Day: June 19, 2024

Like the proverbial boiling frogs, the government has been gradually acclimating us to the specter of a police state for years now: Militarized police. Riot squads. Camouflage gear. Black uniforms. Armored vehicles. Mass arrests. Pepper spray. Tear gas. Batons. Strip searches. Surveillance cameras.;Kevlar vests.;Drones.;Lethal weapons.;Less-than-lethal weapons unleashed with deadly force.;Rubber bullets. Water cannons. Stun grenades. Arrests of journalists.;Crowd control tactics.;Intimidation tactics. Brutality.

This is how you prepare a populace to accept a police state willingly, even gratefully.

You don’t scare them by making dramatic changes. Rather, you acclimate them slowly to their prison walls. Persuade the citizenry that their prison walls are merely intended to keep them safe and danger out. Desensitize them to violence, acclimate them to a military presence in their communities, and persuade them that only a militarized government can alter the seemingly hopeless trajectory of the nation.

It’s happening already.

Yet we’re not just being acclimated to the trappings of a police state. We’re also being bullied into silence and subservience in the face of outright injustice and heavy-handed political correctness, while simultaneously being groomed into accepting government tyranny, corruption and bureaucratic ineptitude as societal norms.

What exactly is going on?

Whatever it is, this—the racial hypersensitivity without racial justice, the kowtowing to politically correct bullies with no regard for anyone else’s free speech rights, the violent blowback after years of government-sanctioned brutality, the mob mindset that is overwhelming the rights of the individual, the oppressive glowering of the Nanny State, the seemingly righteous indignation full of sound and fury that in the end signifies nothing, the partisan divide that grows more impassable with every passing day—is not leading us anywhere good.

Certainly, it’s not leading to more freedom.

This draconian exercise in how to divide, conquer and subdue a nation is succeeding.

It must be said: the various protests from both the Right and the Left in recent years have not helped. Inadvertently or intentionally, these protests have politicized what should never have been politicized: police brutality and the government’s ongoing assaults on our freedoms.

We may be worse off now than we were before.

Suddenly, no one seems to be talking about any of the egregious governmental abuses that are still wreaking havoc on our freedoms: police shootings of unarmed individuals, invasive surveillance, roadside blood draws, roadside strip searches, SWAT team raids gone awry, the military industrial complex’s costly wars, pork barrel spending, pre-crime laws, civil asset forfeiture, fusion centers, militarization, armed drones, smart policing carried out by AI robots, courts that march in lockstep with the police state, schools that function as indoctrination centers, bureaucrats that keep the Deep State in power.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

How do you persuade a populace to embrace totalitarianism, that goose-stepping form of tyranny in which the government has all of the power and “we the people” have none?

You persuade the people that the menace they face (imaginary or not) is so sinister, so overwhelming, so;fearsome;that the only way to surmount the danger is by empowering the government to take all necessary steps to quash it, even if that means allowing government jackboots to trample all over the Constitution.

This is how you use the politics of fear to persuade a freedom-endowed people to shackle themselves to a dictatorship.

It works the same way every time.

The government’s overblown, extended wars on terrorism, drugs, violence, illegal immigration, and so-called domestic extremism have been convenient ruses used to terrorize the populace into relinquishing more of their freedoms in exchange for elusive promises of security.

Having allowed our fears to be codified and our actions criminalized, we now find ourselves in a strange new world where just about everything we do is criminalized.

Strangely enough, in the face of outright corruption and incompetency on the part of our elected officials, Americans in general remain relatively gullible, eager to be persuaded that the government headed up by their particular brand of political savior can solve the problems that plague us.

We have relinquished control over the most intimate aspects of our lives to government officials who, while they may occupy seats of authority, are neither wiser, smarter, more in tune with our needs, more knowledgeable about our problems, nor more aware of what is really in our best interests.

Yet having bought into the false notion that the government does indeed know what’s best for us and can ensure not only our safety but our happiness and will take care of us from cradle to grave—that is, from daycare centers to nursing homes—we have in actuality allowed ourselves to be bridled and turned into slaves at the bidding of a government that cares little for our freedoms or our happiness.

The lesson is this: once a free people allows the government inroads into their freedoms or uses those same freedoms as bargaining chips for security, it quickly becomes a slippery slope to outright tyranny.

Nor does it seem to matter whether it’s a Democrat or a Republican at the helm anymore. Indeed, the bureaucratic mindset on both sides of the aisle now seems to embody the same philosophy of authoritarian government, whose priorities are to milk “we the people” of our hard-earned money (by way of taxes, fines and fees) and remain in control and in power.

Modern government in general—ranging from the militarized police in SWAT team gear crashing through our doors to the rash of innocent citizens being gunned down by police to the invasive spying on everything we do—is acting illogically, even psychopathically. (The characteristics of a psychopath include a “lack of remorse and empathy, a sense of grandiosity, superficial charm, conning and manipulative behavior, and refusal to take responsibility for one’s actions, among others.”)

When our own government no longer sees us as human beings with dignity and worth but as things to be manipulated, maneuvered, mined for data, manhandled by police, conned into believing it has our best interests at heart, mistreated, and then jails us if we dare step out of line, punishes us unjustly without remorse, and refuses to own up to its failings, we are no longer operating under a constitutional republic. Instead, what we are experiencing is a pathocracy: tyranny at the hands of a psychopathic government, which “operates against the interests of its own people except for favoring certain groups.”

So where does that leave us?

Having allowed the government to expand and exceed our reach, we find ourselves on the losing end of a tug-of-war over control of our country and our lives. And for as long as we let them, government officials will continue to trample on our rights, always justifying their actions as being for the good of the people.

Yet the government can only go as far as “we the people” allow. Therein lies the problem.

We are fast approaching a moment of reckoning where we will be forced to choose between the vision of what America was intended to be (a model for self-governance where power is vested in the people) and the reality of what it has become (a police state where power is vested in the government).

This slide into totalitarianism—helped along by overcriminalization, government surveillance, militarized police, neighbors turning in neighbors, privatized prisons, and forced labor camps, to name just a few similarities—is tracking very closely with what happened in Germany in the years leading up to Hitler’s rise to power.

