DOCSLIB.ORG

Association Agreements Between the EU and Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine European Implementation Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Association Agreements Between the EU and Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine European Implementation Assessment Association agreements between the EU and Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine European Implementation Assessment STUDY EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Editor: Anna Zygierewicz Ex-Post Evaluation Unit PE 621.833 – June 2018 EN Association agreements between the EU and Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine European Implementation Assessment In August 2017, the European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) was requested to draw up three own-initiative reports on the implementation of the EU association agreements with Moldova (2017/2281(INI)), Georgia (2017/2282(INI)) and Ukraine (2017/2283(INI)). Petras Auštrevičius (ALDE, Lithuania) was appointed rapporteur on Moldova. Andrejs Mamikins (S&D, Latvia) was appointed rapporteur on Georgia. Michael Gahler (EPP, Germany) was appointed rapporteur on Ukraine. This European Implementation Assessment (EIA) has been prepared to accompany the scrutiny work of the AFET committee and its implementation reports. The first part of this assessment, an opening analysis prepared within the European Parliamentary Research Service, presents the most recent opinions of the EU monitoring and supervising bodies on the implementation of the three association agreements (AAs). It also presents the participation of the three associated countries in selected EU programmes. The second part contains three briefing papers prepared by external experts, who evaluate the implementation of the AAs with Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine in detail. These papers present the successes and shortcomings of the implementation as well as the reforms undertaken. The analyses are accompanied by recommendations on how to improve the implementation processes. 3 AUTHORS 1. The in-house opening analysis was written by Dr Anna Zygierewicz from the Ex-Post Evaluation Unit, EPRS. To contact the author, please email: [email protected] External briefing papers: 2. The analysis of the implementation of the Association Agreement between the EU and the Republic of Moldova was written by Kamil Całus from the Centre for Eastern Studies (OSW) in Warsaw, in cooperation with Dr Angela Gramada from the Security and Global Affairs Association (ESGA) in Bucharest, and Dr Piotr Oleksy from University of Poznań. 3. The analysis of the implementation of the Association Agreement between the EU and Georgia was written by Dr Nona Mikhalidze from the Istituto Affari Internazionali. 4. The analysis of the implementation of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine was written by Dr Andriy Tyushka from the College of Europe (Natolin campus). ADMINISTRATOR RESPONSIBLE Name of the administrator: Anna Zygierewicz, Ex-Post Evaluation Unit, EPRS To contact the publisher, please e-mail [email protected] Special thanks go to Helmut Werner, Ex-Post Evaluation Unit, EPRS, for his help with the administrative work. LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN Manuscript completed in June 2018. DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament as background material to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official position of the Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy. Brussels © European Union, 2018. PE : 621.833 ISBN: 978-92-846-3151-3 DOI: 10.2861/22261 CAT: QA-02-18-851-EN-N [email protected] http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu (intranet) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank (internet) http://epthinktank.eu (blog) 4 Table of contents PART I. IN-HOUSE OPENING ANALYSIS ______________________________________________ 6 Executive summary ____________________________________________________________ 8 1.1. Basic statistical data on Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine ____________________________ 9 1.2. Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine and the Eastern Partnership ___________________________ 10 1.3. Implementation of the AAs according to the EU monitoring and supervising bodies____ 12 1.4. Main similarities and differences between the AAs and challenges faced in implementing them _______________________________________________________________________ 19 1.5. Visa liberalisation __________________________________________________________ 20 1.6. European Parliament's selected recommendations and resolutions _________________ 22 1.7. Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine's participation in selected EU programmes ____________ 23 1.7.1. European Neighbourhood Instrument ______________________________________ 23 1.7.2. The area of economic development and market opportunities ___________________ 25 1.7.3. The area of strong society ________________________________________________ 27 1.8. Perceptions about the EU in Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine and other EaP countries _______ 34 1.9. Key findings ______________________________________________________________ 36 Selected references ___________________________________________________________ 38 Annexes ____________________________________________________________________ 42 PART II. EXTERNAL BRIEFING PAPERS ______________________________________________ 51 Report on the implementation of the AA between the EU and the Republic of Moldova _____ 53 Implementation of the EU-Georgia Association Agreement ___________________________ 113 The implementation of the EU Ukraine Association Agreement ________________________ 161 5 PART I. IN-HOUSE OPENING ANALYSIS Table of frequently used abbreviations and acronyms AA Association Agreement Commission European Commission CSP Civil society platform DCFTA Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area DG Directorate-General EACEA Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency ECA European Court of Auditors EEAS European External Action Service EaP Eastern Partnership ENI European Neighbourhood Instrument ENP European Neighbourhood Policy ERC European Research Council EU European Union FDI Foreign trade investment FP7 Seventh framework programme for research H2020 Horizon 2020 – the framework programme for research and innovation HE Higher education HR/VP High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy JRC Joint Research Centre MSCA Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions MFA Macro-financial assistance Moldova Republic of Moldova NCP National contact point PAC Parliamentary Association Committee Parliament European Parliament PPP Purchasing power parity SME Small and medium-sized enterprises TBT Technical barrier to trade WTO World Trade Organization 6 Table of contents Table 1: Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine - basic statistical data ___________________________ 9 Table 2: The EU's association agreements with Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine _____________ 12 Table 3: Twenty (updated) tangible deliverables to be achieved by 2020 _________________ 42 Table 4: Indicative allocation of ENI funds to Moldova, 2017-2020 _______________________ 43 Table 5: Indicative allocation of ENI funds to Georgia, 2017-2020 ________________________ 44 Table 6: Indicative allocation of ENI funds to Ukraine, 2018-2020 ________________________ 45 Table 7: Moldova's participation in Horizon 2020 per theme ____________________________ 46 Table 8: Comparison of data on Moldova's participation in Horizon 2020 and FP7 __________ 47 Table 9: Georgia's participation in Horizon 2020 per theme ____________________________ 48 Table 10: Comparison of data on Moldova's participation in Horizon 2020 and FP7 _________ 48 Table 11: Ukraine's participation in Horizon 2020 per theme ___________________________ 49 Table 12: Comparison of data on Ukraine's participation in Horizon 2020 and FP7 __________ 50 Table of figures Figure 1: Map of the Eastern Partnership ___________________________________________ 10 Figure 2: What is your image of the EU (%)? _________________________________________ 35 Figure 3: How would you describe relations between the EU and your country (%)? ________ 36 7 Acknowledgements The opening analysis was peer-reviewed internally by the European Parliamentary Research Service. Subsequently, the European Commission and the European External Action Service provided comments on it. The author would like to thank the various contributors for all their valuable feedback and recommendations. The author would also like to thank the European Commission (DG Neighbourhood and DG Research and Innovation) for providing data on the participation of Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine in selected EU programmes. Executive summary This opening analysis presents the opinions on the implementation of the association agreements with Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine, expressed in the most recent documents of the EU supervising and monitoring bodies. It also presents information on the participation of the three associated countries in selected EU programmes. Further on, it provides the gist of selected resolutions and recommendations of the European Parliament and reports on the results of the survey on the perception of Moldovan, Georgian and Ukrainian citizens about the EU. The opening analysis is predominantly based on existing EU documents and data. Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine signed their respective association agreements with the European Union on 27 June 2014. These entered into force on 1 July 2016 in the case of Moldova and Georgia, and on 1 September 2017 in the case of Ukraine. In November 2017, the European Parliament in its recommendation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On the ZIK Television Channel (Novi Komunikatsii LLC) on November 13, 2020
