Russia played a central role in Transnistrian conflict

[Analysis by Andrei Iovu of the series “20 years of the start of the war. When should we expect peace?”, for Info-Prim Neo] Repeat from February 7 It is already 20 years since the beginning of the armed conflict in the eastern districts of Moldova. This conflict continues to be a controversial subject over which the political class of Moldova could not reach a consensus. The events that took place at the start of the 1990s on the sides of the Nistru River can be regarded as secessionist conflicts as those that embraced a series of former Soviet states. In approximately the same period, similar conflicts arouse in Georgia and Armenia. After the dismemberment of the Soviet Union, Russia became its successor and deployed military troops on the territory of a number of states that hadn’t yet proclaimed their independence at that moment. Though Moldova declared its independence on August 27, 1991, it also had Russian military troops on its territory. Russia played a central role in the Transnistrian dispute as it became involved in the conflict with military forces and supported those that wanted to separate from Moldova. The involvement of the Russian armed forces in the Transnistrian conflict wasn’t hidden. The leaders of the breakaway republic of Transnistrian confirmed with pride that Russia was the protector of the ‘republic’. Moscow officials and the international community also admitted this. Even if Russia, at the OSCE Istanbul Summit of 1999, pledged to withdraw its troops from the left bank of the Nistru, it did not fully fulfill those commitments. Moreover, Russia’s involvement in the Transnistrian conflict is not limited only to military support. It also influences the social, economic and political processes in the region. [At social level] This involvement gave a specific quality to the social sphere. Effort was made to keep the elements of the Soviet social life in Transnistria. This objective wasn’t achieved for a number of reasons, but they managed to build a socially dependent system, where the allowances to the socially deprived groups are mainly provided by Russia. Thus, in order to maintain an illusion of social policy, the Transnistrian leaders were made dependent on Russia’s subsidies. The attitudes and lifestyle are powerfully influenced by the social events and trends in Russia. [At economic level] Russia’s involvement in the Transnistrian region had a significant influence on the region’s economy. It is for sure that if Russia stops financing the region, the separatist regime will go bankrupt. The support provided by Russia is not only financial. The products made in the Transnistrian region are exported to Russia. Russian companies illegally privatized Transnistrian firms and thus Russia has powerful control in the region. Transnistria’s debt for Russian gas is attributed to Moldova and this is a reason for Russia to exert pressure on Moldova. [At political level] As it was seen over time, the Transnistrian leaders consider Russia a political, economic and social center of the region and their political discourses confirm this. Though Russia’s influence on Transnistria’s political sphere is incontestable, there are evident own development trends. The last so-called presidential elections in Transnistria, especially the second round, showed that the candidate’s success depends not only on the support provided by Moscow as the region’s population also has a say. Russia’s influence and Tiraspol’s stronger position in the dispute settlement process were ensured by a series of agreements signed with the constitutional authorities of Moldova. The most important are: the agreement on the principles of the peaceful settlement of the armed conflict in Moldova’s Transnistrian zone signed on July 21, 1992, whereby Russia was allowed to maintain peacekeeping forces and can withdraw them only with the consent of the sides, and the memorandum on the principles of normalizing the relations between Moldova and Transnistria signed on May 8, 1997, which de facto gives equal rights to the conflicting sides in the settlement process. During the 20 years, Russia successfully used this dispute as an instrument for exerting influence on Moldova. The lack of political will in the Moldovan political class and the absence of a clear view on the settlement of the conflict led to the strengthening of the Transnistrian authorities’ position and significantly minimized Moldovan authorities’ chances to reintegrate the country in a format favorable to them. [Andrei Iovu, researcher at the Public Policy Institute, Security Sector Reform Program, for Info-Prim Neo]