We are walking a dangerous path right now.

No matter who wins the presidential election come November, it’s a sure bet that the losers will be the American people.

Despite what is taught in school and the propaganda that is peddled by the media, the 2024 presidential election is not a populist election for a representative. Rather, it’s a gathering of shareholders to select the next CEO, a fact reinforced by the nation’s;archaic electoral college system.

Anyone who believes that this election will bring about any real change in how the American government does business is either incredibly naïve, woefully out-of-touch, or oblivious to the fact that as an in-depth Princeton University study shows,;we now live in an oligarchy;that is “of the rich, by the rich and for the rich.”

Be warned, however: the Establishment—the Deep State and its corporate partners that really run the show, pull the strings and dictate the policies, no matter who occupies the Oval Office—is not going to allow anyone to take office who will unravel their power structures. Those who have attempted to do so in the past have been effectively put out of commission.

Voting sustains the illusion that we have a democratic republic, but it is merely a dictatorship in disguise, or what political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page more accurately refer to as an “economic élite domination.”

In such an environment, the economic elite (lobbyists, corporations, monied special interest groups) dictate national policy. As the Princeton University oligarchy study indicates,;our elected officials, especially those in the nation’s capital, represent the interests of the rich and powerful;rather than the average citizen. As such, the citizenry has little if any impact on the policies of government.

We have been saddled with a two-party system and fooled into believing that there’s a difference between the Republicans and Democrats, when in fact, the;two parties are exactly the same. As one commentator;noted, both parties support endless war, engage in out-of-control spending, ignore the citizenry’s basic rights, have no respect for the rule of law, are bought and paid for by Big Business, care most about their own power, and have a long record of expanding government and shrinking liberty.

We’re drowning under the weight of too much debt, too many wars, too much power in the hands of a centralized government run by a corporate elite, too many militarized police, too many laws, too many lobbyists, and generally too much bad news.

The powers-that-be want us to believe that our job as citizens begins and ends on Election Day. They want us to believe that we have no right to complain about the state of the nation unless we’ve cast our vote one way or the other. They want us to remain divided over politics, hostile to those with whom we disagree politically, and intolerant of anyone or anything whose solutions to what ails this country differ from our own.

What they don’t want us talking about is the fact that the government is corrupt, the system is rigged, the politicians don’t represent us, the electoral college is a joke, most of the candidates are frauds, and we as a nation are repeating the mistakes of history—namely, allowing a totalitarian state to reign over us.

“We the people” have a decision to make: do we simply participate in the collapse of the American republic as it degenerates toward a totalitarian regime, or do we take a stand and reject the pathetic excuse for government that is being fobbed off on us?

Never forget, as I make clear in my book;Battlefield America: The War on the American People;and in its fictional counterpart;The Erik Blair Diaries, that the lesser of two evils is still evil.

By Peter Rough and Luke Coffey

(FPRI) — Russia’s large-scale invasion of Ukraine was a seismic event for the Republic of Moldova. The war upended Chișinău’s long-held belief that constitutional neutrality would protect the country. Additionally, the invasion focused Brussels’s attention on Moldova, which the European Union has often regarded as an afterthought.

Moscow’s war catalyzed Moldova’s politics and forced Chișinău and Brussels to make fundamental choices about their future relationship on an accelerated timetable. If Russia hadn’t launched its full-scale invasion, the EU would have probably not invited Moldova to open accession talks so quickly.

Important elections in Moldova and a perilous situation in Ukraine ensure that 2024 will be a pivotal year on Chișinău’s path toward Western integration. United States and European policymakers should proactively shape an outcome that benefits both Moldovans and the Euro-Atlantic community.

Moldova: A Brief Overview

Moldova is a small country in Eastern Europe about the size of Maryland (see map 1). It is sandwiched between Ukraine to the east and Romania to the west. Moldova has a population of 3.3 million people, slightly smaller than the city of Los Angeles. Over the centuries the territory of present-day Moldova has seen many rulers and has been a part of the Russian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. After the Crimean War (1853–56), it even came under the control of an international protector. In 1918, in the chaotic aftermath of the Russian Revolution and amid the Russian Civil War, most of modern-day Moldova was unified with Romania. During World War II, as part of the security pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, the USSR established the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1940. The USSR continued to govern Moldova until it declared its independence in 1991. Today, Moldova is the poorest country in Europe, but is independent.

Still, as former Soviet republics, Moldova’s and Ukraine’s fates are linked. Moldova will never be completely independent and sovereign if Ukraine is under Russian control. As such, Moldova has felt the impact of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine acutely.;The United Nations estimates;that more than one million Ukrainians have entered Moldova since February 2022. Currently, about 118,000 remain—a large number for a small country.¹Moldova has only one port, Giurgiulești, which is on the Danube River. From there it is possible to see and hear Russian drone attacks in Ukraine. Moldova also relies on the Ukrainian port of Odesa for access to the outside world. To a significant degree, whoever controls Odesa controls the fate of Moldova.

Location of Moldova’s breakaway region Transdniester (Transnistria). Credit: RFE/RL Graphics

Practically speaking, Russia likely sees the reoccupation of Moldova as the final phase of its invasion of Ukraine. Moldova’s most recent defense strategy, published in December 2023, states that “the Russian Federation in the near future will not abandon its hostile actions against Moldova.” The document, adopted by Moldova’s parliament, calls on Moldova to deepen relations with Romania, the US, the EU, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). But the strategy does not explicitly call for a change to Moldova’s neutral status.

That neutrality is enshrined in Article 11 of the Moldovan Constitution, which states:

(1) The Republic of Moldova proclaims its permanent neutrality.

(2) The Republic of Moldova does not admit the stationing of any foreign military troops on its territory.

Article 142 of the constitution;states that Moldova’s current position of “permanent neutrality can be revised only through a national referendum.”

