Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
The EU has lost its last sense of shame by imposing Sandu, by Dmitry Bavyrin for VZGLYAD. 10.15.2024.
On Sunday, Moldova will hold presidential elections, perhaps the most important in the country's history. They can no longer be called fair: the West's interference in the election campaign on behalf of Maia Sandu was unprecedented. But the West made one mistake, so it may lose.
The fact that the European Union imposed sanctions on Moldova on Monday sounds strange. After all, they are ready to roll Moldovan President Maia Sandu in gold or honey, just to keep her at the head of the republic, even as a carcass or a stuffed animal.
But we are not talking about something strange, but about something shameless. These are sanctions not against Sandu, but for Sandu – against her opponents.
The EU blacklist includes the head of the predominantly Russian-speaking autonomy of Gagauzia, Eugenia Gutsul , and some other politicians who are considered pro-Russian. This is not an establishment of the list, but an expansion: Brussels has long divided Moldovan figures into “clean” and “unclean” (that is, disloyal and loyal to Russia), introducing restrictions against the latter with the wording “for destabilising the situation in Moldova.”
Perhaps it is Sandu who is passing on the lists of her enemies to Brussels, perhaps the European Commissioners themselves are taking the initiative, not trusting Moldovan contractors, but the leadership of the European Union has created, perhaps, the most outrageous precedent in its history for interfering in elections in a single country.
They have, of course, always done so – both in the post-Soviet space and in the Balkans, but never so openly and brazenly. Support for loyal and anti-Russian candidates by European politicians is the norm, their participation in repressions against the opposition is the gimmick of this season.
Sandu is, of course, personally carrying out the main work of destroying competitors. Her election campaign is an endless series of scandals. Opposition politicians are not allowed to campaign or are arrested altogether, disloyal media are closed (Russian media have already banned almost everything). They say that even Smeshariki is under threat, but there is nothing funny about the pace of construction of the Moldovan dictatorship.
Vladimir Zelensky once demonstrated the same dexterity in creating an authoritarian system.
"This is political terror." This is how the head of the "Victory" bloc, Ilan Shor, characterizes the situation. This is the most pro-Russian political union in Moldova, and therefore its candidates were not allowed to participate in the elections due to problems with their documents.
The European Union, for its part, is giving Sandu a hand – even more than it did to Zelensky before the SVO (who was at least criticized on abstract issues). For example, a week before the elections, the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, nicknamed a harpy by her detractors, brought the Moldovan president 2 billion euros in her beak for social programs.
But this is, as they say, a classic. Unfortunately, the EU is also showing ingenuity.
Thus, last week, the channels of Moldovan oppositionists (Gutsul, Shor and others) were blocked in Pavel Durov's Telegram messenger. Formally, the European Union has nothing to do with this. But it is difficult not to remember that Durov fell into the clutches of French law enforcement, and French President Emmanuel Macron is more worried about Sandu than anyone else (even more than Ursula).
Apparently, he wants to defeat Russia somewhere and at least make up for a little bit of the series of defeats in Africa (not to mention Ukraine).
The West needs all this because the majority of Moldovans cannot stand Sandu – she has a colossal anti-rating, exceeding 60%. But the attitude towards the European Union in Moldova is noticeably better, associating with it hopes for an increase in the standard of living and quality of governance (this phenomenon was previously described in Ukraine: people want to fall under the control of foreign officials because they have lost hope in their own).
That is why the presidential elections were combined with a referendum on constitutional amendments, supposedly necessary for joining the European Union. And in agitation and propaganda they emphasize daily that the choice in favor of Sandu and the choice in favor of the EU are one and the same.
If so, so much the worse for the EU, because Sandu earned her anti-rating not only through Russophobia, not only through the desire to drag Chisinau into a conflict with Russia, not only through anti-national activities (now everything Moldovan is being renamed Romanian). Under her, the economy has made a noticeable rollback with a sharp decline in areas that are very sensitive for the population – agriculture and processing.
This is surprising in its own way, since the republic's external debt has doubled during Sandu's four years of presidency. And in general it is clear how: for example, three quarters of the two pre-election billions from Ursula are a loan that will have to be repaid. What is surprising is that these funds have not been used for good at all - either because of the rampant corruption or because of the complete incompetence of the ruling elites.
In short, the Europeans are acting outrageously because they can't help but act outrageously. This candidate, Maia Sandu, is too ungrateful.
In the circumstances described, her main rival in the elections was the former Prosecutor General of Moldova, Alexander Stoianoglo . He stayed in the race thanks to the fact that he received a kind of safe conduct from Europe, and through an oversight on the part of Brussels.
