Vladimir Voronin: In 2012 there appeared the notion of ‘captured state’ with reference to Moldova

{Info-Prim Neo interview with MP Vladimir Voronin, president of the Communist Party of Moldova (PCRM), of the series “Year 2012 in Moldova’s and Moldovans’ life”, article No.2 of 12, [originally published on December 10]} [– Please name several accomplishments obtained by the PCRM in 2012 and several failures, if there are such] – Generally speaking – as speaking about accomplishments in concrete terms in politics is difficult because the people understand the results achieved differently – the accomplishments are better seen in elections. We didn’t have elections this year, but the greatest success of the PCRM was the fact that we managed to maintain the party’s authority at the same level, with the number of party members going up. They announce the funerals of the PCRM two times a year, not rarer. But the latest surveys show that we are in the lead and our rating didn’t diminish. This is important as it is hard for a party that has been in opposition for almost four years to keep its rating and authority. I think that the greatest failure of our party and of the whole Moldovan society was witnessed on March 16 (the election of the President of Moldova), when the ruling alliance appropriated the state power and started to destroy all the democratic institutions. Everybody saw what happened after March 16. [– How was 2012 in general for your party and its parliamentary group and for Moldova on the whole?] – This year was marked by the largest number of protests. We did not count up, but the estimated number of protests this year was higher compared with other years. There appeared the notion of ‘captured state’ with reference to Moldova. This notion characterizes the passing year. [– You say ‘captured state’, but who are the ‘captors’?] – The criminal and mafiot system that is in power. The Alliance first of all. They are the captors! [– How would you describe the relations between the power and the opposition in 2012? Would you compare today’s relations with the relations existing when the current opposition was in power and the government in opposition?] – It is regrettable, but there are no relations between the government and the opposition. We have proposals, but do not have common consultations. Over 200 proposals and initiatives suggested by us weren’t included in the Parliament’s agenda. When we were in power, the opposition had control over such institutions as the Central Election Commission and the Supervisory Board of Teleradio-Moldova. Today, no representative of the opposition heads an institution controlled by Parliament. What kind of relations can we speak about in such a situation? [–Seven MPs left the PCRM during a year. The question is not how somebody managed to attract them, but why didn’t the PCRM succeed in keeping them?] – The persons who left did it because they no longer had access to the government’s ‘pig bowl’. This is the reason, not the fact that they wanted to create other parties, Lilliputian organizations. Two days before leaving, some of them took part in the party’s plenary congress and accepted executive positions. They are not concerned about the work of the opposition and the struggle. They got used to being chiefs very quickly. But when the power was taken over by the alliance and they remained without posts and possibilities, they decided to deflect. They do not want to be without posts for four years, to have meetings with the people, to take part in protests. [– What are the direct effects of the ban on the use of the party’s symbol on the PCRM? Will you comply if the Constitutional Court rules that the ban is legal?] – The ruling alliance’s arguments concerning the banning of symbols are from the arsenal of Marshal Antonescu. Their goal was to make the people blind by banning these symbols so that they do not see the Communists’ symbol when they go to the polls and not vote for us. They aim to diminish our party’s power. But they will not manage to reduce our authority as we have eight years of government behind us. The people are now able to compare. We are a disciplined and organized party and have organizations all over the country. We are preparing the documents needed to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. Moreover, there were cases in other countries when they tried to prohibit these symbols, including in Romania, Hungary, France, and Algeria. The ECHR ruled in favor of the parties and restored the symbols. [– In 2012, the PCRM promoted the Eurasian integration idea as powerfully as the ruling alliance promoted the European integration idea. Why do you think you will win this competition? Will the Moldovans vote for the yet unclear prospect of a union of not very developed states to the detriment of a union of highly developed states even if this union goes through a crisis, as the rest of the world?] – We do not overlap the message concerning the entry into the Russia-Belarus-Kazakhstan Customs Union with that regarding the integration into the EU. First of all, the European integration idea was put forward by us in 2002, when we were in power. In 2003, we signed the first Moldova – EU Action Plan, which included a broad program of activities in different areas for three years. We over-fulfilled this program during two years. Our results were appreciated and we received a grant of €17 million. The alliance keeps silent about this. The European integration is an extraordinary possibility for modernizing the country and adjusting the national legislation, the medical norms and services, the educational standards and other areas to the European standards. European integration for Moldova means integration into all the European organizations. The entry into the Russia-Belarus-Kazakhstan Customs is first of all a purely economic dimension. In addition, we are well known in these countries. We can speak the same language – Russian. Where is the largest number of Moldovans working? In Russia, about 1 million people. There are many arguments for joining this union as soon as possible. We will have only positive results. It is an economic problem. We will have better results here than in the EU today as we see the profoundness of the crisis that hit the European Union, especially the region along the Mediterranean Sea, starting with Romania, Bulgaria and up to Portugal. We must not politicize this subject. The country must have an opening. Our goods are well-known and appreciated on the markets of these three states. [– Can we follow two paths concomitantly, to the EU and to the Customs Union, or we should choose only one direction?] – We can follow booth of them as nobody bans us from doing this. There are no such restrictions. Don’t you see what relations some of the important EU member states, including Germany, have with Russia? Who did Angela Merkel meet with recently? Not with Putin? Didn’t she go to Moscow? The relations between Germany and Russia are very good. A gas pipe going along the bottom of the Baltic Sea carries gas from Russia to Germany. What about the relations between Russia and France, and Italy? How many investments does Moscow attract? Are we the richest and the wisest to choose? We do not have what to choose from. We must be there where there is the country’s interest, not where one individual or other wants. [– Will 2013 be somehow different from 2012 for the PCRM?] – In 2013, we will extend the activities aimed at developing the party horizontally and vertically. We will continue the political struggle on all the dimensions and will stage protests, if need be. But, in general, I would like the coming year to be the last year in power of the ruling alliance. Let’s remove them! [Mariana Galben, Info-Prim Neo]