Era instabilitatii comuniste

Era instabilitatii comuniste

Nicu Popescu

Receptionat direct prin e-mail de la autor, 10 aprilie 2009

Timp de opt ani Partidul Comunistilor a incercat sa asigure o anumita stabilitate politica care se baza pe trei piloni: crestere economica, centralizare politica si rolul presedintelui Voronin. Paradoxal, dar toti acesti factori se transforma rapid in cauze ale destabilizarii. Timp de 8 ani Vladimir Voronin a contribuit la consolidarea statului Republica Moldova, dar locul sau in istorie va fi decis de comportamentul sau de acum inainte. Restrangerea spatiului democratic este ca o bomba cu ceas pusa sub viabilitatea Moldovei ca stat.

Iluzia stabilitatii

Majoritatea statelor post-sovietice au trecut prin faze de politica
violenta: Rusia in 1993, Georgia in Noiembrie 2007, Ucraina in timpul
scandalului casetelor in 2002, si Armenia in martie 2008 cand 10
persoane au decedat un urma unor proteste indreptate impotriva
alegerilor prezidentiale fraudate. In Belarus si Asia Centrala –
violenta ca factor politic a fost si mai sistematica.

Pe acest fundal post-sovietic, politica nonviolenta din Moldova era o
realizare importanta. In Moldova majoritatea absoluta a protestelor
din cei 18 ani de independenta au fost pasnice (cateva exceptii sunt
protestele din fata primariei in 1998 si dispersarea violenta a
jurnalistilor de la Moldova 1 de catre politisti deghizati in civil in
2004). Protestele au fost nonviolente atat din cauza protestatarilor,
cat si datorita restrangerii manifestate de institutiile de stat,
inclusiv politia. Insa si mai importanta pentru stabilitatea Moldovei
era existenta unui sistem politic relativ democratic care permitea
canalizarea tensiunilor politice in crize politice. Aceste crize se
rezolvau in parlament, prin modificari constitutionale sau caderi de
guvern, dar nu violente stradale.

Restrangerea spatiului politic din ultimii ani a creat bazele unei
instabilitati de fond, deghizata de iluzia unei stabilitatii. In
realitate stabilitatea autoritara suprima procesele normale de
competitie politica. Cu cat mai centralizat si autoritar devenea
sistemul politic din Moldova in ultimii ani, cu atat mai mult crestea
potentialul pentru instabilitate. In conditiile in care sistemul
politic este rigid si centralizat, politica normala si pasnica se
transforma treptat in politica de protest. Si Uniunea Sovietica in
1987 parea stabila, iar peste patru ani nu mai exista.

Violenta genereaza violenta

Cu cat mai restrans devenea spatiul public in Moldova, cu atat mai
mare devenea instrainarea dintre institutiile statului, politie si
cetatenii de rand. In timpul campaniei electorale recente politia a
recurs la o serie de abuzuri impotriva mai multor partide politice si
protestatari individuali. Sigur cea mai mare parte al Ministerului de
Interne isi facea serviciul de asigurare al ordinii publice. Dar
anumite parti ai Ministerului de Interne s-au vazut vizibil implicate
in campania electorala prin intimidarea actorilor electorali.
Atacurile violente asupra unor protestatari pasnici, arestrurile si
intimidarea opozitiei, deschiderea dosarelor penale impotriva
majoritatii liderilor politici de opozitie au transformat forta sau
amenintarea cu forta in element de politica electorala. Drept
rezultat, pentru o buna parte din societate politia devenise un agent
electoral al Partidului Comunist, nu o institutie de stat menita sa
asigure ordinea publica.

In conditiile in care nivelul de incredere al populatiei in politie si
asa este foarte mic, implicarea politiei in campania electorala a
accelerat si radicalizat instrainarea dintre politie si o buna parte
din cetateni. In special tinerii activi politic. Violenta ca noul
factor in politica, cuplata cu limitarile accesului la mass-media si
perceptia ca batalia politica cinstita nu are sorti de izbanda – a
generat sentimentul ca schimbarea se poate face doar prin a raspunde
la violenta cu violenta. Astfel a fost lansata spirala violentei care
are toate sansele sa duca la o degradare rapida, si probabil
ireversibila, al sistemului politic din Moldova. Cu cat mai multa
violenta va aplica politia si statul in zilele urmatoare, cu atat mai
multa violenta va vedea Moldova in urmatorii ani.

Presedintele Voronin ca factor de instabilitate

Timp de 8 ani presedintele Voronin a fost perceput drept un simbol al
stabilitatii. Insa astazi el devine principalul factor care
polarizeaza societatea. Adevarata scanteie care a provocat prezenta
spontana si masiva a protestatarilor in piata (si nu neaparat a
violentele acestora) este persoana lui Vladimir Voronin. Mai exact –
perspectiva ca victoria PCRM la alegeri va duce o situatie in care
Vladimir Voronin va ramane sef de stat de facto pentru inca 4 ani.
Protestele de la Chisinau nu sunt niste proteste anti-comuniste la
propriu zis. Moldova este guvernata de un partid care se numeste
comunist, dar care nu este comunist. In fond protestele nici macar nu
au fost indreptate impotriva comunistilor ca Marian Lupu, Zinaida
Greceanii, Andrei Strata sau chiar Marc Tcaciuc, ci impotriva
mentinerii la putere al lui Vladimir Voronin. Spre deosebire de
Vladimir Voronin, ceilalti lideri ai PCRM nu polarizeaza societatea
atat de mult.