A Year for Choosing

In June 2022, Moldova became an EU candidate country, and in December 2023, the European Council opened accession negotiations with Chișinău. On October 20, 2024, Moldovans will go to the polls to choose their next president and vote in a referendum to amend their constitution to someday join the EU. This will be the first test of the country’s constitutionally mandated neutrality.

Moldova’s political situation is charged and subject to significant pro-Russian influence. Three major groups currently compete in its parliament: the Bloc of Communists and Socialists; the Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS), led by Moldovan President Maia Sandu; and a group of politicians backed by Israeli-born and US-sanctioned oligarch;Ilan Shor, who fled to Israel following Sandu’s election in 2020 and has since acquired Russian citizenship. Sandu is pro-West; the other two movements are pro-Russia.

Around 11 percent of Moldovans are native Russian speakers.;An estimatedone-third of the country hold pro-Russian views and will not vote for a party that is not at least tacitly pro-Russia. Another third of Moldovans are very pro-EU. This seesaw battle for the heart and soul of Moldova makes it a frontline state in the contest between Russia and the West.

The October referendum on EU membership is the centerpiece of Moldova’s internal struggle between pro-Russian and pro-Western elements. Although the referendum will likely pass, the pro-Western incumbent government wants this outcome with a healthy majority and large voter turnout to confer legitimacy. Moreover, the current government hopes to carry momentum from this year’s presidential election and referendum into next year’s parliamentary elections.

Moldova’s Security Outlook

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has presented a continuous, and at times existential, threat to Moldova’s stability. As Moldovan Foreign Minister;Mihai Popșoi recently said, “[these] past two years, without exaggeration, have been by far the most difficult in the past 30 years.”

Had Russia captured Odesa in early 2022 as it had planned, there is little doubt it would have continued on to Ukraine’s Budjak region, which borders Moldova’s pro-Russian area of Gagauzia. Moscow’s troops could have then linked up with Russian forces stationed in the breakaway Moldovan territory of Transnistria, placing Russian troops on the Romanian border. This would have been a severe threat, as Romania is a NATO member state and home to a sizeable US military presence. This includes a land-based missile defense facility at Deveselu and an air base at Mihail Kogalniceau, which is being upgraded into the alliance’s largest complex in Europe.

At a minimum, a Russian invasion of Moldova would have created a humanitarian crisis that would have forced hundreds of thousands of Moldovans, many of whom have Romanian passports, to flee to Romania. It is not unrealistic to think that a Russian advance into Moldova could have triggered a Romanian counter-intervention, with obvious implications for NATO. In such a scenario, Moldovans may have even pushed for unification with Romania.

Thankfully, Russia’s plans were never realized. A staunch Ukrainian defense outside Mykolaiv in spring 2022 and a successful counteroffensive to liberate Kherson in fall 2022 pushed Russian forces far from Odesa. Meanwhile, Ukraine’s liberation of Snake Island in the Black Sea and Ukrainian forces’ major blows against Russia’s Black Sea Fleet have made a Russian amphibious landing at Odesa or Budjak impossible.

As a result, instead of using the approximately 1,500 troops stationed in Transnistria to threaten Moldova, Russia must take pains to protect that isolated and vulnerable garrison from Ukrainian attacks. Moscow has threatened Moldova with strategic consequences, which likely means air strikes. Moldovan and US authorities take that threat very seriously.

Until recently, Moldova rarely prioritized improving its military capabilities. But this is slowly changing. Today, Chișinău participates in several Western security arrangements. This year marks three decades of Moldovan participation in the Partnership for Peace with NATO. Moldovan forces also contribute to the NATO-led international peacekeeping force in Kosovo (KFOR) and the Italian contingent at the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), and they are working to improve their interoperability with NATO forces.

While no Moldovan official is talking about NATO membership, Ukraine’s early success around Odesa has given Moldova space to rethink its security and defense capabilities and reform them accordingly. Moldovan security reforms are concentrated in three areas: civil society measures modeled on Estonia’s highly developed resilience and resistance plans; short-range air defenses and electronic warfare capabilities for anti-drone operations; and Western-designed artillery with greater range than Soviet-legacy systems.

The US-Moldovan defense relationship has been modest in recent years, but this is also changing. Moldova has sent small contingents of soldiers to US-led training exercises in Europe. The North Carolina National Guard and the Armed Forces of Moldova have conducted joint training under the auspices of the State Partnership Program. Washington has long provided Chișinău with foreign military financing (FMF), and the Russian invasion of Ukraine has heightened the urgency of that assistance. As recently as three years ago, any military cooperation between Moldova and the US would have been quiet, even surreptitious. But in Moldova last fall, the American 101st Airborne Division openly conducted joint exercises with Moldovan forces.

Moldova regularly ranks as one of the poorest countries in Europe. As such, it cannot make big investments in its defense. (In addition to FMF from the United States, the European Peace Facility has helped defray some of the costs of Moldova’s military upgrades.) Moreover, the Moldovan public is skeptical that it can withstand the Russian military, and wonders whether it is prudent to fund its military with money that could otherwise flow into state welfare programs. Still, increased cooperation with the West is militarily and diplomatically beneficial for Moldova.

Russia’s Hybrid War

The European Centre of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats;in Helsinki, Finland, defines hybrid warfare as “coordinated and synchronized action, that deliberately targets democratic states’ and institutions’ systemic vulnerabilities, through a wide range of means,” and “activities that exploit the thresholds of detection and attribution, as well as the different interfaces (war-peace, internal-external security, local-state, and national-international).”The aim of hybrid warfare, according to the center, is to “influence different forms of decision-making at the local (regional), state, or institutional level to favor and/or gain the agent’s strategic goals while undermining and/or hurting the target.”²

Russia’s actions in Moldova fit this definition of hybrid warfare. The first few months of 2024 alone offer a chilling snapshot of the hybrid tactics Moscow has employed against Chișinău:

January 2024;

• Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned Moldova’s ambassador to complain about “unfriendly acts” and “aggressive anti-Russian declarations” by the Moldovan government.
• Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs declared that Moldova is becoming “a springboard that will be used to ‘destroy’ Russia.”
• Russia banned seven Moldovan journalists from entering Russia, declaring them “enemy media.”

