BETWEEN THE KREMLIN AND THE ATLANTIC

The presidential elections held in Bulgaria and Moldova coincided with the upheaval of global geopolitics. The leftist leaders perceived at home and in Europe as pro-Russian politicians came to power. However, does this mean a real retreat of the Eastern Europe from the Atlantic strategy?

The winners of presidential elections in Bulgaria and Moldova are candidates of the center-left forces calling for improving the relations with Russia. In Moldova, the former First Deputy Prime Minister and a socialist, Igor Dodon, was elected the president leaving behind Maia Sandu, the candidate from the rights’ Action and Solidarity Party and an ex-official of the World Bank - more than 55% of votes against 44%.

Major General Rumen Radev, former commander of the Bulgarian Air Force, won the elections in Bulgaria with a landslide victory. He was ahead of his main rival, the Chairman of the Parliament and a candidate from the party Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria, Tsetska Tsacheva, with only 3% in the first round of elections. In the second round, the general has guaranteed the support of almost 60% of the voters.

Immediately after the election, the president-elect of Moldova, Igor Dodon, has confirmed his intention to renew the strategic partnership with Russia. His statements about the need for a dialogue with the separatist authorities of Transnistria, an intention to ban the activities of unionist organizations advocating for the unification of Moldova with Romania, as well as the approval of the principle of neutrality as a basis for Chisinau’s foreign policy are noteworthy in this context. Moscow is the first city on Mr. Dodon’s agenda, where he intends to make his first foreign visit. Apparently, the Russian President Vladimir Putin is satisfied that Dodon's victory demonstrates a broad support of the Moldovan voters’ to the policy of “achieving social and economic stability in the country and building balanced foreign policy priorities.”

In contrast to the right calling for strengthening the Europeanization trends in Bulgaria, Major General Rumen Radev, a Bulgarian socialist, has outlined the idea of ​​preservation of Bulgarian identity and respect for national interests in the European policy as a notion of his campaign speeches.

Such accents in positions of the winners is no coincidence. Both in Bulgaria, and Moldova, the voters are dissatisfied with government corruption and a substantial lag in living standards compared to a number of Western countries since the collapse of the socialist system. Thus, according to Igor Dodon, the support of corrupt local elites by their Western curators due to geopolitical considerations is the main reason the number of Moldovan citizens in favor of the country joining the European Union has fallen by half in recent years. Indeed, one of the factors behind the victory of the Socialist candidate in recent elections was the scandal around the withdrawal of $1 billion from the three largest banks of the country and the transfer of this amount to offshore institutions at the end of 2015. The former Prime Minister of Moldova, the leader of Liberal Democratic Party, Vladimir Filat, was found guilty and sentenced to nine years in prison.

In Bulgaria, the dissatisfaction with the promises of European authorities about imminent oncoming of a prosperous life is growing. Instead of well-being, Bulgaria faces the poverty and corruption after joining the EU, which causes the outflow of young people from the country. As a result, according to the Italian La Repubblica, the existing situation in Bulgaria and Moldova, “tired of devastating effects of corruption and high levels of poverty”, has contributed to the popularity of openly pro-Russian leaders holding friendly ties with Putin. It is “a serious shock for the EU and NATO, as well as the whole of the West.”

The economic crisis in the two Danube republics initially supporting a pro-European policy has increased after the introduction of Western anti-Russian sanctions because of the events in Ukraine. Bulgaria and Moldova lost Russia as the main market for their agricultural products. In addition, the Russian restrictions on Moldovan agricultural exports, imposed after the signing of association agreement with the EU had the most adverse effects on Moldova. Therefore, Igor Dodon aims to resume exports to the Russian market. For Bulgaria, the failure of the construction of the strategic gas pipeline South Stream was a heavy blow. Obviously, the previous government has supported the prohibition under the pressure from the European Union, which is still trying to weaken Russia's position in the energy market of the continent.

So, to what extent the pre-election promises of Igor Dodon and Rumen Radev correspond to real possibilities? First off, it should be mentioned that the president's powers are limited in both countries, and the right opposition controls the parliamentary majority. However, the Socialists may initiate early elections in order to gain control of the parliament. Dodon is going to realize a different option, which is holding a referendum to change the constitution and to expand presidential powers. After all, if the members of parliament elected the Moldovan president, Dodon could hardly win the elections. In fact, the ruling coalition (56 out of 101 MPs) in Moldova is formed of pro-European parties - the Democratic and Liberal. But in March this year, the Constitutional Court declared that the election of the president by parliament contradicts the Constitution, and resumed direct elections ineffective in the Republic of Moldova since 1996. Therefore, it became possible to elect the existing head of state, Igor Dodon, who, logically, will try to strengthen the institution of the Moldovan presidency.

However, there is a much more significant factor than the parliamentary form of government and that both Dodon and Radev must deal with. The rights lost the presidential election, but it was not a crushing defeat. Almost half of the population in Bulgaria and Moldova opposes the policy declared by elected presidents, and are committed to a pro-European strategy. The new leaders will have to take this into account. Also, if Dodon and Radev do not achieve tangible economic success in the near future, they will suffer condemnation even from the voters that supported them. And here lies the main problem for the winners: Bulgaria and Moldova have a little chance for a quick recovery from the economic crisis. Over the past three years, the Russian producers and their colleagues from other countries of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEC) have managed to grasp the Russian market due to Brussels’ policy of sanctions and Moscow’s countermeasures. It is, therefore, unlikely that the Kremlin provides the Bulgarian and Moldovan producers some special privileges to the detriment of Russia. While Moldova can still make a shift into the EAEC, as Dodon openly hinted before the elections, not only the local Bulgarian authorities determine the Bulgarian policy and agenda. Sofia is bound to EU obligations. If the President-elect Radev implements his real anti-Western policies, Brussels may fully deprive Bulgaria of financial support, which will result in complete economic collapse. Radev realizes the consequences and makes the following statement: “Bulgaria is a member of EU and NATO, there is no alternative for us. But this does not mean that we have to make enemies out of the cooperation framework. Europhilia does not mean Russophobia.”

As for Moldova, although it is not part of the EU per se, the latter made the political consequences clear in case the poorest country of the Eastern Europe dares realize the anti-Western revolt through its newly elected leader. Incidentally, the Moldovan elite, at least its core is oriented towards and closely linked with the European community. Hence the statement of the Head of the EU Delegation Pirkka Tapiola in Chisinau: “We keep sound relations with Moldova. This is a very important country for us, a neighbor of strategic importance. Relations between Chisinau and Brussels are so deep that they cannot easily break or destabilize.”

So, it is one thing to criticize the status quo, and the other is to adapt the system, which has been configured already to follow the path of the European integration. Nevertheless, the choice of most Bulgarians and Moldovans again indicates a change of trends in the Euro-Atlantic space. The last decade is dominated by neo-liberal order with globalist ambitions. However, the ongoing processes in Europe give rise to talks about strengthening socially oriented policies. Meanwhile, the growing anti-globalization sentiments are interlinked closely with the new wave of nationalism. The victory of pro-Russian presidential candidates in Moldova and Bulgaria is an indicator of this kind of sentiments, focused exclusively on national interests. And it is quite symptomatic in an environment where the Old World faces a number of crises such as Brexit, migration, the growth of terrorism, debt burden of entire countries, etc., promising to change the face of European institutions and the policies implemented by them.