The request to pull out the Russian troops from the Transnistrian region is a political approach in a regional context in which Georgia, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova want to have a common position for the reason that Russia plays the same games on the territories of these countries. Thus, the three states look for support from the EU and the international community, while Russia opposes. The internationalization of the Transnistrian conflict could be a mistake, as some Moldovan politicians assert, but Transnistria, which earlier didn’t want to have discussions in the 5+2 format, now insist on this, and Russia does the same. Such statements were made by Igor Botan, the standing expert of IPN’s project, in the public debate “”Request to withdraw Russian troops from Moldova’s territory: legality, advantages, risks and dangers” that was staged by IPN News Agency.
The expert said the Parliament’s statement is a political document that expresses the will of a parliamentary majority. This statement was issued in a new and unique context generated by the May 2 judgment of the Constitutional Court, which says that the stay of Russian troops in Transnistria is illegal and unconstitutional and the Transnistrian territory is occupied by the Russian Federation. The Constitutional Court’s decision represents a new element, but such statements are made practically annually at the OSCE ministerial meetings that are usually held in the first week of December in the capitals of the countries that hold the presidency of this organization. Furthermore, from time to time this message is found in the positions stated by Moldovan high-ranking officials at the rostrum of the UN General Assembly.
Igor Botan reminded that after a document to stop the hostilities on the Nistru was signed on July 21, 1992, the Prime Minister of Russia Victor Chernomyrdin and Moldovan Premier Andrei Sangheli signed another document, which said that the pullout of the Russian troops was to be synchronized with the designing and acceptance by Transnistria of a special status within the Republic of Moldova. The conflict is frozen and is based on the fact that there are a peacekeeping mission and Russian military troops that guard the 20,000 tonnes of munitions on the left side of the Nistru.
“We know the position of Russia, which considers that it fulfilled the obligations assumed at the OSCE Summit of 1999, while the munitions cannot be pulled out because their transportation is dangerous. Until 2004, there was used an installation that neutralized the munitions. With the political freezing of the conflict that started in 2005 and with the adoption of the law on the special status of the districts from the left side of the Nistru, which is rejected by the Transnistrians, the international “5+2” format of the talks was turned into a kind of carapace that keeps this status frozen until things are clarified,” said the project’s standing expert.
Igor Botan noted that the request to withdraw the Russian troops is purely political in character, while the application submitted to the UN should have been accompanied by a strategy and a plan of action in this regard. “Let’s assume that this application reaches the UN and questions appear and are addressed to the rapporteur, like: “What happens to the dangerous munitions if the military troops are withdrawn?” There is no answer to this question now. The governments for eight years have said that the settlement of the conflict is a priority and an attempt to work out a common plan to resolve the dispute was made in 2010, but no action plan exists if there is no strategy,” said the expert, noting that the Parliament’s statement should be followed by concrete actions for the sides involved in the ”5+2” format to know what happens next.
”Those who are involved in the conflict should see a plan of action for the period after Russia withdraws its troops from the region so that there are no controlled outbursts. But such a plan does not exist. That’s why the statement on the withdrawal of the Russian troops is just a political, rather intelligent approach because it is about a common effort made by Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova,” he stated. According to Botan, the goal of the statement adopted by Parliament is to polarize the public opinion in Moldova, when the Democratic Party intends to take Moldova to the European area, while those with Eurasian views combat these efforts and a perfect environment for polarization appears as a result.
The public debate ”Request to withdraw Russian troops from Moldova’s territory: legality, advantages, risks and dangers” was the 76th installment of the series of debates “Developing political culture by public debates” that are held with support from the Hanns Seidel Foundation of Germany.
