(en) Sergey Birukov I FROM THE EXPERIENS OF (NOT ONLY THE RUTHENIANS) MODERN NATIONALISM. MIHAI GIMPU: THE UNFORTUNATE EURO-INTEGRATION STRATEGIST.  “Scientists and politicians in the West are unanimous that the 20th century is the Century of Nationalism. The Phenomenon of Nationalism is extremely diverse, and this phenomenon simultaneously acts at in many forms – simultaneously as liberation movement, national ideology and an ethnopsychological phenomenon. The Nationalism is simultaneously and the political movement aspiring to a gain or containing of the political power, and the policy justifying such actions by means of the propaganda of a priority of interests and values of the Nation. We admits that the Nationalism is not only ideas and the policy corresponding to them, but also the system of orientations and feelings. Therefore real circumstances, events and so their perception – i.e. experiences of people can be a source which form it. Many modern scientists stress the many-sided nature and ambiguity of Nationalism, its properties and relations, don't aspire to reduce its essence only to ethnocentrism, racism, etc. and to consider it as unequivocally negative phenomenon. Nationalism in this or other form becomes frequent ideology of national movements which defend the interests unfairly and illegally discriminated peoples. At the same time the on the: how to find in the politician "golden mean", defending interests of the people and simultaneously avoiding the extreme measures connected with infringement of interests of other people. The Ruthenian national movement is defending today absolutely well-founded rights and interests of the Ruthenian people, because the Subcarpathian Rus during long time has  undergone of discrimination and an ethnocide. Because of that it is so necessary to consider ambiguous experience of national movements and national leaders of other countries. And first of all for this purpose, what successfully to achieve the purposes of the Ruthenian national movement, without repeating  mistakes of some of the Post-Soviet politicians who have come into the politics with the support of National Movements of 1990th years…”

Destinies of the states in many respects depend nowdays on person of their leaders. This true doesn't cause objections and doesn't demands additional comments. These people should create new state institutes and new rules of the game in the politics, defining the political image of the countries.The destiny of Republic of Moldova was so hard from the moment of getting of independence. Casually or not, at the head of Moldova at this time was a leader, whose personal qualities promoting not stabilization of political process, but multiplicated conflicts and splits and as a result has led him to political fiasco. The destiny of Mihai Ghimpu, enough appreciable Moldavian politician over the last two decades, is more demonstrative example of it. However, his biography seems quite respectable and successful. He was the leader of Liberal Party of Moldova (till 2005 - Party of reforms). In 2009-2010 Ghimpu was fulfilling duties of the President of Moldova. He was the speaker of the Moldavian parliament of XVIII convocation (2009-2010). Earlier Ghimpu held a post of the chairman of Chisinau municipal council (2007-2008). In the past there was one of founders and a member of executive committee of the Popular Front of Moldova (1988-1993), a deputy of parliament of Moldova (1990-1994, 1994-1998, May 2009).Today Ghimpu pretends to be considered as one of "Founding Fathers" of national-democratic movement in Moldova. In the late eighties it was mentioned as the founder of the Popular Front of Moldova (NFM), a member of executive committee of the national-democratic movement which was awarded one of the leading political forces in Moldova. In 1990 as the representative of NFM Ghimpu has been elected in parliament and has entered into fraction of the Popular Front of Moldova. However the main contradiction of all political career of Ghimpu was enough early found out: actively participating in democratic movement of Moldova, it initially positioned himself as the Romanian, supporting already then thought-provoking for many her compatriots the concept of «two states (Romania and Moldova) – one nation». Similar discrepancy of motives, together with great ambition, sensitivity and intractability have predetermined difficult and twisting character of political career of Mihai Ghimpu.It was showed already at the very beginning of advancement of Ghimpu on leading roles in the Moldavian policy and power system. In February 1992 the Popular Front of Moldova became the Christian Democrat Popular Front (CDPF). In 1993 deputy Ghimpu has left the organization, explaining this choice by "necessity to adhere to political realism" (the majority of the population of the country didn't support the aspirations of the leaders of PFM to unconditional association of Moldova with Romania and attempts of rapprochement with the Romanian Orthodox Church). In 1993 Ghimpu has been elected the responsible secretary and further the vice-president of the Congress of Intelligency of Moldova too (he held this post till 1998).

