Fading prospects for reunification

March 18, 2009 could be the date of a breakthrough in the peaceful settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. On this day, the presidents of the Russian Federation, Moldova and Transnistria signed a statement according to which Russia, no more, no less, renounced its monopoly on the peacekeeping operation, which had lasted for the last almost 20 years. This operation should, according to the statement, move to an international format - under the auspices of the OSCE. But, unfortunately, there will be no breakthrough. The effect of the statement, despite the loud fanfare, was reduced to zero by the signatories themselves. There is a catch in the wording of the statement: the transition of the “peace guarantee operation” to the management of the OSCE will take place only “following the results of the Transnistrian settlement.” And it is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future. The weakly smoldering confrontation between Moldova and Transnistria is unique in its own way: there is no other post-Soviet separatism that has such unclear prospects as Transnistria, and there is no other “metropolis” that looks at its breakaway region with such indifference as Moldova.

In Tiraspol, at a meeting at the international youth corporation “Proryv!” (this is the self-name of the organization) an international scandal occurred. The German moderator of the meeting, who had previously been distinguished by refined diplomacy and balance, after the “breakthroughs” showed another video about their social activity in Transnistria, could not stand it and announced to the audience clearly and harshly: “What I see here is fascism and Fuhrerism (approximate translation from German - AK) . Before opening the discussion, I declare that I reject the methods of your organization and leave this meeting." And - left.

The “Youth Corporation” looked after him with open mouths. At some point, there was a fear that serious and tall men - apparently, the true leaders of the “corporation” - would follow the moderator to find out the degree of his rejection of the “methods of the organization,” so everyone jumped up at once. The discussion resumed only a few minutes later. The 14-15 year old youth of Proryv sat scared; Only adults spoke with offended intonations. They talked about the need to recognize Transnistria, an alliance with Russia, and that the hostile West, using double standards, is preventing this in every possible way. We just saw a typical example of this with our own eyes.

At least two large portraits of Vladimir Putin are visible on the streets of Tiraspol - in front of the House of Soviets in the city center and here, on the wall of the headquarters of “Proryv!” In the latter case, Putin shares company with Dmitry Medvedev and, for some reason, Che Guevara. Under the corresponding image is the caption: “Breakthrough – Putin’s breakthrough!” Across the street from the office, two other billboards catch your eye. On the first is the slogan “Unity is our strength!” with the flags of Transnistria, South Ossetia, Abkhazia and, of course, Russia. On the second billboard, Sergei Bagapsh, Eduard Kokoity and Igor Smirnov (President of the PMR) look at each other warmly, as if saying: “Gentlemen, we did it.” Caption under the photo: “Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia – to be!”

Youth Corporation “Breakthrough!” demonstrates the main political trend of Transnistria: the desire for Putin’s Russia. Precisely to Putin’s - and not to any other, because sooner or later the other Russia will withdraw its troops, stop supporting this and other separatist regimes, and will promote, and not hinder, international efforts to eradicate corruption and arms smuggling, which are firmly established here. At one time, Russia put an end to the armed conflict. She could play a key role in its complete settlement. Now it is the guarantor of the preservation of local world order.

Dmitry Furman, one of the best Russian researchers of the CIS, in his work “Moldavian Moldovans and Moldovan Romanians” describes the uniqueness of Transnistria as follows: “Russian and “Russian-speaking” separatist movements under “internationalist”-Soviet, easily turning into Russian-nationalist, slogans in the process the collapse of the USSR arise in many republics (Kazakhstan, Ukraine, the Baltic states). But only in Moldova, Russian-Soviet separatism leads to the creation on the industrially developed lands of the Left Bank, which became part of the Moldavian SSR under Soviet rule, of the Transnistrian Republic, proclaimed in September 1990 and in August 1991, simultaneously with Moldova, declaring its independence.”

Now Transnistria is called the most peaceful of all post-Soviet conflicts. Its armed phase took place in June 1992, when there were fierce street battles around the bridge over the Dniester, in Bendery and in other settlements on the border with Moldova. According to various estimates, from one thousand to two thousand people died, 80 thousand became refugees, and Bendery and a number of other settlements were severely destroyed. Strained relations with Moldova continue to this day. Several times in recent years there have been serious crises, even to the point of a breakdown in relations, but since then there has been no military escalation of the conflict.

Transnistria, as you know, has its own authorities, its own currency (Transnistrian ruble), constitution, police and other attributes of statehood. The only thing it doesn't have is international status. Until now, not a single state in the world, including Russia, has recognized the independence of Transnistria (except for the states of Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia and Abkhazia).

You also have your own passports here, but you can’t go far with them, because they are only valid on the territory of the republic. In order to travel outside the PMR, you need a passport of a state that is a subject of international politics. Mainly in Russia. According to Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the PMR Sergei Simonenko, out of half a million residents of Transnistria, 100 thousand have Russian passports. A Russian consular post has been opened in Tiraspol, where they say a passport (albeit a foreign one) can be issued within two days - faster than the average in Moscow. “I myself,” the deputy minister modestly told us, “travel with a Russian passport.”

Such a total granting of citizenship to residents of an unrecognized region is reminiscent of the “South Ossetian” history. Most Transnistrian enterprises have Russian owners. Russia pays pensions and benefits to local residents, finances construction, etc. Without officially recognizing Transnistria, Russia ensures its independence. If we remember the Russian military bases and the mass of insufficiently controlled weapons, then parallels with South Ossetia arise.

