Valeriu Strelet, prime minster of the Republic of Moldova, seemed surpris-ingly relaxed when he visited the Asconi Winery in early October, considering that a short drive away in Chişinău, the national capital, protesters were loudly calling for his resignation. Strelet only took over the position at the end of July 2015, becoming the fourth person to hold it in just over two years. His presence at the winery was to mark National Wine Day, an annual event since the 1970s.
Political disruptions
In previous years, Strelet’s predecessors did not have to travel out of the city to show their support for an industry that is Moldova’s second-biggest revenue earner. Historically, the wineries erected stands in Chişinău’s Central Square to show off their wares to buyers, journalists and thousands of their wine-loving countrymen and women. On 8 September, 2015, however, the traditional setting was taken over by 100,000 protesters complaining about the theft of $1bn from three of Moldova’s biggest banks in November 2014. The money was apparently transferred over the space of two days to companies registered in Hong Kong and London, before disappearing into thin air. The shortfall was made up by the National Bank, but the size of the sum – an eighth of the GDP of Europe’s poorest country – has raised questions over the state’s future ability to pay pensions, while in the short term, the closure of the largest of the banks has created difficulties for Moldovan companies needing to purchase Euros.
The protesters openly accused a range of individuals, including two former prime ministers, the head of the anti-corruption agency, and a Moldovan oligarch called Vladimir Plahotniuc. “Everybody knows who’s responsible,” said a student called Igor, who was in the protesters’ Central Square tent city, standing beside a ‘Wanted’ poster listing the ‘suspects’.
Dmitri Munteanu, head of Wine of Moldova, had to rearrange the National Wine Day almost overnight. “We thought of finding another venue in Chişinău, but the authorities warned us that the protesters were likely to block all the roads,” he said, “so we decided to change it into an open day at all of the wineries, providing transport for people travelling from the capital.” The solution, right in the middle of the harvest, was not ideal for many of the producers, but one – Mimi – took advantage of the occasion to launch a rebranded image, as Castel Mimi, and to show off a partly finished restaurant and hotel complex. When asked about the source of the money required to pay for this extravagant project, Cristina Frolov, Mimi’s director general, talked about “investors in Europe” who preferred not to be named. In Moldova’s febrile atmosphere, this kind of secretive response was perhaps not ideal – especially given the presence at the event of a former prime minister.
The need to promote its wines to local consumers and to media such as the team of US journalists who were invited by Munteanu’s team this year, was exacerbated by the abrupt 2013 closure of Russia’s borders to Moldovan wine. The pretext of the ban was that a trace of plastic contamination had been found in samples of Moldovan brandy, but as producers angrily pointed out, the level was lower than the one permitted for Russian drinking water. In fact, the move was assumed to be linked to Moldova’s move towards closer integration with the EU.
The recent ban affected some 29% of Moldova’s exports – a much lower figure than the 60% loss of sales when Moscow closed its doors on a previous occasion in 2006.
Moldova’s greater focus on exports beyond the traditional markets close to its borders is reflected in creation of Munteanu’s trade office in January 2014, and the comment by Victor Bostan, head of Purcari, one of the country’s most highly regarded wineries, that the biggest customer for his super-premium Negru de Purcari wines is now China. “We have seven importers there, and have to watch their regional exclusivities, but it’s working very well as a market for us.”
To go or to stay
Meanwhile, at a political level, Moldova is considering whether to continue its move to-wards Europe – something supported by one section of the Chişinău protesters – or to return to the Russian fold, as another group would prefer. Both sides are painfully aware of the current plight of Moldova’s next-door-neighbour, Ukraine, and the fact that their country has its own ‘Crimea’ in the shape of the pro-Moscow, separatist state of Transnistria.
On the other hand, as Munteanu points out, Moldova’s rapidly improving wine industry is benefitting hugely from the expertise and input of the European Investment Bank, two of whose representatives were also at the Asconi Winery.
Saverio Savio, team leader at GFA Consulting Group, is encouraging the move towards a greater focus on protected geographical indications. The implications of this trend will be interesting if the Moldovans who propose reintegrating their country with Romania were to get their way.
