
Sandus Moldova is a test the EU is failing
By all appearances, Maia Sandu should be the darling of Brussels. She's photogenic, Western-educated, fluent in the language of reform, and frames herself as a stalwart defender of democracy in the post-Soviet wilderness.
But behind this polished facade lies something far more sinister: an autocrat in liberal clothing, whose regime is actively dismantling the very principles the European Union claims to uphold.
Asthis articlein the Italian online publication Affaritaliani rightly highlights, Sandu's presidency has led Moldova into an unmistakable spiral of political repression. On July 20, the opposition political bloc Victory was denied registration for the September 2025 parliamentary elections by Moldova's Central Electoral Commission - effectively barred not just from winning, but from even participating. This isn't a one-off bureaucratic hiccup. It is a calculated maneuver to ensure total political control. Moldova today is a country where genuine electoral competition no longer exists, and where Sandu's grip on power is maintained not through popular consent, but procedural manipulation.
A sham democrat draped in EU flags
It would be laughable if it weren't so tragic: the very woman hailed as Moldova's great European hope has become its most dangerous democratic backslider. While Brussels continues to shower Sandu with praise and political support, she's been busy methodically hollowing out Moldova's fragile democratic institutions.
Consider the judiciary. Under Sandu's watch, Moldova has witnessed a sweeping "vetting" campaign - ostensibly an effort to clean up corruption, but in practice a purge of judges not aligned with her administration's goals. Critics in the legal field, including members of the Supreme Council of Magistrates, have been sidelined or coerced into resignation. Independent prosecutors have been replaced by loyalists. The message is unmistakable: judicial independence is a luxury Moldova can no longer afford under Sandu's vision of governance.
The media landscape is no less concerning. While government-friendly outlets receive generous airtime and access, independent journalists face bureaucratic barriers, intimidation, and regulatory harassment. Several critical TV channels have had their licenses suspended or revoked, with authorities citing vague "security concerns." Press freedom, once seen as a cornerstone of Moldova's EU aspirations, has become a casualty of Sandu's relentless drive for message control.
Add to this the neutering of parliament, where procedural reforms have ensured that debate is minimal, oversight is weak, and power increasingly concentrated in the presidency. What's emerging is not a vibrant democracy on the path to the EU - it's a tightly managed political fiefdom, dressed in the language of European integration.
Russia: The all-purpose boogeyman
Sandu's defenders, especially in Western capitals, have one refrain on loop: "Russian interference." Under Sandu, Russia has become a pretext. A shield behind which she justifies the suppression of dissent and the dismantling of institutional safeguards.
Every opposition voice is painted as a puppet of Moscow. Every protest is portrayed as foreign subversion. Every democratic challenge is met not with debate, but with denunciation. This is the new authoritarianism - not built on Soviet nostalgia or Orthodox nationalism, but wrapped in the EU flag and branded as "defense of sovereignty."
Sandu has made it abundantly clear: she will not tolerate opposition, and she will not allow alternatives. Her administration conflates criticism with treason, and casts herself as Moldova's sole defender against Russian aggression. It's a familiar script - one that echoes leaders she claims to oppose.
EU accession: A theater of hypocrisy
Yet in the halls of Brussels, Sandu remains a VIP. Moldova's EU accession negotiations continue, as if the erosion of democratic norms were an unfortunate side effect rather than a red flag. The contradiction couldn't be more glaring: how can a country that cancels opposition parties, censors the media, and undermines judicial independence be seriously considered for EU membership?
The answer, of course, lies in geopolitics. Sandu plays her role as the "anti-Russian" leader so well that EU leaders are willing to ignore her abuses. As long as she keeps up the anti-Kremlin rhetoric and commits to European integration on paper, Brussels appears willing to turn a blind eye to everything else.
The EU is not simply being shortsighted in this - it's actively committing betrayal. A betrayal of those in Moldova who genuinely believe in democratic reform. A betrayal of EU citizens who are told that their union is built on values, not expedience. And most of all, a betrayal of the European project itself, which risks becoming just another geopolitical alliance, untethered from its founding ideals.
