On September 6, 2018, President Igor Dodon had a meeting with the Transnistrian leader Vadim Krasnoselski. The press release issued by the presidential press service said in the discussions the sides managed to draw their positions much closer so as to work out approaches and implement these later. President Dodon also said that he agreed with the necessity of continuing an open dialog that would contribute to building confidence between the inhabitants from both sides of the Nistru. Such vague formulations could be samples of application of propagandistic technologies, but these no longer help.
What the people expect from the President is that this, within his constitutional powers, will fulfil his electoral promises. He has the presidential mandate from the people to do this. If we look at the electoral program of Mister Dodon, we see that he promised the citizens what he cannot do. Indeed, during the first 100 days of presidency, which was until April 1, 2017, in the dialogue with the Transnistrian leaders he was to reach a compromise concerning the political settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. One year and a half passed since that deadline that he fixed himself, without being forced by anyone, for reaching the compromise and it would be normal for him to present the project agreed with the Transnistrian administration to us. Instead, the President says he discussed the “package of eight” concerning the solutions to the problems faced by the inhabitants and business entities from both sides of the Nistru. This is very well, but the package of eight was decided when the presidency was held by Vladimir Voronin, which is over ten years ago. Also then, there was launched the idea of having a dialogue for building confidence between the inhabitants from both sides of the Nistru. Secondly, the agreements on this package were negotiated by the Government recently, without any contribution on the part of the Head of State. We even saw that the President had a position contrary to that of the Government, which was supported by the UN General Assembly’s resolution on the withdrawal of the Russian military forces from the Transnistrian region.
So, the key question is – which is the added value of the President’s activity on the Transnistrian dimension? It is not a trivial question. This thing was proven by the head of the Transnistrian administration Vadim Krasnoselski at the residence of Igor Dodon: “I do not see a method by which this political settlement could be reached. That’s why I suggest solving the social, humanitarian, cultural and economic problems. No one is ready for the political settlement of the conflict, neither Moldova, nor Transnistria or the partners from the 5+2 format. In reality, I see no proposal and no mechanism that would provide a clear understanding of how the Moldovan-Transnistrian problem can be solved politically. In Transnistria, we do not have a problem with this. We have our political status, our independence and have the people’s opinion that cannot be combated.” This statement is an incontestable proof of the fact that President Igor Dodon not only didn’t deliver his electoral promise, but cannot even do this in a predictable future.
We see that the Transnistrian leader satisfies himself with the keeping of a dialogue for solving current problems within a format that was set 10-15 years ago. Indeed, the invoked confidence measures enable Transnistria to trade with other states, especially to benefit from the visa free regime with the EU. The recently agreed problems from the ‘package of eight’ enable Transnistria to form part of the international transport flow, etc. In such circumstances, Tiraspol does not even accept to open the third negotiation basket, concerning the identification of a peaceful solution to the conflict! If so, why was this propagandistic wave about the Dodon-Krasnocelski meeting necessary? The answer is evident. Mister Dodon one day before the meeting informed us, as the informal leader of the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova (PSRM), that the party started its parliamentary pre-election campaign. The message is simple – the obligation that wasn’t honored by Mister Dodon as President could be somehow fulfilled with the contribution of the PSRM, if he acts as the electoral engine of this party in the legislative elections.
In such conditions, the citizens should probably try and make the politicians responsible. We could make the politicians report on the fulfilment of the previous promises before making new promises. Surely, the politicians can ignore people’s proposals, but, if they are reminded of the non-fulfillment of their promises, it would be more difficult for them to attract the sympathy and support of the people. Such an attitude would be correct from all viewpoints, while the politicians would be unable to at least explain their eventual anger.
IPN Experts