February 2024

• Transnistria’s Congress of Deputies met for the first time since 2006 and released a statement calling on Russia “to implement measures to protect Transnistria in the face of the increasing pressure applied by the Republic of Moldova.”
• Fragments of Iran-supplied Russian Shahed drones were found in the Moldovan town of Etulia near the border with Ukraine.

March 2024

• The governor of Gagauzia, Eugenia Gutul, visited Moscow and met with senior Russian politicians, including President Vladimir Putin. During her meetings she accused the central government in Chișinău of “oppressing” the rights of the Gagauz people. According to Gutul, Putin “promised to extend support to Gagauzia and the Gagauz people in upholding our legal rights, our authority and positions in the international arena.”
• In violation of international law, Russia opened polling stations in Transnistria for the 2024 Russian presidential elections. Moldova expelleda Russian diplomat over this issue.
• Footage emerged on social media showing a drone destroying a Mi-M8T helicopter at an air base outside Transnistria’s de facto capital of Tiraspol. Transnistria’s authorities quickly blamed Ukraine for the attack. Moldova and Ukraine denied these allegations and argued that the explosion was staged. Another incident followed in early April. Transnistria reported that a drone had lightly damaged a radar station close to the border with Ukraine. Moldovan officials described the incident as part of “a pattern of provocations” intended to “incite panic and tension.”

April 2024

• Moldovan authorities confiscated more than $1 million from pro-Russian opposition politicians who had likely intended to bribe voters.

Past is prologue. As;the United States, Canada, and United Kingdom warnedthis month, “Russian actors are carrying out a plot to influence the outcomes of Moldova’s fall 2024 presidential election.” During the leadup to Moldova’s October elections, expect Russia to pursue four hybrid attack vectors simultaneously:

1. Attack and discredit President Maia Sandu.;The Russians will use all available tools to try to undermine and discredit Maia Sandu, whom many consider the first unblemished, uncorrupted leader in modern Moldovan history. Moldovan officials are particularly concerned that Moscow will disseminate deepfakes through social media to sully her reputation. Although Moldovan authorities shut down some Russian propaganda television channels in December 2022, Moscow has since redirected its efforts to social media. As one senior official told the authors in Chișinău, “Telegram is the new Russian state TV.”³

2. Attempt to co-opt politics.;The Kremlin will invest in pro-Russian parties and extend its tentacles into less openly pro-Russian blocs in Moldovan politics that many have called “fake European parties.”⁴;Moscow recognizes that it cannot win with Russian sympathizers alone. “Russia wants proxies in both camps,” one official told the authors.

3. Sow instability in Moldovan society.;Russia wants to stimulate dissatisfaction among the population and suggests that the Moldovan government cannot provide even basic security to its citizens. Russia often launches cyberattacks on critical entities, like the;February attack on the postal service, which distributes pensions in Moldova. As President Sandu transforms Moldova into a liberal market economy oriented toward Europe, Russia will seek to leverage some Moldovans’ pro-Russia attitudes, which date to the days of the Soviet Union. Currently, Russia-aligned actors are saturating the government with subsidy requests and spurring street protests that seek to portray Moldova’s current government as incompetent.

4. Use bribery as a weapon.;Russia works through its proxies to distribute dirty money. The Kremlin also buys voters using prepaid cards, which one can add value to in third locations like Dubai and Kazakhstan. For example, pro-Moscow oligarch Ilan Shor paid protestors to demonstrate against President Sandu in Chişinău last year.;The pro-Kremlin Wagner Group then infiltrated;the protests and attempted to turn a manufactured demonstration into an outright coup. This is part of the destabilization playbook that Moscow has employed across Europe, from Montenegro to Georgia and beyond.

Chișinău has enhanced its resilience against these threats. Its border security has also improved; during Russia’s subversion campaign in early 2023, Moldovan authorities stopped agitators who claimed to be supporters of a Serbian sports team from entering the country. Moldova also established the Centre for Strategic Communications and Combating Disinformation, whose inaugural director, former Interior Minister Ana Revenco, is widely regarded as capable and effective. The US has provided some technical assistance in these and related efforts, disbursing hundreds of millions of dollars to Moldova since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Countering Russia’s hybrid warfare is an area where NATO and the EU can make a difference.

Transnistria and Regional Stability

No analysis of Russia’s hybrid warfare against Moldova is complete without considering the breakaway region of Transnistria (see map 2)—referred to as the Pridnestrovian Moldovan Republic by the de facto authorities in its largest city, Tiraspol, and as the Administrative-Territorial Units of the Left Bank of the Dniester by the Moldovan government in Chișinău.

In 1924, the region known today as Transnistria was largely within the borders of the Moldovian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (ASSR) inside the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR). Moscow removed Moldavian ASSR from Ukrainian SSR in 1940 and transferred it to the newly created Moldovian SSR. In the early 1990s, a bloody war erupted between the new Republic of Moldova and the breakaway authorities in Transnistria, who wanted to form their own state. This dispute ended with Transnistria becoming de facto self-governing but still internationally recognized as part of Moldova. Today, many people in Transnistria hold multiple passports, including Moldovan, Romanian, Russian, and Ukrainian. Its ethnic and linguistic makeup includes Russians, Ukrainians, and Romanian Moldovans.

Since the end of the war in the early 1990s, this small sliver of territory has consistently hosted Russian troops. In 1999, Russia agreed to remove all its forces and weaponry from Transnistria by the end of 2002. This did not happen. Currently, an estimated 1,500 Russian troops remain in Transnistria. When Russia wants to exert its influence in the region, Transnistria offers a good platform for it to do so.

When Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, Kyiv closed its border to Transnistria because it feared the Russian garrison there. That garrison is now stuck in Transnistria, as neither Moldova nor Ukraine will allow Moscow to rotate its forces. Not only is the airfield in Transnistria not in usable condition, but Moldova scrutinizes its ports of entry for Russian soldiers trying to enter the territory in civilian guise. This puts the Kremlin’s forces in Transnistria, which include Russian officers and local conscripts, in limbo. They are also operating old and dilapidated equipment. Russia’s Cobasna ammunition depot, located about a mile from the Ukraine-Transnistria border, is considered to be one of the largest in Europe. But it, too,;is showing its age.