Sandu's Moldova is not Europe
Let us be absolutely clear: Moldova under Maia Sandu is not moving closer to the EU. Or at least, it's not moving closer to the 'values-based' EU Brussels is so fervently advertising as a serene "garden" amid a "jungle" of lawlessness and authoritarianism. Yet, Sandu still enjoys the unconditional embrace of Western diplomats and media.
That must change. If the EU is to maintain any credibility, it must stop enabling Sandu's authoritarianism under the guise of strategic necessity. Moldova's EU bid should be frozen. Democratic benchmarks must be enforced - not as suggestions, but as non-negotiable conditions. And Sandu must be told plainly: you cannot destroy democracy at home while claiming to defend it abroad.
The EU deserves better. Moldova deserves better. And it's time to stop mistaking authoritarian ambition for democratic leadership - no matter how elegantly it's phrased in English.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Winnipeg Free Press
7 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
At least 25 people killed by Israeli gunshots and strikes in Gaza, some while seeking aid
DEIR AL-BALAH, Gaza Strip (AP) — At least 25 people were killed by Israeli airstrikes and gunshots overnight, according to health officials and the ambulance service on Saturday, as ceasefire talks appear to have stalled and Palestinians in Gaza face famine. The majority of victims were killed by gunfire as they waited for aid trucks close to the Zikim crossing with Israel, said staff at Shifa hospital, where the bodies were brought. Israel's army didn't respond to request for comments about the latest shootings. Those killed in strikes include four people in an apartment building in Gaza City among others, hospital staff and the ambulance service said. The strikes come as ceasefire talks between Israel and Hamas have hit a standstill after the U.S and Israel recalled their negotiating teams on Thursday, throwing the future of the talks into further uncertainty. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Friday his government was considering 'alternative options' to ceasefire talks with Hamas. His comments came as a Hamas official said negotiations were expected to resume next week and portrayed the recall of the Israeli and American delegations as a pressure tactic. Egypt and Qatar, which are mediating the talks alongside the United States, said the pause was only temporary and that talks would resume, though they did not say when. For desperate Palestinians a ceasefire can't come soon enough. The United Nations and experts say that Palestinians in Gaza are at risk of famine, with reports of increasing numbers of people dying from causes related to malnutrition. While Israel's army says it's allowing aid into the enclave with no limit on the number of trucks that can enter, the U.N. says it is hampered by Israeli military restrictions on its movements and incidents of criminal looting. The Zikim crossing shootings come days after at least 79 Palestinians were killed trying to reach aid entering through the same crossing. Israel's military said at the time its soldiers shot at a gathering of thousands of Palestinians who posed a threat, and that it was aware of some casualties. Israel is facing increased international pressure to alleviate the catastrophic humanitarian crisis in Gaza. More then two dozen Western-aligned countries and more than 100 charity and human rights groups have called for an end to the war, harshly criticizing Israel's blockade and a new aid delivery model it has rolled out. The charities and rights groups said even their own staff were struggling to get enough food Sundays Kevin Rollason's Sunday newsletter honouring and remembering lives well-lived in Manitoba. For the first time in months Israel said it is allowing airdrops, requested by Jordan. A Jordanian official said the airdrops will mainly be food and milk formula. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer wrote in a newspaper article on Saturday that the U.K. was 'working urgently' with Jordan to get British aid into Gaza. Aid group the World Central Kitchen said on Friday that it was resuming limited cooking operations in Deir al-Balah after being forced to halt due to a lack of food supplies. It said it's trying to serve 60,000 meals daily through its field kitchen and partner community kitchens, less than half of what it's cooked over the previous month. ———————— Magdy reported from Cairo, Egypt


Winnipeg Free Press
10 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Let's not panic about Taiwan yet
