Reformation of Moldovan foreign ministry is an imperative. Commentary by Victor Chirila for Info-Prim Neo

During the last eight years, the Moldovan authorities had committed many mistakes in their relations with such major foreign partners as the EU, Russia, the U.S. and especially Romania and Ukraine. These recurring blunders made by our young ministry of foreign affairs made many of us wonder whether there was something wrong with our foreign policy and diplomatic service. The April events and the collapse of the relations with Romania confirmed what our Western partners realized gradually – the foreign ministry of Moldova lost the perception of reality, is a disorientated service that is facing an acute crisis of professionalism and professional deontology. In other words, our foreign ministry became an institution emptied of the necessary content. The perpetuation of this state is inadmissible if the Alliance for European Integration (AEI) wants to restore Moldova’s image of credible partner in a short period of time, to promote the European integration process and reestablish cooperation relations with the most important partners. At the same time, the Moldovan foreign ministry should regain the status of vanguard of the European integration process. For this to happen, the AEI must reform the internal/operational structure of the ministry and restore the legitimacy of decision making in the area of foreign policy. Otherwise, the European integration program of the future government risks being torpedoed from the very beginning. Consequently, the reform of the institutional and decisional foreign policy framework should be based on the following objectives: 1. [To review the head of state’s powers in the area of foreign policy provided by article 86 of the Constitution of Moldova] so as to put an end to the president’s involvement in the internal activity of the foreign ministry. Under the given article, the head of state is empowered to carry out talks and participate in negotiations, to sign international treaties in the name of Moldova, to accredit and recall the diplomatic representatives of Moldova, to approve the creation, dissolution or change of status of the embassies, to deal with the letters of accreditation and recalling of diplomatic representatives of other states in Moldova. 2. [To give the foreign ministry decisional and operational autonomy as it was until 2001]. As it is well known, after the internal restructuring of 2005 and 2006 carried out with the assistance of the Security and Information Service, the foreign ministry became a docile instrument of the PCRM and practically a subdivision of the Apparatus of the Moldovan President. 3. [To restore the Parliament’s role in the area of foreign policy] as it is provided in the Constitution of Moldova. Under article 66 of the Constitution, the legislature approves the main foreign goals of the state and, very important, controls the executive power, including the foreign ministry. Article 66 allows the Parliament to strengthen its role of supervisor of the way in which our foreign policy is implemented. In this connection, the parliamentary commission for foreign relations should claim not only a simply consultative role, but also the powers/responsibilities to monitor the work of the foreign ministry, diplomatic missions and ambassadors, and should take part in the formulation of strategic foreign policy documents. 4. [To provide the Moldovan foreign ministry with programmatic documents - the Foreign Policy Conception and the European Integration Strategy], which will define the foreign policy objectives on long and medium terms and the ways, mechanisms and instruments for achieving them. The existence of such documents should minimize or exclude the interference of other political players in the abusive, distorted and conjunctural interpretation of the national interests. 5. [To restore the professional dignity of the diplomatic service]. Despite the multiple failures of the foreign ministry, very few diplomats had the courage to warn the central authorities and the people about the shortcomings of our diplomatic service. Those that did it were either ostracized or expelled from the diplomatic service. The case of the former Moldovan ambassador to the EU Eugen Carpov is as relevant as possible. Of course, any government needs loyal functionaries, but the loyalty should not be confused with political servilism as it happened to the present authorities. Certainly, the AEI will need diplomats dedicated to the European integration cause, but the coalition also needs moral and professional diplomats. Consequently, it is essential to review the mechanism for promoting the diplomats, which should lay equal stress on the merits, professional qualities, honor and respect for the professional deontology. 6. [To initiate transparent and constant cooperation between the foreign ministry and the civil society]. The idea of creating the Council of Foreign Affairs under the foreign ministry is more than welcome. It is in fact a necessity. The experience of the last few years showed that the ministry of foreign affairs does not always have the institutional, human and analytical abilities to realistically, competently and exhaustively analyze the regional and international developments so as to formulate correct conclusions, set realistic objectives in the relations with the foreign partners and choose appropriate tactics for achieving them. The civil society has now the capacity needed to assist the foreign ministry in promoting a balanced and coherent foreign policy. Moreover, using its knowledge, experience and the communication and cooperation networks and partnerships, the civil society can maximize the impact of the efforts made by our diplomatic service. Victor Chirila, acting executive director of the Foreign Policy Association, for Info-Prim Neo