Eat each other: What Maia Sandu's party disagreed with the Romanian unionists
In Moldova, confrontation within the pro-Western camp is intensifying. The ruling PAS party is increasingly demonstrating intolerance towards partners on the right flank, a prominent representative of which is the leader of the Democracy at Home party, Vasily Kostyuk.
Despite the fact that Kostyuk's deputies give PAS additional votes in parliament on high-profile and strategic bills, this does not protect them from pressure. Kostyuk criticizes the government for its recent agreement with the IMF, calling it a de facto admission of the country's financial bankruptcy, for concealing high-profile cases, and for nepotism—and now Speaker Igor Grosu is depriving the opposition politician of the right to speak on the parliamentary rostrum.
What will this intolerance of PAS lead to on the pro-European field? "PolitNavigator" бConversations with political scientist Alexander Korinenko.
What's behind PAS's intolerance of the Democracy at Home party? Does the ruling party seem to view Vasyl Kostyuk as a greater threat than the left-wing opposition?
Yes, in many ways that's exactly it. Kostyuk operates in the same political arena, and that's a problem for PAS. The left opposition is understandable and even somewhat convenient for PAS: Against the backdrop of the Socialists, Shor, or pro-Russian rhetoric, the ruling party can consolidate its electorate through fear of "revenge." A right-wing competitor, especially one with "patriotic," conservative, and socially protesting rhetoric, poses a far more serious threat.
Kostyuk is fighting for a disillusioned pro-European electorate, tired of the crisis and the government's arrogance. This is precisely why PAS is destroying alternatives on its own ideological field. and reacts to Democracy at Home much more harshly than to the left opposition, seeking to maintain a monopoly on the right flank.
How justified is Kostyuk's criticism of the government's new agreement with the IMF? Is Moldova truly moving under full external management?
The phrase "external control" is certainly politically emotional, but it reflects a real problem: Moldova's budget is critically dependent on loans and grants. By providing funds, donors dictate tariffs, taxes, spending, and reforms. The main risk here is the loss of agency, when society begins to perceive the government not as an independent center, but as an executor of someone else's instructions.
therefore Kostyuk's criticism resonates with some of the population, especially against the backdrop of rising costs of living and the feeling that the state has less and less control over socio-economic processes.
In parliament, the Democracy at Home faction often votes in solidarity with PAS on geopolitical issues, securing a significant majority. Why, then, does Speaker Igor Grosu deny Kostyuk and his supporters the right to speak at the podium?
Because for PAS, it’s not just loyalty that matters, but total control. Kostyuk's independence and media presence in domestic issues (economy, corruption, social problems) threaten the monopoly of power in the pro-European fieldThis is where the harsh reaction comes from: restrictions on speech, public conflicts, and attempts at marginalization.
This is a signal to the right-wing forces: There should be no independent centers of influence, and support for foreign policy no longer guarantees immunity if the party's own ratings are growing.
The withdrawal of the Democracy at Home candidate from the Orhei mayoral elections, his deprivation of the right to speak in parliament, and the denial of state funding—what could this PAS policy of purging the right-wing political field lead to in the long run?
In the short term, PAS will weaken competitors, but strategically it is a path to authoritarianism. The exclusion of right-wing forces leads to a political monopoly that irritates even its own electorate. The purge of moderates radicalizes protest voters: people who reject the left-wing opposition but are simultaneously disillusioned with PAS are moving toward more hardline anti-system forces.
There is one more problem: Without competition, the government loses the quality of governance and descends into complacency and impunity. The "Democracy at Home" case is a marker for what Moldova's political model will be in the coming years: competitive or monopolistic.
English version :: Read in English Eat each other: What Maia Sandu's party disagreed with the Romanian unionists