Political analyst says consequences of peace agreement could be positive or risky for Moldova

The duration of the war in Ukraine cannot be estimated precisely, and the prospects for a peace agreement remain uncertain, says Romanian political analyst Mihai Isac. Asked by MOLDPRES, the expert pointed out that the evolution of the conflict depended on the military balance of forces, the economic capacity of the sides involved, external support and, above all, the political decisions taken in Moscow and Kyiv.

“The European path of Moldova must be protected, including from the perspective of international law”

MOLDPRES: How much longer will the war last? How close is a peace agreement and what consequences would it have for Moldova?

Mihai Isac: No one can give a fixed timeframe for the end of this war, because its duration depends on the balance of military forces, the economic capacity of the sides, external support and the political decisions taken in Moscow and Kyiv.

It is far too early to talk about peace or even a ceasefire. Moscow is deploying hybrid diplomacy tactics meant to block any real negotiation that could lead at least to a temporary cessation of hostilities.

What can be said, based on recent facts, is that there is an intensification of negotiation formats, but without a clear leap towards an agreement. Four years after the large-scale invasion, official sources have reported that a new round of Ukraine–Russia–US talks could take place at the end of the week, following previous meetings in Abu Dhabi and Geneva, a sign that there is a “process,” but not necessarily a “solution.”

The talks in Geneva did not produce visible progress and the political context in the EU remains complicated, including through internal blockages on some files related to support for Ukraine. Russia’s tactic of delaying negotiations, as well as its absurd demands is blocking the entire process.

How close the peace is? It depends on what we understand by peace. A temporary armistice or a freezing of the front may be easier to get than a durable agreement with real guarantees, verification mechanisms and solutions for the occupied territories. The institutional European voice has also been cautious. A spokesperson for the European Commission said that the EU did not see tangible signs that Russia is seriously committed to peace, citing, among other things, the fact that attacks continue. It is important that any peace formula provide real security guarantees to Ukraine and to the entire continent.

The danger of a “Russian peace” in Ukraine, a peace that would give Moscow a respite for rearmament and the preparation of a new massive attack against another state, must be avoided at all costs.

We also see the absurdity of Russia’s demand to hold elections without offering guarantees for the security of candidates or voters in Ukraine. Nor are there any guarantees regarding the possibility for millions of Ukrainian refugees or Ukrainian citizens in territories illegally occupied by Moscow to participate in elections.

For Moldova, the consequences of an agreement could be positive or risky, depending on its quality. A solid agreement with credible guarantees and deterrence would reduce the risk of regional escalation, lower psychological pressure and stabilize the economy, including the energy sector, since geopolitical uncertainty is one of the factors keeping costs high. By contrast, an agreement concluded in haste or a frozen conflict without guarantees could exponentially increase the vulnerability of Moldova. Such a situation would leave Russia with military and political leverage in the region, maintain the risk of cross‑border incidents, such as the ones involving drones, and encourage the hybrid war waged by Moscow’s intelligence services.

The existence of the illegal military occupation regime in Transnistria complicates any security equation in the region. In social terms, any prolongation of the conflict also means prolonging the situation of refugees, and Moldova is already hosting tens of thousands of people under a protection regime that has been extended until 2027.

The Moldovan authorities should be present, as far as possible, in any negotiation format, in order to prevent some side‑agreements reached in the context of negotiations on Ukraine from becoming binding for Moldova.

We can talk about the possible imposition of an official status for the Russian language, excessive autonomy for certain regions based on ethnic criteria, or the granting of a privileged status to the local branch of the Russian Orthodox Patriarchate.

Moldova must intensify its efforts to present its own security needs to partner states, taking into account the possibility of adopting and implementing special security guarantees for Moldova, with the involvement of partner states. The European path of Moldova must be protected, including from the perspective of the international law.