Chisinau and Moscow experts express different opinions about quick settlement of Transnistrian conflict following latest developments in Georgia

Moldovan and Russian analysts and politicians have different opinions about the quick settlement of the Transnistrian conflict following the latest developments in Caucasus and the recognition by Russia of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. On August 29, polytologists from Moldova and Russia participated in a Chisinau-Moscow videoconference and discussed the possible repercussions of the recognition of the two enclaves on Moldova and, in particular, the resolution of the Transnistrian dispute, Info-Prim Neo reports. Analyst Andrei Popov said that the created situation does not inspire optimism about a possible settlement of the Transnistrian conflict in the near future. Given the latest developments in Caucasus, Russia will have greater demands and will probably give a signal: you accept the Kozak plan or you will suffer the consequences following the developments in Caucasus. According to Popov, the solution to the Transnistrian conflict must meet three criteria: 1. The compromise should give birth to a functional state. Such a thing is not stipulated in the Kozak Memorandum and therefore cannot be the basis of such a decision: 2. It must be backed by the majority of the population and the political classes from the two banks of the Nistru, but the positions of the two sides became much more different, especially after 2003; 3. This compromise should be the result of a position accepted also by the international negotiators, but their positions are now different. Transnistrian political thinker Andrei Safonov said that the solution to the conflict must be functional and accepted by everyone. This means that Tiraspol should abandon the idea of independence, while Chisinau – the idea of a unitary state. New talks should be held over these matters, but the negotiating process will not be easy at all, he said. Political thinker Serghei Nazaria expressed a different position. He said that it is not right to compare the Transnistrian conflict with the conflicts in Caucasus or Kosovo because in Transnistria there are no religious or other kinds of divergences involving the populations from the two banks of the Nistru, but only a conflict between the political elites. Russian annalist Alexei Vlasov considers that Chisinau and Tiraspol can reach a mutually acceptable compromise with the help of Moscow. According to him, Russia, Transnistria and Moldova need a compromise that will satisfy all the parties. Russia needs such a compromise to prove that it can solve such problems in other ways too, Vlasov said, expressing his optimism about the prospects of identifying solutions to the Transnistrian dispute. In order to solve the conflict, the parties should learn to trust each other, otherwise no plan would lead to the resolution of the dispute, he added. Russian MP Vladimir Medinskii said that Chisinau must propose attractive solutions in order to convince Tiraspol that it is better to live in the Republic of Moldova. One of such solutions, he said, could be Moldova’s accession to the Russia-Belarus Union. Abkhazia and South Ossetia could join this Union afterward, the Russian MP added.