Kommersant-Vlast: “I think Russia will get over the disease of imperialism”
In November 2003, portraits of Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin were burned in Moldova. Five years later, the Moldovan authorities invited him to Chisinau. YURI ROSHKA, the Vice Speaker of the Moldovan Parliament and one-time leader of the Moldovan opposition, commented on both events to our correspondent, VLADIMIR SOLOVYOV.
On November 25, 2003 Russia suffered one of the most painful diplomatic setbacks in its recent history. On that day, Moldovan President Vladimir Voronin refused to sign the plan of Transdnestr settlement that he had already initialed along with Transdnestr leader Igor Smirnov. The document, also known as "the Kozak Memorandum" (it was drafted by the then-Deputy Head of the Russian President's Executive Office, Dmitry Kozak) was rejected by Mr Voronin at the 11th hour under pressure from the West and the Moldovan opposition.
The leader of the Christian Democratic People's Party of Moldova, Yuri Roshka, led thousands of his supporters in street protests, burned the portraits of President Putin, and trampled Russian flags. As a result, Mr Putin, who was planning to visit Chisinau to personally bless the reunification of the two banks of the Dniester River, canceled the visit and continued to nurse a grudge against Mr Voronin for a long time.
Russia took revenge on the Moldovan President by banning the import of Moldovan wine and hiking up the gas price. During the 2005 parliamentary election, Moscow even tried to engineer a "colour revolution" in Moldova to topple Mr Voronin, a Communist.
Now, the two countries are friends again. The Kremlin repeatedly signaled that it was not going to recognize Transdnestr by analogy with Abkhazia and South Ossetia and would settle the conflict peacefully. However, it has set the condition that Moldova never becomes a NATO member. Mr Voronin appeared ready to cave in, but now Moscow seems to have had a change of heart.
On November 14, Russian Prime Minister Putin made his first visit to Chisinau in six years to attend a meeting of the CIS heads of government and met with Mr Voronin. However, no breakthrough on the Transdnestr issue was achieved. Perhaps the Russian authorities decided to wait and see the outcome of the spring 2009 parliamentary elections in Moldova, or perhaps they will try to influence the outcome of the election once again.
"Putin overestimated his chances"
Q.: Five years ago, you and your Party protested the signing of the Kozak Memorandum. Your people burned Vladimir Putin's portraits and Russian flags in the streets. On November 14 Putin visited Chisinau, but this time around, you kept a low profile. Why?
A.: At that time Putin, through his advisor Mr Kozak, brought us a document that would legitimise Russia's military presence in Moldova until 2020. Moreover, that document violated our Constitution. I can quote the provision from memory: "The Federative Republic of Moldova is the direct legal successor to the former Republic of Moldova." Imagine how a normal person with any patriotic feelings in Russia or any other country would react if he were told: here is a piece of paper for you to sign that amounts to the liquidation of your state.
Instead of the former country they thought up a new one. The suggestion was to change the constitutional system so that Transdnestr would come to dominate Moldova's foreign and domestic policy as an enclave controlled by Moscow.
This was the scheme they were trying to impose and we were against it.
Russia was hoping to steal a march on the West. The memorandum was to be signed in the final days of November, and an OSCE summit was due to be held in Maastricht on December 1 and 2, 2003. Mr Putin wanted to go there personally and tell the international community to roll over: "We have settled everything with the Moldovans. Here are their signatures."
It was an attempt to solve the issue in one fell swoop, so we had to stop that adventurous plan. The protests were not prompted by our dislike of Russia; Mr Putin simply overestimated his chances. He shouldn't have twisted our arms. I am aware that Russia has its interests, which sometimes coincide with the interests of the small post-Soviet states, but sometimes do not. Still, we must learn to come to agreement.
This time around, Mr Putin came here as the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation, a respected individual, one of the leaders of a country that is an important economic and political partner of Moldova. As a result, he was to be accorded all due honour and respect.
Q.: Do you see a danger that Russia will try to pull off the same trick as it tried in 2003?
A.: The only advantage of our Republic is that we are a democracy. The head of state cannot act however he likes. He must reckon with the Constitution, legal norms, and parliament. The President cannot sign documents and give promises that break the law. I am sure that Mr Voronin cannot and does not want to break the law. He is well aware that such an issue as sensitive as Transdnestr must be solved together with all the political forces in the country, together with Russia and together with the West. It may be an arduous process, but there is no point in trying to outsmart or cheat one another. Hence, I do not expect any unpleasant surprises. Mr Voronin is an experienced politician, and will not launch ill-considered initiatives after the bitter experience of the Kozak Memorandum. At the time, we were in a difficult situation, what with commercial relations, gas prices and so on. We would like to avoid such complications.