Iesirea din aceasta situatie este descrisa de Constitutia RM care nu
permite unei si aceleasi persoane sa detina sefia statului mai mult de
doua termene la rand. Ramanerea lui Vladimir Voronin drept sef de stat
de facto – fie ca seaker, prim-ministru sau deputat de rand –
contravine spiritului constitutiei RM si va destabiliza si mai mult
situatia pe viitor.

Necesitatea unui consens politic

Pericolul instabilitatii va fi agravat si de criza economica. Un
guvern care nu mai genereaza crestere economica, este neacceptat de
aproape o jumatate de populatie, are tentatia de a recurge la
strivirea oricarei opozitii politice va genera si mai multa
instabilitate.

Protestele violente de la Chisinau simbolizeaza mai mult ca orice ca
era stabilitatii comuniste a trecut. Moldova va avea in fata o
perioada turbulenta in care instabilitatea economiei mondiale,
clivajele politice interne si persoana lui Vladimir Voronin ar putea
sfarama statalitatea fragila a Moldovei. Fara o democratizare a
sistemului politic, si revenirea (chiar si treptata) la sistemul de
guvernare prevazut de Constitutia Moldovei, riscul violentelor pe
viitor va fi mai mare. Iar cu acestea va veni si izolarea
internationala crescanda a Moldovei, care o va lasa mult mai
vulnerabila in fata oricaror presiuni din partea Rusiei.

Speranta ca Rusia ar putea compensa izolarea internationala a Moldovei
sunt desarte. Experienta unor state ca Belarus arata ca cu cat mai
izolate sunt acestea in plan international, cu atat dura este Rusia cu
ele. Belarusul a fost nevoita pana la urma sa ceara credite de la FMI.
Ucraina a fost ademenita de promisiunea desarta a unui credit rusesc
de 5 miliarde timp de aproape jumatate de an. Alinierea excesiva a
politicii externe a Moldovei la Federatia Rusa va reduce si mai mult
spatiul de manevra al PCRM.

In aceste conditii Moldova are nevoie de un nou consens politic, care
ar rezulta din negocieri dintre guvern si opozitie cu medierea UE. O
solutie politica a crizei ar trebui sa prevada stoparea imediata a
oricaror violente atat din partea protestatarilor cat si a politiei,
numararea din nou a voturilor si verificarea listelor electorale,
recunoasterea noilor rezultate electorale, masuri de liberalizare a
mass-media, exinderea licentei PRO TV, reforma politiei si invitarea
unei misiuni de consilieri europeni plasati la presedintie, parlament,
ministerul de interne, justitie si economie. In contextul crizei
politice actuale acest lucru pare utopic. Dar aceasta utopie este
singura cale de iesire pasnica si democratica din criza politica
creata.

Declaration regarding the escalation of social and political situation in Moldova after the parliamentary elections of April 5, 2009

Declaration regarding the escalating social and political situation in Moldova after the parliamentary elections of April 5, 2009

Chisinau, April 9, 2009

Expressing our concern regarding the worsening social and political situation after April 5, 2009’ parliamentary elections and, being worried that inadequate interpretations of these events serve as justification for decisions and actions that threaten to further polarize the Moldovan society, we declare:

On April 7, 2009 spontaneous and peaceful demonstrations took place in the center of Chisinau. This generally peaceful event was used to provoke violent and criminal acts resulting in the devastation of the Parliament and Presidential buildings. The law enforcement bodies through their actions were not capable to prevent the acts of violence and vandalism.

We categorically condemn such outrageous acts of violence and vandalism. However, we consider it inadmissible to present all protests through the prism of these criminal acts. In particular, it is utterly unjustified to shift responsibility from a small group of violent persons onto a far larger gathering of peaceful protesters or onto the political leaders, some of whom have tried in fact to stop the violence. The peaceful protests didn’t have an anti-state nature.

While the acts of violence cannot be justified in any way and should be investigated by the competent authorities, we believe that those peaceful protests were fueled by doubts regarding the fairness of elections and distrust in public institutions, including those that administrated the electoral process. Those events were largely triggered by the dissatisfaction of young people with the social and economic situation and the feeling of uncertainty about their future prospects in the Republic of Moldova.

The post-election statements made by the head of state have only contributed to inflaming such suspicions and provided an extra motivation for people to get onto the streets.

These regrettable acts of violence and vandalism are now fully exploited by the authorities to intimidate the opposition and civil society and further restrict the already fragile fundamental rights and liberties of the citizens. The authorities have further restricted access to the public radio and TV, Internet and other media. The authorities have launched a massive brain-washing campaign to discredit the participants of the peaceful protests, the opposition and those having different opinions.

The head of state is making extremely grave accusations against some political leaders, describing their actions as a “coup d'etat”, “anti-constitutional plot” etc., even before any investigations or court rulings in this regard. Such statements tend to further heighten the tensions and polarize the Moldovan society. By placing all the responsibility for the recent events on the political opposition and Romania, the authorities are creating an internal and external enemy, which may be used to justify the government's failures.

We believe that preconditions are being created for the establishment of a police and dictatorial regime in the Republic of Moldova.

A reversal of the current disturbing trends is absolutely essential in order to avoid any further exacerbation of the political and economic crisis, prevent the international isolation of the country similar to that of Belarus and avoid compromising the European future of Moldova . It will be impossible for the country to get out of the crisis without the engagement of a broad spectrum of political actors and stakeholders, civil society and international organizations.