Unlike other frozen conflicts across Eurasia, such as those in the breakaway Georgian regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Transnistria possesses a clear geographical administrative boundary at the Dniester River. The Moldovan Border Police and Transnistrian border guards frequently patrol this natural border.

Even though Transnistria is internationally recognized as a part of Moldova, the character of the de facto government in Tiraspol differs from that of the government in Chişinău. Transnistria is a smuggling haven. According to one estimate, 13 percent of all illicit cigarettes in Europe are smuggled through Transnistria.⁵;For example, between January and August 2014, Transnistria imported;more than 11 billion cigarettes for a total population (including children) of around 500,000. Moldova also hosts the Sheriff conglomerate, known for its gas stations, liquor stores, and supermarkets. This conglomerate was founded by former intelligence officers, including a KGB veteran, Viktor Gushan, who now lives abroad.⁶

Unsurprisingly, the security forces in Tiraspol are close to the Russian;siloviki, the country’s ruling elite, and both the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) and Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Armed Forces (GRU) are active there. But senior officials in Ukraine note that “Sheriff’s true loyalty is to money and the conglomerate engages in the illicit trafficking of cigarettes, alcohol, and women.”⁷;President Sandu is pursuing reforms of the Moldovan judicial and financial systems in a bid for EU membership, giving Transnistria a choice between the status quo tied to Russia and a future linked to Europe. The territory’s answer to this question is anything but straightforward.;

One important lever for change is Transnistria’s economy, as the region’s political and economic elite have proven to be pragmatic and malleable where money is concerned. While Transnistria’s black market thrives on economic corruption and smuggling, the territory has also benefited from formal economic ties with the EU. The Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), implemented with the EU-Moldovan June 2014 Association Agreement, has deepened Moldova’s economic ties with the West. Today, the majority of Transnistria’s official exports go to the EU, a share that is likely to grow in the coming years. To avoid EU blacklists, the de facto authorities in Tiraspol will not publicly support Russia’s aggression against Ukraine or Moldova, nor will they meddle in the Chișinău’s politics. In the view of at least one official, Tiraspol is happy to enjoy a low profile and doesn’t want to be bothered.⁸

Chișinău also benefits from the familiarity and stability of the status quo. As a result, neither side is prepared to resolve the Transnistria issue. Western decision-makers should consider this reality when developing any policy toward Moldova.

An Energy Crisis on the Horizon

The Kremlin has sought to turn its energy resources into a hybrid weapon it can wield against Moldova. In October 2022, Russia dramatically reduced natural gas supplies to Moldova and cut them in half a month later. Moreover, direct Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure have triggered massive blackouts in several Moldovan cities.

Yet Moldova’s Western allies have worked to stymie Russia’s energy pressure campaign. As poor weather and inflation took hold in winter 2022, the EU responded with hundreds of millions of dollars in emergency support, while Romania stepped in to provide Moldova with the electricity that Russia’s bombing of Ukrainian power plants had taken offline. By December, Moldovan authorities;announced;they would no longer buy from the Russian energy giant Gazprom, a decision they made permanent in October 2023.

Despite these moves, Moldova is still indirectly dependent on Russian gas. Transnistria receives free Russian gas supplies, which transit Ukraine en route to the breakaway territory. Transnistrian authorities then pump this gas into the Russian-owned Cuciurgan power plant, where it generates electricity that they later sell. This electricity is sold inexpensively in Transnistria, but at higher prices to the rest of Moldova. Since electricity is one of the main sources of revenue for Transnistria, it creates a mutual dependency: Moldova needs Transnistrian electricity, and Transnistria needs Moldovan money. The catch is that Ukrainian President;Volodymyr Zelenskyy has hinted;that he will not renew the current gas transport agreement between Ukraine and Russia when it expires at the end of this year.

Further complicating matters, the regional Soviet-vintage power grid forces even Romania-generated electricity to first enter Ukraine and Transnistria before reaching Moldova. To eliminate this vulnerability, the Moldovan government is constructing a series of modern power lines, the earliest of which is the Chişinău-Vulcănești connector, which is scheduled to be completed in 2025.

Chişinău worries that if the gas transit agreement between Ukraine and Russia is not renewed this year and the economy in Transnistria collapses, Transnistrians will flow en masse across the Dniester River. Policymakers in the US and Europe should watch this issue closely.

Gagauzia

As Russia looks for ways to cause problems in Transnistria, another pro-Russia region in Moldova deserves attention: the Autonomous Territorial Unit of Gagauzia.

Gagauzia is a small area of southern Moldova that borders Ukraine’s Budjak region. Most of the 135,000 people living in Gagauzia are Turkic by ethnicity, Christian Orthodox by creed, and speak Russian. The region is a byproduct of the nineteenth-century rivalry between the Ottoman and Russian Empires in the Black Sea region. Like Crimea, Gagauzia was taken by Russia from the Ottoman Empire after the Russo-Turkish War as part of the 1812 Treaty of Bucharest.

Even though Gagauzia is formally part of Moldova, the region has never fully integrated into the nation. Today, Gagauzia is one of the poorest regions of the country and remains very pro-Russia. Its current;bashkan, or governor, Evghenia Guțul, is a constant and vocal critic of President Sandu. Guțul even met with Vladimir Putin during her visit to Moscow in April 2024. In June 2024, the US government sanctioned her;for her close ties to Ilan Shor. During the last parliamentary elections in Moldova, the pro-Russian Bloc of Communists and Socialists party achieved some of its best results in Gagauzia.

Since Gagauzia possesses few voters, it does not take much to sway a regional election there.;Shor is suspected;of buying votes in the region for pro-Russian candidates. During interviews, Moldovan and US officials told the authors that Guțul had been unknown on the national political scene before she won her election in May 2023.

With national elections taking place in Moldova in October, the political situation in Gagauzia remains ripe for Russian meddling and hybrid war.