Q.: But Russian diplomats consistently hint that it would be a good idea to go back to the provisions of the Kozak Memorandum.
A.: You never know what Russia may propose, but on the whole, I think it is behaving in a more careful manner today. It may suffer another diplomatic setback, and this is the last thing it wants. Anyway, the term of the current administration in Moldova is running out, and some people in Russia are waiting to see what the political landscape in the country will be after the election.
"The siloviki who lead Russia are tough guys and will punish Mr Voronin"
Q.: In the 2005 elections in Moldova, the Kremlin opposed Mr Voronin using the Russian government-controlled media. It was an act of revenge for the failure of the Memorandum. Does the fact of Mr Putin's first visit since 2002 mean that Moscow now sides with the Communist, Mr Voronin?
A.: Anything is possible, but I try to follow the press in Transdnestr and the newspapers in Chisinau, which are close to the Russian embassy and the Kremlin's official line. I do not notice that they are full of praise for Mr Voronin; frankly, it is the opposite. Besides, I think that the security and military men who lead Russia today are very tough guys and are not going to forgive Mr Voronin.
Finally, speaking about the Transdnestr issue and Russian interests in our country, there is a clear sense that Mr Putin and [President Dmitry] Medvedev want to get from Mr Voronin more than he can give.
Q.: What are their demands?
A.: I think that their first objective is to have a military base here. There is no doubt about it. Look at the map: the situation has changed since 2005. The EU and NATO have expanded and Moldova is now on their border. Number one. Number two: we know that Ukraine's future is unpredictable. It is eager to join NATO and nobody knows whether it will manage to get in, or whether Russia will be able to outplay America on that issue.
One thing is clear: the Russian military may be present in Ukraine until 2017, whereas their presence in Moldova is illegal. This irritates Moscow. At all the summits Russia is told, why don't you respect Moldova and international agreements? Well, in this new geopolitical context, considering that it is unclear whether Russia will be able to keep Ukraine, our Moscow friends would like to consolidate their presence in Moldova.
I once asked a Russian diplomat when Russia would comply with the decisions of the Istanbul OSCE summit and withdraw its illegal military presence. His reply was calm and even friendly. He said, "Yuri, you seem to be a serious politician. The Americans are in Romania, so we have no option but to stay here."
From a strategic point of view, it is clear that Russia would hate to pull back its troops 800 km from Ukraine's eastern border. Thus, during the parliamentary elections in Moldova next year, Moscow will go out of its way to secure an amenable parliamentary majority and an amenable president who will legalise Russian military presence.
Q.: How would this happen?
A.: It requires 61 votes in parliament.
Q.: Who could personally solve the issue in Moscow's interests?
A.: My reading of the situation is that it could be either the Our Moldova alliance under its leader Serafim Urekyan, or the centrist union led by ex-premier Vasily Tarlev, or the self-styled Liberal Democrat Vlad Filat. They are the core of that group. They need 61 votes (there are 101 seats in parliament), but that is a lot, about 50% according to our electoral law. These guys will be hard put to it to garner that many votes, so I am afraid of destabilisation.
I am aware that the Communists have a solid rating and can count on 30% of the vote, by the most conservative estimate. But that still means 40 seats and more. We Christian Democrats will make it to parliament and score a lot of points. We will talk about it with you after the elections, but we will not make any such deals with Moscow.
Furthermore, because the people I mentioned have slim chances, they will resort to provocations and destabilisation of the political situation inside the country; thus, if the result our Moscow friends want does not materialise, there will be excuses for rioting and staging a Russian-inspired "colour revolution."
Q.: Do you think Mr Putin was threatening Mr Voronin with such developments during his visit?
A.: I don't know what they talked about, but I don't think that anything of that sort was said. They had a polite, friendly conversation on general political and economic problems. I don't think Mr Putin brought an ultimatum. He is a fairly well-educated and clever politician. He has no reason to trust Mr Voronin (laughs). I recently had a private conversation in Brussels with Misha Saakashvili. He asked me, "Is it true that your President does not recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia?" I replied, "He does not," and he lamented, "but he talks in a very friendly way with your Moscow friends." Well, he is doing the right thing: he is a politician.