The authorities of Moldova have a special role to play in overcoming this crisis and therefore, we ask them to:

- Refrain from any actions or declarations which could deteriorate the situation further;


- Give up any virulent messages, as necessary to create an enabling environment for political dialogue to help overcome this conflict situation;


- Act strictly within the limits of the law in order to prevent any new acts of violence;


- Make public the lists with names of arrested persons and, provide these persons with access to lawyers and human rights organizations;


- Avoid any politically-motivated persecutions;

- Initiate a comprehensive and transparent investigation, with international participation, into the causes that led to the acts of vandalism: identify persons who have maneuvered a part of the otherwise peaceful protesters towards the Presidency and the Parliament compound; identify persons who have instigated the acts of violence and crime; review whether the actions of law enforcement troops were proportionate to the situation and in accordance with their mandate;

- Safeguard the freedom of movement for the citizens;

- Assure the freedom of opinion and speech, safeguard the inviolability of individual freedoms, personal safety and security;

- Actively contribute to the elimination of all suspicions related to the fairness and accuracy of election results.

We call on all media institutions, and particularly on the Public Broadcasting Company „ Tele-Radio Moldova ", to cover correctly and impartially the political and social developments after parliamentary elections of April 5, with the equal and non-discriminatory participation of all parties concerned.

Chisinau, 9 April 2009

Signed by:

Arcadie Barbăroşie, Director, Institute for Public Policies (IPP)

Igor Boţan, Director, Association for Participatory Democracy (ADEPT)

Viorel Cibotaru, Director, European Institute of Political Studies (IESPM)

Nadine Gogu, Interim Director, Center of Independent Journalism (CIJ)

Vlad Lupan, Independent Expert

Ion Manole, Director, Promo-Lex

Igor Munteanu, Director, Institute for Development and Social Initiatives (IDIS-„Viitorul”)

Sergiu Ostaf, Expert, CREDO

Andrei Popov, Executive Director, Foreign Policy Association (APE)

Valeriu Prohniţchi, Economic Expert

Victor Ursu, Executive Director, Soros Foundation Moldova

Alexandru Canţîr, Director, Committee for Freedom of Press

Vitali Catană, Expert, Institute for Public Policies (IPP)

Victor Chirilă, Programs Director, Foreign Policy Association (APE)

Antoniţa Fonari, Director, „Young and Free”

Mircea Eşanu, Anticorruption Alliance

Veaceslav Ioniţă, Expert, Institute for Development and Social Initiatives (IDIS-„Viitorul”)

Vlad Gribincea, Lawyer

Iurie Pintea, Program Director, Institute for Public Policies (IPP)

Eugen Revenco, Programs Director, Foreign Policy Association (APE)

Alexei Tulbure, Director, „ Helsinki ” Citizens Assembly

*Those who wish to subscribe to this Declaration are kindly asked to send a message to the following e-mail address: declaratie@alegeliber.md, indicating their complete name and contact details

Nu admit sa ne fure votul, nu admit sa ne fure LIBERTATEA !

In sfarsit!

Destul!

Azi.md
http://www.azi.md/ro/story/2259

PLDM, PL şi AMN vor organiza duminică proteste contra represaliilor

Cele trei partide de opoziţie anunţă că vor organiza mâine, la ora 11:00, în Piaţa Marii Adunări Naţionale, proteste contra represaliilor începute zilele trecute de autorităţi împotriva participanţilor la mitigurile din 6-7 aprilie, curent.

azi.md, 11 aprilie 2009, 13:09

La manifestaţiile de duminică vor participa membri şi simpatizanţi ai PLDM, PL şi AMN din toate raionale republicii. Protestul este autorizat de Primăria Chişinău.

Declaraţia unui grup de experţi cu privire la escaladarea situaţiei social-politice din R. Moldova

http://www.azi.md/ro/story/2202

Declaraţia unui grup de experţi cu privire la escaladarea situaţiei social-politice din R. Moldova

9 aprilie 2009

Exprimându-ne îngrijorarea faţă de agravarea situaţiei social-politice in urma scrutinului din 5 aprilie 2009 si fiind preocupaţi de faptul că interpretările inadecvate ale acestor evenimente servesc drept justificare pentru decizii si acţiuni de natura să polarizeze si mai mult societatea, declarăm următoarele:


In ziua de 7 aprilie, in centrul Chişinăului au avut loc manifestări spontane şi paşnice care au fost folosite pentru a provoca acţiuni violente şi criminale rezultate în distrugerea clădirilor Parlamentului şi Preşedinţiei. Acţiunile întreprinse de forţele de ordine nu au fost de natură să prevină actele de violenţă şi vandalism.

Condamnând in mod categoric acţiunile de violenţă şi de vandalism, considerăm inadmisibilă prezentarea tuturor acţiunilor de protest doar prin prisma acestor acţiuni criminale. In particular, este complet nejustificat transferul de responsabilitate şi de imagine de pe acţiunile grupului violent pe grupul mult mai numeros şi reprezentativ de protestatari paşnici sau pe liderii politici, unii din care, de fapt, au încercat stoparea violenţelor. Protestele paşnice nu au avut un mesaj antistatal.

In timp ce actele de violenta ce s-au produs nu pot avea nici o justificare si trebuie investigate de organele competente, considerăm că protestele paşnice au izbucnit pe fundalul suspiciunilor legate de corectitudinea alegerilor şi neîncrederea in instituţiile publice, inclusiv cele care au administrat procesul electoral, şi, fiind cauzate , în context mai larg, de nemulţumirea tinerilor faţă de situaţia social-economică, de incertitudinea într-un viitor al lor în Republica Moldova.

Declaraţiile post-electorale ale şefului statului doar au contribuit la inflamarea acestor suspiciuni şi au catalizat ieşirea in strada a cetăţenilor.

