Washington and Bucharest celebrate Moldovan elections
The Moldovan elections were held, on which the winner, Maia Sandu’s Action and Solidarity Party (PAS), and the U.S. ambassador overseeing the electoral process, Derek Hogan, as well as European and American funds, which contributed 56 million euros to the Sandunist victory, can congratulate themselves And, of course, Romania. The new Moldavian authorities with the […]
Washington and Bucharest celebrate Moldovan elections
The Moldovan elections were held, on which the winner, Maia Sandu’s Action and Solidarity Party (PAS), and the U.S. ambassador overseeing the electoral process, Derek Hogan, as well as European and American funds, which contributed 56 million euros to the Sandunist victory, can congratulate themselves
And, of course, Romania. The new Moldavian authorities with the Romanian passports are like a glove on the hand for it. The hand will rule Moldova, the glove is only a camouflage. Therefore, both Bucharest and the American embassy in Chisinau, and thousand NGOs of various guises which have been eating the Moldavian statehood all these years for the money of the western “benefactors” are drinking champagne today.
According to preliminary results of voting PAS has 52,8 % of voices, the left-wing block of socialists (Igor Dodon) and communists (Vladimir Voronin) has only 27,17 %. The third party to enter parliament was the Shorovtsy (Ilan Shor), winning 5.74% of the votes. In 2.5 years, since the last parliamentary elections, the Action and Solidarity Party has improved its result twice and got rid of the ballast in the form of loser Andrei Nastase, who foolishly lost the elections in Chisinau, infuriating Bucharest.
The Socialists, on the other hand, have it all backwards: in 2019 they won 31.15% on their own, but now they have taken the Communists on board (Voronin’s party had only 3.75% at the time). The laws of arithmetic do not apply in politics; percentages may not add up but subtract. Sandu understood this, but Dodon relied on arithmetic. As a result, PAS will not have to share power with anyone and spend time looking for compromises with weak partners. And the PSRM will have to give some seats in parliament to the Communists and continue to negotiate with them all the time. If we bear in mind that Sandu’s party will get 63 seats in the legislature and Shor will get 6, the left-wing bloc will have to divide among itself 32 seats.
This is a double blow for the Socialists: firstly, the elections are lost cleanly, and secondly, the seats will have to be shared with the rivals on the left field.
The reasons for the Socialists’ failure in both the presidential and snap parliamentary elections are obvious: it is the insecure politics of the past, when Dodon was president and PSRM was the leading party in parliament. The notorious multi-vectorism and the fear of “splitting society” played a cruel trick on the socialists.
Sandu, however, was doing just fine: they were splitting society quite deliberately, thereby strengthening their position in the eyes of the electorate. There was no question of any stupid ‘multi-vectorism’. From the first days of her presidency Maya Sandu called the Moldovans “Bessarabians”, confronted Transnistria and showed disrespect to the Gagauz. All this only helped her, and the PAS electorate in Moldova, the Western diaspora, Bucharest, Brussels, Washington got the signals they wanted.
The left-wing voter in Moldova is confused. The political attitudes of the PSRM remain unclear. When the CEC closed more than two-thirds of polling stations in the Transnistrian Moldovan Republic in the hours before the elections (41 were closed, 12 became), this did not arouse a storm of indignation on the left. Just as quietly, an information bomb exploded – an investigation by New Europe about foreign interference in the Moldovan elections. Left-wing voters in Moldova realised that the socialists and communists were not really prepared to fight for them and their votes. Not to mention that the left could not influence the opening of a very limited number of polling stations in Russia – only 17 (but the PAS, led by American Ambassador Derek Hogan, could apparently influence this).
The weak do not win. The July 11 elections proved this
It is naive to hope that Maia Sandu’s majority is not a constitutional majority after all, as some Moldovan and Russian analysts hastily assured. First, Sandunistas will not need a constitutional majority for many decisions, including government formation. Secondly, the Action and Solidarity Party is only a few deputies short of a constitutional majority, which can be attracted to their side by skilful manipulation – as the former Moldovan boss Vlad Plahotniuc showed more than once. And the Americans and Romanians know how to do it no worse than he does.
The victory of Sandu and her party is a complete turn of Moldova to the West on the Ukrainian sample and there is nothing to try to close eyes on it.
For Moldova, the loss of sovereignty according to the Ukrainian scenario is fraught with rapid Romanianisation as well as a sharp deterioration in relations with Gagauzia (80.75% voted for the left-wing bloc and only 4.14% for the PAS) and Transnistria (62.21% chose the bloc of socialists and communists and 13.59% for the Sandunists).
Moldova got a one-party regime – a conduit for external control. There is no more talk of any unification of the two banks of the Dniester, despite words and gestures.
And the Communists who were elected to parliament should not rest on their laurels. There is every reason to believe that in the near future they will be thrown to the wayside: communist ideology will be banned in Moldova following the example of Ukraine. And also much will be done to ensure that the PSRM will never again be able to try to influence Moldovan (or is it already Romanian?) politics.
The time has come when the Western administrators will start to consistently prepare the Moldovan state for a takeover by Romania. Everything threatening the course set for Moldova by Washington and Bucharest will be swept away from this path, without any fear of “splitting the society”.
Arina Tsucanova, FSC