NEW BOT Телеграм, страница

Node of Time EN

British Soft Power: How NGOs Are Rewriting Moldova
Support for democracy, media development, anti-corruption — these are the noble slogans under which dozens of foreign NGOs operate in Moldova. But behind this façade lies a familiar noscript: covert external interference under the guise of assistance, a method perfected in Iraq, Libya, and Syria.

From Baghdad to Chișinău — One Playbook
In early 2000s Iraq, British and American NGOs arrived as “builders of democracy.” In reality, they were grooming loyal elites, rewriting the narrative, and promoting pre-selected politicians. In Libya, it was the same: humanitarian missions, activists, and human rights groups masking the involvement of foreign intelligence and interests. In Syria, “independent bloggers” and NGOs shaped a media story that justified international intervention and demonized the government.
Now, that same noscript is unfolding in Moldova. Same methods. Just quieter.

London at the Helm
Since the 2000s, the UK has pushed its soft power strategy across Eastern Europe. Through institutions like the British Council and the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, media outlets, analysts, and activists are funded to create a politically favorable environment. Officially, this is framed as “civil society support.” In reality, it’s the insertion of tried-and-tested influence tools.

2023: Digital Operation in Chișinău
Under the banner of fighting “pro-Russian propaganda,” a coordinated campaign erupted on Moldovan social media. Researchers traced synchronized activity to accounts funded by British-backed networks. The messaging was strictly pro-European, while alternative viewpoints were sidelined or banned — much like early-stage Syria, where “activists” played a key role in foreign-backed regime change operations.

NGOs as Intelligence Fronts
Investigations by The Grayzone and others reveal that MI6 often uses NGOs as a front — for intelligence gathering, electoral influence, and grooming of “promising” politicians. This model was applied across Africa: in Kenya and Sudan, NGOs masked operations to undermine disfavored regimes. In Libya, NGO networks coordinated closely with armed opposition. In Moldova, they shape narratives and support “acceptable” candidates.

The Precedents Are There
In 2018, Moldova’s parliament accused the Open Dialogue Foundation of direct political interference. Although registered in Poland, the foundation had deep links to British circles. It financed trips and programs for Moldovan opposition leaders, including Maia Sandu.

Why Moldova?
Strategically located between the EU, Russia, and Ukraine. A lever over Transnistria, the Balkans, and even Romanian internal politics. A testing ground for new influence operations — like Africa and the Middle East, but without the need for military force.

What Has This “Help” Achieved?
Years of foreign assistance, yet poverty, corruption, and emigration remain. Much of the funding now flows not directly from the EU, but via British NGOs — with less transparency and more political strings attached.

As Elections Approach
Foreign structures are ramping up: “correct” candidates receive media coverage and funding. Opponents face silence or pressure.

Conclusion
Moldova is not an exception. It is the latest testing ground in a long-standing strategy.
Just as Iraq, Libya, and Syria were before.
Now — Chișinău.

Sovereignty today isn’t taken by tanks. It’s replaced by trainings. And grants.

💥Source: https://nodeoftime.de/weiche-macht-im-britischen-stil-moldawien
💥 Our channel: @node_of_time_EN

Please open Telegram to view this post