În prezent aceste acte de violenţă şi vandalism sunt exploatate din plin de către autorităţi pentru a intimida opoziţia şi societatea civilă, pentru a restricţiona libertăţile şi drepturile fundamentale ale cetăţenilor, şi aşa firave; autorităţile au continuat restricţionarea accesului la posturile publice de radio si TV; au restricţionat accesul la Internet, la sursele de informare. Este lansată o campanie masivă de spălare a creierilor, de compromitere a participanţilor la protestele paşnice, a opoziţiei, a purtătorilor de opinii diferite.

Folosirea de către şeful statului a unor acuzaţii extrem de grave la adresa unor lideri politici, şi calificarea acţiunilor acestora drept „puci", „lovitură de stat", „răsturnare anticonsituţională", etc. înainte de orice investigaţii şi decizii ale instanţelor de judecată escaladează şi mai mult situaţia şi polarizează societatea. Prin plasarea responsabilităţii pentru cele întâmplate asupra opoziţiei politice şi a României se creează un duşman intern şi altul extern care ar putea fi utilizaţi pentru îndreptăţirea eşecurilor guvernării.

Considerăm că în Republica Moldova se creează premisele pentru instaurarea unui regim poliţienesc şi dictatorial.

Pentru a evita aprofundarea crizei politice şi economice, a preveni izolarea internaţională a ţării similară celei în care se află astăzi Belarus şi a nu compromite viitorul european al Republicii Moldova, tendinţele actuale trebuie inversate. Ieşirea din criză este imposibilă fără antrenarea unui cerc larg de actori politici, a societăţii civile şi organizaţiilor internaţionale.

Un rol aparte pentru depăşirea crizei le revine autorităţilor cărora le cerem:

- Să se abţină de la orice acţiuni şi declaraţii care vor avea drept efect deteriorarea situaţiei;

- Să renunţe la mesaje virulente în scopul creării unui cadru de dialog politic pentru depăşirea conflictului apărut.

- Să acţioneze strict în limitele legii pentru ca să nu admită noi violenţe;

- Să facă publice listele celor arestaţi şi să asigure accesul la aceştia a avocaţilor şi a organizaţiilor de protecţie a drepturilor omului;

- Să evite persecuţiile pe motive politice;

- Să pornească o investigaţie plenară, transparentă, cu participare internaţională a cauzelor care au condus la declanşarea actelor de vandalism: identificarea persoanelor care au deturnat o parte din masa de protestatari paşnici spre Preşedinţie şi Parlament; identificarea persoanelor care au provocat acţiunile violente si criminale; în ce măsură acţiunile forţelor de ordine au fost adecvate situaţiei şi conforme misiunii acestora.

- Să asigure dreptul cetăţenilor la libera circulaţie.

- Să asigure libertatea opiniei si a exprimării, inviolabilitatea libertăţii individuale şi a siguranţei cetăţenilor.

- Să contribuie activ la eliminarea tuturor suspiciunilor cu privire la corectitudinea rezultatelor alegerilor parlamentare.

Ne adresăm tuturor instituţiilor de presă, dar în mod special Companiei „Tele-Radio Moldova", să reflecte corect şi imparţial evoluţiile social-politice după alegerile din 5 aprilie cu participarea egală şi nediscriminatorie a părţilor implicate.

Chişinău, 9 aprilie 2009

Semnatari:

Arcadie Barbăroşie, Director IPP

Igor Boţan, Director ADEPT

Vitali Catană, expert IPP

Viorel Cibotaru, Director IESP

Victor Chirilă, Director programe APE

Antoniţa Fonari, Director, „ Tineri şi Liberi"

Mircea Eşanu, Alianţa Anticorupţie

Veaceslav Ioniţă, expert, IDIS-„Viitorul"

Vlad Gribincea, avocat

Vlad Lupan, expert independent

Ion Manole, Director Promo-Lex

Igor Munteanu, Director IDIS „Viitorul"

Sergiu Ostaf, expert, CREDO

Iurie Pintea, Director programe IPP

Andrei Popov, Director executiv APE

Valeriu Prohniţchi, expert economic

Eugen Revenco, Director programe APE

Victor Ursu, Director executiv, Fundaţia Soros Moldova

*Persoanele care doresc să subscrie la această declaraţie sunt rugate să trimită un mesaj la adresa: declaratie@alegeliber.md, indicînd numele complet şi datele de contact

Moldova elections - street and party chronicles

- I am a former Moldovan diplomat
- former Head of NATO Directorate, former Deputy General Director of Euro-Atlantic Security Department.
- I was dealing with Transnistrian separatist conflict in Moldova
- I am a former negotiator in both Conflict resolution commissions.
- Three times member of OSCE Missions.

I am a democrat. I write these notes from the streets of Moldovan capital, Chisinau. We are protesting the communist frauded elections. Here are my chronicles:

Moldova: Chronicles of a Post-Electoral Day

April 8, 2009; 14.00hrs Moldovan time

Vlad Lupan, Independent expert ( GSM +373 79 372020)

This is an extended chronology of the events viewed from the street and from conversations with the opposition party high-ranking officials

Intro

Protests, clashes and destruction are the result of the Moldovan elections. The citizens are divided and antagonized. The opposition is threatened and allegedly blackmailed. The events that unfolded are presented as coup d’etat by one side or as a planned destabilization scenario to discredit the opposition by the other. The evolution of the events was an important indicator that supports some of these scenarios.

Background and developments up to devastations

On April 5th, 2009, Moldova voted in the elections. Some opinion polls showed that the popularity of the communist ruling party was high, of about 35 per cent, while the three Moldovan liberal parties were supposed to come close to the same figure. The announced result of the elections were strikingly different –the Central Electoral Commission, presumed to be supporting the communists, announced 50 per cent of the vote went to the communists and they gather enough votes to get exactly 61 places in the new Parliament. This figure of 61 seats was the exact number of places they needed to elect the President and then form the new government without liberals blocking it.

