Conţinutul numărului revistei |
Articolul precedent |
Articolul urmator |
831 1 |
Ultima descărcare din IBN: 2016-03-17 22:12 |
SM ISO690:2012 МОШНЯГА, Валериу, ЗАВТУР, Клаудия, РУСНАК, Георгий, ЦУРКАНУ, Валентин. Президентские (2005) выборы в Молдове: специфика, стратегии, результаты
. In: Moldoscopie, 2006, nr. 1(32), pp. 73-91. ISSN 1812-2566. |
EXPORT metadate: Google Scholar Crossref CERIF DataCite Dublin Core |
Moldoscopie | |||||
Numărul 1(32) / 2006 / ISSN 1812-2566 /ISSNe 2587-4063 | |||||
|
|||||
Pag. 73-91 | |||||
|
|||||
Descarcă PDF | |||||
Rezumat | |||||
This article speaks about the specificity, strategy and results of the Presidential
elections (2005) in the Republic of Moldova. The specificity of presidential
election (2005) consists in the fact that they were the second election
on the history of the country when the president was elected not by the people of the country, but by the Parliament. For the first time, the President has applied
for the second term. Elections were greatly influenced by the Parliamentary
Elections (2005) held one month and a half before. This proved in
an active interaction of international actors, attempts to use the electoral revolutionary
scenarios to win.
The article analyses electoral strategies of the Governing party, of the
“constructive” and “destructive” opposition used juts before the presidential
elections; the main reasons of the accomplishment / non-accomplishment of
actions of each Moldovan political actor of involved in the Presidential Elections
are discussed as well. Governing party had a correct and differentiated
strategy in elections, it supported the candidate well known and highly rated
in the country, the President V.Voronin. The party had an active collaboration
with international actors who helped in building a constructive dialogue,
overcoming personal discontent between the governing party and the “constructive”
opposition.
The “constructive” opposition (CDPM, SLP, DPM) proved a consequential
attitude the protection of Moldovan political opposition’s interests, combining
the interests of the country with the ones of their parties; they coordinated
their voting with conditions to be fulfilled by the governing party. The
fulfillment of these conditions shall enhance the consolidation of democratic
rules and traditions in Moldova.
The strategy of “obstructive” opposition was not consequent, contradictory,
greatly conditioned by the lack of political experience of leader S.Urechean.
The “obstructive” opposition trended to combine in its political maneuvers
the tactics of “conditions” and outside Parliament methods of fight
by non-allowing the election of V.Voronin for the second Presidential term.
However, unlike the Governing party and the “constructive” opposition, the
“destructive” opposition failed to achieve envisaged results.
The Presidential elections proved the growth of the Moldovan political
elite, it proves ability towards political dialogue and consensus. Although, so
far with the support of international political actors. |
|||||
|