prosecutor, the justice sector reform and other matters are also known. It’s not known if the demands regarding the distribution of the post of head of state and of the administration of the Ministry of Transport and Road Infrastructure will be maintained. But it’s known that there is one new, very harsh demand – the stolen billions must be restored.
“In the current conditions, the PLDM and PDM do not have many counterarguments, but the PL should also take into account its situation in the CMC, where it wants and must form that alliance, at local level. Is the PL ready to offer all the parties with which it announced it can form an alliance - the PPEM, PLDM and PDM – by a post of deputy mayor and of district head’s office and to equally divide the posts of division, service and enterprise heads even if these have fewer seats in the CMC? If it does not ensure a consensus in the CMC, it should not expect its interests at country level to be respected. That’s why the processes of forming parliamentary and municipal coalitions must go hand in hand. Otherwise, not only the functioning of the ‘broad coalition’ will be in difficulty. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to create and ensure the functioning of the ‘smaller coalition’ and the PL and the future mayor, if this is Dorin Chirtoaca, will lose the most,” said the director of IPN.
The third variant is to form a pro-European majority coalition in the PLDM-PCRM-PDM format. “Forming such a coalition is the easiest variant. With the current number of MPs, it will be able to solve the problem of the election of the President and, respectively, of the early parliamentary elections. But the PCRM hasn’t yet declared it support for the European course and it’s not known when and if it does it. A minority coalition is counterproductive for the country and for the three parties that could find themselves in the situation to announce early elections as soon as possible so as to save what can be saved. The local elections showed that they still have what to save. In a year or two, it could be late for the country’s European course too,” it is said in the analysis “National importance of local elections”.
