Romania and the Republic of Moldova: cowardice or camouflaged courage? | Romania | DW
The diplomat from Bucharest had a whole day to formulate his need for the successive explosions in Transnistria. On Monday evening, the first explosions were recorded at the so-called Ministry of Security in Tiraspol, and for the first hour, two communications towers in Transnistria, but 50 kilometers from Chisinau, were blown up.
In addition, on Tuesday, the Ministry of Defense in Bucharest had to deny false information to appear in Russian publications claiming that the Romanian Army had troops in Moldova and that Romania intended to attack Transnistria with NATO support, and then to -he assumes. annex the Republic of Moldova.
It is unclear whether this misinformation is part of the same intimidation strategy in Moldova or whether it is part of a plan announced last week by Russian General Rustam Minekaev, deputy commander of Russia’s Central Military District, which said the Russian army’s goal was to “create a corridor.” ”. to Crimea and exit to Transnistria ”.
In any case, Prime Minister Nicolae Ciuca did not say anything about the Transnistrian prologue before or after his visit to Kyiv, where he was received by the Ukrainian president and where they probably discussed the possible extension of the Russian invasion to the Danube Gorge. a historical target of Moscow.
The Romanian diplomat explained in a press release on Tuesday evening that “he took note with concern of some recent recorded incidents, in circumstances still unclear, in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova”. The Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs also “expresses its full support for the call for calm and responsibility of the President of the Republic of Moldova” and insists that “attempts at artificial, unjustified escalation of tensions do not contribute to maintaining a predictable climate.”
By comparison, the Paris Ministry of Foreign Affairs is much sharper and clearer. France backs Moldova over “risks of destabilization,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said on Tuesday. ”. of the object can be ”.
In short, Romania “fully supports” the “call for calm and responsibility” made by Maia Sandu, while France “fully supports” the Republic of Moldova in the face of the risks of destabilization and the “consequences of the war in Ukraine.”
The difference in rhetoric is not only about geography or culture, but also about the ability to adopt principles, to respect them and to have the courage to put them into practice. Romania seems to be almost ostentatious in the face of the dramas in Ukraine, while the Ukrainians thank Bucharest in advance for the tanks it hopes to receive from Romania. However, the Prime Minister says that the government will take a decision in this regard after it is modifiedLaw on the Refreshment of National Defense Reserves.
According to statements made last week in Bucharest by Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitro Kuleba, Romania is struggling to help Ukraine, including the military, but Bucharest is afraid to talk about this support. Romania had a “smart policy”, “the rest you can interpret”, said Kuleba, adding that “weapons, like money, like peace and do not comment on what we receive and where, if there is no official announcement in in connection with this ”.
So, Romania is helping Ukraine, but it is doing it secretly. Fear of Russia? With the idea of staying in two boats, who knows what might help? Should Romanians not know, because important elections are coming in 2024? Does the same thing happen in Bucharest’s relations with Chisinau? Has Romania promised support to those across the Prut, but does it not assume strong public statements in their favor? Is it cowardice or camouflaged courage? And what is the explanation for this slippery slope? Is it a mathematical calculation, is there a strategy with more moves thought out than in the big chess games? Or is it improvisation?