The expert emphasized that, with the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, some European states have abandoned neutrality, understanding that this formula no longer provides security guarantees. “States that were traditionally neutral have decided to join NATO because the formula for maintaining their national security was no longer valid. States like Sweden or Finland were already interoperable with NATO, and this transition was hardly felt by the armed forces of these states, because NATO standards were already applied,” explained Andrei Curararu.

In his opinion, in the Republic of Moldova, a potential renunciation of constitutional neutrality is difficult to achieve, as society continues to view NATO through the lens of negative perceptions, fueled by Russian propaganda.

“In the Republic of Moldova, there is a fairly clear position, when NATO is perceived as a threat. A threat artificially created by adherence to the Russian information space. Therefore, for the Republic of Moldova, the issue of joining NATO is not currently on the table. This subject could be addressed when the socio-political situation within the state changes, thus more people would understand what Europe means and by extension – NATO. People would understand that NATO’s presence on the European continent, in the 21st century, has rather meant stability,” explained Andrei Curararu.

At the same time, the expert believes that the war in Ukraine has led to a change in perspective on the need to strengthen the defense capabilities of the Republic of Moldova. Andrei Curararu explained that there is now a greater openness both in society and from European partners for investments in the security sector.

“With the war in Ukraine, the window of opportunity has rather opened for investments in the defense sector. More and more people understand the risks of overflying airspace. There is openness from European partners to invest in the defense of the Republic of Moldova, which operates within a broader security architecture and must be interoperable with neighboring states. Neutrality does not mean living in a vacuum. But at the same time, we must also analyze the socio-political realities. Giving up neutrality status is not very high on the public agenda at the moment,” the expert pointed out.

The public debate “Neutrality and the defense capacity of the citizen and the state” is the 354th edition of debates in the series “Developing political culture in public debates”. The IPN Agency carries out this cycle of debates with the support of the German Hanns Seidel Foundation.

The post Andrei Curararu: Giving up the neutrality status is not too high on the public agenda appeared first on ipn.md.

The political scientist argues that the Republic of Moldova must follow the developments of European security architecture and take into account Ukraine’s trajectory, however, avoiding to promote the subject of NATO membership, which does not enjoy the support of the population.

“If the Republic of Moldova decides to integrate into the European security space, I would abstain from NATO. Because we have public opinion that is against any association with this alliance. But the Republic of Moldova will depend a lot on how Ukraine integrates into the European security system,” explained the political scientist, associate expert of the Center for Eastern European Studies, Dionis Cenusa.

He explained that the war in Ukraine has strengthened the position of the Republic of Moldova internationally, facilitating access to external support. However, the authorities have not fully capitalized on the economic opportunities generated by the new regional context, says the expert.

“The Republic of Moldova has managed to cement its international status as an ally of the European forces that respect international law. Geopolitically, the Republic of Moldova has gained many benefits with the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, becoming more respected and more easily obtaining external assistance in the field of defense. However, financially, the war has opened windows of opportunity that the Republic of Moldova has not capitalized on. We have not seen figures for how many Ukrainians have remained in the Republic of Moldova and opened businesses,” explained Dionis Cenusa.

Referring to the support provided by the European Union for strengthening defense capabilities, the political scientist emphasized the role of the European Peace Facility (EPF), which has become the main mechanism through which the Republic of Moldova benefits from funding for the modernization of the army.

“In the field of defense, the Republic of Moldova has benefited the most within the Framework of the Peace Instrument. When the aggression against Ukraine began, Brussels made an exception for this instrument to be used for other objectives than those previously announced. Now the money can be used for the modernization of the army. It is still unclear whether the EU can use this instrument for offensive weapons or ammunition, so far it has focused on defensive equipment, that is, for defense. But this can change, depending on what happens in Ukraine,” the political scientist pointed out.

The public debate “Neutrality and the defense capacity of the citizen and the state” is the 354th edition of debates in the series “Developing political culture in public debates”. The IPN Agency carries out this series of debates with the support of the German Hanns Seidel Foundation.