But few people believe in such a scenario, and indeed in the possibility of a new military confrontation. The head of the OSCE mission, Philip Remler, who knows the problems of the region well, puts it briefly: “Yes, Transnistria is somewhat similar to South Ossetia. But Moldova is not at all like Georgia!”

Deputy Minister of Reintegration (that is, for Transnistrian settlement affairs - there is such a post in the government of the Republic of Moldova) Ion Stavila also denies the possibility of a new conflict: “In addition to Russia, many other parties are involved in resolving the conflict - in the “5 + 2” format (EU, OSCE , USA, Ukraine, Russia + Moldova and Transnistria). All parties are satisfied with the status quo.”

Some observers, however, admit the possibility of a new escalation. Ion Marandici, a Moldovan journalist and researcher at Rutgers University in the USA, fears a sharp deterioration in the economic situation in the region: “In this case, Transnistria will most likely accuse Moldova of all mortal sins and, in order to justify its own existence, may provoke military aggression. The Moldavian army is weaker than the armed forces of Transnistria, so Moldova will be forced to request military assistance from Romania, Ukraine or NATO. Fortunately for Moldova, Transnistria does not share borders with Russia, which makes Russian intervention problematic.” The second, more likely scenario of a possible aggravation due to the crisis, according to Marandici, could arise if Russia officially recognizes the independence of Transnistria. “Such attempts have been made more than once, for example, in the State Duma. This option will become even more possible if, as a result of the crisis, nationalist forces come to power in Moldova,” he says.

One of the most pressing problems of post-conflict resolution is the remaining stockpiles of weapons on the territory of the republic. Military warehouses in the village of Kolbasna alone, north of Tiraspol, store up to 20 thousand tons of ammunition and weapons - from machine guns to man-portable anti-aircraft missile systems. Since the 90s, Transnistria has maintained a reputation as a black market for weapons. Thanks to international efforts, control over the warehouses has been strengthened in recent years, although it is still carried out by Russian military personnel. For some time, Russia took steps to remove abandoned weapons, but then the export stopped. The problem of criminal access has not been completely resolved: machine guns and grenade launchers from Kolbasna appear every now and then in Chechnya, Ingushetia, the former Yugoslavia and even in Africa.

The Transnistrian settlement is also hampered by Moldova's too slow integration into Europe. Foreign diplomats in Chisinau complain not only about its dependence on Russia, but also about its lack of expressed interest in the European Union. German Ambassador Nikolaus Lambsdorf did not hide his disappointment at the meeting with us: “We have a problem - an almost complete lack of partners. Moldova is not focused on Europe. Of all the Western values, only the market has taken root.”

Czech Ambassador Petr Cupr is even more pessimistic. As a representative of the country presiding over the EU, he, according to him, is trying to make every effort to bring Moldova closer to Europe. The result is minimal: “People are interested in foreigners from the point of view of benefits. There is no European thinking, no developed civil society, no independent media... At the micro level, little can be done.”

The communists in power in Moldova, of course, influence the political and economic preferences of the country. But the country did not follow the path of most CIS countries - along the path of rolling back the democratic gains of the 90s. Power in Moldova has not been usurped into the hands of an authoritarian president, and a strong and independent parliament continues to provide a strong counterweight to him.

Dmitry Furman describes this phenomenon of Moldovan politics as follows: “Ideologically (with the communists coming to power in 2001 - AK) Moldova almost returned to the Soviet past, but in its political system it moved further away from it than all other CIS republics and almost as far away as the Baltic republics... The most democratic country in the CIS and the only one in which communists are in power is a very peculiar combination.” According to Furman, Moldova was prevented from becoming one of the typical authoritarian regimes of the CIS by its divided identity. There are two strong ethnocentric forces in the country - the “Romanians” (unionists), who do not see the future of Moldova without unity with “native” Romania, and therefore with Europe, and the “Moldovenists”, united on the basis of the state and cultural community acquired during the Soviet era. Moldova (1944-1991). After Romania joined the EU in 2007, its popularity in Moldova increased sharply. According to various estimates, 10-20% of the Moldovan population already has Romanian passports (and therefore EU passports), and this figure is increasing. So, of the two vectors of development in Moldova, the European one has been slowly but steadily winning in recent years.

It is interesting how this will affect the problem of the long-standing Transnistrian conflict, especially now when the role of international participation is increasing. As long as Russia remains the most influential power in the region, Transnistria will look primarily to the East. But no one knows how the current crisis will affect the situation of the republic: whether Russia will want to continue to have unrecognized regimes with a dubious reputation around its neck or will try to peacefully transfer them to their “countries of origin.”

The chances of Transnistria returning to Moldova are gradually fading. There has grown its own elite, which values ​​its power and influence and does not want to become one of the Moldovan provinces. And in Moldova itself, only the last radicals continue to demand the annexation of the left bank of the Dniester. For Moldovans, this strange region with a dark past and unclear prospects has mentally ceased to be theirs over the past years. Today's Moldova is worried about other problems.

Moscow – Chisinau – Tiraspol

The author's trip to Moldova and Transnistria in a group of political scientists from Western and Eastern European countries took place in early March 2009 at the invitation of the German Society for Foreign Policy (Berlin).