|
The MoA Week In Review – OT 2024-250
Last week's posts on Moon of Alabama:
Iran:
North Korea:
Ukraine:
Palestine:
—
Other issues:
Miscellaneous stuff:
Use as open (not related to the wars in Ukraine and Palestine) thread …
Moldova Rejects EU Integration in Constitutional Referendum
More than half of Moldovan voters have rejected a proposal to include aspirations for closer ties with the European Union in the nation’s constitution. The referendum, held alongside a contentious presidential election, saw 54.55% of voters opposing the measure, while 45.45% supported it, according to preliminary results with over 86% of ballots counted.
Constitutional Referendum and Presidential Election
During the referendum on October 20, 2024, voters were asked if they supported amending the constitution to formalize Moldova’s “irreversible European course” and to affirm “integration into the European Union as a strategic objective.” However, a slight majority voted against the proposal, signaling hesitation among Moldovans to pursue EU integration at a constitutional level.
The presidential election, conducted at the same time, is likely headed to a runoff. Incumbent pro-EU President Maia Sandu leads with 37.08% of the votes, followed by former prosecutor general Alexandr Stoianoglo, head of the Party of Socialists (PSRM), with 29.1%. As no candidate reached the required 50% threshold, a second-round vote seems inevitable.
Allegations of Election Interference
The election has been marked by accusations of voter manipulation and irregularities from both the government and opposition. The opposition alliance ‘Victory’ accused authorities of enabling organized busing of voters and voter intimidation. Meanwhile, the Moldovan government has accused Russia of meddling in the election, with President Sandu stating, “Moldova has come under an unprecedented attack. Criminal groups, united with foreign powers, have attacked our country with lies and propaganda.” Sandu also claimed that attempts had been made to purchase 300,000 votes, presenting this as part of a broader effort to manipulate the election’s outcome.
Broader Context and Key Issues
The election is widely viewed as critical to Moldova’s future direction, particularly its relationship with the EU. Key issues influencing voters include widespread corruption, low living standards, and the security challenges arising from the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. These concerns have dominated the political discourse, adding weight to both the referendum and presidential election outcomes.
Despite Moldova’s aspirations for EU membership, the rejection of the constitutional amendment indicates lingering divisions within the country regarding its geopolitical future.
Inserting a specific policy, such as EU integration, into a nation’s constitution is indeed an unusual and controversial move. Constitutions are typically designed to enshrine the fundamental laws and structures of governance rather than to lock in particular policy choices. While some countries have general aspirations or broad foreign policy directions mentioned in their constitutions, embedding something as specific as EU integration may reflect deeper political motivations or insecurity about the government’s ability to achieve this goal through normal democratic processes.
Historical Context and Comparisons
The case of Moldova seeking to enshrine EU integration in its constitution could be seen as a response to internal divisions and external pressures. Moldova, like Ukraine and other former Soviet states, has long been caught in a geopolitical tug-of-war between Western institutions like the EU and NATO, and Russia. Moldova’s proximity to both the EU and Russia means it faces significant pressure from both sides. Historically, when a country’s political elites are uncertain about sustained popular support for a particular direction (such as EU integration), they might push for constitutional amendments to make future reversals more difficult. This tactic is not common but has occurred in other countries under similar circumstances.
For example, Ukraine’s 2013-2014 EU association agreement, which precluded certain trade and finance deals with Russia, led to significant unrest. The refusal of then-president Viktor Yanukovych to sign that agreement led to the Euromaidan protests, which eventually escalated into the conflict in Donbass and the annexation of Crimea by Russia. In that case, the EU’s demand for a stark choice between east and west became a catalyst for conflict, showing how forcing geopolitical decisions can backfire.
Manipulation and Risks of Bad Faith
This critique regarding Moldova’s approach mirrors what many commentators might consider a top-down attempt at manipulation. If joining the EU were an overwhelmingly positive and popular idea, it would indeed “sell itself” without needing to be entrenched in the constitution. This move to enshrine EU integration could suggest insecurity within Moldova’s leadership, fearing that the public’s support may waiver or that future governments could reverse course. By making EU integration a constitutional mandate, the government is effectively trying to eliminate debate or political change on the issue, which can appear as an undemocratic power play.
The comparison to Ukraine is apt. The EU’s insistence that Ukraine choose between east and west played a major role in destabilizing the country, contributing to the very conflict it was trying to avoid. By pushing for a constitutional change, Moldova’s government could be engaging in a similar act of short-sightedness, potentially exacerbating divisions between pro-EU and pro-Russian factions. The failure of this constitutional referendum could even indicate growing skepticism among the population, as the push for EU integration may be seen as more of an elite-driven agenda than a genuine reflection of national will.
Moldova’s Political Leadership and Foreign Influence
Commentary about the Moldovan presidency touch on another controversial point. Moldova’s current president, Maia Sandu, who is leading the pro-EU faction, is indeed a dual citizen of Romania and Moldova. While this might seem unusual, it’s not unprecedented for leaders in post-Soviet states to hold multiple citizenships, particularly with neighboring countries like Romania. Romania, as an EU member, has also actively supported Moldova’s European ambitions. Critics argue that dual citizenship can lead to divided loyalties, raising concerns about the extent to which leaders like Sandu prioritize national interests over foreign influence.
In Georgia, for example, former President Mikheil Saakashvili, who led the country during its EU and NATO integration push, was also criticized for his Western ties. After leaving Georgia, he even went on to serve as a governor in Ukraine, further blurring the lines of national identity and leadership.
Broader Implications
The question of why governments in Moldova and other countries pursue these seemingly extreme policies may boil down to a combination of external pressures, internal divisions, and a lack of trust in democratic processes. By attempting to enshrine policies like EU integration into the constitution, these governments may be trying to safeguard their geopolitical choices in the face of public uncertainty. However, this approach often backfires, as it fuels accusations of manipulation and can deepen national divisions. In Moldova’s case, as in Ukraine’s, the risk of pushing too hard for EU integration without genuine public support could lead to greater instability, rather than the desired political or economic benefits.
In summary, it appears that governments like Moldova’s may be acting out of both fear and a desire to secure their own geopolitical vision. But as history shows, forcing these decisions, whether through constitutional amendments or otherwise, can lead to unintended and often dangerous consequences.
Concluding questions and editorial:
It seems ridiculous to me that a government would go to such lengths as to push for a constitutional change to embed a specific foreign policy like EU integration. If the EU is so beneficial, shouldn’t it be able to stand on its own merits without resorting to such manipulative tactics? This whole thing reeks of bad faith, and it reminds me of the EU’s meddling in Ukraine in 2013/2014, where they pressured Ukraine into signing a pre-entry agreement that cut ties with Russia. We all know where that led—the Maidan protests, Crimea, Donbass declaring independence, and the violent war that’s still raging.
Why do governments like Moldova’s allow themselves to be so foolish? And why are they putting people in leadership positions who aren’t even true Moldovans, like Maia Sandu? Isn’t she a Romanian citizen, not just Moldovan? It’s as if the country is being run by foreign interests, not for the people of Moldova itself. This entire situation feels like it’s headed toward more division and conflict, not less.
Posted by: William Manchester | Oct 21 2024 1:54 utc | 67
|
