PhD. Angela Grămadă (President of the Association “Experts for Security and Global Affairs”, Romania) has offered us her insight on the current challenges facing the Republic of Moldova, in the interview given the Geostrategic Pulse Magazine.

Geostrategic Pulse: After her victory in the presidential elections, Maia Sandu stated that she “will make every effort so that the Republic of Moldova should have good relations with the East, as well as with the West". Is this main foreign policy objective of the Republic of Moldova a feasible one? Or, on the contrary, the Republic of Moldova should choose between East and West?

Angela Grămadă: The phrase “good relations with both the East and the West” has become a political satire, during Igor Dodon’s presidency. Every president of the Republic of Moldova should be preoccupied with implementing the foreign policy agenda of the country, as stipulated by the Constitution, as well as with multiplying the opportunities that the citizens outside the country could benefit from. Maia Sandu will have a very difficult mandate. She will have to strengthen her domestic position, prove herself powerful and capable, demonstrate that she deserves the support of citizens, and, at the same time she will have to deal with the pending issues inherited from Igor Dodon. This implies discussions with both the East - where there are national interests prejudiced by particular interests of some political players, and with the West, intending to regain the trust and the time lost in advancing projects of strategic interest to the Republic of Moldova. We should get rid of the dilemma "between East and West”. We need to move on and implement what we have pledged to deliver through various documents and international treaties.

Abandoning a foreign policy dependent on the Russian Federation inevitably implies rethinking the relationship with the regime in Kremlin. To what extent does Vladimir Putin acknowledge the political change in Chișinău? Will the Russian Federation reduce, or intensify its influence in the Republic of Moldova?

During the past four years, the relation with the Russian Federation has rather been one of “vassalage” and not necessarily of the citizens of Republic of Moldovan. It was the subordination to Kremlin of a very small group of political players in the Republic of Moldova, while the Moldovan citizens were served a strategic partnership that was ineffective and that was advantageous only to a few.

Vladimir Putin has accepted the change of the leader in Chișinău with calm. However, we must understand that Moscow’s attitude towards the Republic of Moldova will not change. Russia is very present in Moldovan politics and economy, and can still influence many processes. It is enough to look at the interests of some politicians or businessmen, who support various economic agendas, to see that the political change in Chișinău – the country’s president so far – could only mean intensifying the fight to secure gains and opportunities. Of course, we are interested in seeing how the relationship between the ex-president Igor Dodon and his Moscow partners will change, but also, who will Moscow try and discuss in Chișinău, besides the socialists, what will happen in the negotiation format of the conflict in Transnistria, how will the energetic and economic dialogue evolve, and what legislation serving the interests of Moscow’s foreign policy will the deputies in Chișinău promote? At this point, Maia Sandu cannot completely change the substance of the bilateral dialogue with Russia, however, she can steer it in the right direction. Moscow must find out that the Republic of Moldova has defined national interests and objectives.

What are the challenges in front of Republic of Moldova’s endeavour to develop pragmatic and productive dialogue and relations with its Western and European partners, as well as in the region? 

It was Igor Dodon who was isolated abroad. The Republic of Moldova has kept on benefitting from financial support, or technical assistance from its European partners. There had indeed been missed opportunities when the financial assistance was stopped and conditioned by accomplishments in the anti-corruption reforms or the overcoming of domestic political crises, but that was only because Moldova’s partners needed stability and continuity. Changing governments and political leaders are ordinary processes in democratic countries. However, a minimum degree of predictability is needed when it comes to undertaking commitments, just as openness to a sustained and credible domestic dialogue is needed when it comes to the country’s development direction. There are multiple challenges, and they are related to diplomatic guidelines that have been disregarded (i.e. the scandal involving some of the Moldovan embassies abroad), to rebuilding the image of the Republic of Moldova as a country that supports the territorial integrity of its neighbour, to promoting a firm intention to find a solution to the conflict in Transnistria, to the domestic political fighting affecting institutional resilience, as well as to the ability to promote the economic interests abroad. The agenda of the Republic of Moldova is very substantial when it comes to challenges. Nevertheless, we have bigger problems when it comes to solutions and the ability to promote these solutions for the benefit of our citizens.

To what extent does the Republic of Moldova have the necessary external credibility to develop strong partnerships with the USA and the EU?

Both the European Union and the United States of America have promoted and supported the Republic of Moldova becoming a coherent player that has its interests. Of course, there were many times when we could question the ability of the authorities in Chișinău to seize the potential of the bilateral or multilateral dialogue.

At present, I believe that the image Maia Sandu promotes – that of an honest politician, who is not involved in schemes and corruption scandals – supports the credibility of the partnerships with the EU and the USA. Hence, we can foresee that we will witness a transfer of credibility from the person to the country. However, we should not forget that the Chișinău’s political scene will soon face an increasing political crisis and/or early parliamentary elections, which could dishearten those wishing to build partnerships with us.

What are the perspectives regarding the opening of a NATO office in Chișinău? Do you see a possible change of attitude from MaiaSandu as opposed to Igor Dodon’s reluctance?

So far, establishing a NATO Office in Chișinău was not mentioned in Maia Sandu’s public appearances. And I am strictly referring to the period following her investiture. We need to understand that her current public speech covers many domestic priorities, and focuses on organizing early parliamentary elections. Anyway, without strong support from the Government or the Parliament, any initiative coming from the president of the country will not be possible to be put into practice, and her activity could be blocked.

President Klaus Iohannis’ visit to the Republic of Moldova brought back into the spotlight the issue of strategic relations with the neighbours. In short, what are the courses of action and the areas where the two countries could enhance their cooperation?

I believe that any political dialogue could bear fruits if it is based on sustained and effective economic cooperation. The roadmap signed in the fall of 2019 includes a list of priorities and bilateral projects that Romania and the Republic of Moldova have committed to. This roadmap is very generous concerning the objectives assumed on the political front, on economic and energy infrastructure, as well as on social and cultural cooperation. Not in the least, I believe that Romania enjoys support within the EU to assume more responsibility towards the Republic of Moldova. We have priorities and objectives set, there is a new government in Bucharest, and there is support in the Romanian Parliament for a sustained dialogue with Chișinău. Only one challenge remains: finding our “true grit”.