Moldova under Lucinschi

Demokratizatsiya, Winter 2002 by Quinlan, Paul D

Paul D. Quinlan is a professor of history at Providence College and an associate at the Davis Center for Russian Studies, Harvard University.

During the Soviet period Moldova was commonly referred to as "sunny Moldova." Unfortunately, today the country's economic situation is anything but sunny. Moldova has the ignominious distinction of being one of the three poorest states in Europe. Since declaring independence in 1991, Moldova has had the largest fall in gross domestic product and living standard of any former socialist state in Europe. The GDP is a mere 30 percent of what it was in 1990. The average monthly nominal wage was a pitiful 405 lei (singular leu), or U.S.$32, as of the middle of 2000. Moldova also has been plagued by myriad political problems as it struggles to make the transition from communism to democracy and a market economy. Although politically the country has made significant progress in establishing functioning democratic institutions, other problems, especially its dire economic situation, are taking their toll on its young democratic political system and have raised concern about Moldova's existence as an independent state. In this article, I take a brief look at the overwhelming economic, political, and other problems that Moldova faced from the parliamentary elections of March 1998 to those of February 2001, in an effort to understand why Moldova has now turned back to the Communist Party for leadership.

The March 1998 Parliamentary Elections and the Second Ciubuc Government

President Petru Lucinschi's chances of carrying out important reforms were hindered from the start by the scheduling of parliamentary elections for early 1998. This also relegated Prime Minister Ion Ciubuc's cabinet to a caretaker role. Immediately after losing to Lucinschi in the December 1996 presidential elections, now former president Mircea Snegur began making plans for a coalition for the upcoming parliamentary elections. In June 1997, he announced the formation of the Democratic Convention of Moldova, styled after the Democratic Convention of Romania. In addition to Snegur's own party, the Party of Revival and Conciliation, the Democratic Convention included the pan-Romanian Christian Democratic Popular Front (CDPF), a direct successor of the Popular Front of Moldova, along with a number of smaller parties. The Democratic Convention's foreign policy stressed closer ties with the West, including NATO membership, and despite its pro-Romanian wing supported Moldovan independence.

Not to be outdone, in September 1997 Lucinschi's supporters formed the Bloc for a Democratic and Prosperous Moldova, taking membership from the pro-Lucinschi Movement for a Democratic and Prosperous Moldova that had been set up in December 1996 under the leadership of Deputy Speaker of Parliament Dumitru Diacov. Like the Democratic Convention, the Bloc included a number of smaller parties. As in the presidential elections of 1996, the Lucinschi forces hoped to capture as much of the political center as possible. Somewhat of a surprise was the return of a strong unreformed Communist Party. Although outlawed from 1991 to 1994, the Communist Party of Moldova still maintained by far the best countrywide political organization, and it was the only political party with any longevity and tradition. The party hoped to capitalize on Moldovans' suffering from the country's severe economic plight and to dominate the left, including Russian-language speakers and other minorities, by combining protest with nostalgia. The Communists sharply attacked Western-style market reforms as the root of the problem while preaching a return to a more command economy and the renationalization of privatized enterprises; they also opposed the privatization plans of the government, full integration into the CIS, and the expansion of NATO.

Increasingly succumbing to populism, the left-dominated Parliament passed a law that "ostensibly guaranteed all Moldovans a subsistence-level income," even though the cost to the state would be twice the annual budget. 1 In an effort to benefit the Bloc, Diacov proposed that Parliament dissolve itself and schedule early elections. But the gambit backfired when the left and right joined forces to remove him as deputy speaker. Several other highly placed Lucinschi supporters were dismissed from their positions as well. Even though Lucinschi had previously criticized Snegur for not being able to work within the constitutional structure, which gives roughly equal power to the prime minister and president, he now began calling for changes that would strengthen the power of the president.

Moldova's bitterly fought political campaigns, marked by numerous personal attacks, have caused some to question the wisdom of having elections for the presidency and Parliament only two years apart, instead of holding them together. As one analyst stated, "Society ... is tired of incessant elections, and each time a new polarization of opinions has a painful impact on the development of [the] democratic process." 2 In a television address after the March elections, Ciubuc said that the five months preceding the elections had damaged the country's economy beyond "the blackest expectations." The executive branch of the government had "worked just formally" and "ties with the IMF [International Monetary Fund] and the World Bank were practically disrupted, while foreign investments ceased." The government unjustifiably forgave "huge debts" of many state enterprises and made "populist reductions of tariffs for energy consumption." 3