The Liberals announced that they believe that these figures are a fraud. They brought to the attention of the local and international community that on the very day of the elections there were certain irregularities. From the point of view of the voting procedures themselves, those irregularities were less visible. However, they stated that a number of people were issued by the state authorities the necessary papers to vote repeatedly, dead people were on the voting lists and allegedly some of them “voted”, a number of ballots were printed ahead of the elections and then allegedly destroyed, while citizens were rumoring that a number of election officials in poor rural areas were bribed by the communists with as much as 60-70Euros.

Parties also reminded about the fact that the so-called public media – apart from Russian public channel, the only media with national coverage and credibility in the entire country – worked for years to support exclusively the ruling communists. The communists managed to build a Kremlin-like “vertical of power” legally prohibiting their future rivals to form a pre-electoral coalition, raising the electoral threshold, managing to ensure a tight grip over the judicial system, police, prosecution, initiated criminal cases against the liberal opposition leaders, state budget was used for the purposes of electoral campaigning. Communists were opening schools and presenting road repairs, announcing them as achievement of communist “stability” that should be supported and voted again in the next elections. Local administration units, where people voted in 2007 for non-communists, were cut off from the budget and did not receive such incisions.

Through all these actions and long-term preparations the elections, liberals say, were stolen from the outset. This brought to massive protests that started these days in Moldova and had some unfortunate side-effects that are supposed to be possibly also triggered by the Communists.

Yesterday, two of these protests overlapped. A number of youth NGOs and movements went out in the streets at the same time with the Liberal Democratic Party, one of the most vociferous protesters of the election results. A massive youth presence generated a lot of energy and desire to actively protest in the masses. From the Governmental building they were suddenly suggested by a number of unknown people, some of them had their faces covered, to move to the nearby Presidency and Parliament – the two institutions, which after eight years of governance, were widely associated with the communists.

In front of the Presidency and Parliament, two buildings facing each other, the same face-covered people started to instigate the youth to storm the buildings. Liberal-Democrat leaders moved quickly from the Government to the Presidency to temper the crowd that left their protests. The masses were already heated up, their repulsion towards the communists reached in the streets the climax, and despite the desperate attempts by the liberal-democrats the politicians were swept away.

What followed was, in fact, revealing to the intentions and possible scenarios muted by the local politicians and observers. After a brief and relatively sluggish response, the police withdrew and basically ceded the control of the Presidency. The same instigators suggested to overheated youth to smash the offices and shouted pro-Romanian slogans, popular with this segment of Moldovan population. They also waved the Romanian flag. One of these flags was quickly raised over the Presidency, in such a manner, as raising questions of how the person knew how to reach the top of this labyrinth style building. The Parliament was next, there was more police including special intervention forces. However, the response of the police was not very different. The law enforcement withdrew as “effectively” as in the case of the Parliament.

Most of the people between Parliament and Presidency were onlookers and not participants in the attacks. They were shouting anti-communist slogans. Political parties were constantly trying to stop the attackers and appealed to demonstrators to return to the main square.

Liberal-communist negotiations and first conclusions in the afternoon, April 7, 2009

After those provocations that lead to the incitement of the youth, and the ease with which police withdrew and finally to devastation of the Presidency, the Communists announced that all three liberal parties that disagreed with the results of the elections are “putchists” provoking a coup d’etat and will be held legally responsible. One should understand that from the legal viewpoint such an accusation has no cassation limit, being unlimited in time and presuming long term detention.

Until that moment, the other two liberal parties (Liberal Party and Our Moldova Alliance) were practically absent from the protests. In the afternoon the leaders of all three liberal parties appeared at the peaceful protests in front of the Government (including Liberal Democrats that was the only force that tried to tame the problematic situation). They declared they will enter negotiations with the Communist leadership.

Their requests were to finally obtain free access to the Moldovan Public TV, check the voters list and recount the votes, establish a day of new elections and to obtain guarantees that the communists will renounce to accusations against liberals for alleged organised coup d’etat. After hours of discussions, none of those conditions were met – it is important to note that the President was very intransigent to the fact that the liberals will not obtain any access to the national public media. He only stated that he might think of withdrawing his accusations, without giving any hint that he will actually do so. As for the other requests he directed the parties to the Central Electoral Commission.

Immediately after the negotiations the Speaker of the Moldovan Parliament, present at the discussions with the liberals, declared that the liberals are “putchists” – thus confirming that the communists were determined to quash the opposition leadership.

At that point the liberals left for a coordination meeting. While they counselled, the communist controlled media that has a great number of media posts, well funded and with good coverage, was propagating the idea that the liberals are responsible for devastations. The idea ended up flying over the crowd in the centre. In reality the Parliament and Presidency were already abandoned and a very few offenders were roaming free there right in the sights of a few police officers. Behind the Parliament there were at least two hundred policemen making no move. A few instigators were directly suggesting to a number of minors that appeared in the area to enter and destroy the offices, smash computers.

In the centre of the town, in absence of the liberal leaders, protesters from the peaceful crowd were less and less clear of what they should expect. Officials from the political parties confirmed that the entry in the town is prohibited – army and police brought up armoured vehicles and blocked the exit and entry in the Moldovan capital. People coming with buses to support the peaceful protest, not only younger public this time, was stopped and not allowed to enter the town. There was clear and credible information that people from various regional centres of Moldova are ready to come to the Moldovan capital, Chisinau. Liberals did not seem to react. They did not even bring water to the peaceful protesters, at least.

At that time the author knew that that some western embassies informed the liberal leaders that they disapprove the destruction, while supporting the right for the liberty of expression. That was understood as – no support.