However, it is too hardly to estimate, that the experience of Ghimpu in a role of  «the political party builder» as successful. In 1997 he has reanimated and has leaded the Party of Reforms, which was created in 1993 (PR). Founding Fathers of this Party, playing a significant role in democratic movement of Moldova in past, were the participant of Movements for National Revival (MNR) Anatol Shalaru and businessman Anatol Stati approached to Peter Luchinsky (which earlier was the first secretary of the Central Committee of Communist Party of Moldova, and he became the second president of Moldova in 1996). According to some information, MNR’s leadership have passed to Ghimpu in 1995. After arrival of the new leader, according to analysts, the party «has run into hibernation» more than for 10 years: it was noticed, that this party taken part in the elections (as independently, and as a coalitions member), but never overcame a passage barrier.
It is characteristic that in the course of party building of Gimpu,  despite  repeatedly declared adherence to the European principles, didn't avoid the appearance of nepotism (that, finally, hasn't helped him with Party Building). In 2004 Gimpu’s nephew, Dorin Kirtoake became Ghimpu’s assistant on a post of the leader of «Party of Reforms». In April 2005 the Party has changed the name and began to be called as Liberal Party of Moldova (LPM). In a press this party named "most Proromanian" (for negation of the Moldavian identity and appeals to association of Moldova and Romania) and different by "radical anticommunistic ideology". Ghimpu declared that formation headed by himself puts before a problem "advancements of liberal values". It is necessary to recognize that the feeling of «political realism» already then has leaved «domnul Mihai». The Moldavian analysts noticed then that necessity to reanimate absolutely forgotten by the Moldavian voters Party of Reforms, having decorated with her new perusal of liberal ideology (which then it was necessary to create) was understood Ghimpu in connection with public activity of its nephew on elections of 2005. Kirtoake  took part in Chisinau mayor elections, and was thus rather unlucky: some times elections have been recognized by not taken place because of a low appearance of voters.
But the next Kirtoake attempt to be selected was succesful. In June 2007 Chisinau’s mayor elections again have been organized. In the first round of Kirtoake which in the mass-media named «the perspective young reformer», has taken the second place, having typed more than 24 percent of votes, and in the second round on June 17th, 2007 has received 61,17 percent of votes. As a result, having collected votes of all the protest electorate which has voted “not so much for him, how mainly against communists", he has won a convincing victory over the candidate of Communist Party Vyacheslav Iordan and has headed Chisinau municipal administration.

Mass-media named the victory of Kirtoake on this elections “the Liberal Party hour of triumph», and Kirtoake himself – "the more successful project» of experienced politician Mr. Ghimpu». In October 2007 Ghimpu has been elected by the chairman of Chisinau municipal council. «For a city it is indifferent, who from them will sit in the most beautiful armchair -  they are all identicall», - wrote mass-media, telling about squabbles and the auction between representatives of opposition and possible applicants for this party.
However the uncle and the nephew haven't succeeded in practical administrative work. In the 2008 year, when has new elections took place, as observers marked, the most part-time on a new post of Kirtoake has been consacred to regulation of conflict situations in Chisinau municipal council where the new mayor because of excessive "guardianship" from Gimpu’s Party and its own administrative inconsistency simply wasn't considered as the serious manager. At the same time, a tandem of "Gimpu-Kirtoake" to has made nevertheless certain propagandist-ideological effect by his the activity. According to experts, because of finding the leadership of Liberal Party of posts of the mayor and the chairman of municipal council of capital it has turned «into one of the main opposition forces of Republic Moldova».
However tandem of "Gimpu-Kirtoake" hasn't succeeded in the decision of essential problems of inhabitants of Chisinau. The mass-media wrote that the municipal council under the governance of Ghimpu «was remembered with infinite scandals and inability to make a reasonable decision». Wу can remember also his decision "to pay all losses of a water canal at the expense of townspeople", a sharp rise in prices for service of residential buildings and growth of tariffs for heating. In June 2008 Ghimpu has been discharged of the post by the decision of members of municipal council, despite performances of Kirtoake in protection of his relative. Thus, the work experience in the power at municipal level at a tandem "uncle-nephew" can be appreciate as unsuccessful.
Then the tandem decided to make sustained investments in their party building again. However here again hasn't done without scandal. During election campaign, which preceded parliamentary elections in April 2009, Ghimpu has taken the second place in the list of Liberal Party of Moldova (Kirtoake has taken the first place, and the first leader of LP Shalaru - the third). However "world" between colleagues under the party list was only seeming. In the Moldavian press there was an information that Shalaru has returned to a policy not only in support "a phenomenon of Kirtoake", but also for "somehow to truncate" outright dispersed Ghimpu as that "not only behaves absolutely inadequately, but has solving influence on D. Kirtoake too".

