It is necessary to start preparing society for potential far-reaching compromises in Transnistrian settlement

[Info-Prim Neo interview with Giedrius Čekuolis, CiO Special Representative for Protracted Conflicts] {Original interview in Russian} [ - Which are the main results achieved in the latest round of 5+2 negotiations in Moscow?] - As it is already known, an informal meeting in the 5+2 format took place on June 21 in Moscow. Its participants discussed the possibility to resume formal negotiations in this format. A decision in this respect hasn't been adopted yet. The meeting was suspended on a stopped-clock principle and will be resumed in Moscow without any further condition. [ - Were expectations higher? Or did the results exceed expectations?] - Indeed, hopes were rather high that it would be possible to resume formal negotiations on the Transnistrian settlement already at this meeting in Moscow. But the meeting wasn't concluded and is to be continued in the near future. So hopes of resumption remain. [ - Which is the role of the 5+2 stakeholders in achieving or not achieving a certain goal?] - A key role is played by Chisinau and Tiraspol; very much depends on them in the settlement of the Transnistrian issue. The mediators in this format – Russia, Ukraine and the OSCE, as well as the observers – the EU and the USA – all of them provide their constructive contributions in identifying a viable solution which satisfies all participants. [ - What explains the appearance of prospects for the resumption of 5+2 talks after so many years of intermission?] - As I already mentioned, the Moscow meeting is not over yet, and there are some things to be done to make the resumption possible. However, I would like to remark that lately a favorable atmosphere has actually emerged, which is beneficial for the activity of the 5+2 format. This is, first of all, due to the determination and competence of the current pro-European government of the Republic of Moldova, due to the confidence-building measures between the two sides of the Nistru River, and the willingness of the Transnistrian authorities to solve the accumulated problems. But most important are the international factors involved. First and foremost, this is Germany's willingness to contribute to the settlement of the Transnistrian issue. In this context, one year ago the Meseberg Memorandum was signed by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. This Memorandum provides, among other, for cooperation between the EU and Russian in the settlement of the Transnistrian issue. [ - What explains this protracted break in the formal negotiations? And what should be done to avoid such a situation repeating itself in the future?] - I have been working with this issue just from the beginning of this year, so it would be difficult for me to clearly determine the causes of such a long break in negotiations. I assume that, anyway, one of the reasons was an insufficiency of political will on the part of some key stakeholders; I guess there are forces that are satisfied with this {status quo}. To avoid such situations in the future, it is needed among other things, to intensify interaction among the two sides of the Nistru. I highly commend the “football diplomacy” started by Prime Minister Vlad Filat and I hope that such measures will be continued in the near future. [ - Which is the nature of the Transnistrian conflict, in your country's opinion?And, consequently, which should be the main instruments in its settlement?] - I am not an expert in Moldovan history but based on surface observations I can confirm that there are indeed no ethnic or religious grounds for this conflict. What do exist are a number of unsettled problems, and these are first of all economic ones. There is also a geopolitical factor involved. Concerning the instruments for its settlement, the first thing I'd like to mention is Moldova's Eurointegration aspiration and the socioeconomic reforms associated with these efforts. I think that the attractiveness of western-side Moldova in general – the welfare of its citizens, the rule of law, the right of free movement across Europe and the European orientation of your country – will help to create conditions for the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. [ - Why does Lithuania believe that its presidency will make more progress than other OSCE presidencies in the Transnistrian settlement? Which do you think are the strong and novel aspects in your country's approach to the issue?] - The Lithuanian presidency of the OSCE builds on the experience of previous presidencies, including on the Transnistrian issue. We make considerable efforts to resume formal negotiations in the 5+2 setting. Of course, not everything depends on us. We also give particular attention to consolidating confidence-building measures, because we strongly believe that bringing the sides of the Nistru closer to each other is one of the keys to the settlement. I would also like to remark that Lithuania and Moldova share many historical connections, the fates of our nations, in particular in the 20th century, are very similar. This gives us a particular expertise and a good understanding of the processes occurring in this area. [ - Where are the keys to the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict? Politicians and experts of various orientations have pointed at many different locations: Moscow, or Chisinau, Tiraspol, Brussels or Vienna, or Washington, or Kyiv...] - The settlement of the Transnistrian conflict depends on many different factors and all the 5+2 stakeholders are very important in their own special ways. Moscow's role cannot be overestimated, and the role of Ukraine as a neighboring state is also great, especially in securing the existing customs regime along the border. The European Union and the United States play an essential role in promoting reforms and democratic changes in Moldova. The OSCE, for its part, offers a platform for talks. And as I mentioned earlier, one of the key aspects in the settlement is the interaction between the two sides of the Nistru. [ - What do you think Moldova, both the government and society as a whole, has done right, and what it should have done better to solve the conflict?] - First of all, let me praise the Moldovan authorities for their tolerance and painstaking efforts. A great deal of work has been done to create secure conditions for the settlement: this includes the multiple agreements signed among Chisinau and Tiraspol, the registration of Transnistria-based companies, issuance of certificates of origin for the goods manufactured on the eastern side of the Nistru, the free movement of people on both banks, the continuing confidence-building efforts and many other things. Of course, much remains to be done. I think that a priority should be to identify a final solution to the rail transit issue: it is desirable to secure the passage of not only passenger trains, but also of freight trains through Transnistria. At a more general level, I think it is necessary to start considering a potential status for Transnistria which is based on international law and which is acceptable for the eastern-side population. I would also like to note that it necessary, as well, to start preparing society for potential far-reaching compromises. [ - What would the Lithuanian authorities and society do if faced, heaven forbid, with a similar situation?] - Our country lived a very difficult situation before World War II, when our capital Vilnius and Klaipeda region were taken from us. But I think our situation then and the Transnistrian settlement are rather different in many respects. Let me just note that today Lithuania is a EU and NATO member and this speaks for itself. I can assure you that Lithuania fully supports the European aspirations of your country, and this is exactly the perspective from which we see the key to the current problems of Moldova, including the settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. [ - What are Moldova's odds of settling this conflict, considering that few successful examples exist in history? Is there any chance at all?] - I am confident that the Republic of Moldova has good chances of settling this. The combination of all existing circumstances, both internal and international, allow me to draw this conclusion. [Valeriu Vasilica, Info-Prim Neo]