US Policy Considerations Moving Forward

Moldova is at a historic fork in the road between European integration and Russian coercion. The choice is clear, but Moldova cannot make it alone. As long as Chişinău wants help from its European neighbors and the United States, the West should provide it. It is in America’s interest that Moldova, an important piece in the West’s multi-dimensional struggle with Russia, remains secure, stable, and sovereign with minimal malign outside influence. Below are 12 policies the US and its allies could adopt to achieve this goal.

Political and Diplomatic Recommendations
 

• Establish a visible senior political presence in Moldova. Moldova is the only country in Eastern Europe that a sitting US president has not visited. The last US vice president to visit Moldova was Joe Biden in 2011. As president, Biden should pay a visit before Moldova’s October elections. Furthermore, senior officials from all areas of the US government should follow up a program of more frequent cabinet-level visits.
• Focus on Moldova’s real anticorruption achievements—not on unrealistic outside expectations. The US should work closely with Europe to help Moldova fight corruption. Social, economic, and political reforms in Moldova will take time. The prospect of EU membership will drive reforms in Moldova faster and more effectively than anything Washington and Chişinău can do on a bilateral basis.
• Promote economic and political reforms in Moldova. The US and Europe should cooperate to enhance governance in Moldova. Tackling corruption and building a vibrant, free economy to attract foreign direct investment will help secure Moldova’s future and put guardrails in place to ensure the country remains on a Euro-Atlantic path.

Security and Defense Recommendations
 

• Pursue a policy of victory in Ukraine. The best way for the US to ensure a secure, prosperous, and sovereign Moldova is by ensuring that Ukraine defeats Russia militarily. Until Ukraine is secure, Moldova will remain in Moscow’s crosshairs.
• Focus relevant NATO centers of excellence on helping Moldova.NATO should encourage its centers of excellence to assist Moldova against Russian hybrid aggression. The alliance should especially consider inviting Moldova to participate in the centers focusing on cybersecurity, energy security, and countering propaganda.
• Gradually deepen US-Moldova defense ties. The US should work bilaterally and, when appropriate, through NATO to improve Moldova’s security and military capabilities. This can include greater Moldovan participation in US and NATO training exercises, more US military education opportunities for Moldovan officers, and a deeper relationship between North Carolina and the Moldovan military as part of the State Sponsorship Program. However, Chișinău should set the pace for this increase in cooperation.
• Focus FMF, European Peace Facility, and European Deterrence Initiative resources to help Moldova with its defense reforms. The Moldovans understand that their small armed forces will have limited capability. However, the Moldovan armed forces have prioritized improving their air defenses, cultivating social resilience, and boosting artillery and indirect fire capabilities. The US and its European allies should work with Moldova to help them in these areas.

Geopolitical Recommendations
 

• Work with Europe to create a new format for peacefully resolving the Transnistria issue. The existing 5+2 format on Transnistria (consisting of Moldova, Transnistria’s de facto authorities, Russia, Ukraine, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, with the EU and the US as observers) was rendered unviable by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Washington should focus on improving trilateral relations among Ukraine, Moldova, and Romania until a suitable alternative can be found.
• Coordinate now with Moldova, Romania, and the EU regarding Transnistria’s looming energy crisis. The US needs to work with stakeholders now to forestall an economic and humanitarian crisis in Transnistriawhen Russia’s gas transit deal with Ukraine expires at the end of this year. It is entirely reasonable for Ukraine not to renew its deal with Russia. However, Chișinău’s concerns about a pending economic and humanitarian crisis in Transnistria are also justified. Romania is stepping up to fill the electricity gap that Moldova might face as a result. However, to ensure stability in the broader region, policymakers need to find an enduring solution to Transnistria’s Russian gas dependence.The US should explore whether the Three Seas Initiative (3SI) could help address this issue.
• Work closely with Moldova regarding any regional diplomatic, security, energy, or economic policy that could directly or indirectly impact Transnistria. The Kremlin uses its influence in Transnistria to undermine Moldova’s legitimate state institutions. However, the current ruling elite in Transnistria is also worried about the stability required to ensure its own prosperity, whether through the legitimate economy or the black market. Moldovan and Transnistrian officials are wedded to the status quo to preserve stability. The US should frame its policies toward the region with this in mind.
• Revitalize US engagement with the Organization for Democracy and Economic Development–GUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova) to build relations with Moldova. GUAM is a regional bloc that encourages economic, trade, cultural, and diplomatic cooperation among Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova. Washington should consider how regional organizations like GUAM can help advance its national interest and build relations where US and regional interests overlap. The last US-GUAM meeting at the foreign minister level took place in 2017. Secretary of State Antony Blinken should immediately request a US-GUAM summit in Washington to explore ways to boost cooperation.
• Revitalize US participation in the Three Seas Initiative. The 3SI was launched in 2016 to facilitate the development of energy and infrastructure ties among European nations with interests in the Baltic, Adriatic, and Black Seas. The 3SI includes Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Ukraine and Moldova are participating partners. The US should consider the role that the 3SI could have in improving the energy and transit situation in Moldova.

By taking these steps to strengthen Moldova, Western policy can help Moldovans resist the temptation to feel helpless and resigned in the shadow of Russian power. By doing so, the West can win a crucial battle in its ongoing struggle with Russia.

About the authors:

• Peter Rough is a Senior Fellow and Director, Center on Europe and Eurasia
• Luke Coffey is a Senior Fellow, Center on Europe and Eurasia

Source: This article was published by FPRI

Poland is supposed to be one of the politically sane places in Europe right now. The far-right Law and Justice Party lost national elections last year to a centrist coalition and exited power after eight long years of democratic repression. Donald Tusk, who’d previously been the president of the European Council, once again became the Polish prime minister. His government immediately set about;restoring the rule of law;that the Law and Justice Party had been so determined to dismantle.

Sounds good, right?

Yes, but then there’s Grzegorz Braun.

