The deputy director of the think tank Experts for Security and Global Affairs (ESGA), Cătălin Done, gave an interview for the FES foreign policy newsletter in which we discussed critically and constructively the relationship between pro-European forces and Moldova’s European path. We talked about the recent Moldova-EU summit on 4th of July, but also about how the election campaign for the parliamentary elections on 28 September should be approached. Risks and threats to the Republic of Moldova were also given priority. We invite you to read the full interview with Cătălin Done below:

How much of a historic event was the Republic of MoldovaEU summit in Chișinău on 4th of July? Some said it was just a political PR event that did not have much historical significance. How did you see it?

I also share the view that this summit was not a historic one. We can say that the European Political Community summit held in Chișinău in 2023 was a historic summit. However, this one was not, for several reasons. The first reason is that the presence of European leaders was extremely limited, restricted to the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, and the President of the European Council, Antonio Costa.

Moreover, this summit was an attempt by the authorities in Chișinău, or at least that is how it was perceived, to show the people of the Republic of Moldova that the European Union remains firmly committed to supporting the Republic of Moldova on its European path and in the European integration process.

However, I would have expected much more from this summit. The reason why I perceived it more as a form of political PR than as a historic meeting between the authorities in Chișinău and European leaders is that they did not present much of the bilateral agreements. I am referring to the fact that the same projects and the same EU support measures that had been announced two months ago were announced again.

However, it was clear evidence that the European authorities and leaders remain firm in their support for the Republic of Moldova. But citizens need to be given tangible, concrete results. They were told about roaming, about the fact that Moldovan citizens will be able to benefit from free roaming services in the European Union. This is already happening, whether we are talking about Moldovan citizens living in the European Union who benefit from this telecommunications mobility, or about companies. I recently saw an advertisement in Chișinău for a mobile phone operator that was already offering promotional telecommunications packages with roaming minutes and internet included.

I believe that, in fact, this summit was, in addition to Moldova’s European path, a form of support for President Maia Sandu and the PAS party in the run-up to the upcoming parliamentary elections. This is because the PAS currently needs to show the population, to show voters, that it is the only political party that can guarantee a European majority. Of course, this is quite negative and damaging to the health of democracy, but this is what Maia Sandu, the de facto leader of the PAS and the pro-European government in Chișinău, has been trying to do.

How do you view the reforms that the Republic of Moldova has implemented so far out of those requested by Brussels? What has been done well and what has not, and what are the sensitive areas where Chișinău has not taken convincing steps?

It is clear that this government has succeeded in creating a coherent legislative framework compared to what we have been used to in the Republic of Moldova. Extremely significant steps have been taken in the fight against corruption. The same applies to the legislative framework, which provides predictability, because ultimately that is what accession to the European Union is all about.

Important steps have been taken in adopting the acquis communautaire in the Republic of Moldova and transposing part of the legislation, but there are also some drawbacks. It is not enough to fight corruption while at the same time politicising some of the fundamental institutions of the state. My impression is that, unfortunately, an attempt has been made to take over certain institutions and politicise them, which is a step backwards for the Republic of Moldova.

I will give you an example that I find extremely telling. It concerns the centre that fights disinformation in the Republic of Moldova. I found it very curious how Parliament, in a completely non-transparent and even somewhat undemocratic manner, placed the centre that fights disinformation under the authority of the President of the Republic of Moldova.

Another example with which I do not necessarily agree is the fact that the Information and Security Service (SIS) continues to operate under the direct supervision of the President of the Republic of Moldova, even though Parliament exercises some control over the institution. So, we are still talking about certain aspects that need to be made transparent.

The social sector is the one that suffers the most. We still have a lack of vision on the part of the government regarding the social sector and the social protection of labour. One essential thing is that Moldova has managed to completely break away from its dependence on Russian hydrocarbons and connect to the European Union’s energy system. But despite all this, we still have problems in the areas of social security, defence and environmental protection. Steps have been taken, but they are small steps.

The EU has released EUR 270 million for the Republic of Moldova out of a total of EUR 1.9 billion at the first summit in history between the two sides in Chișinău. Where should this money go to have an immediate effect, given that it is coming just before parliamentary elections?

I believe that critical infrastructure should be the main beneficiary of these funds. I am referring in particular to roads, bridges and intra- and interregional interconnectivity networks. Because this is the first thing that citizens see.

Regional development is extremely important, and I believe that the Republic of Moldova should learn a little from Romania’s mistakes. Because Romania has always been extremely poor in terms of regional development, and we still have some of the poorest regions in Europe on Romanian territory. Given that the Republic of Moldova is preparing to join the European Union by 2030 at the latest, regional development should be at the top of the government’s strategic agenda, regardless of its political colour.

Citizens need unrestricted access to state infrastructure, they need immediate and unrestricted access to all public services, to everything that makes for a good quality of life. And so I think that this should be the main concern of politicians in Chișinău.

Were the benefits gained by Moldova as a result of the 4 July summit effectively communicated, by which I mean Moldova’s accession to the SEPA system and the elimination of roaming charges with the Republic of Moldova from 2026? How accurately and effectively were these benefits communicated to the public?

