Geopolitics of the Presidential elections: Russian game

         Why the geopolitics? Because it is the determining factor that marks since beginning the politics as well as the politics in Moldova. It would be great if the current election campaign themes, but also of the previous ones aimed only the everyday problems. However if you analyze the essence of our problems, you realize that the geopolitics is ubiquitous. If not directly, then indirectly to the country project, which we aim to implement. Geopolitics is not just to have access where it is easier to sell your apples or your wine, although that is geopolitics as well; Geopolitics is not just where the "gasses are getting out". For us, the geopolitics in the campaign means development models. We want to work disgusted and steal as in the East do, however to live as in the West. I think that decades of Soviet power and 25 years of independence shows us that this is impossible.

            Now, the billion theft problem is rightfully exploited to the maximum. It happened during the governments that have declared themselves pro-European. Nevertheless, if you follow the thread where they hatched the schemes and by whom were they inspired and applied, you realize that they lead more towards east. Were they not designed and implemented by exploiting the greed and callousness of local politicians to compromise the European path, with which they identified themselves? Therefore, it is at least not serious to ignore the geopolitical factor when you are talking about the election situation in Moldova.

            For a while, some political forces in Chisinau were going on the message "and-and", ie: and the EU, and Russia. That was possible only if the partner in the East wanted a rapprochement with Europe. In the early 90s, once it seemed feasible prospect, but after installing the Putin regime in Moscow, this has become impossible. As Vladimir Putin grows more durable roots in Kremlin, Russia was breaking away from Europe and Western values. That made practically impossible to play in two skiffs stay once they went into different parts or "sucking" from two cows, as some would say. At present, relations between Europe and Russia are such that the issue is only "or-or".

            Russian world is a world of which we cannot yet break. I do not think that is in our power to do it by ourselves. Directly and forcibly, we are connected to it, with small intervals, for over two hundred years. Unlike the Western social-economic and political model that provides welfare and liberty, the Russian world in addition to his own ambitions of domination, was not noted by anything. The Russian world - a place where the company has not experienced political modernization. Here the state has maintained its quasi-total control over the society, but in outside, it tried to secure dominance by extensive methods. Without offering a dynamic and viable model, Russia passes today by a stage of deep and dangerous agonies. Trying desperately to keep its previous position, unable to offer to others something tangible and real that it prefers a world of confrontation not competition.

            Over us crosses the line that separates the Russian world of the western one. These two spaces, in fact, offer two different pictures of the world. One based on force expansionism, another on the competition. One, leading after the written law, another one after unwritten ones. A model that has tested welfare and freedom, and another, underdevelopment and authoritarianism. Essentially, the October 30, 2016 presidential race is a choice between these two models. Thus, in a form more or less open or covert, the geopolitics are present in the programs of the two forces, which marks electoral debates: the Russian match and the European match. We can also talk and about intermediate variants, about some mutants, but with the same objectives.

            The Russian match in Moldova is represented traditionally by parties and persons that are placed on the left side of the political spectrum, and, more recently, populists without ideology, without a program and without any unscrupulous (and even without pants! ...). They are fishing among nostalgic voters, ethnic minorities, families whose inhabiting incomes depend on remittances from the East, but also of people disappointed by how things work in the country. The lamentable performance of governments that have identified themselves as pro-European electoral have strengthened the pro-Russian segment.

            The support for the campaign in various forms and means also comes from the East. Firstly, through the pro-Russian propaganda, which is available through national frequencies, is called a massive audience from our localities. To Russian channels are added the local ones. Through unilateral criticism by the representatives of the current government, which, with the support, but under strict monitoring of the Westerners, is concerned with the implementation of the Association Agreement actually draws water to the mill of the Russian game. On this dimension activates an army of journalists, analysts, commentators, bloggers. Some of them declare their geopolitical options openly, others do it discreetly. Paradoxical as it may seem, the last mentioned are working in projects focused on promoting Western values, so the geopolitical twist, just to make us ti renounce to geopolitics. Among them there are also people connected to rival lobbyists of those in government today. They probably are hopping that by changing the vector, some will make it up, and the others will succeed to escape jail so that the old projects can be revived. Now, they are uncompromising with the current government and indulgent with those put under accusation. If you watch carefully, they are working in prestigious institutions connected to projects promoting democratic values and principles: rule of law, pluralism, freedom, transparency etc. The Litmus test to identify them is their attitude towards early elections, which would install at the ruling the Russian game.

            Another stand-premise to the Russian match remains the paternalistic mentality of most citizens, ready to go into the hands of some adventurers that are offering easy solutions in the form of promises to reconnect the country to "paradise" in the East. Judging by the polls, many people believe them. Given the increasingly bad image of Russia in the world, due to its actions in the international arena, but also within the country, the representatives of the parties find it increasingly difficult to remain persuasive and relevant. That is why they prefer a less initiated public, unhappy and manipulated by Russian propaganda. The nominees from the pro Russian game declare that, if they become president, they will dissolve parliament and early elections will result. They want this as quickly as they can, as long they are still on the top. How they manage to provoke early elections, by remaining within the constitutional framework, of course, they won't say. Or, as we know, the powers of the President are limited, the Parliament can not be dissolved only by the whim of someone, even if it is the President, whose election program is the promise in question. But as it turns out,  that does not matter neither for the candidates or for their electorate. Destructive instinct prevails over reason and constructive intentions.

            In the current Russian game, declared candidates at the presidential elections are just a few. The most likely suitor is the PSRM leader, Igor Dodon. Next is the PN candidate, Dumitru Ciubasenco and that's about it. The Grand absent is the candidate from the Communist Party. Note that, accidentally or not, this election is not a too crowded segment. Aside from a few independent candidates, who are exploiting the populist message, we do not have anyone. This fact opens the corridor that leads the representative of this party to the second round (which, according to polls, with a difference of score will be Igor Dodon).

            The Russian party still has candidates among the populist ones, although some declare themselves from the right wing, that in qualification for the stereotype of the domestic political discourse, means pro-European. Here firstly is highlighted Andrei Nastase, the leader of the DA Platform, now the party of the same name. Exponent of some forces with oligarchic intentions, whose main objective is to accede to power at any cost. In the effort to gather votes from both geopolitical parties, it urges to disregard the vector of development of the country. Like the candidates who are openly pro-Russian and campaign for early elections, and sees the president position sees as a lever to destabilize the situation in the country. By striving to provoke early parliamentary elections, Nastase is not even scared of the possibility that the Russian party from Moldovan politics would seize a political majority. Now is left to answer how pro-European is the "right-wing" candidate - Andrei Nastase.

            Other populists who can take the votes of the electorate from this segment are independent candidates - Inna Popenco, Maia Laguta, but here no one expects surprises.

            I would like to think that Maia Sandu, when was insisting on early elections or trying to convince the IMF not to sign the Memorandum with Moldova, due to emotions of the moment, without taking into account the geopolitical aspects i.e. long-term effects of installing a game of the Russian power.

           The totality of objective and subjective factors make the Russian match persistent and vivid in this space, and from geopolitics - a subject still omnipresent and unavoidable in the local political speech.

10.10.2016