Nevertheless, inner-party contradictions was regulated for a while, and Ghimpu with supporters can to achieve certain success. In the beginning of April 2009 in Moldova the next parliamentary elections have taken place. Four parties has came to parliament, including the Liberal Party of the Moldova which has received more of 12 percent of votes of voters. However the majority of votes (almost 50 percent) was received by Communist Party of Moldova (CPМ), leaded by the President of the country Vladimir Voronin. Despite acknowledgement of independent observers of the fact that elections have passed without significant violations, the Moldavian opposition has dissatisfied with results of voting and organized protest actions in the capital of country. The demonstrators have crushed and have set fire to Parliament and Presidential Administration of  Moldova. After this event leaders of opposition have declared …  the loss a control over a situation and called for support of "peace protests" on purpose to achieve from the power of recalculation of bulletins and check of reliability of lists of voters. 
Anyhow, not washing so driving – but the breakthrough Gimpu and its supporters into power has taken place. In the same month on demand of President Voronin the Constitutional Court of Moldova has made the decision on a vote recount in elections. By results of recalculation of bulletins of the Communist Party have confirmed the result (49,48 percent of votes). Liberal Party also has received 13,13 percent of votes, having conceded only the Communist Party. Then the Constitutional Court has confirmed mandates of deputies of parliament of Moldova of XVII convocation. However Ghimpu and other deputies from the opposition, received the mandates, on official delivery of documents hasn't come, and got them in the Central Election Committee. Then Gimpu has made the characteristic statement that Liberal Party "under no circumstances won't cooperate with a communistic regime" and refuse to participate in presidential elections. The first part of this declaration was very expected, but the second sounded strange. In parallel with it the declaration has sounded, that Liberal Party will appeal against the decision of the Constitutional Court of Moldova on a recognition of legitimacy of last elections in the European Court of Human Rights. This Gimpu’s declaration has guarded even his allies in Liberal Party.

In May 2009, in Parliament were held elections of the future president. Despite the Communists supported nominated for this position Zinaida Greceanii, she does not become president. She did not have one deputy to vote, because the three opposition factions - the Liberals, the Liberal Democrats and the "Our Moldova Alliance" - boycotted the vote.

However, shortly thereafter Ghimpu, before declaring a principled non-participation of his party in presidential elections, unexpectedly announced that in the ranks of the LP fraction he "hides the same 'golden' 61st vote needed to elect a president." It was nothing but a direct allusion that bargain with him and his party comrades still possible. And the bargain was soon possible. After the failure of the second ballot Voronin nominated Greceanii as Prime Minister, 10 June, the cabinet was approved by Parliament, and 15 June, the President according  the constitution dissolved Parliament and fixed new parliamentary elections. As a result, the “master of political combinations" Ghimpu left with virtually nothing, but has not lost his optimism and ambition.

July 29, 2009 in Moldova were held parliamentary elections in early XVIII Convocation. First place in the election then took the Communist Party (44.76 per cent of voters). Entered the parliament four parties more: the Liberal-Democratic (16.55 percent), Liberal (14.61 percent), Democratic Party of Moldova (12.55 percent) and the Alliance "Our Moldova" (7.35 percent of the vote). As a result, the Communists gained 48 seats in parliament (out of 101), the Liberal Democrats - 18, the Liberals - 15, AMN - 7 Democrats - 13. Ghimpu, as well as leaders of the Liberal Democratic Party (Filat), Democratic Party (Lupu) and the Alliance "Our Moldova" (Urechean) more than a week held talks on forming a coalition, and in August 2009, the party established a coalition government with the slogan " for European integration". Even then the "competition of ambitions" between the party leaders was shown, but temporary compromise could still be achieved. Ghimpu has a historic chance to lead a coalition of democratic forces, and finally put into practice his showy and attractive political declaration.

In the end, after long negotiations August 28, 2009 the Parliament of Moldova elected Ghimpu as a Speaker: for him voted 53 members of the coalition "For European integration." The communists at once said that will appeal the election of the Speaker in court. Vladimir Voronin stepped down as president of Moldova September 11, 2009, thereafter Ghimpu became acting president until a new president.

