The first official meeting between Moldovan President Vladimir Voronin and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev was rather one of establishing relations, [Radu Vrabie, program coordinator at the Foreign Policy Association]said. The two presidents met on Friday, June 6, at the informal CIS summit on St. Petersburg's outskirts. Even the press release disseminated by the Moldovan presidential press service mentions the Transnistrian issue last, argues Radu Vrabie. The expert maintains that Dmitri Medvedev is known to be the man that continues the policy promoted by his predecessor Vladimir Putin and, taking into account that it was the first meeting between him and Vladimir Voronin, one cannot expect spectacular developments in the Transnistrian issue. Most probably, they discussed about the same subjects in the same tone as it had been at the meetings between Vladimir Voronin and Vladimir Putin. In this context, according to the analyst, one cannot expect radical changes in the Moldovan-Russian relation concerning the Transnistrian issue, at least till fall. Yet, probably more discussions are going to occur on this matter, as for example the Moldovans expect Duma`s speaker Boris Gryzlov and other Russian officials to come to Chisinau. As for the economic relations, there are all the prerequisites that they go on, and even go up. The Moldo-Russian dialog in other areas, except for the Transnistrian issue, is quite good, accepted by both parties, and is going to keep on, unless any other problems appear in the Transnistrian matter, the expert believes. At the same time, the results of the St. Petersburg meeting entails a high degree of loyalty on behalf of the Moldovan leadership towards the Russian interests in Moldova, says [analyst Denis Cenusa, expert in international relations]. Vladimir Voronin has confirmed he wants to deepen the relationships with Russia in the spirit of a strategic partnership, which has been confirmed by Dmitry Medvedev, too. However, none of the sides mentioned the Transnistrian issue among the priorities of the further bilateral cooperation, regardless of the fact that it is difficult and it depends on Russia. This thing displays the satisfaction of the Communist government as to the process of settling the Transnistrian issue, and the degree of Moscow’s involvement in easing this settlement, the analyst remarks. At the same time, had Russia made any havoc in the Transnistrian issue, anyway the Communist government in Chisinau would have given up building a tough line on the negative rule of the Russian side in the Transnistrian settlement. The main cause for such reservations relates to the Moscow’s electoral importance, which can support the Communist party in the 2009 elections. At the same time, Moscow’s support could be conditioned by the fact that the current leadership set as an objective not to enter any military blocs (including NATO). An important role in this regard is played by the fact that the Moldova's National Security Concept does not rule out the presence of the Russian Army in the Transnistrian area. Thus, Russia can demonstrate the international community that its peace keepers play an important role in settling the frozen conflicts in the former Soviet space. This will enable Moscow to reject the criticism of Georgia as to the negative impact of the Russian peace keepers in the disputed Georgian areas (as Abkhazia), says Denis Cenusa.