Politics
Historical politics in the Republic of Moldova – an unfulfilled obsession
Reading Time: 6 minutesHistorical politics that one talked about in case of Poland and Ukraine was a constant for the foreign policy of Moldova. Unlike two other countries previously mentioned, Moldova has failed to raise this kind of politics to the rank of state poli
Historical politics that one talked about in case of Poland and Ukraine was a constant for the foreign policy of Moldova. Unlike two other countries previously mentioned, Moldova has failed to raise this kind of politics to the rank of state policy; it manifested rather erratic and intermittent, being the privilege of opposition and of a minority in governmental vaults. This inability to strongly affirm historical politics at official rank may be explained by the fact that unlike Ukraine and Poland which have always targeted Russia as the “pole of evil”, Moldova has always identified as “bad guys” – Russia and Romania. This balance of competing historic codes, settled in the collective mentality of Moldovan people, resulted in a quiet and retractile foreign policy that did not dare to make outspoken accusations to neighbors of Moldova.
Historical politics – a constant of foreign policy of the Republic of Moldova
20 years anniversary of the Independence of Moldova represents a moment of reflection that obliges us to discuss the main topics of our foreign policy. One of its guidelines was historical politics. Even if historical politics was not reflected in any major foreign policy document, being an objective that was not consciously assumed by politicians in power, it manifested itself spontaneously and chaotic through interactions and circumstantial diplomatic strategies, being an asset through which Moldova has tried to assert full sovereignty, but however, never managed to the end. Moldova’s historical politics has always had two ways of expression – Russia and Romania.
This is determined by the existence of two antagonistic visions in Moldovan society – alternatively, Russia and Romania were seen as threats and aggressors vs. Republic of Moldova. In the early ‘90s, due to the movement of National Renascence, one set Russia’s role of the “bad guy”, which assigned to it all crimes and horrors of Stalinism, and the consequences of USSR imperial policy. Subsequently, the early 21st century, once the Communist Party came to governance, direction of historical politics was changed from east to west, Romania appearing as an imminent danger to the sovereignty of Moldova, being accused of imperialism and unionism.
The coming to power of AEI I (Alliance for European Integration I) and AEI II did not change these constants of our foreign policy. Relations with Romania have significantly improved by signing local border traffic and border regime, opening consulates in Balti and Cahul and by benefiting from financial assistance offered by Romania. However there are some natural limits of this rapprochement, imposed by constraints of historical politics – agreement on border regime has not been ratified yet, thesis „European integration through Romania” was abandoned and financial assistance is still yet to come because both states did not agree yet on the terms of a joint Action Plan. The same thing is valid in relation to Russia. The refusal of Mr. Mihai Ghimpu, interim president, to participate in the parade on 9 May 2010 in Moscow and declaration of 28 June as the Day of Soviet occupation, as well as inauguration of the commission on investigation of communist crimes have triggered hostile reactions in Moscow, which resorted to blocking Moldovan wine exports. Also, various Russian politicians make regular allusions to the dangers of proximity between Moldova and Romania, last statement being made by the State Duma deputy Serghei Marcov, according to whom „Moldovan people will not kneel in front of Bucharest”. In addition, the issue of Romanian danger is approached in the context of country reintegration, Chisinau always being put in front of an imagined choice between Transnistria and Romania.
Defining elements of historical politics in Moldova
Historical politics in Moldova is not a simple affirmation of Moldovan people identity on political way and neither promotion of a politicized history by endless debates between historians promoting Romanism or separate state existence. In line with Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, it represents a conscious but diffuse policy in achieving three major objectives – 1) setting a bigger and neighbor state as executioner, responsible for sufferings of Moldova and self-assuming the role of victim, 2) identification of „internal enemies” or „ax handles” in the country, which are a kind of fifth column and are to be eliminated in various ways, 3) creating a positive and uplifting image of the Moldovan people based on epic narrations, to strengthen it as a nation.
