Picture this, if you will. It is May 21st, 2023.
You are standing right in the absolute center
of Qina, in the great National Assembly Square.
It is a Sunday. The weather is actually holding
up. And everywhere you look, as far as the eye
can see, it is just this massive sea of flags.
You've got the Moldovan tricolors, the blue,
yellow, red, and you have the circle of stars
on blue for the European Union. It was a massive
visual statement. I mean, the police estimate
about 75 ,000 people were there, journalists
and the organizers. They were pushing that number
closer to 100 ,000. Now, for a country the size
of Moldova, we're talking about a population
of roughly 2 .5 million. Getting nearly 100 ,000
people into a single square is not just a crowd.
That is a highly significant percentage of the
entire demographic. Exactly. It is huge. And
today we are doing a deep dive into this specific
event, the European Moldova National Assembly.
Now, that name sounds very official, doesn't
it? Like a legislative session or some sort of
constitutional convention. But it wasn't a parliament
session at all. It was a rally. But here's a
twist that makes. this so unique. It was a rally
organized by the government. Which is the very
first thing that really jumps out when you look
at the source material. Usually, you know, in
a healthy democracy or even a struggling one,
people rally against the government to demand
change. But here you have the government busing
people in to demand. Well, the government essentially
keeps doing what it's already doing. Right. It
feels a little bit like inception, doesn't it?
A rally within a government mandate. But we have
a really fascinating stack of sources today to
help us unpack this. We aren't just looking at
the speeches from the stage. We have the official
government decrees. We have the financial disclosures,
which, spoiler alert, get very messy later on.
And we have some academic analysis on something
called soft power that really explains the why
behind all of this. We are going to unpack why
it happened. it was funded and that really stark
contrast between this pro -European rally in
the capital and the counter protests happening
at the exact same time. And that why is absolutely
crucial, because on the surface, it just looks
like a giant party. But when you dig into the
reports and the opposition response, you realize
it was a highly strategic move to answer a very
specific question. So let's get into it. President
Maya Sandu announced this event back in April
2023, and she was very explicit about the goal.
Her stated purpose was to tell the world that
we are Europeans and to finally answer the question,
what do Moldovans want? That phrasing is heavy.
What do Moldovans want? It implies that up until
that exact moment, the answer was ambiguous.
And historically, it has been. Moldova has been
this classic swing state, balancing between East
and West, between Russia and Europe. Sandu's
administration, the PAS party, wanted to end
that ambiguity. They wanted a definitive visual
confirmation that the debate was over. So let's
set the scene properly for you. Fast forward
to May 21. The square is absolutely packed. And
they didn't just bring out local politicians
to speak. They brought out the heavy artillery
of European diplomacy. They really did. The star
guest of the day was Roberta Mazzola. The president
of the European Parliament. Right. That is not
some low -level bureaucrat sent to just shake
hands and take photos. That is the very top tier
of EU leadership. Her presence alone was a huge
signal. But it was what she did on stage that
really shifted the energy in the square. She
didn't just give a generic speech in English.
She actually switched to Romanian. No local language.
Exactly. At the absolute climax of her speech,
she shouted, Europa este Moldova. Moldova este
Europa. Europe is Moldova. Moldova is Europe.
Wow. I can imagine the crowd just went totally
wild for that. It was electric. Because you have
to remember, language in Moldova is deeply, deeply
political. By speaking Romanian and by equating
the national identity directly with European
identity, she was validating the entire premise
of the gathering. She was telling those tens
of thousands of people, you belong with us. But
looking at the program in our notes, it wasn't
just suits and diplomats up on that stage. It
seems like the organizers were trying to curate
a very specific image of the whole society. That
is a really key observation. If you only put
politicians on stage, it just looks like a campaign
rally. And they knew that. So they had artists,
they had businessmen, farmers, writers. They
even had Eugen Doga. The famous composer. The
composer. He is arguably Moldova's most famous
living cultural figure. I mean, his waltz is
recognized by UNESCO. Having him there sent a
very distinct message. It says this isn't just
a government policy. This is our culture. This
is the actual soul of the nation aligning with
Europe. And then came the vote. Now, usually
when we talk about votes on a deep dive, we are
talking about ballot boxes, election monitors,
checking IDs, you know, the boring bureaucratic
stuff. This was very different. Very different.