The post Dionis Cenusa: Public opinion is against association with NATO appeared first on ipn.md.

Igor Botan stated that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has amplified security risks for the Republic of Moldova. “The war in Ukraine brings additional threats to the Republic of Moldova. The Russian Federation has set its goal to restore the Russian Empire, not the Soviet one. This was clear from the positions of President Vladimir Putin starting with his speech in 2007, in Munich, when he clearly announced that his intention is to establish a new world order,” explained the permanent expert of the project, Igor Botan.

Referring to the neutrality status of the Republic of Moldova, Igor Botan noted that it was adopted in a specific political context of the year 1994 and emphasized that neutral states are obliged to invest more in their own defense, as they do not benefit from the guarantees offered by military alliances.

“The decision of the Republic of Moldova to proclaim itself a neutral state was a circumstantial solution in 1994, when the Constitution was adopted. Statistically, neutral countries usually have larger budgets than countries that are part of military blocs. Experience has shown that Switzerland, Austria, the Scandinavian countries, which recently joined NATO, have had defense budget expenditures much higher, about twice as much, than NATO member countries. This shows how important security is for neutral countries. Because neutral countries can only rely on their own forces,” explained Igor Botan.

The expert invoked the case of Ukraine, which for many years had the status of neutrality, but was attacked by the Russian Federation. According to him, this experience demonstrates that neutrality does not exclude the risk of military aggression.

“Ukraine, from 1990, after the adoption of the Declaration of Sovereignty, until 2014, positioned itself as a country outside of military blocs, a neutral state. However, Ukraine’s experience shows that being a neutral country you can be attacked. Only after Russia annexed Crimea and attacked Donbas, did Ukraine renounce its neutrality status,” Igor Botan pointed out.

The public debate “Neutrality and the defense capacity of the citizen and the state” is the 354th edition of debates in the series “Developing political culture in public debates”. The IPN Agency carries out this series of debates with the support of the German Hanns Seidel Foundation.

The post Igor Botan: The experience of Ukraine shows that, being a neutral state, you can be attacked appeared first on ipn.md.

The project’s permanent expert, Igor Botan, explained what the status of permanent neutrality implies from the perspective of international law, and what are the objectives pursued by the states that choose this option.

“Permanent neutrality is a legal status through which a sovereign state decides, either by its own will or through international agreements, not to participate in any armed conflict or military alliance, neither in times of peace nor in case of war, benefiting instead from the recognition and respect of this state by other countries. States emphasize the permanent nature of their neutrality to obtain firm international recognition, to discourage external aggressions, and to assure neighbors that they do not represent a military threat, thus building long-term diplomatic predictability,” explained the project’s permanent expert, Igor Botan.

Political scientist Dionis Cenusa mentioned that, in the case of the Republic of Moldova, constitutional neutrality is affected by the security realities on the ground.

“In the Republic of Moldova, unfortunately, neutrality is more on paper. The fact that the Republic of Moldova continues to need external assistance to ensure an efficient army, shows that we are in the initial phase. Even if we have this debate between the modernization of the army, which is the leitmotif of this government, and demilitarization, which is the narrative of the pro-Russian forces, we must acknowledge that the Republic of Moldova is the only beneficiary in the region that has managed to build the first pillars for defense capacity with the help of the European Union grants,” explained Dionis Cenusa.

In turn, the expert of the WatchDog Community, Andrei Curararu, spoke about the circumstances in which neutrality was included in the Constitution and argued that this provision has not achieved its purpose, given that part of the country’s territory continues to be under occupation.

“The Constitution was adopted in 1994. We are talking about a state that had just emerged from an armed conflict. In the context where the armistice was signed by Boris Yeltsin and Mircea Snegur, I think we can talk about a war. Thus, the introduction of neutrality in the country’s Constitution represented a message that the Republic of Moldova does not desire the expansion of the conflict or participation in alliances that would antagonize the Russian Federation. It is a norm that has never worked well considering that 11% of the territory of the Republic of Moldova is occupied by the Russian Federation to this day,” stated Andrei Curararu.