Unlike Poland and Ukraine, which only imagine Russia as supreme aggressor, setting in the foreground and accordingly interpreting the Holodomor and Katyn (making the Volyn tragedy and Vistula operation vanish), Moldova has built its mental maps based on two “irritant factors” – Russia and Romania. This contraposition is the best described by “war of holidays” – 1 December, National Day of Romania, which is the opposite to 2 December, which according to the Communist Party from Moldova represents the day of Moldovan State foundation in 1917, a state which entered in USSR after a period of “annexation” by Romania and opposition between Victory Day on 9 May and 9 May Day of Europe on one hand, but also 28 June, Day of „Soviet occupation” in 1940”, on the other hand. Both Russia and Romania were seen in different periods as major dangers for Moldovan statehood, local political forces undertaking certain actions to their counteraction. Among the gestures that have mostly bothered Russia were the creation of Commission to study victims of communism, as well as consideration of Soviet period as “occupation”, and regarding Romania, one referred to obstruction actions such as declaring Romania „the last empire in Europe” in 2007 by the president Voronin, but also adoption of State National Policy in 2003, organizing the census in 2004 and returning to Integrated history course, all these actions aimed at damaging Romanian element in Moldova.
The fight against internal enemies also took place in both directions. The KGB-sts, security officers, communists and nomenclature officers were considered “ax handles” of Russia. Nevertheless, in Moldova one failed to pass Lustration Law and creation of Remembrance Institute after Polish or at least Ukrainian pattern. Therefore, no politician has been sanctioned or disclosed, and the results of Commission for investigation of communist crimes were kept away from public. Meanwhile, the students pursuing their studies in Romania and unionists were assigned as Romanian “secret agents”; against them one would periodically launch defamation campaigns without a clear purpose for these actions.
„War of historians” for the name and content of an appropriate history course for Moldova’s essence, represents the efforts that failed to print a clear and strengthened identity for Moldovan State. Historians, also named “unionists” by the opponents, have developed manuals of History of Romanians, and “moldovenists” have insisted on introducing the course of “Integrated history” in schools. The fact that in August 2011, Ministry of Education discussed the introduction of a new history course – „History” – which would require new manuals, demonstrates that in this matter neither of parties was victorious, so that writing the history of Moldovan people represents a task for the future.
The Government of Alliance for European Integration has clearly marked boundaries and failures of historical politics promoted in Chisinau. Main failures concerned the fate of the decree of Mr. Ghimpu on declaring the day of 28 June as day of Soviet occupation, refusal of the Parliament to debate upon results of Commission for investigation of communist crimes, hostility manifested towards the installation downtown of the Monument for Victims of Communist Regime and, in the opposite the renouncement on the course of “History of Romanians”. In this context, we can say that historical politics could not been promoted to the rank of state policy as it happened in Poland, and intermittently, in Ukraine. Only the period of 2001-2009 may be considered, with some reticence, as a period when Romania was officially seen as undisputed aggressor. However, policy of communists in relation to Romanian factor was rather prudent and flexible.
The main reason why Moldova was not able to consequently promote a historical politics in relation to states perceived as “oppressive”, may be explained by the relative balance existing between the two imagined historic codes. Russia and Romania cannot be irreversibly pushed in the category of „impious states” simply because these codes are symmetrical. Those who see Russia as an executioner of Moldova positively appreciates the role of Romania in establishment of statehood and admits the possibility of a union. Conversely, the ones being horrified by the deeds of „Romanian bourgeois-landlord regime” of 1918-1940 are tempted in the mean time to give positive feedback to Soviet period and Russia. Thus, both sides are mutually blocking one another.
Consequences of historic deadlock for the official foreign policy of Moldova
Impossibility to assert a coherent historical politics has determined the style of Moldova’s official diplomacy, a style that describes in a special way the governing period of AEI. This style is characterized by a policy of “silence” where both “poles of evil” are treated with double caution in order not to raise any suspicions that somewhere in the middle there might be historic reasons. Unlike Ukraine and Poland, Chisinau officially refused to submit or support historic claims, trying to convert all existing bilateral problems into a pragmatic and economic dimension. In case of Russia, one accuses only Moscow illegal actions in relation to Transnistria, stressing out the international law and the principle of inviolability of state sovereignty. It is interesting that even during the incident at the Russian Embassy from 10 June 2011, when Vladimir Iastrebceak was introduced by the Ambassador of Russia as Minister of foreign affairs of Transnistria, the Ministry refrained from submitting a note of protest, despite promises, limiting only with an interview exclusively made for a TV channel. In case of Romania, current diplomacy was satisfied to return to the zero point of diplomatic relations. Improvement of Moldovan and Romanian relations was due mainly to previously reported drift. After a period of political revival when both parties have signed a few official documents, one attests the establishment of a status-quo shrouded in silence, the parties no longer being able to evolve on bilateral relationship. Bilateral Action Plan has not been signed, so that it raises the issue of financial aid of Romania. Meanwhile, the parliaments do not rush to ratify the treaty on border regime. Thus, the curse of “aggressor” continues to hinder building lasting relations, Moldovan diplomacy having only maintenance of a mutually acceptable state of affairs.