A resolution was read out loud to the crowd,
and it had four massive core demands. One, enshrine
EU accession in the Constitution. Two, target
joining the EU by 2030. Three, start the actual
session negotiations by the end of 2023. And
four, an explicit condemnation of the Russian
invasion of Ukraine. Those are huge demands.
Changing the Constitution. Joining the EU in
just seven years. Massive. And to pass this resolution,
the moderator simply asked the massive crowd
to raise their hands. A show of hands for a constitutional
change. A literal show of hands. And looking
at this huge sea of flags and hands, the moderator
just declared unanimity. OK, I have to play the
skeptic here for a second. I am looking at this
from the outside. You have a government that
already holds a clear majority in parliament.
They control the presidency. They have the legislative
power to pass laws or initiate actual referendums.
Why do you need to pull 100 ,000 people into
a square to raise their hands? What is the actual
utility of this theater? Theater is the right
word, but I really don't want to use it dismissively.
This is exactly where we need to open up the
academic side of our source deck. We have this
fascinating analysis by Razvan Fonsea regarding
the concept of soft power. We hear that term
a lot. Usually it means movies, pop culture,
music exports. How does soft power apply to a
political rally? Fonsea argues that for a small,
vulnerable state like Moldova, soft power is
essentially a survival mechanism. Think about
Moldova's geopolitical position. It has a separatist
region in Transnistria with Russian troops stationed
there. It has a relatively weak military. It
simply cannot force its neighbors to respect
it through hard power, meaning guns and tanks.
So it has to use soft power, which is narrative,
legitimacy, and international image. So the argument
is that Sandu was building a solid state project
out of optics. Precisely. Fonsea argues that
Sandu's strategy was to turn Moldova's vulnerabilities
into a strategic advantage. By getting the public
to physically show up and participate, they aren't
just observers anymore. They're being positioned
as the actual creators of the state's pro -European
path. So it is psychological buy -in. If I stand
out there in the sun for four hours and raise
my hand in the air, I am personally invested
in this EU goal. I have committed to it physically.
That is exactly it. It is sort of the IKEA effect
applied to nation building. If you help assemble
it, you value it more. And Fonsi points out that
this assembly wasn't an isolated event. It was
actually part of a specific triad of events designed
to build this narrative. A triad. What were the
other two pieces? Think of it as a three -part
marketing campaign for the country. Part one
was actually the Eurovision Song Contest. In
2022 and 2023, Moldova's entries were heavily
folk -inspired, pushing a distinct pro -European
but very traditional national identity. That
is the cultural signal. Okay, so Eurovision is
step one. Step two is this national assembly
on May 21, the domestic show of force, the voice
of the people. And step three happened just 10
days later on June 1st, the second European Political
Community Summit. Right. That was a big one held
at the winery in Bulbuwaka. All the major European
leaders showed up, Macron, Schultz, everyone.
Exactly. So look at the narrative arc they built.
First, we assert our culture with Eurovision.
Second, the people speak at the assembly. Third,
Europe listens at the summit. It creates this
sense of inevitable momentum that a simple law
passed in a quiet parliament building could never
achieve. That makes a ton of sense from a strategic
branding perspective. You are creating a story
where the ending, meaning EU membership, feels
completely written in the stars. But branding
usually tries to hide the competition. And in
this case, the competition was quite literally
down the road. The split screen. This is a crucial
part of the story because while the cameras in
Chino were focused on the EU flags, there was
a completely different reality playing out in
other cities. This is where we get to the opposition,
specifically the ALO party. Yes. The opposition
or party organized counter rallies in Orhe, Comrade
and Bali on the exact same day. Now, to be impartial
and just look at the facts of who they are, this
is a party led by a fugitive oligarch, and they
are widely recognized as being aligned with Russian
interests. What were they actually asking for
at these counter rallies? Because presumably
they weren't out there cheering for Roberta Mazzola.