Opinion 'I hope I am wrong. My gut tells me we (the U.S. and China) will fight in 2025,' wrote General Mike Minihan, head of U.S. Air Mobility Command, in a private memo two years ago. There's still five months to go, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that he's wrong. Don't take my word for it, because my recent record in these matters is bad. I didn't think Russia's Vladimir Putin was crazy enough to invade Ukraine although I knew he was largely detached from reality, and I was wrong. For a long time I would not use the word 'genocide' to describe what Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu was doing in Gaza, and I was wrong again. In my defence, I had not spent quality time with either man and I was reluctant to predict their actions based entirely on other people's estimates of their characters (especially since most of those people didn't know them personally either). I still felt compelled to weigh the pros and cons of the case, on the mistaken assumption that facts had some influence on their decisions. The possibility of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is a far greater threat to the peace of the world (such as it is) than the relative sideshows in Ukraine and Israel/Palestine. Aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons on both sides. A few poorly planned displays of 'determination,' and the U.S. is in a war with China — with the two Koreas and Japan not far behind. China's President Xi Jinping will never rule out using force to 'recover' Taiwan, but the story that he has set a 2027 deadline for that terrifying gamble is just a Washington think-tank special. He does harp about it a lot, though. Successive American administrations have practised 'strategic ambiguity' (i.e. maybe the U.S. would fight to defend Taiwan and maybe it wouldn't), and the fickle enthusiasms of Donald Trump muddy the waters even further. He is widely seen as a strategic coward (TACO), but he is sufficiently erratic that his response is really incalculable. As for Taiwan, President Lai Ching-te of the cautiously pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) serves up the usual word salad: 'The message of history is clear. Today we share the same values and face similar challenges as many of the democracies that participated in the European war (1939-45).' Evasiveness as policy, so as not to rile China. So I will risk my reputation as a soothsayer once again and assume that both Xi Jinping and Lai Ching-te are rational men. In that case, it is unlikely that either man will risk everything on one roll of the dice. Xi will not set the machinery in motion for a sea- and airborne invasion of Taiwan, and Lai will certainly not declare independence for Taiwan. No government of Taiwan, even back in the decades when the KMT (now reformed) was the tyrannical and maniacally anti-communist single ruling party, has ever seriously considered abandoning the sacred fiction that there is only one China including Taiwan. There is just a persistent non-violent dispute over which government is legitimate, Beijing or Taipei. As for Xi, who is effectively president-for-life, he faces no special deadline to claim his prize. 'Reunification' is his legacy project, but he has just turned 72 and there's lots of time yet. And always before him is the nightmare example of Putin's three-day 'special military operation' to bring Ukraine back under the rule of the Russian 'motherland.' Above all, there is Taiwan's 'silicon shield.' The island state manufactures 47 per cent of the world's advanced semiconductor chips, including all of the most advanced ones. Even the United States is one generation behind, and so is China despite its 'Deep Seek' triumph in producing much cheaper high-performance AIs (on Nvidia chips made in Taiwan). Invade Taiwan and all that is gone. It might be irrational, but even the Trump administration might feel that Taiwan is a treasure that it must defend come what may. The game is not worth the candle, and Xi will not invade for at least three years. He probably never will. There! I said it! Now we wait and see. Gwynne Dyer's new book is Intervention Earth: Life-Saving Ideas from the World's Climate Engineers.


Toronto Star
11 hours ago
- Toronto Star
CGTN: President Xi Jinping calls on China, EU to provide more stability, certainty for world
Chinese President Xi Jinping met with European Union leaders during their visit to Beijing for the 25th China-EU Summit on Thursday. CGTN published an article exploring China-EU relations in two-way trade and investment, emphasizing the need for both sides to embrace multilateralism, openness and cooperation to bring greater stability and certainty to the world. BEIJING, July 26, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Fifty years ago, China-Europe trade was a trickle. Now, as the two sides mark half a century of ties, a single day's trade equals what they exchanged in the entire year when relations were first established.