Practically no headway has been made with the Transnistrian dispute, while Tiraspol and Russia continue to impede the progress. Info-Prim Neo interview with Radu Vrabie, program coordinator at the Foreign Policy Association

[ -What steps had been taken in 2008 to solve the Transnistrian conflict? In general, were the tendencies positive of negative?] - 2008 can be divided into two periods: the optimistic period that lasted from the start of the year until September and the realistic period that lasted from September until yearend. The events that happened during the first period made the official Chisinau hope that it could unfreeze the Transnistria conflict settlement talks. These events include: the proclamation of Kosovo’s independence in February, the hearings at Russia’s State Duma when Transnistria was not put on the same side as Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the elections in Russia, Moldovan authorities’ expectations that Vladimir Putin would like to remain in history as a pacificator and would solve the Transnistrian conflict before leaving, the coming of the new Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, the April 11 meeting between President Vladimir Voronin and the Transnistrian leader Igor Smirnov after a seven-year pause and the armed conflict in Georgia. The official Chisinau hoped that these events would help unblock the conflict somehow. But, after Voronin and Smirnov had separate meetings with Medvedev, it became clear that neither Tiraspol nor Moscow want to change something. All the hopes faded away during the next period. Smirnov postponed the meetings with Voronin, which were one of the conditions imposed by Russia: meetings in the 1+1 format and then in the 2+1 format. The last meeting held on December 24 showed that the Transnistrian leader does not want the conflict to be settled and such a position is somehow understood. Russia showed that it wants its status quo in the Transnistrian issue to be changed only if this change offered it more than Transnistria now offers. This year saw ambiguous developments. On the one hand, we had positive changes like the European Union’s involvement. In 2008, the EU had involved more actively in Moldova’s life in general and in the Transnistrian conflict in particular. 2008 witnessed a number of active measures. Voronin and Smirnov had two meetings, even if not very productive. On the other hand, the situation remained practically the same as in the previous years, with Tiraspol and Russia not wanting to change something. [ - How would you explain the fact that the objective to settle the conflict until this yearned announced by Vladimir Voronin was not achieved?] - In principle, we all wanted that the Transnistrian conflict is solved as soon as possible. But the solution must be viable so that Moldova is not transformed into a hostage of this settlement or a Kozak-2 plan appears. Such a thing is impossible nowadays: Russia is not disposed to yield and offer the solution wanted by Moldova, which gave up a lot in the Transnistrian settlement. That’s why it was rather hard to believe that a solution would be identified until this yearend. This was practically impossible given that one of the major players, Russia, was against. [ - Has been there certain headway made with the settlement of the conflict since its appearance?] - We are in a period of political impasse, which deepened after the meeting between Voronin and Smirnov. No format of the talks besides the 5+2 format is acceptable for Moldova because a solution identified outside this format would be bad for us. We now should prepare the ground for a medium-term settlement. Two paths can be followed in this case. I would name the first path “European Integration – a Chance for Solving the Transnistrian Conflict”. If we manage to implement the reforms proposed by the EU and become an attractive, credible and predictable country for the EU, the European Union’s interest in Moldova will grow. It would be easier to settle the dispute if the EU involves more actively. The second important thing is that we should not make mistakes. Every mistakes committed at home is used by the Tiraspol administration to prove that Moldova is a bankrupt state with no future. If we avoid such mistakes and work with the population from the Transnistrian region, we can achieve a result during a medium term. [ - What progress can be made in the settlement of the conflict next year, which is an electoral year?] - Regardless of the election outcome, it is clear that the political leadership in Moldova during at least the first half of the year will be busy with other matters and will not pay much attention to the Transnistrian conflict. Therefore, I think that the first half of 2009 will be unproductive for the settlement of dispute, even if Voronin and Smirnov meet again in March. During the first half of the year, everything will depend on the people that will come to power and on the strategy that they will choose. Yet, the Transnistrian dispute will remain on Moldova’s political agenda. It will continue to be very important and we hope that we will witness an unblocking, which will be transparent and made in cooperation with all our partners – Brussels, Kiev, Bucharest, Washington – so that they offer their support.