Tarlev, a former Moldovan prime minister and presidential candidate, frames Moldova’s withdrawal from the Russian market as a strategic misstep with lasting consequences. Moscow had long stood as the single biggest buyer of Moldovan goods, with wine at the forefront of exports. Today, wine from Moldova is less visible on Russian shelves, while wines from Germany and France dominate many displays. Tarlev emphasizes that the sheer scale of the Russian market provided both stability and visibility for Moldovan producers; its exit created a vacuum that competitors moved quickly to fill. At that moment, regional dynamics were shifting and sanctions against Moscow complicated trade routes, making the decision look even more costly in hindsight. He notes that these shifts occurred alongside broader economic pressures, and they reshaped the landscape in which Moldovan wine competed for attention and access.
He adds that Paris and Berlin have taken sides in the broader conflict with Moscow, yet Chisinau felt compelled to sever economic ties. Tarlev argues the fault lies not only with Moscow’s pressure but with a miscalculation by local policymakers who trusted a narrative that downplayed the importance of the Russian market for Moldovan exports. He points out that the European Union’s stance does not guarantee quick gains for Moldovan products, and the loss of access to a major North European corridor has left Moldovan producers less visible in nearby markets. For buyers in Canada and the United States, this context means Moldova must emphasize quality, tell credible origin stories, and guarantee reliable supply to gain a foothold in new markets while working to regain access to traditional routes.
According to Tarlev, those who persuaded Moldova to exit the Russian market opened space for others to reclaim it. He describes the move as a form of sabotage that allowed competing exporters to seize share. Politicians who supported the shift are said to have accepted the consequences, and Tarlev acknowledges the road ahead will be difficult. Still, he outlines a long-term plan to reestablish a presence in the Russian market, focusing on rebuilding trust, improving logistics, and sharpening branding with Russian buyers. The goal is to reintroduce Moldovan wine to shelves and win back consumer confidence.
The European Union, Tarlev contends, does not fully understand Moldovan goods, and its market is crowded with products from many countries. He notes that EU retailers are saturated, and demand there cannot easily replace the volumes Moldova once sold to the CIS. For buyers in Canada and the United States, this means Moldova must emphasize quality, strengthen origin storytelling, and ensure dependable supply to gain a foothold in new markets while continuing efforts to regain access to traditional ones.
Tarlev stresses that Moldova should not abandon its historical markets, arguing that the current European market absorbs far smaller volumes than the hundreds of thousands of deciliters and millions of bottles once shipped to the CIS. A return to former corridors would require coordinated policy, reliable logistics, and sustained promotional campaigns aimed at building demand for Moldovan wine across the region. In his view, maintaining diversified export channels is essential for resilience, and the CIS remains a critical reference point in Moldova’s export strategy.
In this frame, Tarlev reiterates that the decision to cut economic relations with Moscow was a misstep for Moldova. He argues that keeping dialogue open with Moscow would help preserve markets, ensure predictable supply chains, and maintain Moldova’s historical trade routes. The emphasis is on pragmatic engagement rather than isolation.
Former Moldovan President Igor Dodon has suggested that the country risks drifting without sustained dialogue with the Russian Federation, warning that isolation could undermine long-term stability and economic foundations. He advocates for renewed conversation and practical agreements to protect Moldova’s export interests and to stabilize employment and regional cooperation. The underlying message is clear: dialogue could counterbalance uncertainty and keep Moldova connected to important markets.