The withdrawal of Russia’s military presence after the collapse of the Soviet Union was limited to the western side of the Nistru River, and the continued presence on the Russian troops on the eastern bank essentially means the perpetuation of Russian occupation, thinks the political pundit Igor Botan.

In an interview with RFE/RL’s Moldovan service, Igor Botan noted that the Constitution explicitly states that no foreign troops can be stationed on Moldovan soil.

Commenting on the latest Constitutional Court interpretation of Moldova’s neutrality status, Botan said: “The Constitutional Court had a very specific approach – it interpreted this notion in a narrow sense. Meaning, Moldova’s permanent neutrality applies only to situations of war among third parties, in which Moldova must stay out of. This is very important to understand. In times of peace, Moldova is free to take any steps to ensure its independence and national sovereignty”.

Botan thinks that earlier the Communist Party, during its time as the main opposition force, and now the Socialists have tried to see this constitutional Article 11 proclaiming neutrality develop into a special law that would reinterpret it into something more favorable to Russia. After the Constitutional Court gave it this narrow interpretation in May, Botan believes that even if Russia withdraws, the neutrality status must be construed in no other way than in this narrow sense.

“As concerns President Dodon’s reaction to the Constitutional Court decision of May 2, he didn’t insist much on interpreting the decision itself. He just revoked the presidential decree from May 2016 approving the National Security Concept. This is actually the only thing Mr. Dodon could do. Now, all he can do is resort to political moves which show, which emphasize that Mr. Dodon in fact disapproves of the Constitutional Court decision”, said Igor Botan.

The pundit went on to add that Moldova’s partners and other stakeholders with a significant interest in this region can see that there’s no national unity on security issues, that there are differences between the branches of government. But Botan thinks that the May 2 decision clarified everything: it deconstructed the notion of neutrality and its manifestations, suggesting that, despite this neutral status, in times of peace Moldova has a right and even a duty to take measures towards ensuring the country’s security.