Monitoring→Politics→Transnistrian Conflict

New round of talks held on 25–26 May

A new round of talks on the Transnistria issue in the five-sided format including representatives of Moldova, Transnistria and the mediators took place in Tiraspol and Chisinau on 25–16 May. The two parties circulated at the meeting their written opinions on each other’s proposals on the political plan drafted by the mediators under the OSCE aegis last autumn. Assisted by the mediators, the parties discussed the structure and institutions of the future federation.

William Hill, Head of the OSCE Mission to Moldova, summed up the results of the talks at a press-conference on 26 May. According to Basa-press, he stated that the parties still remain on divergent positions with regard to the structure of the future federation. Although the meeting produced no written documents, it helped parties reach agreement on some important issues, Hill added, although he did not name any such issues. Asked to comment on views expressed in Moldova, Transnistria and elsewhere that no significant progress is to be expected prior to the parliamentary elections in Moldova in March 2005, Hill said those views were “exaggerated”, and that any time is a good time to seek compromise and try to reach agreement. The next round of talks was provisionally scheduled for w/c 21 June.

In a TV talk show broadcast on Moldovan National Television immediately after the negotiations and joining Moldovan Minister of Reintegration and Head of Moldovan delegation at the talks Vasile Sova, the Transnistrian “foreign minister” Valeri Litkai and the OSCE Head of Mission William Hill, the parties reiterated their embedded divergences, but showed committed to continue the talks. Notably, this has been the first ever TV show to feature a TV debate on the Transnistrian issue by top Moldovan and Transnistrian leaders.

Public Opinion Barometer, May 2004

The public opinion barometer commissioned in April-May 2004 by the Chisinau based Institute of Public Policies on a national representative sample, excluding the Transnistrian region, found that the territorial reintegration of the country is thought to be Moldova’s primary task by only 2.9% of respondents (up by only 0.3% since November 2003), after the consolidation of the state and order (30.6%), economic development and upgrading of living standards (30.3%), ensuring peace and accord among people (15.3%), fighting corruption (8.3%) and improving the education, science and cultural spheres (4.1%). At the same time, asked whether they find acceptable the proposal to turn Moldova into a federal state, 17.1% of those questioned said yes (21.20% in November 2003), 32.6% said they would not accept it in any case (37.80% in November 2003), 14.3% said this question did not concern them (13.10% in November 2003), and 32.7% did not know how to answer this question (25.50 in November 2003). Notably, the data for the November 2003 barometer was collected in early November, i.e. prior to the Kozak Memorandum events. The comparison of November 2003 and current results shows no significant differences, which makes one believe that the Kozak Memorandum events have left no lasting impression on the Moldovan public opinion and the popular attention to the Kozak Memorandum events last November was small-scale and short-lived.

Small arms and light weapons in Moldova

The South Eastern Europe Small Arms and Light Weapons Monitor, funded by the South Eastern Europe Clearinghouse for the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons and prepared by the UK based NGO Safeworld, was published at a round table organized at the UNDP office on 17 May in Chisinau. According to the monitor, “Moldova’s small arms problems, including illicit production and sale of SALW, large stockpiles of surplus weaponry and the lack of controls over a wide segment of the country’s external border, are inextricably linked to the political and security challenges emanating from the “frozen” conflict in the breakaway region of Transnistria”. The Monitor takes on allegations made elsewhere that Transnistria is a haven of organized crime and a virtual arms’ dump containing within its boundaries large quantities of mines, ammunition and small arms, as well as that the Transnistrian regime has the capability to manufacture and export different models of SALW, and argues that the SALW issue is further complicated by the lack of actual border and customs control along the Moldovan-Transnistrian and the Transnistrian-Ukrainian borders, which facilitates smuggling, arms transfer and other illegal activities. In conclusion, the report acknowledges that the problem if SALW cannot be fully mitigated unless the Transnistrian problem is solved, referring to the findings of the IGC “No Quick Fix” whereby one cannot develop effective collaborative actions to improve legislation, law enforcement training and awareness-raising campaigns related to trafficking issues when a country is not recognized internationally.

Archive

2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

 

© 2001–2018 Association for Participatory Democracy “ADEPT”
Phone/Fax: (373 22) 21-29-92, e-mail:
Reproduction of the materials is welcomed provided the source is indicated

Created by NeoNet