Expert Veaceslav Ionita said it is hard to obtain political benefits and opportunities by developing the subject of the complete and unconditional withdrawal of the foreign military forces from Moldova. Studies show the citizens place Russia second among the states that help Moldova the most. As regards the economic impact of the resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly, the Russian Federation will take particular measures, but these will not have the same intensity as earlier. The expert made such statements in a public debate entitled “(Political, economic, social, international) consequences of UN discussion on the withdrawal of the foreign army from Moldova’s territory” that was held by IPN Agency and Radio Moldova.
Veaceslav Ionita said it is hard to say there is consensus as regards the relationship with the Russian Federation, but from the viewpoint of measurements, the relationship with Russia is strong. However, there are sensitive elements in trade as Moldova is tied to Russia 90% and more in the case of particular positons of goods. In the case of the export to the EU, which increases, only several exporting companies are involved, while in the case of the export to Russia, it is about hundreds or even thousands of farmers who have a low production volume and these are and can be affected considerably.
According to the expert, the remittances are an important element. Many of these come from Russia. In general, there will be short-term economic costs, but they will be incomparably lower than those incurred in 2014 or even 2008. The costs for maintaining the Russian troops on Moldova’s territory are another aspect. A state that does not solve its security problems is very vulnerable from the viewpoint of investments. That’s why the Republic of Moldova sustains huge losses in this regard.
Veaceslav Ionita said when they say that Russia should withdraw its troops, nothing is invented as this country earlier assumed a commitment and the UN General Assembly resolution does nothing but reiterate this commitment. “The invoked reason that the problem cannot be solved technically has nothing to do with the fact that they need indeed to pull out their troops. They should declare first they will withdraw the troops and the technical details will be discussed later. I don’t like when they manipulate by saying that this is not possible and the troops should not be withdrawn,” stated the expert.
He noted that the Transnistrian administration that is fueled by the Moldovan constitutional authorities in a way hampers the withdrawal of the Russian troops from the region. “The right side of the Nistru is the most important backer of the administration from the left side of the Nistru. The Transnistrian budget is formed with the contribution of the right side of the Nistru. Most of the exports from the Transnistrian region go to the right side and to the EU and less than 20% go to the Russian Federation. When they faced problems related to currency and sought help from the Russian Federation, they were assisted by the right side of the Nistru,” said Veaceslav Ionita.
According to him, if the Moldovan authorities want the UN General Assembly resolution to have an effect, they should inquire why the Russian Federation voted against a document that fully meets the international commitments and should think if they, by their actions, don’t fuel the system that takes actions that run counter to the intentions. “I would like this document not to be purely electoral in character. This could be a tragedy for us. We should say it clearly that the troops should be withdrawn from the country,” concluded the expert.
The public debate “(Political, economic, social, international) consequences of UN discussion on the withdrawal of the foreign army from Moldova’s territory” was the 91st installment of the series “Developing political culture through public debates” that are staged with the support of the German foundation Hanns Seidel.
