A geopolitical dispute has always existed in the Republic of Moldova. Two development models persist here – the European one and the Eastern one, which is authoritarian and personalized. There should be yet no doubt that the European model is the one that should be followed by Moldova, stated expert in international relations Ion Tăbârță. “The problem is that we want the benefits of the Western world, but do not want to respect the rules this imposes for enjoying these benefits,” the expert noted in the public debate “Germany’s Presidency of Council of EU: impact on Europe, impact on Moldova” that was staged by IPN News Agency.
Ion Tăbârță said an institutional development model that will later bring all the benefits to the citizens of the Republic of Moldova should be chosen and this is the European model. There is the Association Agreement with the EU, which is a framework document that should be implemented in order to achieve the European model. “The problem is that in the implementation of this Association Agreement, we try to adopt a selective approach. We implement the economic, commercial part that brings benefits to us, but do not want to apply the macro-political part, to say it so. We do not want to do the necessary reforms that are probably painful and that affect particular privileged sections of society, such as the justice sector reform and the fight against corruption. The problem derives from here,” he stated.
According to the expert, in the person of the EU Moldova has that model to which it should aspire to build a prosperous, democratic, developed society. “The Republic of Moldova is a small state situated at the confluence of two geopolitical areas and this is a big problem. The division of society according to the geopolitical criterion persists. When analyzing the multiparty system, on which a functional democracy is based, we see that we have parties founded according to geopolitical criteria – the parties of the left are pro-Eastern and pro-Russia ones, while the parties of the right are pro-European and pro-Romania ones. Probably after 2014-2015, another cleavage appeared in Moldovan society, the so-called oligarchic and anti-oligarchic cleavage,” he noted.
Ion Tăbârță considers this cleavage emerged amid the society’s deception concerning the European course. “There was a kind of automated division earlier – those of the left are associated with different problems inherited from the past, while those of the right are pro-European and clean and represent the future. It seemed that the government of particular pro-European parties of the right will contribute to solving most of the problems. But it didn’t happen so. The pro-European government during about ten years clearly showed that this pro-European camp includes those who really want a European path for the Republic of Moldova and those who parasitize on this message and adopted artificial European reforms. These factors contributed to the bank fraud, capture of justice and other illegalities that generated a lot of disillusion in the West, including Germany, after that promising start of 210-1012. Surely, the ball is in our court. Democratization depends on us,” stated the expert.
He also said that the changes and reforms should come from inside the state and the EU offers assistance in this regard. This support should be also designed to help Moldova cope with particular risks and threats that come from other geopolitical areas.
The debate “Germany’s Presidency of Council of EU: impact on Europe, impact on Moldova” was the 142nd installment of the series of debates “Developing political culture through public debates” that is supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