Braun is a member of a party called Konfederacja that stands just to the left of the Nazis. Think that’s an overstatement? Back in December, Braun used a fire extinguisher to put out the candles on a menorah in the Polish parliament, which had been set up to celebrate Hanukah. Just in case anyone might misinterpret the gesture—perhaps he though it was a fire risk?—Braun denounced the Jewish holiday as “satanic” and insisted that “those who take part in acts of satanic worship should be ashamed.” He also favors the criminalization of homosexuality. And he was the only Polish parliamentarian to oppose a resolution in 2022 denouncing the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

And yet, despite these toxic positions, Braun was just elected to represent Poland in the European parliament. And so were five other members of his Konfederacja party, who have equally toxic views. That’s a gain of six seats over their previous showing in the 2019 elections, which had been zero. An astonishing 12 percent of Polish voters endorsed the positions of Braun and his colleagues.

Sure, in those same EU elections, Tusk’s centrist party managed to squeak by Law and Justice, which lost seven of their seats. But it was the party even further to the right that seemed to benefit.

Trump, a crowd surfer without parallel, is riding a wave. Will it crest before November?

Swing to the Right

The big takeaway from the recent European Parliament elections was the success of far-right parties. Marine Le Pen’s National Rally won over 31 percent of the vote in France, prompting French President Emmanuel Macron to make the counter-intuitive decision to dissolve parliament and call new elections. Giorgia Meloni, the far-right leader in Italy, also managed to increase her party’s share of support.

And the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) came in second in Germany;with a big boost;from the under-30 crowd, who didn’t seem to care about the various scandals involving the far-right party’s leadership. Because of the statements of party member Maximilian Krahl—he;said;that not all Nazi SS members were war criminals—the AfD was actually kicked out of the Identity and Democracy bloc. And then the AfD kicked Krahl out of the party, not only because of those statements but also because his close ties to Russia and China were attracting unwanted scrutiny. German voters elected him to the European parliament anyway.

Is there nothing that far-right politicians can say or do these days that disqualifies them in the minds of voters from holding public office? Each month, it seems that a new red line is crossed: anti-Semitism, extraordinary corruption, a felony conviction. What’s next, the use of germ warfare?

In the European parliament elections, the far right also took first place in Austria, Hungary, and Slovakia and tied for first in the Netherlands. Indeed, the only places that the far right didn’t do better than their last outing were;Sweden, Finland, and Portugal, but even here the results weren’t exactly reassuring. The far-right Sweden Democrats remained steady at 3 seats (as did the Danish People’s Party at one seat). The Portuguese far right Chega party actually made it into the European Parliament for the first time with two seats. Only the True Finns party lost representatives and it was a drop of only one seat.

The good news is that the far-right electoral coalitions—the European Conservatives and Reformists Party (ECR), the Identity and Democracy bloc (ID), and the unaffiliated bloc that includes Fidesz and now the AfD—didn’t win enough votes to take over the leadership of the parliament. The ECR gained 14 seats (thanks largely to Meloni in Italy), the ID gained 9 seats (thanks largely to Le Pen in France), and the now-unaffiliated AfD increased their delegation by six seats. That puts the far right at nearly one-quarter of the total number of seats.

But the center right also did well in the election, increasing their total number of seats to 190. The ECR will not be forced to form a governing coalition with the far right, and that means that the European consensus on the green energy transition will;remain more-or-less intact.

The Not-So-Long March

Let’s face it: the European parliament is not the most powerful institution around. What’s important about the far right’s victories is their apparent abandonment of any desire to destroy the EU or, at least, withdraw from it. The new far-right strategy is borrowed from the left (just like some of its economic program): a “long march through the institutions” in order to control them. Bye-bye Brexit and its heir apparents: Nexit, Grexit, Frexit. The far right wants to conquer Brussels.

Meanwhile, it is continuing its long march through national institutions. In Belgium, in federal elections earlier this month, the far-right, Euroskeptical, Flemish nationalist party Vlaams Belang;came in second, behind a right-wing, Euroskeptical, Flemish nationalist party New Flemish Alliance. Traditionally, Belgian parties have agreed not to partner with Vlaams Belang to form governments. But with the New Flemish Alliance moving ever further to the right, the Belgians might be on the verge of breaking with this informal pact. Don’t expect a new government any time soon though: it took 18 months to forge a ruling coalition five years ago.

In Austria, the far-right Freedom Party is on track to win elections in September. Its coalition government with the Christian Democratic People’s Party collapsed in 2019 because of the;Ibiza affair,;which linked Vice Chancellor Heinz-Christian Strache of the Freedom Party to a corrupt deal involving a woman he thought was a well-connected Russian. The Freedom Party’s adulterously close relationship to Russia has not seemed to diminish its popularity. Another recent spy scandal broke, involving a top intelligence official passing information to Russia in exchange for money, which took place when the Freedom Party;was in charge of the Interior Ministry. And yet Austrian voters concluded that this was just the type of party to send to the European parliament.

And then there’s France. Who knows, perhaps the French far right, too, will take over after the snap elections that Macron has called. The French, it seems, now;hate Paris;as much as they hate Brussels (the seat of the EU). Marine Le Pen is taking advantage of an anti-elitist, anti-globalist, anti-technocrat spirit that is rebranding reactionary as merely rebellious (sound familiar?). That’s bad news for Macron, whose every gesture and remark scream “Paris elite.” Fortunately, a more genuine challenge to the French orthodoxy has emerged on the left, as the Socialist, Communist, France Unbowed, and Ecologists parties have formed a new coalition. It is currently;running neck and neck;with Le Pen’s National Rally.

In The Netherlands, meanwhile, the far right has finally managed to put together a coalition government after their surprise victory in elections last year. Firebrand Geert Wilders had to give up on his desire to become prime minister, but in exchange his Party for Freedom (PVV) will;control five ministries.

The new head of the migration and asylum ministry, Marjolein Faber of the PVV, is perhaps the last person you’d want in charge of a sensitive issue like immigration. She;favors;the abolition of Islam. She has called migration “repopulation,” a popular word in the far-right lexicon that;has roots;in the German word;umvolkung, which was used by the Nazis and which today has much the same connotation as the “replacement” of majority white populations with non-white immigrants. And she has been guilty of the worst kind of racial profiling when she said that a stabbing suspect looked like a “North African” when witnesses reported otherwise.

