“It is absolutely insufficient to seek the removal of the PAS from power. It is much more important: to suggest something instead; to explain the attitude to the ongoing Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, to explain where resources will be taken from to improve the socioeconomic situation and how to act with regard to the European integration process, which is supported by over half of the country’s population – should it be reversed or continued; how to act with regard to the justice sector reform – should it be stopped or continued, in what way, etc...”
---
Announcement of resumption of protests
After the general local elections held on November 5, 2023, the electoral councils are still tabulating the voting results. For now, we don’t know the final results – are they encouraging for the opposition, for the current government or for any third force? What we know with certitude is that the elections served as a pretext for announcing the resumption of protests against the current government. We also don’t know anything about the size of the future protests. We only know that the start of the protests was set for November 7, 10 a.m.
The launch of the protests was announced ahead of the elections, on November 1, by the leader of the Party of Development and Consolidation of Moldova (PDCM), ex-Preemie Ion Chicu, who stated: “Never democracy in the Republic of Moldova was humiliated so much by a government that claims to be democratic. Personally, I do not intend to tolerate the crimes committed by the corrupt analphabets from the PAS against the state and the citizens of this country. I call on the political leaders to combine forces with us in this struggle!”
If it goes to a struggle against the government, a conspiracy is needed. This is probably the reason that made the leader of the PDCM to make a call to the potential outsiders: “I ask for confirmation (in private) of the readiness to take part in this gathering”. Anyway, the conspiracy is the key element of any revolutionary struggle. That’s why it is absolutely necessary, especially because the start of the struggle against the current government was symbolically timed to coincide with the 106th anniversary of the Bolshevik putsch of November 7, 1917.
Struggle against government on Common Agenda
In the struggle declared against the current government, the PDCM can bank on the support of the eight parties that form part of the Common Agenda platform. At least this is what one of the leaders of the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM), Vlad Bătrîncea, asserted one year ago. The hiatus of about a year taken in organizing the protests can be due to the fact that the protest initiative was initially assumed by the Shor Party and the so-called National Salvation Council (NSC) which included the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova (PCRM), the Party “We Build Europe at Home” (PACE), and the Revival Party (PR). Elementary logic suggests that after the Shor Party was declared unconstitutional, time has come for the initiative to be taken over by the Common Agenda platform which was on waiting positions, as we can see.
It is not accidental that the PSRM immediately responded to the PDCM leader’s call, saying that: “The Socialists always pleaded consistently and responsibly for the combination of all the healthy forces so as to obtain snap parliamentary and presidential elections...All the healthy forces should unite to oust the anti-people government”. Moreover, in the struggle against the current government, the leader of the PSRM, Igor Dodon, ostentatiously pleaded in favor of the use of the paraphrased slogan of the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party (PLDM), Vlad Filat, - Moldova without Maia Sandu, Moldova without the PAS! The insistence to put into circulation the paraphrased famous slogan of Vlad Filat is nothing but an additional confirmation of the invitation made to the latter to take part in protests alongside the Common Agenda platform. The point is the PLDM associated itself from the start with the Common Agenda, but later withdrew. Only after Vlad Filat took over the PLDM, the party repeatedly insisted on the combination of the efforts of all the political forces against the current government. This way, all the components of the Common Agenda platform could confirm, evidently in private, that they support the initiative of the leader of the PDCM – Start protests!
Success of protests...
The PDCM leader’s initiative is not an original one. Two years ago, such an initiative was launched by the Shor Party, which insisted on the created of the National Salvation Council, and later by the PSRM, which repeatedly insisted on the creation of the United Salvation Front. This year, ahead of the local elections, such calls were made by the PLDM and the same PSRM. The PDCM’s innovation resides in the calling of protests immediately after the elections, when it will become clear which political forces really enjoy the citizens’ support. This post-electoral test has both good and bad points. This way, it is highly improbable that the Common Agenda parties with modest results are interested in becoming involved in protests to support the ambitions of the leaders of the PDCM and PSRM, Ion Chicu and Igor Dodon.
First of all, the two leaders can be directly blamed for the coming of the PAS to power. No one could understand, for example, why was it necessary for Prime Minister Ion Chicu to resign on December 24, 2020. That resignation generated a profound political crisis, contributing decisively to the PAS’s takeover in the state. Ex-Premier Ion Chicu’s decision was supported by Igor Dodon and the responsibility is common therefore. After such political blunders, the pretention of the two to save Moldova from the PAS government is not at all convincing. As they say, their deed was worse than am crime; it was a mistake.
Secondly, the leader of the PSRM raged at Ion Ceban, chairman of the National Alternative Movement (MAN) – “Ceban is not a Socialist. Ion Ceban is a chameleon that changed his political color, betrayed the PSRM, changed his values to please the Americans and the Europeans and to cheat you”. At least this is what the leader of the Socialists, Igor Dodon, who was earlier a party mate of Ion Ceban – both as part of the PCRM and as part of the PSRM - stated... “He went to Putin together with me and said that he was for the EEU, but now is already for the EU. He told me that the language was Moldovan and he now calls it Romanian”. These assertions belong to an established traitor who even committed perjury against the PCRM and its leader, Vladimir Voronin. It is highly improbable that after such a public attitude, Ion Ceban would want to be somehow associated with Igor Dodon and the PSRM.
Thirdly, the notion of protest movement was fundamentally corrupted by Ilan Shor, who during a year paid by about $20 to protesters for participation in each mounted protest. Respectively, it is highly improbable that a new wave of protests will be unfolded without using the pecuniary reflexes cultivated by Ilan Shor. The last one would undertake to pay for a new wave of protests, but the authorities seem to have learned to detect the ways by which illegal funds enter the country. However, money for protests could be found. In this regard, it is probably not accidental when the leader of the PSRM lures to protests the leader of the PLDM to whom Ilan Shor presumably paid $250 million bribe. We cannot know if this is true, but money for protests would probably be found.
Conclusions
Very soon, after we find out the final results of the general elections, we will learn if the initiative of the PDCM leader Ion Chicu to stage a new wave of protests can be successful and if this can bank on the idea of the illegitimacy of the PAS’s power.
If, eventually, the protests expand, it will be very interesting to follow which the driving forces of the protest movement and their sources of financing are. Finely, the political program of the new protest movement will hold great interest. It is absolutely insufficient to seek the removal of the PAS from power. It is much more important: to suggest something instead; to explain the attitude to the ongoing Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, to explain where resources will be taken from to improve the socioeconomic situation and how to act with regard to the European integration process, which is supported by over half of the country’s population – should it be reversed or continued; how to act with regard to the justice sector reform – should it be stopped or continued, in what way, etc...”