    Opinion No.44 On the coverage of the topic of grant receivers (the Renaissance Foundation and others) on the ZIK television channel (Novi Komunikatsii LLC) on November 13, 2020 Kyiv December 21, 2020 І. Circumstances of the case 1. On November 12, 2020, the Independent Media Council received an appeal from Oksana Romaniuk, executive director of the Institute of Mass Information, regarding the telethon “Sorosist Revenge” as announced on the ZIK television channel, to review the respective content and provide an opinion on whether or not there were violations of professional standards on the part of the ZIK channel, including hate speech and manipulations. 2. On December 1, 2020, the Independent Media Council, pursuant to paragraph 12 of the Regulations on the Independent Media Council, recognized the appeal regarding this case admissible, given the matter is of great social importance (similar content was already aired on this TV channel, whereby the IMC identified violations). 3. In the morning (at 08:37) on November 13, 2020, the ZIK channel aired a story devoted to George Soros, his influence on the Ukrainian government and the "army of his supporters", allegedly formed by him in nearly every country of the world; it was said that the billionaire was born into a Jewish family in Budapest in 1930; that "Soros combines getting rich quick with charity", and that most of his assets are allegedly owned by the Open Society Foundations. It is asserted that G.Soros is financing various projects in developing countries through a network of his foundations. Yet later, with a reference to the "billionaire’s critics", he is accused of having selfish motives and commercial interests - with only Ihor Mosiychuk, an ex-MP, shown to be criticizing G.Soros directly.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Report No 9/2016 EU External Migration Spending in Southern
    Special Report No 9/2016 (pursuant to Article 287(4), second subparagraph, TFEU) EU external migration spending in Southern Mediterranean and Eastern Neighbourhood countries until 2014 together with the replies of the Commission 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi - L - 1615 Luxembourg T (+352) 4398 – 1 E [email protected] eca.europa.eu 2 CONTENTS Paragraph Abbreviations and acronyms Glossary Executive summary I - V Introduction 1 - 20 EU external migration policy 2 - 20 The policy framework 2 - 5 A global approach to external migration 6 - 8 Priority given to neighbourhood countries 9 Varied institutional and financial instruments 10 - 11 Different sources of the EU's external migration spending 12 - 16 Financing and management arrangements 17 - 20 Audit scope and approach 21 - 26 Coherence of objectives, identification of partner country needs and monitoring instruments need improving 27 - 65 A wide range of policy objectives not always interlinked 27 - 31 Identification of partner countries’ needs requires better attention 32 - 37 Monitoring and assessment instruments need improving 38 - 51 Geographic and thematic priorities were difficult to verify 52 - 60 Intervention spread over a wide geographical area 61 - 65 Weaknesses affected the effectiveness of the EU's external migration spending (TPMA and ENPI) in the Southern Mediterranean and the Eastern Partnership countries 66 - 89 Shortcomings in operational objectives and result indicators made projects’ effectiveness difficult to assess 67 - 69 Factors hindering effectiveness 70 - 73
    [Show full text]
  • Download Series Brochure
    OVERVIEW This Second Webinar Series is part of CEELI to Justice During and After the Pandemic Institute’s program with the Central and East – is particularly relevant to the judiciary European Judicial Exchange Network. The in the current climate, but also touches on CENTRAL & EASTERN EUROPEAN Network, which has been going since 2012, is numerous access to justice issues that have JUDICIAL EXCHANGE NETWORK comprised of some of the best and brightest on-going relevance beyond the current young judges from eighteen countries who extraordinary circumstances. The first gather regularly to share best practices on series, which explored Videoconferencing issues of judicial independence, integrity, in support of Remote Access to Courts, WEBINAR DISCUSSION accountability, and court management. As took place bi-weekly between April 7 and SERIES #2 international in-person meetings are likely May 19 2020, and is available on-demand to be limited for some time to come, the to all Network members through the CEELI ACCESS TO JUSTICE Webinar Series ensures that the Network Online platform. To request a logon for can continue to meet its mandate to improve CEELI Online to access content please email DURING AND AFTER judicial integrity and court efficiency [email protected]. This second series THE PANDEMIC in Central and Eastern Europe, despite aims to build on the first by looking beyond the global lockdowns resulting from the videoconferencing to broader justice issues June/July 2020 coronavirus pandemic. The topic – Access raised by the pandemic. WEBINAR #1 In this first session, a number of judges SPEAKERS: from the Judicial Network shared firsthand TUESDAY 2 JUNE 2020 experience of running hearings by JUDGE VICTORIA SANDUTA, (75 MINUTES) videoconference.
