The National Assembly of the Democratic Party of Moldova (PDM) held on October 21, 2018 was thoroughly planned, with no financial, media or administrative limitations. The event organized by the PDM was actually a triumph of the implemented modern communication technologies. In this regard, the event was first of all an occasion for launching a propagandistic, pre-electoral campaign without a precedent in Moldova. Events of such a scale were held earlier too, but the unique element of the PDM’s effort resides in the fact that never in the short history of the Republic of Moldova’s independence was such an important event adorned with somehow veiled loans from the political messages and programs of parties from Moldova’s political arena. Evidently, the PDM massively inspired itself from the creations of the Agrarian Democratic Party of Moldova (PDAM), the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM) and the Liberal Democratic Party of Moldova (PLDM). Nevertheless, no one can accuse the PDM of plagiarism. First of all, the PDM is a graft deriving from the PDAM and one of the founders of the PDM, Dumitru Diacov, reminded of this in the assembly. Secondly, the formulations of the PSRM were borrowed from the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova (PCRM), while the PDM’s event involved 2/3 of the former Communist MPs who defected to the PDM and these were present on the stage. Also, the PDM’s event was attended by ½ of the former Liberal-Democratic MPs who also joined the PDM. So, this is not plagiarism, but transfer of expertise from the PCRM and PLDM to the PDM.

This transfer of expertise was somehow highlighted in the event and in the program “Reply” on Prime TV channel. This way, one of the protagonists of the event MP Eugen Nikiforchuk, who read the PDM’s commitment for the next electoral cycle, in the given program noted that:  “The pro-Moldova orientation of the Democratic Party means first of all the keeping of traditions, values, history of the people”. What is there new in this orientation of the PDM? Don’t we find the same thing in the political program of the PSRM that was adopted in the 12th extraordinary congress of September 28, 2014 that was set for the parliamentary elections of November 30, 2014? Definitely yes! However, there is a difference. The PSRM’s approach is much more elaborate and is the natural continuation of the slogan: MOLDOVA – MOLDOVANS – MOLDOVAN! Moreover, the PDM’s plea in favor of strengthening the Moldovan civic nation, reaffirmed in the speech of the PDM’s founder Dumitru Diacov, was taken also from the PSRM. In this regard, the PSRM’s program clearly provides: “The PSRM pleads for consolidating the Moldovan civic nation. We will follow the principle “many ethnic groups – one nation”. We will ensure interethnic tolerance and the protection of cultures of the ethnic communities that live on the territory of the Republic of Moldova”. In this regard, we can assert that the PSRM’s political program contains the PDM’s program as a chapter as of October 21, 2018.

To highlight the practical dimension of the PDM’s commitment for the future electoral cycle, Eugen Nikiforchuk noted the revitalization of Moldovan villages: This means infrastructure, repaired roads, water supply and sewage systems, renovated schools and kindergartens. This effort made by the PDM seems to reproduce the messages of the former ruling partner Vlad Filat, with whom the leaders of the PDM signed secret protocols to divide the law enforcement and regulatory agencies. It should be noted that the activists of the PDM cannot pretend not to have known about the messages of Vlad Filat, one of the founders of the PDM and vice-president of the party in 1997-2007. The point is that in the native district of the current leader of the PDM Vlad Plahotniuc, Nisporeni, Vlad Filat said the following over three years ago: “Together we built roads and water supply systems, repaired schools and kindergartens”. In fact, the ex-vice president of the PDM Vlad Filat acted so in all the districts, which is he focused on good things for Moldova - roads, water supply systems, repaired schools and kindergartens - starting with June 2013, after losing any hope of returning to the post of Premier, until before the elections of November 30, 2014. So, the assimilation of the given experience of the PLDM is even legitimate somehow after half of the MPs of the parliamentary group of the PLDM joined the PDM.

But the most valuable loans of the PDM were yet undertaken from the PDAM. In this regard, the founder of the PDM Dumitru Diacov even rendered homage, which was somehow camouflaged, to the given party that he represented in Parliament in 1994-1998. Dumitru Diacov actually spoke about a success story of the PDM that is 23 years long, but the PDM is only 21 as it was founded in February 1997. And this is not accidental. The PDM probably wants to be able to claim that it had links with what was most valuable in the creations of the PDAM! The point is that the most important message of the PDM’s event of October 21, 2018 was borrowed from the PDAM. Evidently, this is the state doctrine. It’s true that one of the leaders of the PDAM, ex-Speaker of Parliament Dumitru Moțpan formulated the idea of working out a state ideology. On the eve of the parliamentary elections of March 22, 1998, Dumitru Moțpan launched a program that is strikingly similar to the recent program of the PDM: “Without making use of fashionable doctrines that do not enjoy social and ideological support in society, the Agrarian Democratic Party of Moldova proposed concrete mechanisms for resolving a number of existing problems that were often, I repeat, created artificially. We also proposed mechanisms for overcoming the socioeconomic crisis in which we found ourselves. Despite all the created obstacle, our conception actually became the only ideology for the recovery of society, which was borrowed by many parties and political movements and is present in their electoral programs or platforms...

Indeed, the PDAM leader Dumitru Moțpan’s plea for a state ideology was put into practice by the PCRM by adopting Law No. 546 of  December 19, 2003 concerning the concept of the national policy of the Republic of Moldova. This fact was mentioned by the first Speaker of Parliament of the Republic of Moldova Alexandru Moșanu in an interview for the rubric Witnesses to Independence. However, the existence of the state ideology is not appropriate as this runs counter to Article 5(2) of the Constitution: “No ideology can be instituted as an official ideology of the state”. That’s why in 2014, the PSRM replaced  the notion of ideology with doctrine in its political program: “The PSRM pleads for formulating a state doctrine of the Republic of Moldova. Currently, the Republic of Moldova is governed in the absence of a state doctrine as the country does not have a common long-term development strategy whose implementation would be mandatory for any government, regardless of its political color. Such a doctrine should define the fundamental principles of the development of the state and Moldovan identify, economic recovery and reestablishment of the territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova”. This way, given Dumitru Moțpan’s express plea that was borrowed by the PCRM and PSRM, we ascertain that the PDM on October 21, 2018 opened a new page in the history of the Republic of Moldova by introducing the fourth path (PDAM - 1, PCRM – 2, PSRM – 3, PDM – 4), with a pro-Moldova state doctrine. This is how the experience and expertise of the predecessors and eventual alliance partners are accumulated and recorded. We can even say that this way we grow Moldova!  

In conclusion, we should say that the PDM actually enters for the fourth time the same ideological or doctrinaire torrent and this shows that Heraclitus wasn’t right when he said that “no one can enter the same river twice” as one can even four times!  

IPN Experts