Under these circumstances it became clear that the political parties wanted to dissociate themselves from the destruction – however, they managed to dissociate themselves from the peaceful protest as well. This was the protest that they wanted, but it turned out that at the end of the day the protesters wanted them close, while the liberal leaders became so over-cautious that

Second layer party members stated that their leaders were contacted by the Prosecution and Security and Information Service and threatened with immediate arrests if they do not give up on their requests and if protests are not withdrawn, although at that time there was only one protest, the peaceful demonstration in front of the Government.

The fact that liberals and a number of mainly youth NGOs consulted on an antic-communist movement, proved that party leaders understood they need to stay on their course and contest the election result. The communists do not leave them another way out. However, they also felt compelled to dissociate themselves from the destruction. They were threatened and blackmailed with arrests. They did not obtain aces to the nation-wide public media.

At this point the minors set on fire an office in the Parliament and that was copiously filmed on TVs. Two of the liberal leaders went to explain their actions and the situation to the third most popular TV station in Moldova, ProTV. This was around 21.00hrs. There were already less people in the crowd, their number closing to 2000, as compared to about 5-6 thousand in the morning.

The ProTV is a Romanian station that broadcasts local news bulletins and several local political shows that have a high popularity. Even pro-democratically and pluralist ProTV showed images of fire and of two political leaders seating in ProTV show. They felt for the image that someone wanted to create for those liberals – the image of people responsible for both devastation and now fire.

Exactly at this moment, the author of this lines was going behind the Parliament – there were six fire-machines standing there doing nothing to get in front of the building and fight the fire. No one already would have stopped them. They were waiting for the TVs to film enough dramatic footage. Although the ProTV finally managed to show the real situation with the fire-trucks, the damage was done. This further increased liberals’ predicament. They stated they will visit the crowd after the TV show.

After hours of expectations of a visible, well-known political person to lead them, the crowd was getting thinner. Liberal parties’ supporters started to grumble “they needed the TV more than they needed us”. The momentum of the street protest was lost, people started to leave the place.

At 22.50hrs, liberals were expected to appear in the centre – only Liberal Party officials appeared. They said the crowd “could” protest if it wishes. They returned again and again to the idea that the protests should be peaceful, if people wish to protest.

The author asked some of the party high ranks if they will only condemn the devastation, or will also confirm they continue to disagree with the elections results, further asking for their invalidation – will they protest these results, however clearly underlining them peacefully? They answered that they were concerned about the fact that the protests started by one liberal party would be blamed on another. They remembered the statements of the western ambassadors.

Instead of conclusions in evening of April 7, 2009 and morning of April 8, 2009
- The protests continue now, form 10.00hrs of April 8.

- Foreign journalists were allegedly banned from entering the country. Those who came by planes were asked to leave immediately with the same aircraft. Land-borders are blocked for the foreign journalists. It seems the only way through is via separatist Transnistria in the east of Moldova, although it might be that this is risky as well.

- The messages or conclusion coming from the latest events are clear:

1. The fact that the devastation occurred, showed that the liberals did have a role in it.

2. Their lack of clear action-plan proved they did not plan a coop d’etat. Their lack of coordination was just another clear signal on that.

3. The very well visible and organised provocative actions, were, instead, well organised. It is clear that despite the fact that the liberals did not have a development scenario, the communists did.

4. The liberals are cornered by the Communists. There is no outside support. They are alone against the communist machine – media propaganda, police, security services, professionally organised instigators; even army was brought in to block the entries into and out of town – clearly in defiance to the liberty of expression, so clearly asked by the Western ambassadors. Some people in other towns were beaten up and dispersed by the police, after they attempted similar protests in their locations.

5. The liberals also understood that the communists are not going to back down – the semi-autocratic regime in Moldova is not going to be softer than in Belarus with opposition.

6. At the end of yesterday the Anti-Communist Coalition announced it will further organise peaceful protests, in the name of teachers associations, student NGOs, political parties and citizens, subscribing to the Coalition demands – basically the same demands that party officials asked from the communists (fee media access, exclusion of “dead souls” that voted from the graves, recount of the electors, no coup d’etat accusations, etc).

Thus, the liberals are now in a dilemma – they want to dissociate themselves from the destruction, while in parallel they do not recognise the electoral results.

The fact that the Communist party increased pressure and is basically showing no mercy, reduces any illusion that the Communists will leave the opposition alone; or that the Communists will organise by free will fair elections.

A few days ago, ahead of the protests, the author of these lines was invited to speak in front of the EU Ambassadors in Moldova – they were told that the liberals might have three options – accept the election results that they believe were long-frauded, attempt a protest scenario as in “orange revolution” in Ukraine or protest and slowly fade away, like in Belarus. A good number of Ambassadors laughed when they’ve heard about Moldovan opposition organising protests like in Ukraine, diplomats basically showing there will be no support for such a scenario. Many of them, probably, are rethinking this scenario now – one thing is clear, they were far behind the events.

The signals of lack of support that the West is now giving to Moldovan liberals are read by the Communists in one simple manner – they feel their impunity to orchestrate any scenario and get away with it. Just like in the times when the West left the Belarus opposition alone.

The liberals are now feeling somehow abandoned, maybe even afraid. They want a rule of law Moldova, they do not want destruction and they wish no connection with it. However, they need to take a final decision and they understand that they are left with no way back. Its “or – or”. Its: Europe or Belarus.

Let’s hope that Europe will not be far behind the events at least this time.

I am going to a meeting of the civil society experts to make a joint NGO statement on the events. Wish us luck.