    [Show full text]
  • E-Journal, Year IX, Issue 176, October 1-31, 2011
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Policy Documentation Center Governance and democracy in Moldova e-journal, year IX, issue 176, October 1-31, 2011 "Governance and Democracy in Moldova" is a bi-weekly journal produced by the Association for Participatory Democracy ADEPT, which tackles the quality of governance and reflects the evolution of political and democratic processes in the Republic of Moldova. The publication is issued with financial support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, in framework of the project "Promoting Good Governance through Monitoring". Opinions expressed in the published articles do not necessarily represent also the point of view of the sponsor. The responsibility for the veracity of statements rests solely with the articles' authors. CONTENTS I. ACTIVITY OF PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS........................................................................................................ 3 GOVERNMENT ................................................................................................................................................ 3 1. Events of major importance ...................................................................................................................... 3 Premier’s report regarding assaults on share stocks of some banks ........................................................ 3 2. Nominations. Dismissals ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Motion: Europe Is Worth It – for a Green Recovery Rooted in Solidarity and A
    German Bundestag Printed paper 19/20564 19th electoral term 30 June 2020 version Preliminary Motion tabled by the Members of the Bundestag Agnieszka Brugger, Anja Hajduk, Dr Franziska Brantner, Sven-Christian Kindler, Dr Frithjof Schmidt, Margarete Bause, Kai Gehring, Uwe Kekeritz, Katja Keul, Dr Tobias Lindner, Omid Nouripour, Cem Özdemir, Claudia Roth, Manuel Sarrazin, Jürgen Trittin, Ottmar von Holtz, Luise Amtsberg, Lisa Badum, Danyal Bayaz, Ekin Deligöz, Katja Dörner, Katharina Dröge, Britta Haßelmann, Steffi Lemke, Claudia Müller, Beate Müller-Gemmeke, Erhard Grundl, Dr Kirsten Kappert-Gonther, Maria Klein-Schmeink, Christian Kühn, Stephan Kühn, Stefan Schmidt, Dr Wolfgang Strengmann-Kuhn, Markus Tressel, Lisa Paus, Tabea Rößner, Corinna Rüffer, Margit Stumpp, Dr Konstantin von Notz, Dr Julia Verlinden, Beate Walter-Rosenheimer, Gerhard Zickenheiner and the Alliance 90/The Greens parliamentary group be to Europe is worth it – for a green recovery rooted in solidarity and a strong 2021- 2027 EU budget the by replaced The Bundestag is requested to adopt the following resolution: I. The German Bundestag notes: A strong European Union (EU) built on solidarity which protects its citizens and our livelihoods is the best investment we can make in our future. Our aim is an EU that also and especially proves its worth during these difficult times of the corona pandemic, that fosters democracy, prosperity, equality and health and that resolutely tackles the challenge of the century that is climate protection. We need an EU that bolsters international cooperation on the world stage and does not abandon the weakest on this earth. proofread This requires an EU capable of taking effective action both internally and externally, it requires greater solidarity on our continent and beyond - because no country can effectively combat the climate crisis on its own, no country can stamp out the pandemic on its own.
    [Show full text]
  • European Influences in Moldova Page 2
    Master Thesis Human Geography Name : Marieke van Seeters Specialization : Europe; Borders, Governance and Identities University : Radboud University, Nijmegen Supervisor : Dr. M.M.E.M. Rutten Date : March 2010, Nijmegen Marieke van Seeters European influences in Moldova Page 2 Summary The past decades the European continent faced several major changes. Geographical changes but also political, economical and social-cultural shifts. One of the most debated topics is the European Union and its impact on and outside the continent. This thesis is about the external influence of the EU, on one of the countries which borders the EU directly; Moldova. Before its independency from the Soviet Union in 1991, it never existed as a sovereign state. Moldova was one of the countries which were carved out of history by the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact in 1940 as it became a Soviet State. The Soviet ideology was based on the creation of a separate Moldovan republic formed by an artificial Moldovan nation. Although the territory of the Moldovan Soviet Socialist Republic was a former part of the Romanian province Bessarabia, the Soviets emphasized the unique and distinct culture of the Moldovans. To underline this uniqueness they changed the Moldovan writing from Latin to Cyrillic to make Moldovans more distinct from Romanians. When Moldova became independent in 1991, the country struggled with questions about its national identity, including its continued existence as a separate nation. In the 1990s some Moldovan politicians focussed on the option of reintegration in a Greater Romania. However this did not work out as expected, or at least hoped for, because the many years under Soviet rule and delinkage from Romania had changed Moldovan society deeply.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Election Disputes: Achilles Heel of the Electoral Administration
