The Republic of Moldova will not manage to have a constructive relationship with the Russian Federation as long as it does not have institutions controlled by the people, which are not subordinated to party interests, and as long as the political players do not ensure transparency, while civil society and the media do not do their job as regards the counteracting of misinformation and education of critical thinking in society, Dionis Cenușa, a political scientist, researcher at the Institute of Political Sciences at Liebig-Justus University in Giessen, stated in IPN’s public debate “Reforming of Moldovan-Russian relations after presidential elections: problems, solutions, priorities”.
According to the expert, Moldova’s President-elect faces very serious dilemmas related to the relations with the Russian Federation. These relations are complex and difficult primarily because the politicians in time exploited the relations with the Russian Federation for personal or party purposes. Respectively, Maia Sandu should resolve a number of problems simultaneously. “For the purpose, she needs to gain competence in a record period of time and be responsible for what she states about the relations with the Russian Federation. What a President states can have an echo in society, while the de-politicization of the President’s rhetoric will be beneficial to the President,” said Dionis Cenușa, noting misinformation should be treated as a national security issue as this can be used to mislead not only the Moldovans, but also the foreign partners, including the Russian Federation.
In another development, Dionis Cenușa said Igor Dodon, after he was installed as President, practically transformed the presidential institution into an own corporation. He spoke in the name of the presidential administration, but also represented Moldova’s interests. This way, all the ties that Russia developed during the past four years were developed through him and his leaving now creates a dependence problem. If the new President wants to have a new qualitative relationship with the Russian Federation, she should take the relations over and time is needed for this. “Another important aspect is related to the politicization of institutions in the Republic of Moldova and division of institutions between different political interests. This happened primarily after the Communists left. In these conditions, the institutions became somehow disoriented from institutional viewpoint and were subordinated to very clear political interests. Society can influence this situation as the political parties act depending on the preferences of society,” stated the researcher.
Dionis Cenușa noted that if Moldova wants coherent foreign policy that serves the national interests, the foreign policy should be pragmatic, consistent and constructive in relation to all the foreign players. “This pragmatism derives from the importance of the relations the Republic of Moldova has with a particular country. If the Russian Federation is important for various reasons (energy, humanitarian), namely these aspects should be addressed and good results should be achieved here.”
According to the expert, Russia’s perceptions of the Moldovan political class are also important. When the misinformation about Maia Sandu’s statements concerning the Moldovan-Russian relations in sensitive areas started, it was evident that the misinformation of Igor Dodon and those from the PSRM worked, but it was also Russia’s predication to accept that misinformation. Earlier, as Moldova chose the European integration course in a sovereign way, Russia had an unhealthy reaction as it imposed bans on Moldovan production.
The public debate “Reforming of Moldovan-Russian relations after presidential elections: problems, solutions, priorities” was the 161st installment of the series “Developing political culture through public debates” that is supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