Revista 22 Romania - Opozitia ar putea cere repetarea alegerilor

Inca ieri dimineata am prezentat un articol pentru Revista22 din Romania - pentru cei care nu stiu este una dintre cele mai prestigioase reviste de la Bucuresti.

Este un articol in primul rand pentru informarea publicului. Materialul este de la orele 10.15 in el deja vorbeam despre o posibila contestare. Ulterior procentele de vot s-au mai schimbat. Desi articolul a fost publicat ieri, totusi postez pe blog acest material, publicat cu datele de la ora 10.

Revista 22:
http://www.revista22.ro/opozitia-ar-putea-cere-repetatea-alegerilor-din-republica-moldova-5877.html

-------------------------------------

ORELE 10.15

REVISTA 22

Editia Online

2009, APR 06

Opozitia ar putea cere repetatea alegerilor din Republica Moldova

Vlad Lupan - Chisinau, Analiza Zilei

De vreme ce 59.49% din alegători s-au prezentat la urnele de vot, alegerile parlamentare din Republica Moldova sunt considerate valabile. Însă partidele liberale care n-au intrat în Parlament considera rezultatul acestor alegeri viciat profund de felul in care s-a desfasurat campania elctorala si au anunţat că se vor mobiliza pentru alegeri anticipate.



-------------------------------------

Cititi sau comentati tot articolul pe paginile Revistei 22 la adresa:
http://www.revista22.ro/opozitia-ar-putea-cere-repetatea-alegerilor-din-republica-moldova-5877.html

sau continuati sa cititi aici:

-------------------------------------

CONTINUARE: ORELE 10.15


În acest moment Comisia electorală centrală a numărat 95,6% de buletine. Partidul Comuniştilor din Republica Moldova (PCRM) a obţinut 49,93% din voturile populaţiei.

Trei partide liberale de opoziţie, care s-au declarat gata să formeze o coaliţie, au inregistrat urmatoarele rezultate: Partidul Liberal – 12,88%, Partidul Liberal Democrat – 12,24%, iar Alianţa Moldova Noastră – 9,85%.

În condiţiile în care, cu o excepţie, partidele liberale au reuşit să se afirme doar recent în viaţa politică din Republica Moldova, unificarea acestora ar fi o chestiune de viitor. Pornind de la ideea că aceste trei partide încă nu sunt gata pentru fuziune şi vor diviza electoratul din Republica Moldova, guvernarea comunista a introdus cu peste un an în urmă un prag electoral mai înalt, de 6% şi a interzis crearea unor coaliţii pre-electorale.

Deja, în campanie, dezbaterile electorale au fost orchestrate în aşa fel încât comuniştii să fie absenţi din confruntarea cu liberalii. Partidele de opoziţie au semnalat abuzuri grave privind tiparirea şi distrugerea necontrolată a buletinelor de vot, numararea voturilor a fost efectuata de catre Comisii, ai caror membri sunt în bună parte susţinători ai PCRM.

Însă problema votului substanţial al populaţiei Republicii Moldova în favoarea PCRM, cred liberalii, este rezultatul unor manipulări cu conştiinţa populaţiei de mai mulţi ani.

Pe parcursul ultimilor ani partidele şi organizaţiile nonguvernamentale semnalau un deficit serios în ce priveşte starea democraţiei şi libertăţilor politice în ţară, cu impact aşteptat asupra alegerilor din 2009.

Intr-o republică parlamentară, preşedintele comunist a ţării a întărit poziţia partidului său la guvernare, a instituit un control total asupra mass-media publică prin care manipuleaza cetăţenii, a permis televiziunii ruse să emită pe frecvenţe de stat la nivel naţional, astfel încât prim-ministrul şi preşedintele Rusiei sunt cei mai populari oameni politici din Republica Moldova care susţin PCRM, bugetul de stat a fost utilizat pentru încurajarea financiară a primăriilor comuniste, cu inaugurări de şcoli şi reparaţii în prezenţa liderilor comunişti chiar înainte de alegeri.

Totodata, au fost pedepsite financiar administraţiile publice locale care nu au votat pentru partidul de guvernare în alegerile locale din 2007.

Pornind de la ideea că mintea cetăţeanului Republicii Moldova a fost alterată de mai mult timp, partidele liberale nu văd decât o singură soluţie: Republica Moldova este un stat parlamentar, în care preşedintele ţării este ales de către membrii parlamentului. Rezultatele alegerilor presupun că partidul comunist nu are suficiente voturi ca să aleagă singur noul preşedinte al Republicii, care ulterior ar urma să nominalizeze guvernul.

Pentru a bloca ascensiunea comuniştilor la putere pentru un al treilea mandat consecutiv, partidele liberale au declarat că vor merge pe formula unor alegeri anticipate, refuzând să negocieze cu PCRM postul de şef al statului.

Problema care se întrevede pentru un astfel de curs este că liderul PCRM, Vladimir Voronin, a declarat că va încerca să „negocieze” cu fiecare deputat liberal în parte. Ori familia Voronin are resursele financiare necesare pentru asemenea „tratative”, precum şi posturi în guvernare. Totul va depinde de loialitatea liberalilor faţă de propriile partide.

Republica Moldova va intra, probabil, într-o zonă de turbulenţă politică din care va ieşi dupa un timp, însa nu e deloc clar in cel fel o va face.

The day after the 4th of April

The Republic of Moldova has entered the final phase of the electoral campaign. The voting is scheduled for the upcoming Sunday, April 5. The choice of the governing Communists to run elections after the famous in the Moldovan political life day, of 4th of April, inevitably brings us four years ago, when several political parties supported the Communists. It was a post-electoral arrangement that was announced as pro-European.