    C - 0; M - 95; Y - 100; K - 2; PANTONE 485 CP C - 0; M - 98; Y - 91; K - 30; PANTONE 7621 CP C - 0; M - 97; Y - 87; K - 60; PANTONE 7624 CP V Pre-Election Disputes: Achilles Heel of the Electoral Administration ELENE NIZHARADZE Over the recent years the electoral administration has achieved important progress in terms of transparency, cooperation with non-governmental orga- March, 2018 nizations and introduction of new technologies. In 2017 only, the work of the Central Election Commission (CEC) was recognized with two international awards.1 The CEC Chairperson was also awarded in 2017 for her contribution to development of electoral processes.2 Such awards are indicative of success, however the question that remains is whether the work of the electoral adminis- tration was equally successful in all areas. Over the last two years the work of the electoral administration with regard to consideration of electoral complaints in the pre-election period was less than successful. Resolving election disputes the right way is a tool for creating fair and competitive electoral environment. The electoral administration, which is in charge of considering and deciding disputes envisaged by the legislation, plays an important role in this regard. It should establish the right practice, in compli- ance with the spirit and goals of the electoral legislation. With its decisions the electoral administration should help create high standard, as a precondition for creating equal electoral environment. Instead the electoral administration has failed to adequately address the chal- lenges raised by several precedent-setting cases. Its use of electoral norms is completely against the purpose of the electoral legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • Messi, Ronaldo, and the Politics of Celebrity Elections
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by LSE Research Online Messi, Ronaldo, and the politics of celebrity elections: voting for the best soccer player in the world LSE Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/101875/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Anderson, Christopher J., Arrondel, Luc, Blais, André, Daoust, Jean François, Laslier, Jean François and Van Der Straeten, Karine (2019) Messi, Ronaldo, and the politics of celebrity elections: voting for the best soccer player in the world. Perspectives on Politics. ISSN 1537-5927 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592719002391 Reuse Items deposited in LSE Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the LSE Research Online record for the item. [email protected] https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/ Messi, Ronaldo, and the Politics of Celebrity Elections: Voting For the Best Soccer Player in the World Christopher J. Anderson London School of Economics and Political Science Luc Arrondel Paris School of Economics André Blais University of Montréal Jean-François Daoust McGill University Jean-François Laslier Paris School of Economics Karine Van der Straeten Toulouse School of Economics Abstract It is widely assumed that celebrities are imbued with political capital and the power to move opinion. To understand the sources of that capital in the specific domain of sports celebrity, we investigate the popularity of global soccer superstars.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Report on the Political Situation in Georgia and Related Foreign Malign Influence
    REPORT QUARTERLY REPORT ON THE POLITICAL SITUATION IN GEORGIA AND RELATED FOREIGN MALIGN INFLUENCE 2021 EUROPEAN VALUES CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY European Values Center for Security Policy is a non-governmental, non-partisan institute defending freedom and sovereignty. We protect liberal democracy, the rule of law, and the transatlantic alliance of the Czech Republic. We help defend Europe especially from the malign influences of Russia, China, and Islamic extremists. We envision a free, safe, and prosperous Czechia within a vibrant Central Europe that is an integral part of the transatlantic community and is based on a firm alliance with the USA. Authors: David Stulík - Head of Eastern European Program, European Values Center for Security Policy Miranda Betchvaia - Intern of Eastern European Program, European Values Center for Security Policy Notice: The following report (ISSUE 3) aims to provide a brief overview of the political crisis in Georgia and its development during the period of January-March 2021. The crisis has been evolving since the parliamentary elections held on 31 October 2020. The report briefly summarizes the background context, touches upon the current political deadlock, and includes the key developments since the previous quarterly report. Responses from the third sector and Georgia’s Western partners will also be discussed. Besides, the report considers anti-Western messages and disinformation, which have contributed to Georgia’s political crisis. This report has been produced under the two-years project implemented by the Prague-based European Values Center for Security Policy in Georgia. The project is supported by the Transition Promotion Program of The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Emerging Donors Challenge Program of the USAID.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia: Background and U.S