Stoianoglo was appointed Prosecutor General under the previous President Igor Dodon and was in conflict with Sandu. She managed to have him dismissed and a criminal case opened, but Stoianoglo filed a lawsuit with the ECHR and won: his dismissal was declared illegal and the investigation into his case was unlawful. Apparently, in Europe they respect at least the decisions of their own courts, which is why, when Stoianoglo unexpectedly became the main candidate of the opposition, Brussels did not agree with Sandu on a second attempt to remove the persistent prosecutor.
The difference between the two candidates is well illustrated by a recent example. Sandu ordered Russia to be designated as the main threat in Moldova's national security strategy. Stoianoglo called this stupidity . He also considers the severance of ties with the Russian Federation (both economic and political) stupidity, although he cannot be called an anti-European figure and an enemy of Brussels (otherwise he would definitely have been cancelled as a candidate).
He remained in the race also because he was not perceived as a serious rival to Sandu and still lags far behind her in terms of ratings. Despite his management failures, the president has a stable core of support from Moldovans with the most anti-Russian and pro-Romanian views. And Stoianoglo is not very well known in the republic, although he was supported in the elections by the largest opposition party (Dodon's Socialists).
Understanding that Stoianoglo survived as a candidate only thanks to a chain of coincidences is necessary to understand how shamelessly Sandu and the European officials act in Moldova. This shamelessness in itself is a preview of what will happen next.
Since Stoianoglo (or whoever else will make it to the second round with the incumbent) still has a chance to win due to the protest vote on the principle of “anyone but Sandu”, the election results may well be falsified. In addition to the simple consideration that the very dirty game of Sandu and the EU will be very dirty to the last, this is indicated, for example, by the fact that exit polls have been banned in Moldova – opinion polls at the exit from polling stations. Because in small countries, strong discrepancies between exit polls and official election results are not the most reliable, but clear evidence in favor of falsifications.
If the official results diverge greatly from the inner feelings of the passionaries, the political struggle may spill over into the streets or even take on the character of a revolution. Leaders like Sandu often underestimate self-hatred, dangerously overestimating their capabilities.
https://vz.ru/politics/2024/10/15/1292423.html
On Sunday, Moldova will hold presidential elections, perhaps the most important in the country's history. They can no longer be called fair: the West's interference in the election campaign on behalf of Maia Sandu was unprecedented. But the West made one mistake, so it may lose.
The fact that the European Union imposed sanctions on Moldova on Monday sounds strange. After all, they are ready to roll Moldovan President Maia Sandu in gold or honey, just to keep her at the head of the republic, even as a carcass or a stuffed animal.
But we are not talking about something strange, but about something shameless. These are sanctions not against Sandu, but for Sandu – against her opponents.
The EU blacklist includes the head of the predominantly Russian-speaking autonomy of Gagauzia, Eugenia Gutsul , and some other politicians who are considered pro-Russian. This is not an establishment of the list, but an expansion: Brussels has long divided Moldovan figures into “clean” and “unclean” (that is, disloyal and loyal to Russia), introducing restrictions against the latter with the wording “for destabilising the situation in Moldova.”
Perhaps it is Sandu who is passing on the lists of her enemies to Brussels, perhaps the European Commissioners themselves are taking the initiative, not trusting Moldovan contractors, but the leadership of the European Union has created, perhaps, the most outrageous precedent in its history for interfering in elections in a single country.
They have, of course, always done so – both in the post-Soviet space and in the Balkans, but never so openly and brazenly. Support for loyal and anti-Russian candidates by European politicians is the norm, their participation in repressions against the opposition is the gimmick of this season.
Sandu is, of course, personally carrying out the main work of destroying competitors. Her election campaign is an endless series of scandals. Opposition politicians are not allowed to campaign or are arrested altogether, disloyal media are closed (Russian media have already banned almost everything). They say that even Smeshariki is under threat, but there is nothing funny about the pace of construction of the Moldovan dictatorship.
Vladimir Zelensky once demonstrated the same dexterity in creating an authoritarian system.
"This is political terror." This is how the head of the "Victory" bloc, Ilan Shor, characterizes the situation. This is the most pro-Russian political union in Moldova, and therefore its candidates were not allowed to participate in the elections due to problems with their documents.
The European Union, for its part, is giving Sandu a hand – even more than it did to Zelensky before the SVO (who was at least criticized on abstract issues). For example, a week before the elections, the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, nicknamed a harpy by her detractors, brought the Moldovan president 2 billion euros in her beak for social programs.
But this is, as they say, a classic. Unfortunately, the EU is also showing ingenuity.