A new football club has earned a leading place in the UEFA Champions League groups and starred in the headlines of worldwide football news yesterday. The Football Club Sheriff Tiraspol claimed a win with the score 2-1 against Real Madrid on the Santiago Bernabeu Stadium in Madrid. That made Sheriff Tiraspol the leader in Group D of the Champions League, including the football club in the groups of the most important European interclub competition for the first time ever.
International media outlets called it a miracle, a shock and a historic event, while strongly emphasizing the origin of the team and the existing political conflict between the two banks of the Dniester. “Football club from a pro-Russian separatist enclave in Moldova pulls off one of the greatest upsets in Champions League history,” claimed the news portals. “Sheriff crushed Real!” they said.
Moldovans made a big fuss out of it on social media, splitting into two groups: those who praised the team and the Republic of Moldova for making history and those who declared that the football club and their merits belong to Transnistria – a problematic breakaway region that claims to be a separate country.
Both groups are right and not right at the same time, as there is a bunch of ethical, political, social and practical matters that need to be considered.
Is it Moldova?
First of all, every Moldovan either from the right or left bank of Dniester (Transnistria) is free to identify himself with this achievement or not to do so, said Vitalie Spranceana, a sociologist, blogger, journalist and urban activist. According to him, boycotting the football club for being a separatist team is wrong.
At the same time, “it’s an illusion to think that territory matters when it comes to football clubs,” Spranceana claimed. “Big teams, the ones included in the Champions League, have long lost their connection both with the countries in which they operate, and with the cities in which they appeared and to which they linked their history. […] In the age of globalized commercial football, teams, including the so-called local ones, are nothing more than global traveling commercial circuses, incidentally linked to cities, but more closely linked to all sorts of dirty, semi-dirty and cleaner cash flows.”
What is more important in this case is the consistency, not so much of citizens, as of politicians from the government who have “no right to celebrate the success of separatism,” as they represent “the national interests, not the personal or collective pleasures of certain segments of the population,” believes the political expert Dionis Cenusa. The victory of FC Sheriff encourages Transnistrian separatism, which receives validation now, he also stated.
“I don’t know how it happens that the “proud Moldovans who chose democracy”, in their enthusiasm for Sheriff Tiraspol’s victory over Real Madrid, forget the need for total and unconditional withdrawal of Russian troops from Transnistria!” declared the journalist Vitalie Ciobanu.
Nowadays, FC Sheriff Tiraspol has no other choice than to represent Moldova internationally. For many years, the team used the Moldovan Football Federation in order to be able to participate in championships, including international ones. That is because the region remains unrecognised by the international community. However, the club’s victory is presented as that of Transnistria within the region, without any reference to the Republic of Moldova, its separatist character being applied in this case especially.
Is it a victory?
In fact, FC Sheriff Tiraspol joining the Champions League is a huge image breakthrough for the Transnistrian region, as the journalist Madalin Necsutu claimed. It is the success of the Tiraspol Club oligarchic patrons. From the practical point of view, FC Sheriff Tiraspol is a sports entity that serves its own interests and the interests of its owners, being dependent on the money invested by Tiraspol (but not only) oligarchs.
Here comes the real dilemma: the Transnistrian team, which is generously funded by money received from corruption schemes and money laundering, is waging an unequal fight with the rest of the Moldovan football clubs, the journalist also declared. The Tiraspol team is about to raise 15.6 million euro for reaching the Champions League groups and the amounts increase depending on their future performance. According to Necsutu, these money will go directly on the account of the club, not to the Moldovan Football Federation, creating an even bigger gab between FC Sheriff and other football clubs from Moldova who have much more modest financial possibilities.
