The electoral debates between the candidates for the vacancy of mayor of Chisinau municipality organized PRO TV channel offered us the possibility of assessing both the promises and the personal performance of the protagonists. The goal of such a type of debates is to enable the TV viewers, the voters, to form realistic opinions about the candidates for whom they are to vote, free from the influence of the persistent propagandistic machinery.
The general perception is that the debates on PRO TV channel focalized candidates’ efforts to persuade the citizens and the themes of the previous debates on a common denominator. The problems of the municipality have been the same for dozens of years, being faithfully listed by the press. The solutions proposed by the candidates vary depending on their professional training, the teams of experts who assist them and the limits of their imagination. In this regard, the competition was relatively balanced owing to the debate framework and the professional skills of the moderator. Consequently, the candidates most probably strengthened their base of sympathizers. The attraction of the undecided voters remains yet an open problem.
Surely, the competition between the candidates hadn’t been a chivalry tournament. Candidate Ion Ceban tried to take the bull by the horns from the very beginning, giving Andrei Nastase a discouraging blow – an alleged illegal privatization act with the involvement of persons close to him. This happened before the moderator opened the debate. Was it a nervous tic or a planned act aimed at the opponent’s integrity? We will yet see! However, the episode revealed a prearranged behavior designed to morally harass the opponent – the intrusive, annoying invitations to take part in open-air public debates without clear rules, invasive surprise visits to the opponent’s meetings with voters, etc. It is hard to say who stands to gain from such behavior – the invader or his victim. The mentioning of a popular saying in response was appropriate – who would like to be put a fly in the ointment?
The mutual attacks on the opponent’s integrity in the debates weren’t a surprise. One of the parents of the U.S. Constitution said that if men were angels, no government would be necessary. Surely, the competitors for the post of mayor of Chisinau aren’t angels, but they both have integrity certificates issued by a competent public institution. This fact is somehow funny. On the other hand, the debate moderator showed educational inspiration when she asked the opponents to clarify particular episodes of their recent past for the citizens. Andrei Nastase had to admit that aiming to use metaphors, he sometimes misuses phrases, as in the case of the “handkerchief on the dulcimer” (expression meaning ‘hiding something’). For his part, Ion Ceban admitted that sometimes the circumstances are more solid than his convictions, which can be flexible. That’s why, asking his former colleagues Igor Dodon, Zinaida Grecheanyi and others who in 2012 fundamentally undermined the Communist opposition against the Alliance for European Integration to account for this publicly, he rode the wave and later found himself among those requested to account for reprehensible acts. Undoubtedly, the given episode crowned the moderator’s triumph.
There were also other very interesting aspects of the performance and promises of the candidates, but it is important to note that high-quality debates free from propagandistic pressure are possible only on a TV channel that is not affiliated to political parties. Therefore, it is not strange when the media holdings affiliated to political parties refuse to organize debates with the participation of candidates.
IPN experts