    Georgia: Background and U.S. Policy Updated September 5, 2018 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45307 SUMMARY R45307 Georgia: Background and U.S. Policy September 5, 2018 Georgia is one of the United States’ closest non-NATO partners among the post-Soviet states. With a history of strong economic aid and security cooperation, the United States Cory Welt has deepened its strategic partnership with Georgia since Russia’s 2008 invasion of Analyst in European Affairs Georgia and 2014 invasion of Ukraine. U.S. policy expressly supports Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, and Georgia is a leading recipient of U.S. aid in Europe and Eurasia. Many observers consider Georgia to be one of the most democratic states in the post-Soviet region, even as the country faces ongoing governance challenges. The center-left Georgian Dream party has more than a three-fourths supermajority in parliament, allowing it to rule with only limited checks and balances. Although Georgia faces high rates of poverty and underemployment, its economy in 2017 appeared to enter a period of stronger growth than the previous four years. The Georgian Dream won elections in 2012 amid growing dissatisfaction with the former ruling party, Georgia: Basic Facts Mikheil Saakashvili’s center-right United National Population: 3.73 million (2018 est.) Movement, which came to power as a result of Comparative Area: slightly larger than West Virginia Georgia’s 2003 Rose Revolution. In August 2008, Capital: Tbilisi Russia went to war with Georgia to prevent Ethnic Composition: 87% Georgian, 6% Azerbaijani, 5% Saakashvili’s government from reestablishing control Armenian (2014 census) over Georgia’s regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Religion: 83% Georgian Orthodox, 11% Muslim, 3% Armenian which broke away from Georgia in the early 1990s to Apostolic (2014 census) become informal Russian protectorates.
    [Show full text]
  • Transnistrian Region December 2015
    Regional Economic Review: Transnistrian Region December 2015 Disclaimer This document is published by the Independent Think-Tank Expert-Grup within the Program “Support to Confidence Building Measures”, financed by the EU Delegation in Moldova and implemented by United Nations Development Programme in Moldova. Opinions expressed in this document belong to the authors and are not necessarily the opinions of the donors. Also, the authors are aware of potential risks related to quality of the statistical data and have used the data with due precaution. This document is a translation from the Romanian language. 2 Regional Economic Review: Transnistrian Region December 2015 Contents List of figures .............................................................................................................................................. 3 List of tables ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Key messages of this issue....................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 7 Chapter 1. Domestic Supply ...................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 2. Domestic Demand.................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • OSW COMMENTARY NUMBER 168 1 European Integration (AIE)
    Centre for Eastern Studies NUMBER 168 | 22.04.2015 www.osw.waw.pl An appropriated state? Moldova’s uncertain prospects for modernisation Kamil Całus There have been several significant changes on Moldova’s domestic political scene in the wake of the November 2014 parliamentary elections there. Negotiations lasted nearly two months and re- sulted in the formation of a minority coalition composed of two groupings: the Liberal-Democratic Party (PLDM) and the Democratic Party (PDM). New coalition received unofficial support from the Communist Party (PCRM), which had previously been considered an opposition party. Contrary to their initial announcements, PDLM and PDM did not admit the Liberal Party led by Mihai Ghim- pu to power. Moreover, they blocked the nomination for prime minister of the incumbent, Iurie Leancă. Leancă has been perceived by many as an honest politician and a guarantor of reforms. This situation resulted in the political model present in Moldova since 2009 being preserved. In this model the state’s institutions are subordinated to two main oligarch politicians: Vlad Filat (the leader of PLDM) and Vlad Plahotniuc (a billionaire who de facto controls PDM). With control over the state in the hands of Filat and Plahotniuc questions are raised regarding the prospects of Moldova’s real modernisation. It will also have a negative impact on the process of implementation of Moldova’s Association Agreement with the EU and on other key reforms concerning, for example, the judiciary, the financial sector and the process of de-politicisation of the state’s institutions. From both leaders’ perspective, any changes to the current state of affairs would be tantamount to limiting their influence in politics and the economy, which would in turn challenge their business activities.
    [Show full text]