However, "de jure" Ghimpu failed to gain a foothold in the new political status. Subsequently, the Moldovan parliament twice - in November and December of 2009 - failed to hold presidential elections (boycotted the vote both times, the Communists). In addition, in early September 2010 because of low voter turnout was declared invalid referendum in which citizens of Moldova had to decide whether they want to elect the head of state through direct elections. (The same month, the Constitutional Court admitted the legitimacy of the parliament dissolution, then Ghimpu dissolved parliament and called on November 28, 2010 to hold early elections. As a result, the situation returned to normal .

Ghimpu suffered yet another "intermediate" political failure. In September 2010, due to low turnout was not considered a referendum on the introduction of direct presidential elections, Moldova. In November of that year in Moldova took place early parliamentary elections, but they again failed to resolve the political crisis: the Communists won, taking 42 seats in parliament, the Liberal Democratic, Democratic and Liberal parties together have 59 seats and kept the alliance "for European Integration "but the number of MPs were part of it again was not enough to elect a new president. All in all, December 30, 2010 Acting President of the Republic became the leader of the Democratic Party of Moldova, Marian Lupu. "The Odyssey" of Ghimpu has been completed, and the relations between the leaders belonging to the "pro-European coalition," only worsened.

Survive this political failure was to Ghimpu very difficult. In the course of the 2011 debate between supporters of the coalition continued, and a compromise on major political issues could not be reached.

Parties of the ruling Alliance for European Integration of Moldova held September 30, 2011 negotiations on the election of the president. Members of the Alliance for European Integration had to come first to a common denominator in the Alliance and decide who and how should to elect the head of state. However, agreement on fundamental issues of Alliance members was not possible. It is no coincidence that after the talks acting Moldova's President, Speaker of Parliament and Democratic Party chairman Marian Lupu declined to say what issues were touched upon the negotiations. Other members of the AEI - the leader of the parliamentary faction of the Liberal Democratic Party chairman, Valery Sagittarius and the Liberal Party Ghimpu - refused to make statements to the press. But the main reason for the futility of negotiations, according to Moldovan observers, it was persistence Ghimpu, hard to claim for themselves the support in the fight for the presidency, regardless of the views and interests of other leaders of the Alliance.

Just against this background the corruption scandal broke out, which put into question the very existence of the liberal coalition. October 13 meeting of the Moldovan parliament, Prime Minister Vladimir Filat demanded the resignation of Attorney General for the ineffective response to the raider attack on Moldovan banking system. (According to him, if these initiatives will put to the vote, "then we will have another speaker, who will do it." The same day, at the request of deputies from Filat's Liberal Democratic Party and the Communist Party dismissed the Director of Information and Security Service of Moldova, the Liberal Party nominee George Michael, which caused a fit of anger of Ghimpu.

October 17, in Chisinau, was held a meeting of leaders of the ruling Alliance for European Integration. As stated after the talks the leaders of three parties in the AEI, they talked about the future of the ruling coalition in the context of the requirements of the Liberal Democrats for an immediate start of Speaker Marian Lupu procedures resignation Attorney General Valeriy Zubko.

A very characteristic in this case was the position of Ghimpu. He proposes to revise the principle of distribution of the highest public office in the Alliance for European Integration. As the leader of the Liberal reporters after the meeting of Standing Committee on Legal Issues, Appointments and Immunity October 19, the best to the Liberal Party is the option when Ghimpu himself occupies the post of prime minister, current Prime Minister Vladimir Filat could be a candidate for president, and Marian Lupu could stay on as Speaker of the Parliament. Leader of the Liberal Party believes that it is possible the other option - if PLDM vote for the removal of Lupu from the post of the Speaker. "Alliance will not exist no more. Filat could then become a speaker, he wanted to be back in 2009, and me - the Prime Minister. In this case, in the government it will be calm and grace. If the prime minister Filat can not work with ministers in government and each of them criticize, then he should go ", - concluded Ghimpu. Such proposals are declared in the midst of crisis, caused dissatisfaction among colleagues Ghimpu in the Alliance and further weakened the union. "Bargaining" Ghimpu obviously failed.

