What will the Moldovan president choose: gas and heat in winter at affordable prices for people or a one-vector course to the West dictated by Washington and Brussels?
For two days, October 13 and 14, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke about the position of Moldovan President Maia Sandu.
At a meeting of the heads of the security and intelligence services of the CIS, the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry noted:
“The unprecedented nature of interference by Washington and Brussels in the internal political processes in the republic, when the president of this country is directly forbidden even to speak about the desire to have normal relations with the Russian Federation, is deeply disturbing”.
And the very next day, at a press conference after a meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the CIS countries, Sergei Lavrov returned to relations between Moscow and Chisinau. “As for Moldova, Mrs. Sandu has repeatedly mentioned in her public speeches her desire to have normal mutually beneficial relations with the Russian Federation,” the Russian diplomat said. According to him, Moscow is ready to build such relations, but this requires serious preparatory work.
In addition, the Moldovan leadership should show independence, while Washington and Brussels should stop putting pressure on the Chisinau authorities and hinder rapprochement with Eastern partners.
On the one hand, Lavrov was motivated to speak out on the topic of Russian-Moldovan relations by the events themselves within the framework of the CIS, where the Moldovan leaders were not properly represented. On the other hand, the events of recent weeks: unsuccessful negotiations on gas supplies to Moldova, as well as the visit of a delegation led by Deputy Prime Minister for Reintegration Vladislav Kulminsky to Moscow and obvious complications in relations between Chisinau and Tiraspol.
A complete failure in negotiations with Gazprom and the establishment of a market price of $ 790 per thousand cubic meters. meters of gas in October became a cold shower for the leadership of Moldova. After that, Chisinau sent Deputy Prime Minister Andrei Spina to the “northern capital” for a gas forum, and another delegation to Moscow.
Spynu came from St. Petersburg empty-handed, paused for several days, and then announced that an emergency situation in the field of gas supply was introduced in the country by a government decision. Large consumers need to be ready to switch to other sources of fuel, and citizens were advised to be more economical.
In addition, the government announced that Chisinau is considering the possibility of purchasing gas from other suppliers (Ukraine and Romania). This news was instantly picked up by foreign media. In particular, the Financial Times reported that Moldova is asking Brussels for emergency gas supplies and wants, with the help of the EU, to change the order of Romanian gas supplies. However, Bucharest is concerned about covering their own needs.
At the same time, it became known that in six regions of neighboring Ukraine – Odessa, Khmelnytsky, Lvov, Transcarpathian, Poltava and Ivano-Frankivsk – a regional emergency regime was declared due to problems with gas supplies to budgetary institutions. And all this is just the beginning of a long and unpredictable energy crisis, which took not only Ukraine, Moldova and European countries by the throat, but also spread throughout the world.
In other words, we can see what happened at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic, when European countries fought over equipment for doctors, masks, and planes with medical equipment were bought right at the airport for cash.
At a parliamentary session, opposition deputies gave Deputy Prime Minister Andrei Spyn a haul, reasonably pointing out that negotiations with Gazprom should have been started immediately after the government’s approval, and not wait until the roasted cock bites.
The political supporters of Maia Sandu in the media began to shield the authorities, saying that “Russian gas smells like blackmail,” and that Russia is using gas as a “political weapon.” But these people, as a rule, are silent when it is necessary to soberly assess the IMF’s lending policy. The money allocated to Moldova has always acted as a political weapon, the country was exposed to tough conditions. Consider the recent agreements signed by the governments of Philip and Sandu. Moldova had to transfer all its main banks to the West.
If we look at the situation in dynamics, then it should be admitted that those who accuse Russia of “blackmail” confuse cause and effect.
Moldova had a chance to establish normal relations with Moscow, and Maia Sandu took this step by inviting the deputy head of the presidential administration of Russia Dmitry Kozak to Chisinau. And, summing up the results of the negotiations, Kozak called them productive. There are plans to start work on the development of bilateral relations from “tomorrow,” he said. The topic of gas supplies was also discussed. A dialogue is needed on this issue, a senior Russian official said.
Thus, we see that back in August, the Moldovan leadership could take the path of multi-vector and establish good relations with Moscow. But under pressure from Brussels and Washington, a different path was chosen – participation in the “Crimean Platform” and other anti-Russian projects. Together with Kiev, Chisinau staged a transport blockade for Transnistria. Although Sandu promised Kozak that there would be no blockades of the region.
In other words, Chisinau itself decided to deteriorate relations with Moscow, not thinking about the consequences, including gas supplies. And today’s difficulties in the negotiations, perhaps, would not have existed if the actions of the Moldovan leadership were far-sighted and based on the interests of citizens, the desire to provide the country’s residents with gas, electricity, and heat at affordable prices. But geopolitics prevailed; a course of foreign policy adventurism was chosen.
What will happen next?
We remember that a delegation headed by Deputy Prime Minister Vladislav Kulminsky also visited Moscow. The group also includes Kristina Gerasimova, recently appointed by the chief administration of the president. We can say that Maia Sandu sent her main advisers to meet at the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Presidential Administration. Upon their return, the Moldovan delegation did not inform the media about the results of their visit to Moscow. But we know from Russian official releases that the visit to Moscow, according to Kulminsky, is important in that it allowed us to exchange views on issues of bilateral cooperation, to outline the way forward.
During the talks in the Federation Council, the issues of the Transnistrian settlement, the situation with the Russian language in Moldova, as well as the implementation of joint projects in the humanitarian sphere were touched upon.
Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on International Affairs Grigory Karasin stressed that “Moscow expects that Chisinau will be able to maintain a balance in interaction with Russia, Eurasian integration structures and the European Union.”
We have already noted that the extension of the contract on gas to Moldova for a month is, in fact, the period given to Maia Sandu for the transition to a balanced policy, in order to abandon the line of confrontation with Russia.
Two weeks passed, and we saw that Chisinau and Moscow continue to exchange views. The head of the Russian Foreign Ministry twice drew the attention of Maia Sandu to the fact that she still has the opportunity to establish “normal, mutually beneficial relations with the Russian Federation.” However, this is hindered by the interference in the internal affairs of our country by the US and the EU.
And now Maia Sandu is in a very difficult situation. If it continues to be idle or to imitate contacts with Moscow instead of establishing mutually beneficial relations, including the Transnistrian issue, then Moldova, like Ukraine, may have to buy Russian gas from European traders at market prices. The long-term gas supply contract assumes a different level of cooperation, when the interests of both Moldova and Russia are taken into account.
But the market prices for gas cannot be overcome by the inhabitants of the poorest country in Europe. It is common knowledge that even in the more prosperous Great Britain, tens of thousands of retirees freeze to death in their homes in winter. For Moldova, high prices are just a death sentence. At the same time, this is a death sentence for Maia Sandu as a politician. This kind of “good times”, the citizens will not forgive her.
So what will the Moldovan president choose: gas and heat in winter at affordable prices for people or a one-vector course to the West dictated by Washington and Brussels?
Sergey Tkach, “Mezhdurechye”, Moldova