The messages from politicians and the government were correct, but they were ineffective and insufficiently thought out to reach the public.

Ordinary citizens do not know what SEPA means, they do not know what critical energy infrastructure means, and so I think a much clearer and more detailed explanation of the benefits of this European money is needed.

There is another extremely important point. During the presidential election campaign in Moldova, PAS MPs went out into the country to explain why Moldovan citizens should support a pro-European candidate, but they made the same mistake. They used wooden, extremely sterile language and conveyed extremely complicated messages to the target audience. The same thing has happened now. Citizens do not understand what closer ties with the European Union mean.

Most of them rightly fear that joining the European Union means war, antagonising relations with the Russian Federation and severing all ties with the East. This is not true. The European Union is not a military alliance. Joining the European Union does not mean that the Republic of Moldova will necessarily renounce its neutrality. We have neutral countries such as Austria, which is a member of the European Union. But citizens need to know this and they need to be told correctly and in their own language.

I believe that, in some way, the current government and leaders of Moldova should nuance their messages, speak in extremely simple terms, come down from the pedestal they have climbed onto, take the pulse of society and explain to citizens in a transparent manner that they have nothing to fear from the European Union and from the decisions that the Republic of Moldova is now taking for their benefit, for the benefit of its citizens.

Is it feasible for the Republic of Moldova to join the EU by 2028-2030? Whether yes or no, could you give us some arguments in this regard?

It is extremely difficult to say that the Republic of Moldova will join the EU by 2028. This message is neither feasible nor realistic. In fact, I believe that it is extremely damaging to the idea of European integration in the Republic of Moldova. Because it creates certain expectations among the citizens of the Republic of Moldova, it offers them certain prospects, which will be extremely disappointing if they are not fulfilled.

Let’s take a look at Romania. It took Romania almost 18 years to negotiate each chapter with the European Union in the country’s integration process. And imagine that Romania’s bureaucratic apparatus was about three times larger than that of the Republic of Moldova. What will actually happen if the Republic of Moldova and its government fail to integrate the country into the European Union by 2028? Well, anti-European and pro-Russian forces will use this failure to show Moldovan citizens that Europe does not want them.

Look at what happened in Romania with AUR, Călin Georgescu and George Simion. When Europe kept Romania and Bulgaria at the gates of the Schengen area, these anti-democratic and antiEuropean forces built these narratives to increase Euroscepticism in Romania. And this will also happen in the Republic of Moldova; this example, this scenario will be replicated in Chișinău. I fear that once this target of accession by 2028-2030 is not met, we can forget about the European project in the Republic of Moldova for a very long time.

I believe it would be more honest and fairer on the part of pro-European leaders – whether in government or opposition – to present the citizens of the Republic of Moldova with a realistic roadmap.

In my view, I believe that the Republic of Moldova cannot join the European Union before 2035, and it would be a mistake to accelerate the European integration process without Ukraine, with a decoupling of the Republic of Moldova from Ukraine. Because that would cause a lot of problems for the Republic of Moldova. Firstly, the Republic of Moldova would become a border country of the European Union, it would become an external border of the EU, which would generate enormous costs for Chișinău to ensure the security of the European Union’s external border, and secondly, let us not forget that Kiev pretends to forget, but it does not forgive. Kiev could also create enormous problems for the Republic of Moldova if the latter were to integrate into the European Union without Ukraine.

How significant do you think Russia’s involvement will be in the run-up to the parliamentary elections in order to obstruct Moldova’s European path, and how resilient do you think Moldova’s institutions are today in dealing with the hybrid war waged by Russia?

The integration of all aspects related to resilience and coping with hybrid attacks from the Russian Federation in the Republic of Moldova is a success. The Republic of Moldova’s law enforcement agencies are extremely resilient and have managed, both in recent years and during the presidential election campaign, to keep the Russian Federation’s influence at a moderate level. Russia will use all its political, social and even economic resources to try with all its might to divert the Republic of Moldova from its European path.

We are seeing the effects of this involvement and influence at the moment. We are witnessing systematic attacks organised by political or social groups against the fundamental and constitutional institutions of the Republic of Moldova, against the Parliament, against the Presidency or against the law enforcement agencies. We are seeing an attempt to destabilise society, to accelerate these narratives and to spread them in the public sphere in terms of fear of war, fear of the unknown, uncertainty, and exploiting the shortcomings of the pro-European government does nothing but increase the level of insecurity, instability and mistrust of citizens in institutions.

In the period remaining until the elections, I believe that Parliament, the Government and the Presidency should fight together, side by side, to regain citizens’ trust in institutions. In this election campaign, representatives of state institutions should come up with a revised social contract between the state and the citizens, not a fanciful government programme. They need to come up with an honest contract, precisely to assure voters that the Republic of Moldova will remain a democratic state, a free state where fundamental rights and freedoms are respected. This is exactly what Putin and Russia want. They want to sow mistrust between the state and its citizens.

Thank you!