“I do not see anything useful for Moldovan football, not a single Moldovan player is part of FC Sheriff Tiraspol. I do not see anything beneficial for the Moldovan Football Federation or any national team.”
Is it only about football?
FC Sheriff Tiraspol, with a total estimated value of 12.8 million euros, is controlled by Victor Gusan and Ilya Kazmala, being part of Sheriff Holding – a company that controls the trade of wholesale, retail food, fuels and medicine by having monopolies on these markets in Transnistria. The holding carries out car trading activities, but also operates in the field of construction and real estate. Gusan’s people also hold all of the main leadership offices in the breakaway region, from Parliament to the Prime Minister’s seat or the Presidency.
The football club is supported by a holding alleged of smuggling, corruption, money laundering and organised crime. Moldovan media outlets published investigations about the signals regarding the Sheriff’s holding involvement in the vote mobilization and remuneration of citizens on the left bank of the Dniester who participated in the snap parliamentary elections this summer and who were eager to vote for the pro-Russian socialist-communist bloc.
Considering the above, there is a great probability that the Republic of Moldova will still be represented by a football club that is not identified as being Moldovan, being funded from obscure money, growing in power and promoting the Transnistrian conflict in the future as well.
Photo: unknown
Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova, Natalia Gavrilita, together with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Nicu Popescu, pay an official visit to Brussels, between September 27-28, being invited by High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell Fontelles.
Today, Prime Minister had a meeting with Charles Michel, President of the European Council. The Moldovan PM thanked the senior European official for the support of the institution in strengthening democratic processes, reforming the judiciary and state institutions, economic recovery and job creation, as well as increasing citizens’ welfare. Natalia Gavrilita expressed her confidence that the current visit laid the foundations for boosting relations between the Republic of Moldova and the European Union, so that, in the next period, it would be possible to advance high-level dialogues on security, justice and energy. Officials also exchanged views on priorities for the Eastern Partnership Summit, to be held in December.
“The EU is open to continue to support the Republic of Moldova and the ambitious reform agenda it proposes. Moldova is an important and priority partner for us,” said Charles Michel.
Prime Minister Natalia Gavrilita also met with Paolo Gentiloni, European Commissioner for Economy, expressing her gratitude for the support received through the OMNIBUS macro-financial assistance program. The two officials discussed the need to advance the recovery of money from bank fraud, to strengthen sustainable mechanisms for supporting small and medium-sized enterprises in Moldova, and to standardize the customs and taxes as one of the main conditions for deepening cooperation with the EU in this field.
Additionally, Prime Minister spoke about the importance of the Eastern Partnership and the Deep Free Trade Agreement, noting that the Government’s policies are aimed at developing an economic model aligned with the European economic model, focused on digitalization, energy efficiency and the green economy.
A common press release of the Moldovan Prime Minister with High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the Commission, Josep Borrell Fontelles, took place today, where the agenda of Moldova’s reforms and the main priorities to focus on in the coming months were presented: judiciary reform; fighting COVID-19 pandemic; promoting economic recovery and conditions for growth and job creation; strengthening state institutions and resilience of the country.
“I am here to relaunch the dialogue between my country and the European Union. Our partnership is strong, but I believe there is room for even deeper cooperation and stronger political, economic and sectoral ties. I am convinced that this partnership is the key to the prosperity of our country and I hope that we will continue to strengthen cooperation.”
The Moldovan delegation met Didier Reynders, European Commissioner for Justice. Tomorrow, there are scheduled common meetings with Oliver Varhelyi, European Commissioner for Neighborhood and Enlargement, Adina Valean, European Commissioner for Transport and Kadri Simson, European Commissioner for Energy.
Prime Minister will also attend a public event, along with Katarina Mathernova, Deputy Director-General for Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations.
Photo: gov.md
Politics
Promo-LEX about Maia Sandu’s UN speech: The president must insist on appointing a rapporteur to monitor the situation of human rights in Transnistria
The President of the Republic of Moldova, Maia Sandu, pays an official visit to New York, USA, between September 21-22. There, she participates in the work of the United Nations General Assembly. According to a press release of the President’s Office, the official will deliver a speech at the tribune of the United Nations.
