Immaturity issues
By Andrei Munteanu
Chisinau (Moldova.ORG) – The reaction of the Moldovan Democratic Party after the appeal launched by the President Ghimpu to the North Atlantic Alliance is not only regretful, it is worthy of disregard and irony at full swing. By this reaction, actually it is noticeable that the MDP does not seem to be a party with democratic „facet”, it seems like being be mostly an ad-hoc emerged party, which only got the moment some time ago, to monopolize the “domain”, so that now it can accumulate capital… let’s say political too.
The „Marian Lupu styled” behavior is not new to us; we have known that in the recent past, and some longer time ago. One of them is the case when the representatives of the so-called church „Mother Matrons” from the R.M., wanted to be more “orthodox” than the Patriarch of Moscow. By the fact that they aggressed the Highly Ranked official of the Moscow Patriarchy – proto-deacon Andrei Kuraev – they have displayed lack of elementary culture in any regards - either secular or Christian.
By the regretful attitude, Lupu straightforwardly displays he is unable to make any distinction between „loyalty”, “partnership” and „ sycophancy” towards “somebody”, who eventually may not have even asked him to do so… to that extent and in such an absurd manner. While thinking of Lupu’s “gesture”, it reminds me the anti-alcoholism campaign of Mr. Gorbachiov’s time, when in the R.M. were cut immense areas of vine plantations, so that shortly afterwards, from many sources we got to know that nobody in Moscow could even think of cutting vines… There was an urge to produce grapes juice instead of wine. It was a mere manifestation of a “chiefs’ syndrome” at the republican level, of the former Soviet Socialist Republic of Moldavia (SSRM), who used to “compete for loyalty”. What Lupu is doing seems mostly a manifestation of cheap „chief-ism” nobody may have needed, but, once emerged, somebody’s reaction could be – „…let it be”.
Marian Lupu seems to be unable make distinction between rancor and rational occurrence of approaching the causality of the Moldova’s underdevelopment und subsistence comprehensively, i.e., including through the angle of inheritance factor. The fear of not getting in “somebody’s disgrace” causes him an emotional blockage and neither seems to understand that, by the fact that there have been „European diplomatic efforts”, he thinks could be “undermined” due to Mr. Ghimpu’s appeal, we cannot believe that somebody owes us to settle our problems, while we can wait in an „ignoramus manner”.
It is high time that at least Mr. Lupu be aware that if he does not share the stance of the Mr. President Ghimpu, admit that at least the latter has this right, and should anybody call him to account – admit with due dignity of a leader, that Mr. Ghimpu has the right to think and proceed as he considers and, that Mr. Lupu does not have the right to claim for being more than he is – a leader of a party which is what it is according to results of the opinion poll(s) as on the moment of publishing this/them.
If the appeal of Mr. Ghimpu has been launched after Mrs. Merkel’s initiative, isn’t it ridiculous to have this kind of attitude towards his initiative?
The text of the appeal is not a message with anti-Russian rhetoric. It is a message with analytical rhetoric and, in a sound analysis of a problem equation, one cannot operate with too many „unknown variables”, particularly when their number is not so big. It is a message of intent for pro-development of the R.M., and Marian Lupu should understand that not any mention of an entity in a certain declaration, we may disagree, mandatorily means a manifestation “anti-“ the respective entity. In this appeal there isn’t any malicious manifestation towards the RF, but rather, a mention of consecutive factors and measures that need to be undertaken in order to de-block possible ways for natural development of the R.M.
So far there’s been enough time to draw conclusions on which are the attitudes towards the R.M. What has been noticed on behalf of the RF is that it does not manifest interest towards pro-development initiatives and occurrences of the R.M., and one cannot skip and/or stay indifferent forever on this issue.
Thus, the R.M. needs a security „umbrella” for being able be attractive for the sound strategic investors, and, in this regard it is hard to believe that Lupu cannot make distinction between the private investments and state loans, without which the R.M. virtually cannot move, even if they are more charitable by nature, rather than coming from interest of partnership stemmed from mutual satisfaction and more trust in eventual an win-win outcome. Even admitting this fact, we should be aware in taking attitudes, who is worthy of gratitude.
When having a chance to compare occurrences of selfishness and genuine big deals, it does not matter when they occurs – in the electoral campaign or not – it matters that they occur, nevertheless, even though sooner or later; what matters is if there are or not people who can be bearers of values and not mere „leaders” inebriated by „illusionary charisma”, which in many situations can transform in torturing burden, for whole nations, for tens of years.
Comments