Minister of Defense of the Republic of Moldova invited to the DECODIFICAT podcast
The Minister of Defense of the Republic of Moldova, Anatolie Nosatîi, was the guest of the second edition of the DECODIFICAT podcast. Several current topics were discussed during the podcast. Here is a brief overview of the topics and statements made by the guest.
What does the Ministry of Defense do and what are its responsibilities? The Ministry of Defense is the basic structure responsible for building and developing the national defense system. It is the structure responsible for developing policies in the field of security and military defense. At the same time, it is the structure that coordinates and monitors the development of the national army to fulfill its basic missions.
About the current priorities of the national army and how these priorities are set: The basic mission of the national army is to ensure the integrity of state sovereignty. In other words, it is to prepare for the defense of the Republic of Moldova. The preparation process is one that must continue permanently, and it is not possible to expect results in a short period of time if this preparation has not been given the attention it deserves.
The needs arise primarily from an analysis of the security environment and an analysis of military risks and threats to national security.
About the low spirit of patriotism and the small percentage of those who would be willing to take up arms and defend the country in the event of a potential military aggression/war: We must draw attention to this issue and work harder to prepare society to understand the responsibility of defense and security, and to understand that it is not only certain structures that are responsible for this, but that it is the responsibility of society as a whole.
What are the major military risks we are currently facing and need to respond to, and where can we find a description of the risks, solutions, and responses to these risks? Everyone is focusing on and wants to emphasize the recent period, which I do not think is entirely correct. In terms of military security, the Republic of Moldova has always had risks and vulnerabilities that, at different times, have been addressed differently, but we, those in the system, have always focused on the basic mission of preparing for the defense of the state. The obvious risk is the existence of a separatist territory in the Republic of Moldova, which has a militarized structure and, in addition, Russian Federation forces are deployed on this territory.
I would suggest that citizens consult the relevant policy documents, namely the national security strategy, the military strategy, and the national defense strategy, which clearly identify the risks, vulnerabilities, and priorities for development.
Why do we need a new national security strategy? Strategic documents usually cover a period of 5-7 years. The strategy we have in place dates back to 2011 and is clearly outdated. At the same time, it has been overtaken by changes in the security environment in the region, and it is now imperative to review and adjust it to the risks and threats to national security. At the same time, the new strategy will clearly identify the priorities for ensuring a security climate that would allow the Republic of Moldova to advance in its strategic areas, such as European integration, economic development, ensuring a secure environment, and others that are necessary for a democratic society.
Should defense institutions be more transparent or not? This is a problem, and I believe that over the years, it has indeed made the defense sector a little more closed and has meant that people are not well informed, resulting in manipulation and false narratives. But we are striving to correct this. National legislation on state secrecy says that we should not disclose many details, but it does not prohibit us from providing general information about what we do, our priorities, and our general needs, so that people know why, for example, the government is increasing the defense budget this year, etc. Since the beginning of my term, I have set out to draw more attention to this issue.
Given the current regional security environment (the war in Ukraine), is neutrality still functional? If so, why do you think it is functional? If not, what could we do to strengthen it, or what would be the best way to ensure our security? The principle of neutrality generally sounds good, but the question is whether it is respected and recognized. Unfortunately, recent examples show us that the international security environment has changed significantly. Even those countries with a neutrality that was introduced much earlier than ours. In the context of changes in the security environment and indirectly, we are talking about the war in Ukraine launched by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, which was again a neutral state, and here I want to refer to countries such as Sweden and Finland, which have revised their neutrality and whose citizens have voted to change this status, which was approved much earlier, as I said, and which had a much more developed national defense system than ours. It is important to understand that if you are neutral, then you are solely responsible for changes in the situation, which means that you must ensure a security environment in which citizens can be sure of their defense.
Our neutral status does not prevent us from having partners or collaborating with international organizations and institutions. On the contrary, it compels us to be more active and to establish more partnerships that would enable the development of a national defense system, allowing us to have credible defense capabilities and be prepared for any challenges.
On the role of partnerships in the development of defense institutions: We have very advanced partnerships with strategic partners, and here I would refer primarily to our neighbors, Romania and Ukraine. Similarly, I would like to emphasize our strategic cooperation with the United States, our cooperation with Italy, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Greece, etc. Basically, we cooperate with all countries in Europe and overseas that want to help us modernize our national defense system. At the same time, we respect our basic principles. The areas of cooperation relate to the exchange of experience and, secondly, to training and military education; these are the basic principles. But cooperation also involves the technical and material field. And when we talk about technical and material, we mean a broader spectrum that refers to the equipment that the military needs to carry out its mission. Clearly, this includes weapons and technology, protective equipment and devices, radio stations, everything the military needs to carry out its mission.
How do we cooperate with international organizations and what does this cooperation consist of? I believe that cooperation with organizations is more difficult, because it is one thing to say that you want something and another to demonstrate that you need that something. When we talk about an organization, we must understand that in order for the request to be accepted, all member countries, alliances, or organizations must agree. They have to vote for it and they have to contribute something. That’s why if there is no clear motivation for what you need, then you won’t get it.
Participation in peacekeeping or peacekeeping missions: necessity or opportunity: The opportunity for military and civilian personnel from the Ministry of Defense and the National Army to participate in various international activities is an opportunity to exchange experiences. It is an opportunity to learn something new and to implement it in the institutions/units to which the military belongs. There are many things that the military in our country cannot train for, such as amphibious operations, the extensive use of helicopters, or landing from different types of aircraft. What we can do is limited to our country, but by participating in various international exercises, military personnel can clearly train in these exercises. But most importantly, they can get to know military personnel from other countries and learn from their experience. At the same time, they have the opportunity to be messengers for our country, the Republic of Moldova.
The Constitutional Court clearly stated that the participation of military personnel in international training and missions does not contradict the principle of neutrality; on the contrary, it recommends using all mechanisms to ensure security.
Regarding the defense budget: unfortunately, financial allocations over the years have been quite limited. Historically, budgetary provisions have been limited to 0.3% of gross domestic product, which has only allowed for maintenance, but not development. The government has made every effort, despite all the problems currently facing society, to identify sources to increase financial allocations for 2023. I know that many are speculating about why, for what, in favor, against, and so on. I don’t want to get into a lot of discussions, but we have to look at the news coming out of Ukraine, and I think the answer must be clear: we must invest in security.
The budget allocated in 2023 is approximately 0.55% of gross domestic product. It is not enough, but it is a considerable allocation, which will allow changes to begin. I would like to mention that this allocation is planned in the medium-term budget, which means that this focus will continue for at least the next three years. As I mentioned, this will allow us to start equipment modernization programs that will be based on our own money.