In this context, the Promo-LEX Association suggested the president to request the appointment of a special rapporteur in order to monitor the situation of human rights in the Transnistrian region. According to Promo-LEX, the responsibility for human rights violations in the Transnistrian region arises as a result of the Russian Federation’s military, economic and political control over the Tiraspol regime.
“We consider it imperative to insist on the observance of the international commitments assumed by the Russian Federation regarding the withdrawal of the armed forces and ammunition from the territory of the country,” the representatives of Promo-LEX stated. They consider the speech before the UN an opportunity “to demand the observance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the Russian Federation with reference to this territory which is in its full control.”
“It is important to remember about the numerous cases of murder, torture, ill-treatment, forced enlistment in illegal military structures, the application of pseudo-justice in the Transnistrian region, all carried out under the tacit agreement of the Russian Federation. These findings stem from dozens of rulings and decisions issued by the European Court of Human Rights, which found that Russia is responsible for human rights violations in the region.”
The association representatives expressed their hope that the president of the country would give priority to issues related to the human rights situation in the Transnistrian region and would call on relevant international actors to contribute to guaranteeing fundamental human rights and freedoms throughout Moldova.
They asked Maia Sandu to insist on the observance of the obligation to evacuate the ammunition and the military units of the Russian Federation from the territory of the Republic of Moldova, to publicly support the need for the Russian Federation to implement the ECtHR rulings on human rights violations in the Transnistrian region, and to request the appointment of an UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur to monitor the human rights situation in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova.
**
The Promo-LEX Association concluded that 14 out of 25 actions planned within the National Action Plan for the years 2018–2022 concerning respecting human rights in Transnistria were not carried out by the responsible authorities.
The association expressed its concern and mentioned that there are a large number of delays in the planned results. “There is a lack of communication and coordination between the designated institutions, which do not yet have a common vision of interaction for the implementation of the plan.”
Promo-LEX requested the Government of the Republic of Moldova to re-assess the reported activities and to take urgent measures, “which would exclude superficial implementation of future activities and increase the level of accountability of the authorities.”
Photo: peacekeeping.un.org
“They are not needy, but they need help”. How Moldovan volunteers try to create a safe environment for the Ukrainian refugees
Reading Time: 3 minutesAt the Government’s ground floor, the phones ring constantly, the laptop screens never reach standby. In one...
#WorldForUkraine – a map that shows the magnitude of the world’s actions against Russian aggression
Reading Time: 2 minutesThe international community and volunteers from all over te world have launched #WorldForUkraine as a platform that...
How is Moldova managing the big influx of Ukrainian refugees? The authorities’ plan, explained
Reading Time: 3 minutesFrom 24th to 28th of February, 71 359 Ukrainian citizens entered the territory of Republic of Moldova....
Russia And Ukraine At The Beginning of 2022
Reading Time: 4 minutesThis opinion piece was written by Dr. Nicholas Dima. Dr. Dima was formerly a Professor of Geography and...
The man raising children on Nistru river
Reading Time: 7 minutesOn the Nistru, near the village of Varnița, a few colored pens with blue dots in the...
The village of the first astronomer in the Republic of Moldova
Reading Time: 5 minutesFrom eight in the morning till noon, every Thursday and Sunday, people lay their merchandise on the...
The prodigal son returns and turns his grandparents’ home in a tourist attraction on Nistru river
Reading Time: 7 minutesOn the road towards the school, a well-maintained rural house catches your eye, yellow stags painted on...
FC Sheriff Tiraspol victory: can national pride go hand in hand with political separatism?
Reading Time: 4 minutesA new football club has earned a leading place in the UEFA Champions League groups and starred...
Study// What is the reaction of authorities to journalistic investigations?
Reading Time: 3 minutes“People expect logical consequences when they see cases of undeclared assets, conflicts of interest, protectionism or proof...
Secretary General of CoE called on Moldova’s state institutions to avoid constitutional crisis. Politicians took it the way they wanted.
Reading Time: 3 minutesAt the beginning of this month, Speaker of Parliament, Zinaida Greceanii, sent a letter to Secretary General...