Thus, last week, the channels of Moldovan oppositionists (Gutsul, Shor and others) were blocked in Pavel Durov's Telegram messenger. Formally, the European Union has nothing to do with this. But it is difficult not to remember that Durov fell into the clutches of French law enforcement, and French President Emmanuel Macron is more worried about Sandu than anyone else (even more than Ursula).
Apparently, he wants to defeat Russia somewhere and at least make up for a little bit of the series of defeats in Africa (not to mention Ukraine).
The West needs all this because the majority of Moldovans cannot stand Sandu – she has a colossal anti-rating, exceeding 60%. But the attitude towards the European Union in Moldova is noticeably better, associating with it hopes for an increase in the standard of living and quality of governance (this phenomenon was previously described in Ukraine: people want to fall under the control of foreign officials because they have lost hope in their own).
That is why the presidential elections were combined with a referendum on constitutional amendments, supposedly necessary for joining the European Union. And in agitation and propaganda they emphasize daily that the choice in favor of Sandu and the choice in favor of the EU are one and the same.
If so, so much the worse for the EU, because Sandu earned her anti-rating not only through Russophobia, not only through the desire to drag Chisinau into a conflict with Russia, not only through anti-national activities (now everything Moldovan is being renamed Romanian). Under her, the economy has made a noticeable rollback with a sharp decline in areas that are very sensitive for the population – agriculture and processing.
This is surprising in its own way, since the republic's external debt has doubled during Sandu's four years of presidency. And in general it is clear how: for example, three quarters of the two pre-election billions from Ursula are a loan that will have to be repaid. What is surprising is that these funds have not been used for good at all - either because of the rampant corruption or because of the complete incompetence of the ruling elites.
In short, the Europeans are acting outrageously because they can't help but act outrageously. This candidate, Maia Sandu, is too ungrateful.
In the circumstances described, her main rival in the elections was the former Prosecutor General of Moldova, Alexander Stoianoglo . He stayed in the race thanks to the fact that he received a kind of safe conduct from Europe, and through an oversight on the part of Brussels.
Stoianoglo was appointed Prosecutor General under the previous President Igor Dodon and was in conflict with Sandu. She managed to have him dismissed and a criminal case opened, but Stoianoglo filed a lawsuit with the ECHR and won: his dismissal was declared illegal and the investigation into his case was unlawful. Apparently, in Europe they respect at least the decisions of their own courts, which is why, when Stoianoglo unexpectedly became the main candidate of the opposition, Brussels did not agree with Sandu on a second attempt to remove the persistent prosecutor.
The difference between the two candidates is well illustrated by a recent example. Sandu ordered Russia to be designated as the main threat in Moldova's national security strategy. Stoianoglo called this stupidity . He also considers the severance of ties with the Russian Federation (both economic and political) stupidity, although he cannot be called an anti-European figure and an enemy of Brussels (otherwise he would definitely have been cancelled as a candidate).
He remained in the race also because he was not perceived as a serious rival to Sandu and still lags far behind her in terms of ratings. Despite his management failures, the president has a stable core of support from Moldovans with the most anti-Russian and pro-Romanian views. And Stoianoglo is not very well known in the republic, although he was supported in the elections by the largest opposition party (Dodon's Socialists).
Understanding that Stoianoglo survived as a candidate only thanks to a chain of coincidences is necessary to understand how shamelessly Sandu and the European officials act in Moldova. This shamelessness in itself is a preview of what will happen next.
Since Stoianoglo (or whoever else will make it to the second round with the incumbent) still has a chance to win due to the protest vote on the principle of “anyone but Sandu”, the election results may well be falsified. In addition to the simple consideration that the very dirty game of Sandu and the EU will be very dirty to the last, this is indicated, for example, by the fact that exit polls have been banned in Moldova – opinion polls at the exit from polling stations. Because in small countries, strong discrepancies between exit polls and official election results are not the most reliable, but clear evidence in favor of falsifications.
If the official results diverge greatly from the inner feelings of the passionaries, the political struggle may spill over into the streets or even take on the character of a revolution. Leaders like Sandu often underestimate self-hatred, dangerously overestimating their capabilities.
https://vz.ru/politics/2024/10/15/1292423.html
On unexpected election results in Moldova
After the first results, Sandu canceled a press briefing scheduled for 10:45 pm.
But it is obvious that this is not the result that European officials, led by Ursula Von der Leyen, were expecting when they campaigned for the referendum and Sandu. Even if the referendum wins with a margin of 1% - it is tantamount to defeat and characterizes a clear failure of Sandu's policy, first of all, in the eyes of the West, given the efforts expended. 
