ADEPT | Gagauzia 2016 | Presidential 2016 | Elections 2015 | Bashkan 2015 | Gagauzia 2012 | Political Parties
Foreign Affairs on June 28 – July 11, 2004
|
|
e-journal #34 |
CIS informal Summit
On July 3, President Vladimir Voronin flew to Moscow for the Summit of the CIS Heads of State. According to official source, participants discussed the agenda for the CIS Summit in Astana due in September 2004 and joint celebrations of the end of WWII.
During the summit, Vladimir Voronin had a private meeting with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin. According to the press-service, the Two considered issues related to “developing bilateral relations, resolution of Transdnistrian conflict, and other issues of mutual interest”.
Russian and Moldovan press alike (state-run and independent) scarcely covered the reunion, which explains why the reactions to such an important document as Declaration of the Chief of States on “state of affairs within OSCE” were late to come. The reason for issuing a declaration was the fact that “this European organization fails to fully meet its tasks formulated in its founding documents, its primary focus being human rights dimension and functioning of democratic institutions to the expense of other dimensions of collective security, such as military, political, economic, environmental and humanitarian”. The Declaration was submitted by Russia’s permanent representative to OSCE, Aleksandr Borodavkin, during the OSCE Permanent Council meeting in Vienna on July 8. BASA-press reported that Georgian President, Mihail Saakasvili, was the only one who refrained from signing, while President Voronin insisted on formulating some reservations with regard to OSCE’s activity pointing to the “gap between OSCE’s activism in supporting democratic standards and passivity in resolving frozen conflicts in the CIS”.
Given that Transdnistrian conflict is also a frozen one and more importantly considering President Voronin’s numerous public acknowledgements of the OSCE assistance in settling Transdnistrian conflict, one may notice some shifts in attitude. This shift in attitude might resume to the following — OSCE is solely to be blamed for the lack of progress in settling Transdnistrian conflict. This attitude is in contrast to the attitude shared by opposition, public figures and analysts alike who are rather inclined to blame the stubborn and uncooperative stance of Tiraspol, which is supported by Moscow. They do point out that in fact OSCE did a big favour to Moldova when it opposed the signing of “Kozak Memorandum”.
The joint Declaration of the CIS Heads of States was intended to draw the attention towards the need to take urgent and wide-scale measures to fundamentally refocus OSCE’s priorities and activities.
Archive
2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 |