The 2009 elections are already marked for the outside public by a U-turn pro-Russian speech of the Communist party. The 10 European reform preconditions, put forward to the Communists by other parties on the 4th of April, 2005, are not met. Those parties still stay in a partnership with the governing Communists, unconcerned of the US Department of State 2008 Report that recognises official interference in the judiciary, of media freedom alarms made by NGOs and two statements of EU Embassies in Moldova that place country’s path towards European integration under a serious question mark. The third group of opposition, the democrats, instead, ask for a clearer European direction and reforms.

The Communist party, coming to power in 2001, promised that the Republic of Moldova would join the Russia-Belorussia Union. In 2003, mostly pressured by the civil society, including political parties and outside actors, the Communist President declined to sign the Kozak Memorandum on settling the Transnistrian separatist conflict in Russian terms and against Moldova’s European integration. The Communist Party of the Republic of Moldova (CPRM) turned then to the European integration, which was not a free choice political motivator, however. Further internal actions of the communists proved that assumption.

In 2005, by free choice, the President of the Republic of Moldova consolidated his executive powers de facto, although de jure the country is a parliamentary republic. He did not step down from his position of the Chairman of the Communist party. He then implemented the well known Kremlin-like “vertical of power”. Disregarding legal provisions, he fired personnel from the Government over Prime-Minister’s head.

New laws and regulations on State secret and checks of the public officials brought controls that have not been implemented even during the soviet times. The Head of the Security and Information Service was replaced by the President’s former legal advisor, who is his nephew as well. Although the SIS is formally subordinated to the Parliament, the President publicly tasked it to monitor political parties and media to disallow foreign funding. Human rights NGOs registrations are not extended.

In the last eight years the country became the state with the highest number of cases per capita at the European Court of Human Right. The nation-wide Public TV supports the Communists, other media cannot obtain broadcasting frequencies to operate nationally. Russian TV is the most popular channel in Moldova, being the only other channel that broadcasts nation-wide and on State frequency, while Mr. Putin and Medvedev surpass the Moldovan President’s popularity and nothing is done to liberalise the media market.

In 2008, the CPRM governance cut down funding to Local self-governance that voted against them in 2007 local elections. Pre-electoral alliances were prohibited, threshold was raised from four to six per cent and political parties were asked to re-register ahead of the elections, thus creating more sidetrack tasks for them. The Communists suggested such practices exist in the EU countries, while, in reality, there is no such European country where all these barriers meet together. The cumulative effect of such decisions is unique and its intention is unambiguous.

Some of the Moldovan and foreign observers suggested that most of the pro-Russia CPRM actions were under outside pressure. The above decisions were obviously not.

The observers, however, rightly noted that the electorate will chose between three groups of parties – pro-Russian movements (Communists united with Patria-Rodina, Social-Democrats and Centrist Union), the currently governing coalition supporters (rightist Christian Democrats and leftist Democratic Party), and new-coming liberals.

The 2005 elections showed that, despite economic and democracy deficiencies, the citizens support the European integration, declared as a national goal. New parties’ growth of popularity also showed at that time that a part of the Moldovan society is keen to have a change for better.

In 2009 we have the Communists advocating for stability, implementing a “vertical of power”, attracting Russia and its highly popular media in Moldovan parliamentary elections. Other pro-Kremlin parties are not much different and relevant.

The second group is formed of parties that supported Communists in 2005, and, according to various opinion polls, seriously lost their popularity – another sign of changing attitudes in the Moldovan society.

The third group consists of liberals, although advocating for different forms of liberalism. Our Moldova Alliance, an older player, is a swinger from a pro-Russian 2005 camp to an independent liberal future. The other is the Liberal Party that surfaced as a victory against Communists in 2007 local elections in the capital of Moldova. The third player is a newly formed Liberal Democratic Party that appeared in 2008. In less than one year it managed to show qualified figures, gathering a serious support of pro-European electorate. Its lawyers have practiced in controversial cases, including at European Court of Human Rights, substantiating the supremacy of the rule of law principles, against political allegations.

It was widely argued that these three parties split the electorate, and their unification would provide a more solid choice for a unified liberal and pro-European opposition. The problem is that these parties appeared only recently on the country political scene, as either fractions of former Alliances or newcomers, and had not enough time to stabilise and mature for such a move. Nonetheless, their message is pro-reforms, and, hence, pro-European, they pressed the Communist governance to soften their stance on a number of anti-democratic matters and provided a solid choice for a good part of the electorate. Although they cherish their newly established independence and did not unite, for obvious reasons, they have already looked into a joint future.

Moldova is a young democracy, and the process of political consolidation is only on its way. The disagreements between the young liberals provided the Communists sufficient media material to attempt forming a public opinion of political instability of democracy. However, it should come to no surprise that, in a young democracy, having more political views on how the reforms should be implemented is democratic and pro-European, while, adopting a “vertical of power” for eight years, it is not.

The fact, that the election day is set for the 5th of April, gives the incumbent President a negotiation edge in the follow up election of his successor. Four more years of vertical of power might harm Moldova. The Moldovan president indicated that he wishes to settle as Speaker of the Parliament and one can presume that he would want to shift the political and executive power there, after the election of the new President. The Communists did not publicly ruled out a post-electoral alliance with other pro-Russian parties, although CPRM quotes Russian pressure as an excuse for its actions. This direction is isolation, and not an European integration path.

Because of the prohibition to form pre-electoral alliance, liberals have put aside their notional disagreements and announced that they would be ready to form a post-electoral coalition.

The election day comes after some years of media engineering and political prohibitions, and we look ahead to the direction Moldova would go – Europe or Belarus.

End

(Do not click on Read more that's it)