Victor Chirila: Reformation of Moldovan Diplomacy Is an Imperative

August 19, 2009

Subscribe to: RSS, Email

By Victor Chirila

During the last eight years, the Moldovan authorities had committed many mistakes in their relations with such major foreign partners as the EU, Russia, the U.S. and especially Romania and Ukraine. These recurring blunders made by our ever young diplomacy has made many of us wonder whether there was something wrong with our foreign policy and diplomatic service.

The April events and the collapse of the relations with Romania confirmed what our Western partners realized gradually – the foreign ministry of Moldova has lost the sense of reality, has become disorientated and is facing an acute crisis of professionalism and professional deontology. In other words, our foreign ministry became an institution emptied of the necessary content.

The perpetuation of this state is inadmissible if the Alliance for European Integration (AEI) wants to restore Moldova’s image of credible partner in a short period of time, to promote the European integration process and reestablish cooperation relations with the most important partners.

At the same time, the Moldovan foreign ministry should regain the status of spearhead of the European integration process. For this to happen, the AEI must reform the internal/operational structure of the ministry and restore the legitimacy of decision making in the area of foreign policy. Otherwise, the European integration program of the future government risks being torpedoed from the very beginning.

Consequently, the reform of the institutional and decisional foreign policy framework should be based on the following objectives:

1. To restore the head of state’s responsibilities in the area of foreign policy in accordance with article 86 of the Constitution of Moldova, so as to put an end to the president’s involvement in the internal activity of the foreign ministry. Under the given article, the head of state is empowered to carry out talks and participate in negotiations, to sign international treaties in the name of Moldova, to accredit and recall the diplomatic representatives of Moldova, to approve the creation, dissolution or change of status of the embassies, to deal with the letters of accreditation and recalling of diplomatic representatives of other states in Moldova.

2. To restore decisional and operational autonomy of the foreign ministry as it was until 2001. As it is well known, after the internal restructuring of 2005 and 2006 carried out also with the assistance of the Security and Information Service, the foreign ministry became a docile instrument of the PCRM and practically a subdivision of the Apparatus of the Moldovan President.

3. To restore the Parliament’s role in the area of foreign policy as it is provided in the Constitution of Moldova. Under article 66 of the Constitution, the legislature approves the main foreign goals of the state and, very important, controls the executive power, including the foreign ministry. Article 66 allows the Parliament to strengthen its role of supervisor of the way in which our foreign policy is implemented. In this connection, the parliamentary commission for foreign relations should claim not only a simply consultative role, but also the powers/responsibilities to monitor the work of the foreign ministry, diplomatic missions and ambassadors, and should take active part in the formulation of strategic foreign policy documents.

4. To provide the Moldovan foreign ministry with programmatic documents - the Foreign Policy Conception and the European Integration Strategy, which will define the foreign policy’s medium and long term objectives, as well as the ways, mechanisms and instruments for achieving them. The existence of such documents should minimize and, even, exclude the temptation of other political players to interpret in distortional and abusive manner Moldova’s national interests.

5. To restore the professional dignity of the diplomatic service. Despite the multiple failures of the foreign ministry, very few diplomats had the courage to draw attention of the central authorities and to warn public opinion about the shortcomings of our diplomatic service. Those that did it were either ostracized or expelled from the diplomatic service. The case of the former Moldovan ambassador to the EU Eugen Carpov is as relevant as possible. Of course, any government needs loyal public officers, but the loyalty should not be confused with political servility as it has happened with the present authorities. Certainly, the AEI will need diplomats dedicated to the European integration cause, but, at the same time, the coalition also needs moral and professional diplomats. Consequently, it is essential to review the mechanism for promoting the diplomats, which should put equal stress on the merits, professional qualities, honor and respect for the professional deontology.

6. To initiate transparent and constant cooperation between the foreign ministry and the civil society. The idea of creating the Council of Foreign Affairs with participation of the foreign ministry is more than welcome. It is in fact a necessity. The experience of the last few years showed that the ministry of foreign affairs does not always have the institutional, human and analytical abilities to realistically, competently and exhaustively analyze the regional and international developments so as to formulate correct conclusions, set realistic objectives in the relations with the foreign partners and choose appropriate tactics for achieving them. The civil society has now the capacity needed to assist the foreign ministry in promoting a balanced and coherent foreign policy. Moreover, using its knowledge, experience and the communication and cooperation networks and partnerships, the civil society can maximize the impact of the efforts made by our diplomatic service.
---
Victor Chirila is the Acting Executive Director of the Foreign Policy Association, APE (initially published by IPN on 19 August 2009 in Romanian)

APE