Meanwhile, events continued to grow in the worst case scenario. Democratic Party chairman said he did not intend to initiate resignation of Attorney General, because it has no justification. And the fate of the Alliance for European integration, he said, was to be decided at a meeting of parliament on Thursday, during which his office could lose Marian Lupu himself. "On Thursday will put everything into place. Colleagues by the alliance put forward too many ultimatums. On Thursday, we'll see if there is another alliance or in its coffin was hammered the last nail - the offset from the position of Chairman of the Parliament. I am ready to resignation of the speaker. And wait Thursday with great interest. The point here is not Lupu, and what will effect the situation, "- said Lupu. For his part, Prime Minister Filat confirmed, then, that if, prior to Thursday's parliamentary speaker will not be initiated by the resignation of Attorney General, "we will initiate the procedure for the resignation of the chairman of the parliament." "If someone important alliance Attorney General, let him take over the consequences. We are prepared for all scenarios," - said minister said.

In turn, the leader of the Liberal Party Ghimpu instead of trying to reconcile the opposing positions and thus to preserve a political union, said the alliance after the refusal to consider his proposal for the allocation of roles (which are actually an ultimatum) for European Integration "is buried, there are only fill it with earth. " "I think this is the beginning of the campaign" - the Liberal leader was of the view.

In the current due to destructive position Ghimpu situation, Prime Minister of Moldova, the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party (PLDM) Filat to urgently convene a council PLDM to discuss "how we will proceed further." So the leader of the Liberal Democrats Filat responded on 28 October in Parliament the report Attorney General Valeriy Zubko, who said the involvement of "a number of senior officials of the government" to the contraband. Commenting in the same context, which took place at the same meeting of the parliament elected Communist MP Artur Reshetnikov to the post of Deputy Speaker of the Communist Party and the Democratic Party votes, PLDM leader expressed the opinion that all these events can lead to a "new configuration in the political arena" and reformatting of the ruling alliance . Ghimpu in this situation prefer to say that he represents the party has done everything possible to save the AEI, but at the moment, these possibilities have exhausted themselves.

As a result, the Alliance virtually ceased to exist as a unified political entity. In this situation, a kind of tuning fork was proposed to establish a broad Communist coalition, which was necessary to dismiss the leadership of parliament and government to start negotiations from scratch and re-distribute the public office. However, conflicts within the former allies of the Alliance made the proposal unworkable. Since then, political ways Filat Lupu and Ghimpu clearly separated.

But the main question is to what political consequences resulted in the activity of the Alliance leaders, including the leader of the Liberal Party Ghimpu and managed if they promote Moldova towards European integration? Typical in this respect were the recognition of some prominent European politicians.

The EU policy of support for Moldova "has limits, and most important of them - the fact that Moldova is not a European perspective of membership." As reported October 27 in Chisinau news agency Infotag, it was declared in Berlin, at the meeting "between democratic renewal and political crisis: what are the prospects of the Republic of Moldova?" commissioner of the South-Eastern Europe, Turkey and the European Free Trade Association of the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Germany, Nikolaus Graf Lambsdorff.

"Moldova, along with Ukraine and Belarus, has not so-called European membership perspective, which possess the Balkan countries, which fulfilled all the conditions that may apply to join the EU" - said the diplomat. As to Moldavia, then he said, "now the Republic of Moldova enjoys the political support and is on the agenda of many meetings, visits and talks in Brussels." Nikolaus Graf Lambsdorff said that the EU thus corrected his mistake, because "over the next 10-12 years since independence, Moldova, the EU did not pay attention to it, which is one of the reasons which contributed to the Communists came to power." "The EU corrected the mistake. But this support has there are limits. The most important of them - the fact that Moldova has not perspective there membership in European Union. I say this with regret, but it is a political fact," - said the representative of the German Foreign Ministry.

What is the cause of this unfortunate outcome of the efforts of Moldova in convergence with Europe? Apart from the difficulty of the objective nature of the causes of this failure should be remembered and negative personality traits of some Moldovan politicians, self-proclaimed advocates of "European values", but really showed his unhealthy ambition, inability to negotiate, failure to make the necessary compromises to achieve a "team goals". These factors predetermined their failure as statesmen. These politicians, unfortunately, should also include the former Acting President Mihai Ghimpu, which have been linked high hopes of Romania and EU countries leaders, and who eventually lost the chance to become the true leader of the "pro-European coalition" and the country as a whole. Perhaps it is time for Europe to support the new politicians from Moldova, who not bound with "complexes of the past" and who not fixated on personal career ambitions? May be already near future give us the answer to this question.

Dr. Sergey Birukov