The public debate “Neutrality and the defense capability of the citizen and the state” is the 354th edition of debates in the series “Developing political culture in public debates”. The IPN Agency carries out this series of debates with the support of the German Hanns Seidel Foundation.

The post The neutrality and defense capability of the citizen and the state. IPN Debate appeared first on ipn.md.

The Polish official clarified that the missile is part of the category capable of carrying nuclear warheads. According to him, it was among the approximately 20 missiles heading towards Poland during a Russian attack on Ukraine.

Tomczyk further stated that the missile was tracked by a Ukrainian pilot, but the mission was halted approximately 20 seconds before reaching the border, as the aircraft could not enter Polish airspace.

The rocket fell on farmland near the town of Tarnawa-Kolonia in the Lublin Voivodeship, about 70 kilometers from the border with Ukraine, causing an explosion. No casualties were reported.

The post The Polish Deputy Minister of Defense says that the missile that crashed in Lublin was a Russian one appeared first on ipn.md.

In a social media post, Volodymyr Zelensky clarified that the discussions focused on the results of his visit to Washington, the historic dialogue between Ukraine and Poland, and other topics on the bilateral agenda. The Ukrainian president specified that the two also addressed priority measures for protecting Ukrainian cities and communities from Russian attacks.

Zelensky emphasized that missile defense remains a priority and that Ukraine’s security is closely tied to that of Poland and the whole of Europe. He also addressed the situation of Ukrainian refugees in Poland, stressing the importance of them feeling safe.

Donald Tusk mentioned, in turn, that the discussions focused on the results of Zelensky’s visit to the United States, Polish investments in Ukraine, cooperation in the field of missile defense, and the support given to Kiev in the context of the Russian invasion.

The post Zelensky and Tusk discussed missile defense and support for Ukraine appeared first on ipn.md.

Anatolie Nosatii appreciated the support offered by the Czech Republic in recent years for the National Army, including through donations of goods and equipment, training opportunities and specialized expertise. According to the minister, this cooperation has contributed to the modernization of the defense institution.

The Moldovan official emphasized the importance of the assistance provided by the Czech side for the implementation of defense sector modernization projects through the European Instrument for Peace and the Defense Capacity Building Initiative.

The cooperation in the field of defense between the Republic of Moldova and the Czech Republic has been ongoing since 2011.

The post Czech support for the modernization of the National Army, discussed in Prague appeared first on ipn.md.

The NATO Summit in Ankara, held on July 7 and 8, was not a routine diplomatic exercise. Essentially, it was the act through which the North Atlantic Alliance officially recognized the new strategic reality: Russia is no longer an occasional rival or a regional problem, but a structural threat, in the long term, to the entire Euro-Atlantic security. This formulation, insistently repeated in the final statement, is not a mere diplomatic figure of speech. It is a diagnosis. And diagnoses, unlike political statements, have concrete budgetary, military and institutional consequences.

The figures speak for themselves. Over 50 billion dollars in new military acquisitions announced directly at the summit. A commitment of 70 billion euros for supporting Ukraine alone in 2026, with the promise of at least an equal level in 2027. The total defense expenditures of the member states estimated to reach 1.8 trillion dollars this year. Massive investments in missile defense, unmanned systems, military artificial intelligence and common cyber infrastructure. European allies and Canada increased their defense spending by over 139 billion dollars in 2025 alone.

This is not the language of an alliance preparing for peace. It is the language of an alliance that is methodically and with vast resources preparing for a prolonged confrontation with Russia – be it direct or, more likely, through financial and technological deterrence at an unprecedented level since the Cold War.

Moscow’s reaction paradoxically confirmed exactly what NATO had diagnosed. The spokesperson for Russian diplomacy, Maria Zaharova, called the decisions from Ankara “irresponsible” and accused European states of preparing for an armed conflict with Russia. Beyond the usual rhetoric, there was also a significant acknowledgment from Moscow: that all allies, including those who do not perceive an immediate danger from Russia, signed the same assessment of the threat. This unanimity, regretfully highlighted by the Kremlin itself, may be the most important political signal to emerge from the summit.