Far from it. They were demanding a referendum
on foreign policy. Their core argument was basically,
you can't just gather your friends in a square
and declare the country's future is settled.
If you are so sure Moldovans want Europe, put
it to a real vote, a ballot box vote. And what
were their numbers like? Because matching 100
,000 people in the capital is a pretty high bar
to clear. The Ayora party claimed they had 60
,000 participants across those three cities.
Now, as with all protest numbers, you might want
to view that with a critical eye, especially
compared to the police estimates for the main
rally. But even if it was a fraction of that
claim, it still represents a notable chunk of
the population that is actively rejecting the
government's European narrative. But here's where
it gets a little messy regarding those democratic
norms we mentioned. I was reading the reports
about a blockade. Yes. This is a major point
of controversy in our sources. The government
used the commission for extraordinary situations
to prevent opposition parties from holding counter
rallies inside Chenino. Wait, explain that process.
The opposition wanted to protest in the Capitol,
but the government just said no? Essentially,
yes. The opposition sources state that they had
obtained legal authorization for their protests
well in advance, but the government invoked the
Commission for Extraordinary Situations, which
is an emergency power body originally set up
because of the war next door, to block them from
the Capitol on that specific day. That feels
like it raises some serious questions. If you
are throwing a massive rally celebrating European
democratic values, blocking the opposition from
entering the capital seems a bit contradictory.
And the opposition seized on that exact contradiction.
They called it a dictatorship disguised as democracy.
Journalists from Radio Free Europe actually witnessed
anti -government groups being physically stopped
at the entrances to China. The police officially
claimed no incidents took place. But the reported
reality on the ground was that dissent was actively
kept out of the frame. So the unanimity in the
square was partly achieved because the people
who strongly disagreed weren't allowed to enter
the square. That is the primary criticism. You
can have unanimity much easier if you control
the guest list. And looking at the reactions,
it wasn't just the pro -Russian opposition complaining,
right? I saw that even some pro -European allies
were pretty unhappy with the whole thing. That
is a crucial nuance to highlight. This wasn't
just a simple pro -Russia versus pro -Europe
binary. The Dignity and Truth Platform, which
is actually a pro -European party and a former
ally of the ruling PAS party, accused the government
of using this event for purely electoral reasons.
Because local elections were coming up later
that same year. Exactly. Their argument was that
the government was using state resources and
a national holiday atmosphere to boost their
falling approval ratings ahead of the vote. They
essentially saw it as a massive campaign rally
disguised as a national assembly. And speaking
of state resources, we have to talk about the
money. Because nothing gets people quite as riled
up as government spending disclosures. The receipts.
Yes, the receipts. So initially, the government
didn't really want to say how much this whole
production cost. Which is never a good look for
transparency. No, it isn't. But eventually, they
did disclose the figures. The total estimated
cost to the public was 4 .7 million lei. To put
that in perspective for you, that is roughly
250 ,000 euros. For a national government budget,
that is not exactly bankrupting the nation. But
in Moldova, where the average pension is quite
low, 4 .7 million lei is a number that really
resonates with the public. OK, I have the actual
financial breakdown right here. And some of these
line items are just wild. One million lei was
spent on flags. That is the official figure.
They spent a million lei to distribute 4 ,000
flags to the participants. I am doing the math
in my head right now. That is 250 lei per flag.
For a handheld rally flag. That seems like a
very premium price. It is certainly a high markup.
And critics jumped on that immediately. Why is
the state spending a million lie on literal props
when everyday people are struggling with severe
inflation? But the thing that really stood out
to me in these disclosures, and this feels like
it belongs in a tabloid, was the payments to
the performers. This caused a huge scandal, didn't
it? It really did. It highlighted a financial
disparity that upset a lot of people. So you
had these professional orchestras playing at
the event. Three of them received $100 ,000 each.
