After over 25 years of negotiations, the political regulations of the Transnistrian conflict remain unclear. During the last few years, they negotiated and discussed issues that do not refer to the status of the region and to the illegal presence of the Russian forces, but these problems are key for Chisinau in the Transnistrian settlement process. The inconsistency of Chisinau and the absence of tools for making Russia withdraw its troops from Moldova’s territory led to the “localization” of the settlement process. To escape from this vicious circle, Chisinau should find solutions to put problems related to the status and the forces and also to the human rights on the “5+2” negotiating table. Such a conclusion was formulated in an event held to present three studies on the Transnistrian disputed produced by the Institute for Development and Social Initiative “Viitorul” on July 12, IPN reports.
Igor Tabarta, “Viitorul” expert and author of the study “Diachronic assessment of documents signed by Chisinau in the Transnistrian settlement process”, said the biggest relevant result was achieved by Moldova in November 1999, when Russia pledged to withdraw its troops from the left side of the Nistru at the OSCE Istanbul Summit. But Russia didn’t fulfil this commitment and refused to fulfil this later in Porto, and after 2003 avoided discussing the issue with Moldova. This way Moscow premeditatedly violates the international agreements.
Speaking about the study “Assessment of the implementation of the protocol decisions on education”, Igor Tabarta said the protocol decision concerning the functioning of Moldovan-administered, Romanian-language schools in the Transnistrian region is implemented partially. The chief negotiators of Chisinau and Tiraspol have dissenting opinions about the implementation of this protocol. The points about the lease period and the payment of rent are implemented as both of the sides confirmed that these points are respected.
According to the expert, it is not clear how the first point of the protocol, concerning the public utilities, is implemented. There is dissention on all the rest of the points of the protocol decision between Chisinau and Tiraspol. The fifth and sixth points are interpreted differently by the sides. Chisinau wants the persons, teaching aids and other things needed to ensure the education process to move freely, while Tiraspol demands that it is preliminarily informed about the free movement and transportation of aids. Also, Chisinau fulfils the commitments assumed when the protocol on the apostilling of education certificates issued in the Transnistrian region was signed. As many as 87 diplomas were apostilled by June 25.
Igor Munteanu, “Viitorul” director and author of the study “External shields of secessionism: para-diplomacy and insurgency” , noted Russia plays a major role in blocking the settlement process and the negotiations, acting not like a classical mediator that has a balanced attitude to the positons of the sides, but as a player that defends its own interests. Moscow would like the secessionist republic in the current form to be dissolved, but only if its protégée obtains decisive influence on the affairs of the newly reintegrated states. Russia wants to remain the main guarantor of the settlement, including as a measure to secure the reunified states, under the pressure of external brokers.