What does NATO membership actually mean – and what does not being a member mean?

This is exactly where the discussion becomes relevant for the Republic of Moldova. Because the Ankara statement does not only talk about Ukraine or about NATO’s eastern flank in a generic sense. It talks about the fundamental, even existential, difference between states under the umbrella of Article 5 and those that are not.

Article 5 – the principle that an attack on one ally is an attack on all – remains, as reaffirmed in Ankara, the foundation of the entire Western security architecture. It is the mechanism that transforms a billion citizens from 32 states into a single defense community. It is the reason why no one, not even Russia, has ever directly tested a NATO member state through conventional military aggression, despite continuous hostile rhetoric.

Ukraine does not have this shield. Neither does the Republic of Moldova. And the difference between countries like Poland or the Baltic states, on one hand, and Ukraine or the Republic of Moldova, on the other hand, is not one of the intensity of the threat felt from Moscow – it is a structural, legal one, of belonging to a collective deterrence system. The Ankara Summit has shown, once again, how much the Alliance is willing to invest to protect this system for its members. And, implicitly, how exposed the states outside of it remain.

The 70 billion euro support for Ukraine is generous, but as emphasized even in the text of the declaration, it remains assistance – not a guarantee of collective security. The final declaration from Ankara does not contain any reference to a possible accession of Ukraine to NATO. It is a telling omission: the Alliance is willing to massively finance Ukraine’s defense, but not, at least for now, to integrate it into the mechanism that would render this aid unnecessary in the long term, because it would automatically activate collective defense.

The precedent set by Finland and Sweden – and why it matters for Chisinau

The clearest lesson of recent years, one that should be the starting point of any serious debate about the security of the Republic of Moldova, is the one offered by Finland and Sweden. Both states have maintained, for decades, a carefully constructed policy of neutrality, motivated precisely by the desire not to provoke Moscow and to avoid becoming a front line. The war in Ukraine has demonstrated, in a few months, the bankruptcy of this logic: neutrality was not perceived by Russia as a guarantee of safety for its neighbors, but as a window of vulnerability. Helsinki and Stockholm drew the correct and swift conclusion – they abandoned a tradition of neutrality older than the Cold War and joined NATO.

Today, the Republic of Moldova finds itself in a structurally similar position to the one that Finland and Sweden have abandoned. Moldovan neutrality, inscribed in the Constitution, is often presented as a protective formula against involvement in regional conflicts. In reality, it has not prevented the presence of Russian troops on national territory, in the Transnistrian region, for over three decades. It has not prevented the constant economic, energy and informational pressures exerted on Chisinau. It has not prevented repeated attempts at internal political destabilization. In the case of the Republic of Moldova, neutrality has not been a guarantee of security – it has been, at most, a rhetorical formula that has allowed an external actor to maintain a disproportionate influence over a sovereign state, under the pretext of respecting this status.

The Ankara Summit confirms, through the scale of investments and the unanimity of the diagnosis regarding Russia, that states effectively under NATO protection treat the Russian threat as a real, structural and long-term one – not as a transient phenomenon that will fade on its own. It is hard to argue that a state directly neighboring this threat, without the protection offered by Article 5, could be less exposed than the Alliance members.

Romania, the Black Sea and regional responsibility

Another significant element for Chisinau, explicitly mentioned in the summit reports, is Romania’s positioning. President Nicusor Dan confirmed in Ankara Bucharest’s commitment to allocate approximately 3.7% of GDP for defense and security in 2026 and emphasized Romania’s role as a stabilizing actor on the eastern flank and in the Black Sea region, including through continuous support provided to Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova, among others through the Bucharest 9 format.

This positioning confirms a simple but essential geopolitical truth: the security of the Republic of Moldova cannot be separated from the broader regional security of the Black Sea. Romania, a NATO member state, assumes an active role not only as a beneficiary of the Alliance’s protection, but as a provider of stability for its non-aligned neighbors. It is a valuable form of support – logistical, political, diplomatic – but remains, by definition, limited compared to what direct membership in the collective defense system would offer.