Be Afraid, Very Afraid

Faber, Krahl, Braun: these far-right politicians make Donald Trump look like a conservative Democrat (which he used to be before opportunism beckoned). Of course, the Eurocrazies don’t have as much power as Trump might once again have. But the really scary part is how routine it has become for such people—who, a generation ago, would have been just kooks making long-winded speeches from the audience at public forums—to now be in positions of real responsibility.

It’s also frightening because it’s not just Europe that has been affected by this peculiar political disease. Narendra Modi, despite a drop in his party’s support;in the latest elections, will continue on as prime minister of India. Nayib Bukele, the telegenic autocrat in El Salvador, won a supermajority in parliament earlier this year for his New Ideas party. And Vladimir Putin, no surprise here, won his election in Russia.

Trump was blocked from doing his worst by the institutions of a democratic society (Congress, state governments, courts, conscientious objectors at all levels). The EU, after this near miss with near fascism, will also be able to prevent the far right from unraveling the rule of law.

But at what point will the far right achieve a critical mass of support such that it can kick away the ladder that they used to climb to power? The far right’s long march through the institutions has only one ultimate destination: autocracy.

• This article was published at FPIF

By Yossi Mekelberg

In recent years, the world has faced many events to which the adjective “unprecedented” has been frequently and correctly attached: from a global pandemic to a member of the UN Security Council illegally invading a neighbor and global warming reaching a new height. However, in the next few months, much of our attention will turn to the US presidential election — and there too the unprecedented nature of events rules supreme.

For the first time, both candidates are looking to be elected for a second term; their combined age is the highest of any previous pair of candidates; and, in addition, criminal trials are dominating much of the political debate, despite the enormous challenges confronting the country domestically and internationally. And if Donald Trump wins, he will become the first American president to be a convict. For now, he holds the unenviable record of being the first former president to be convicted of felony crimes and he might even have to run the country from behind bars.

As far as the two court cases are concerned, there is a marked difference between them. In the case of President Joe Biden, he has not been suspected, let alone charged with any offence, but his son Hunter was convicted last week in a federal court on three felony counts relating to buying a handgun while being a crack cocaine user and lying about that. The president’s support of his son, especially considering the tragic history of their family, is an understandable fatherly act that should be held in his favor and not used against him.

In contrast, Trump’s recent conviction on 34 counts of falsification of business records in the first degree, in a scheme to illegally influence the 2016 election through a hush money payment to an adult film actress, is a legal stain on his reputation that should have excluded him from running for the highest office in the country. This is only one of four criminal cases against him, with the remaining three trials yet to commence.

Trump has also been embroiled in civil cases relating to his business empire; and he was found liable for sexual abuse by a civil court last year. One wonders how he has time to focus on his election campaign or how he would run the country should he win the trust of the people for another term. More disturbing is why millions of law-abiding citizens might put their faith in someone with his record.

During this unusual presidential race, these trials are an unfortunate distraction from the real issues that are going to determine the lives of Americans over the next four years, as well as the lives of many others across the globe. Nevertheless, they are also a symptom of America’s malaise and the profound rupture in its society. This gives some insight into the source of support among Republicans for a candidate who will represent almost anything that goes against the values of the vast majority of those who vote for him. In addition, social media platforms have made it extremely easy to drive a wedge between elements of society and stoke distrust through spreading disinformation, making it difficult to discern what is truth and what is a lie.

Trump is a product of our times, whereby reality is in the eye of the beholder. Research shows that polarization is ingrained in American society, creating a perfect environment for the former president to thrive on. Moreover, supporters of both Democrats and Republicans perceive their rival supporters in an extremely negative light, as much as they do the party leaders. This split society translates to a rigid, tribal voting pattern, with little switching of support from one party to another. Instead of judging candidates by their policies and personalities, they support them according to what side of the political map they are on, while developing hostile emotions toward the rival party.

A poll conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago has revealed that an overwhelming majority of Democrats and Republicans agree on some fundamental values, among them accountable government, fair and equal application of the rule of law, personal responsibility and accountability for one’s actions, and respect and compassion across differences. Those are honorable values that should be the basis for a healthy society, but in the same breath, despite both sides of the political map supporting these values, they are highly skeptical of each other. And how many of these values can one associate with Trump?

How could supporters of the Republican Party not be shocked and dismayed by Trump’s rebuff of the last presidential election result or the attack on Capitol Hill — surely they should be. Apparently not, in their current state of mind: for them, the Democrats and President Biden are not rivals but enemies. Furthermore, Republicans are more conservative in their value system, in which the family is at the center of life and society, and yet Trump is hardly a proponent of this and still won the primaries without breaking sweat. Instead of traditional values, he plays on their fear of migrants by offering them fantasy solutions that are unworkable but resonate with their emotions rather than their reason.

Ironically, when voters are polled on the issues that concern them most, one of their top answers is that Democrats and Republicans should work together, yet by supporting Trump and some of his loyalists in Congress, they are bound to achieve only partisanship and discord: the exact opposite. To explain the rise of Trumpian populism, much can be attributed to the increasing number of Americans who feel left behind and disenfranchised; levels of income and wealth inequality are higher in the US than in almost any other developed country and are rising. It is a very wealthy country, yet there are far too many people who find it difficult to make ends meet. In Trump, who manages to fashion himself as their champion, they look for salvation, while his record belies this and shows that he is clearly more concerned with the super-rich, not those who face daily economic struggle.

Few believed that Trump would win the election back in 2016 and, considering his first term, it is almost inconceivable that the great American people will renew his mandate. This might indeed appear to be a logical conclusion, but logic is something that is threatening to desert America’s current social and political environment.

• Yossi Mekelberg is a professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the Middle East and North Africa Program at international affairs think tank Chatham House. X: @YMekelberg 

NPR News: 06-19-2024 8PM EDT

Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices

NPR Privacy Policy

Armenia, Azerbaijan trade barbs after France pledges new arms to Yerevan  Reuters