For more than three decades, the Transnistrian conflict has condemned both banks of the Nistru River, and especially the left bank, to economic and social underdevelopment, to a low standard of living, to flawed fundamental freedoms, to a lack of social cohesion and to international isolation, from which, it seems, there is still no way out. Under these conditions, the name “cursed” conflict is accurately appropriate for the essence of the frozen conflict on the banks of the Nistru and also for all the other conflicts of the same kind. The participants in IPN’s public debate “Curse of Frozen Conflicts and their Solutions” discussed the phenomenon of frozen conflicts in the post-Soviet space as a whole, as well as the general causes, common features, and ways of solving them.
Igor Boţan, the permanent expert of IPN’s project, said that a frozen conflict represents a situation in which an active armed conflict ended, but can return to the “hot” phase again. “A frozen conflict in international relations between recognized state entities is a conflict in which active hostilities ended, but a peace treaty has not been concluded. In the recent past, the term “frozen conflict” has been applied mainly to post-Soviet separatist conflicts, usually territorial disputes within a specific state,” explained the expert.
According to him, such conflicts usually occur in particular areas of countries with certain specificity, which are no longer under the control of central governments. Although the disputes remain unresolved, the lack of solutions to these problems does not lead to an increase in armed activity. “This situation weakens the position of the central authorities and, at the same time, encourages other states that support the separatists to get involved in their affairs directly or indirectly. In this regard, the frozen conflicts in the post-Soviet space are a result of the foreign policy interests pursued by the Russian Federation after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991,” said Igor Boțan.
Political commentator Anatol Țăranu, a doctor of history, said that according to experts’ estimates, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, more than 170 conflict zones were registered in this space. These are latent or very active conflicts. Thirty conflicts had an active form and ten conflicts reached the state of military confrontations. Among the most recognized conflicts that have gone through a hot phase, there is certainly the Transnistrian conflict, but also the conflict in Crimea, which initially had a latent form, but reached a hot phase in the context of today’s war in Ukraine
Moldova’s former ambassador to the Russian Federation referred to the way the conflicts in the Caucasus arose and what were the main causes of the outbreak. “The Abkhazian conflict took real shape during the Soviet period, more precisely at the time of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. It was the moment when the Georgians’ desire to create their own independent state met with resistance from the Abkhazians to create their own state. Under these conditions, the hot conflict broke out, which continues to this day and caused numerous victims. More than 16,000 people died in the Georgian-Abkhaz war. And this conflict continues today because Russia has recognized Abkhazia as an independent state. This is despite the fact that Abkhazia is no longer recognized in such a form by any state,” stated the commentator
Former Deputy Prime Minister for Reintegration Gheorghe Bălan, a security expert, said that the Transnistrian conflict differs significantly from other conflicts in the post-Soviet space, although there are also common features. What makes it special is that on both banks of the Nistru there are the same ethnic groups – Moldovans-Romanians, Russians, Ukrainians. Respectively, this conflict is not based on an ethnic or religious component as mostly Orthodox Christians live on both banks. Also, there were no historical misunderstandings between the banks.
According to the expert, this conflict took shape during the dissolution of the Soviet Union and in the context of Russian authorities’ attempts to keep the Republic of Moldova in their sphere of interests. The reasons for the appearance of the conflict were external and the support for the separatist movement also came from outside, initially from the central authorities of the USSR, later from the Russian Federation, which supported and supports to this day the maintenance of frozen conflicts in the post-Soviet space.
In 1992, there were military confrontations between the banks of the Nistru. There were attempts to influence and get involved in the politics of the Republic of Moldova. Then and in all these years, the people from both banks have experienced no problems of coexistence. “Today, tens of thousands of people move from one shore to another. Thousands of inhabitants of the Transnistrian region work on the right bank of the Nistru and 360,000 inhabitants of the region hold the citizenship of the Republic of Moldova. Unlike other conflicts, in our case there is no ethnic, religious component. The people can coexist and the idea of European integration will contribute to bringing the banks closer and to identifying compromises in the interest of the citizens from both banks of the Nistru and their children,” said the ex-Deputy Prime Minister for Reintegration.
The public debate entitled “Curse of Frozen Conflicts and their Solutions” was the 312th installment the project “Developing Political Culture through Public Debates”, which is implemented by IPN News Agency with support from the Hanns Seidel Foundation of Germany.