The lesson that Chisinau must learn

From the statement in Ankara, from the furious reaction of Moscow, from the Finnish and Swedish precedent, and from the active positioning of Romania, a clear picture emerges. NATO remains, as the history of the last eight decades demonstrates, the most efficient collective security structure ever built – not because it is infallible, but because no member state has ever been militarily attacked by a conventional adversary in the over 75 years of the Alliance’s existence. The investments announced in Ankara show, more than any speech, that this commitment remains solid and that member states are willing to pay the political and financial price to maintain it.

For the Republic of Moldova, the question is no longer whether the Russian threat is real – the thirty years of unauthorized military presence in Transnistria, energy pressures and disinformation campaigns provide an unambiguous answer. The real question is whether the status of neutrality still serves any practical purpose of protection, or whether it has become, as happened with Finnish and Swedish neutrality before 2022, a symbolic construction maintained more out of inertia and fear than from rational strategic calculation.

The lesson of Ankara is not an invitation to bellicose rhetoric, nor a pressure for hasty decisions. It is an invitation to realism. The states that enjoy the greatest security in the region today are those integrated into credible and well-funded collective defense structures. The states that remain outside these structures, no matter how sincere their declared neutrality, are exposed to a power calculation that they do not control. The Republic of Moldova cannot change the geography that places it on the border of an active conflict zone. But it can, like Finland and Sweden before it, decide whether it wants to face this reality in isolation or alongside an alliance that has just demonstrated, with concrete figures and long-term commitments, its willingness to invest massively in the defense of its members.

Ankara was, after all, a test of coherence for the West. Chisinau now has its own coherence test to pass: that of aligning the political discourse about Europeanization and security with an honest assessment of the tools that provide, provenly, real protection.

The post Ankara builds deterrence, Chisinau still bets on neutrality. Op-Ed by Anatol Taranu appeared first on ipn.md.

For this, eight member countries will provide the Alliance’s military with 16 training centers. The decision reflects the lessons learned from the war in Ukraine, where drones have become an essential element of military operations. NATO believes that threats posed by unmanned aerial vehicles are rapidly evolving and require accelerated investments in both detection and interception systems, as well as in personnel training.

To accelerate acquisitions, the Alliance will create a dedicated common market for anti-drone systems, through which member states will be able to purchase tested and NATO-standard compatible equipment, according to the Alliance’s statement. The initiative aims to reduce the time required for acquisitions and increase interoperability among allied armies.

The announcement is part of a broader package of projects presented at the NATO summit in Ankara, which also includes acquisitions of radar aircraft, high-altitude drones, refueling aircraft, and other programs to strengthen the defense industry. NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, stated that the investments are intended to transform political commitments into concrete military capabilities and to respond to increasingly complex threats to the Alliance’s security. According to him, the development of anti-drone technologies and the expansion of industrial cooperation represent a strategic priority for the coming years.

The post NATO will invest over 40 billion dollars in anti-drone systems and operator training appeared first on ipn.md.

Ireland’s mandate, which extends over a period of six months, until December 31, marks the eighth time the state holds the presidency of the Council. In a global context defined by instability and major challenges, Dublin aims to act under the motto “Strength through unity”. Also, the emphasis will be on the rule of law, the resilience of democracies and fundamental rights, including the protection of minorities and children online.

At the same time, Ireland will pay special attention to the EU enlargement process, considering it an essential tool for ensuring peace and prosperity across the entire continent. The Dublin government has expressed its support for the merit-based accession process for candidate states such as Moldova and Ukraine. In this regard, Ireland insists that the fundamental values of the community bloc, especially the rule of law, be strictly respected both within the EU and in the candidate countries.

At the same time, during its six-month mandate, Ireland aims to conduct complex negotiations on the future multiannual budget of the union, while maintaining support for key policies such as the Common Agricultural Policy and regional cohesion.

The post Ireland takes over the presidency of the EU Council, with an agenda focused on expansion and security appeared first on ipn.md.