$100 ,000. Okay. One of those specific orchestras
happened to be led by the brother of a PAS deputy.
Oh. See, that is exactly the kind of detail that
makes voters cynical. Even if they're the absolute
best orchestra in the country, the optics of
paying a ruling party deputy's brother 100 ,000
live from state funds are just terrible. It gets
much worse when you compare it to the other performers.
Remember Eugen Doga, the famous composer we mentioned
earlier, the ultimate national icon. The guy
they put front and center to show cultural unity
to the world. Right. He received 12 ,500 lei.
Wait. Let me get this straight. 100 ,000 for
the orchestra connected to the deputy's brother
and only 12 ,500 for the national icon. Correct.
And the real kicker in the disclosure, the Teleradio
Moldova Choir performed as well. That is the
public broadcaster's choir. There were 30 people
in that choir. 30 people. What did they get?
5 ,000 lei. Wait, total? Total. For the entire
group. That is wild. For 30 people, that is what,
roughly 160 lei a person? Roughly, yes. That
is about 8 euros each. That barely covers a quick
lunch and the bus ride home. So you have the
government spending a million on flags, handing
100 ,000 to politically connected orchestras,
and giving the public choir lunch money. Exactly.
And that is exactly why this became a massive
headline. It wasn't just about spending money
on a rally. It was about how that money was allocated.
It reinforced the exact narrative of And this
feeds right into the critique from Irina Vla,
the governor of Gagotia. Right. She made a very
pointed argument that Moldova was under an official
state of emergency at the time. Her position
was, look, we are in a crisis. We have a severe
energy crisis. We have a literal war next door.
We should be spending every available loo on...
Pensions, salaries and quality of life, not throwing
a massive party in the city square. It is the
classic guns versus butter debate, or I guess
in this specific case, flags versus pensions.
Exactly. And for the average citizen who might
be struggling just to pay high gas prices to
heat their home, seeing one million lieu dropped
on flags can be incredibly frustrating, regardless
of how much they actually support the EU integration.
It just feels disconnected from the reality of
daily survival. So we have this really intense
tension. On one hand, it was a highly successful,
massive display of soft power and national unity.
On the other hand, it faced serious accusations
of waste, electoral maneuvering and stifling
the opposition. How did the world react to all
this? Did the soft power strategy actually work
on the international stage? It certainly seems
so. The U .S. Embassy was very vocal in its support.
Ambassador Kent D. Logsdon actually attended
the rally personally. That is a very strong diplomatic
signal. It is. He stated he was there to demonstrate
a firm commitment to Moldova's democratic, prosperous
and secure future. And the U .S. embassy released
an official message saying they were proud to
support Moldova's European pass. So purely in
terms of signaling to the West that Moldova is
ready, the rally was an undeniable success. And
it wasn't just happening in Hachino, right? The
diaspora showed up in a big way, too. Yes. And
this is deeply important because the Moldovan
diaspora is huge and economically vital to the
country. There were simultaneous solidarity protests
organized in major European cities like Paris,
Rome and London. So the overarching image projected
was of a global Moldovan community entirely united
for this single cause. So if we zoom out from
the event itself, what does this actually represent
going forward? We had that resolution demanding
to join the EU by 2030. Is that in any way realistic?
Well, the resolution called for starting negotiations
by the end of 2023. Amazingly, looking at the
historical timeline, the European Council actually
did decide to open accession negotiations in
December 2023. So that part of the mandate was
officially fulfilled. But the 2030 target, that
is less than four years away now. That is extremely
ambitious. The resolution demands this specific
goal be enshrined in the Constitution. But as
we discussed with the theater of it all, you
can't actually change a constitution with a show
of hands in a square. You need a parliamentary
supermajority or a legally binding national referendum.
