{[Info-Prim Neo Analysis]} Drivers and owners of Chisinau's routed passenger minibuses, colloquially known as rutieras or marshrutkas, have engaged in a strike action based on apparently irrational considerations. Or maybe, on the contrary, their considerations are well-thought-out and known only by a narrow circle of people. Either way, it seems that most participants – both drivers and owners – in the strike that has headed into its third day are acting to the detriment of their business, now and over the long haul. This conclusion appears evident after piecing together all the strikers' actions and statements. Just a few of the aspects which appear to be irrational: [First: Wrong target] In their strike action, the protesters have a wrong target. The issue of raising tariffs, including fares in the public transit system, is the exclusive prerogative of the Chisinau City Council. The Council is known for its slowness when it comes to assembling for a meeting, and it's even slower when it comes to actually solving problems. Yet the problem of passenger transportation is indeed stringent. They, however, continue to hound Mayor Dorin Chirtoaca as they've been doing for months. At this stage, all Chirtoaca can do is to convoke the City Council for a meeting, an extraordinary one if needed, and he's already done that. On Thursday morning the Council assembled and the rare chance was created for the rutiera issue to be addressed. No such luck, though. After a lengthy argument, the councilors dispersed without even declaring the meeting open. One of the reasons of the meeting's failure was the absence of Mayor Chirtoaca, who, ironically, was busy braving out the complaints of the strikers outside the City Hall. Wouldn't it have made more sense if the protesters begged or told Chirtoaca to go and join the Council meeting? They should have known better than to call him “traitor” among other cries of contempt and disapproval. And then, the next meeting of the Council was scheduled for late October, no earlier. Meaning, all the talks about fares will remain talks until then. [Second: The-deaf-talking-to-the-mute negotiations] Any problem can be solved by means of negotiations, and quite less often by means of unilateral pressure. Suppose the strikers are right and have the right to claim a raise of fares, but it's also them who have a host of responsibilities to meet. The list of requirements which the rutiera drivers should follow was formulated, or more precisely reiterated, at the end of the first day of the strike. The list includes, among other requirements, the following: no passengers in standing room; the speed limit of 50 km/hour must be strictly observed; rutieras must stop only at designated stops; timetables must be displayed in each rutiera and strictly followed; no smoking, talking on the mobile phone, listening to music by the drivers; drivers must drive buckled at all times; drivers must have a civilized behavior and a clean appearance; a card with information on the driver and operator must be displayed in the vehicle; the technical condition of the vehicle must be constantly checked; a GPS tracking system should be introduced to check speeds, routes, stops and driving times; a common center should be created to monitor rutieras; and unruly drivers must be fired and banned from re-employment on other routes. This is a list of legitimate, fair and essential requirements for the improvement of passenger transportation conditions in Chisinau. The rules of fair negotiations and of common sense state that each party in the negotiations should take its share of steps towards middle ground. Any other approach involving pressure, obstructions and blackjack is anything but fair negotiations. [Third: a vulnerable position with an even more vulnerable future] Rutieras appeared in specific historical circumstances when both the ability and eagerness of the government to address the problem of the ever growing passenger numbers were down. In those circumstances, coercive negotiations would have made some sense, but not today. Recently the Municipality bought one hundred new trolleybuses and more recently it voiced its intention of purchasing one hundred new buses as well. During the ongoing talks on the rutieras' issue, Mayor Chirtoaca stated, for those with ears to hear, that there is a tendency to revive large-capacity means of public transit, leaving rutieras to circulate only on secondary streets. This tendency of the municipal authorities will persist, or will even be strongly promoted if the current public-private partnership continues in the twist-of-arm spirit. Any municipal government, irrespective of its political color, will tend now and in the future to escape the embrace of such an unfair partnership. [Fourth: Which might the actual goal be?] With these pieces of the problem, the question that should be asked is the following: does the strike really pursues the stated goal, that of securing a raise of the rutiera fare? In all situations and at all times there have been political forces interested in a destabilization that would help them stay in, come to or come back to power. For now, however, let's leave aside “purely” political interests that might be involved, and concentrate on the apparent irrationality of the strikers' actions. Potential answers should be rather searched in the zone of economic interests, with or without political connections. It appears that what the Municipality tries to obtain from the passenger carriers is simply order and observance of rules, and nothing more. The failure to keep the activity of the rutiera business under strict record has placed it in the gray compartment of economy, and this is no secret. This implies, in particular, significant amounts of money which go untaxed. The unyielding demand of the strikers that they must not be fined for the failure to give out tickets is a telling indication of the resistance against the efforts to have this business completely transparent. We shouldn't rule out the possibility that municipal or even government actors might pursue obscure interests in the troubled waters of the public transit system, but this is yet to be demonstrated. Further, from the perspective of an imminent reduction of rutiera operations, many owners and drivers could find themselves on the curbside. If not now, maybe then will they question themselves what role did they play in this autumn's strike and in the future redistribution of rutiera routes? [Valeriu Vasilică, Info-Prim Neo]