Q.: By the way, are you not afraid that Moldova will share Georgia's fate?
A.: There are two main differences between our countries. First, an energy corridor to the West passes through Georgia, but not through our country, and second, we are separated from Russia by Ukraine. Thus, the pressure on our country is not as strong as on Georgia.
"Yeltsin and his team hadn't finished the job"
Q.: Don't you have a feeling that Mr Voronin and his Communists are again playing the Russia card?
A.: That's PR. Don't confuse PR with real actions. If they think it will win them more votes, let them play that card. I look forward to the time when our country won't need to flatter Russia - or revile it.
Q.: And when you revile Russia is that also PR?
A.: It is a necessity. And I am not reviling Russia, I am simply stating that sometimes Russia's foreign policy interests diverge from the interests of my country. I am obliged to do it, and I am not doing it because I enjoy it. It is my right and my duty as a politician. I do not claim to always be right, but I have the right to speak my mind and to protect my country's interests using all available democratic methods. It is that simple.
Q.: Before the 2005 elections, you were a hard-line opponent of the Communists, but later you started cooperating with them. What happened?
A.: I will never become a Communist and Mr Voronin will never become a Christian Democrat. However, it has so happened that we are at a certain historical period must build up our country together. Let me cite an example: [Barack] Obama has won the elections in the States. What happened? He and [John] McCain shook hands and said, "We must cooperate for the good of America, because it has a lot of external enemies and domestic problems".
The same is true of Moldova. We are a small country, but the authorities and the opposition must stop regarding each other as enemies and going at each other's throats. Moldova has been in an absolutely new situation since 2004. At the time, all the parties that carried any weight said, "We want democracy, a market economy and integration into the EU. Let us implement that project."
Are there many people in Russia who know that in 2001, all the members of Mr Voronin's government were Communists, while in 2008 there is only one Communist, and even he is a minister without a portfolio? Mr Voronin has realized that he needs young professionals and technocrats who will competently run the country, regardless of whether or not they are Communist Party members. This is what is important for me.
Q.: I remember that you were afraid that Mr Voronin would resolve the Transdnestr conflict before the 2009 elections and that the Communists would win again.
A.: That is no longer a danger. Indeed, if you close your eyes and imagine a nightmarish scenario in which pro-Russian parties, bankrolled by Russia, come to power in Moldova, they would still be unable to do anything. They would find themselves in the same situation that Mr Voronin was in 2003. They would be willing but unable to do Moscow's bidding.
Q.: You will come out into the streets again?
A.: I will, if necessary, but that is beside the point. I did not take to the streets because I am impetuous, but because there was no other way I could influence the situation.
Now, I can speak calmly in Parliament or with the President and achieve the aims that, at that time, I had to shout through a loudspeaker. I am sorry that serious politicians in Russia consider us to be an anti-Russian party - that is not so. If I sit down with a Russian politician to discuss Russian culture, I am not sure that he would hold his own against me. One simply has to understand what I have repeated a hundred times: we are not against Russia, we are another country. A small and poor country, but a different one. These differences must be respected. One shouldn't behave like a neighbourhood bully. You can kill, but you cannot make yourself be loved by force. So why rape?
Q.: Do you seriously believe that Russia will recognize Moldova as an equal?
A.: I think the Russian state will evolve. It will get over the disease of imperialism. I am not the kind of impassioned politician who gets his kicks out of berating Russia. We just want to have normal relations. We want both you and us to have successful societies. Why should you come after us all the time? Leave alone tiny Georgia and the Baltic countries, which Russian political commentators call "dwarf states". The message behind it is that you can't respect them because they are so small. Well, if you are so big, that is precisely why you should respect them. The reason is that Yeltsin and his team had not finished their job. They should have purged all the former Communists and buried Lenin, and they didn't do it. That was a great misfortune. There was no break with the Soviet past.
How we look at our past is important: with hatred or with an understanding that it was a tragedy for everyone. If we understand that it was a tragedy, we will be happy, if we look at it with hatred, we won't get very far.
I harbour no hatred against anyone because it was not Mr Putin who exiled my ancestors. Such were the times. It is stupid to hate Russia because it has suffered under Soviet government more than anyone else. We are all victims of the past. We should turn the page and move forward. Instead, we are trying to push each other back into the past, and that is not helpful.