And that requires a completely different, much
more rigorous legal process than just hosting
a rally. Exactly. The rally gave the government
a sort of moral mandate to push for those legal
changes. They can point to the drone photos of
the square and say the people demand this, but
they still have to do the incredibly hard work
of judicial reform, fighting entrenched corruption
and actually aligning the domestic economy with
EU standards. And as we saw with the budget for
the rally itself, nepotism accusations, the bizarre
spending disparities, fighting corruption is
clearly still a work in progress. That is the
central irony of the source material. The event
was meant to showcase European values of transparency
and democracy, but the execution displayed some
of the exact old habits that keep Moldova from
fully integrating. It is really interesting how
these political mechanisms work. You create the
image of absolute inevitability. You tell the
world, look at this massive crowd, look at the
sea of flags, look at the European leaders on
our stage. This is happening whether you like
it or not. That is the pure essence of political
theater. And again, I don't use theater in a
derogatory way at all. Politics requires powerful
symbols. It requires a compelling narrative.
Sandu needed to show that the pro -Russian protests
weren't the only voice in the country. She needed
a bigger, louder, more colorful voice. And she
absolutely got it. But at a real cost, both financially
with the 4 .7 million lei and politically with
the serious accusations of excluding the opposition
through emergency powers. Politics is always
a calculated tradeoff. The government clearly
calculated that the global image of 100 ,000
people cheering for Europe was... totally worth
the domestic criticism over the flag budget or
the block counter protests. They bet that the
visual of unity would outlast the nuisance headlines
about the choir's lunch money. It really highlights
the sheer complexity of Moldovan politics for
you. You have this massive geopolitical shift
happening, trying to actively break away from
Russia's historical sphere of influence and sprint
toward Brussels. And it is playing out loudly
in city squares, not just in closed -door diplomatic
meetings. And the stakes honestly couldn't be
higher. With the war in Ukraine right next door,
this wasn't just a rally for better agricultural
trade deals. The explicit condemnation of the
Russian invasion in that resolution makes it
a hard security issue. It is an existential choice
for the survival of the country. Which perfectly
explains why the U .S. ambassador was standing
there and why the European Parliament president
was speaking Romanian from the stage. They aren't
just supporting a local policy. They are supporting
a massive geopolitical alignment. They are trying
to secure a flank on the European map. Precisely.
They were there to say, we see you, we hear you,
and we accept your choice. So we have covered
the scene, the soft power strategy, the messy
money and the political backlash. It is incredible
how much depth and contradiction there is to
just one single afternoon in May. It really serves
as a perfect microcosm of the entire pro -European
effort in Moldova. You see the genuine enthusiasm,
the logistical challenges, the deep internal
divisions and the sheer cost, both financial
and democratic, of trying to rapidly pivot a
country's entire direction. And the role of the
everyday people in that pivot. Whether they are
standing in the square cheering or out in the
provinces protesting or just sitting at home
wondering why the National Choir only got paid
160 lei. Every single reaction tells part of
the story. Yeah. You really can't understand
the event without looking at the people who weren't
allowed there just as much as the people who
were. Before we wrap up, I want to leave you
with something to really mull over. We talked
about that vote by a show of hands. The declared
unanimity. Right. And here's the question I want
to leave hanging for you. In a modern democracy,
what is the true measure of a mandate? Is it
the quiet, messy, often disappointing process
of checking boxes on a ballot paper? Or is it
the overwhelming visual of a packed square declaring
unanimity while the dissenters are legally blocked
at the city gates? And what happens when the
next government, maybe one with completely different
values, uses this exact same soft power playbook?
If you legitimize a show of hands in a curated
square as the ultimate democratic mandate, you
might just be handing a very powerful, very dangerous
tool to whoever holds the microphone next. It
is a profound question of legitimacy versus optics.
The rally provided the optics. The elections
provide the legitimacy. But history is very often
written by the people with the best optics. A
truly fascinating tension. That is all for this
deep dive into the European Moldova National
Assembly. Thanks for unpacking all these sources
with me. Always a pleasure to dig into it. And
thank you for joining us. We will catch you on
the next deep dive.