Alegerile parlamentare din 2021 în Republica Moldova - alegeri.md
 Monitoring→Politics→Transnistrian Conflict

Transnistrian Conflict on June 1–15, 2007

|print version|mail| e-journal #97 |

US propose transforming the peacekeeping operation in Transnistria

On the eve of the Extraordinary Conference on the CFE Treaty, the US have proposed deploying a multinational peacekeeping force to Transnistria, also to include Russia, as a solution to the dispute on the illegal stationing of Russian troops and ammunition in Moldova. The US have reiterated their call for an immediate completion of the withdrawal of Russian ammunition from Transnistria, as a precondition for ratification by the US and other parties of the adapted CFE Treaty.

Daniel Fried, US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, stated on the eve of the CFE Conference that Russia has not fulfilled its obligations assumed in Istanbul in 1999 with regard to its troops and ammunitions in Transnistria. Fried called for a “creative compromise” that would allow for the fulfilment of Russia’s Istanbul commitments and that would be acceptable to Russia. “Russians sometimes argue that their forces are in Transnistria, performing a legitimate and peaceful peacekeeping function. Well, if it’s a peacekeeping function, maybe we ought to consider how a modest peacekeeping function can be properly institutionalised”, the high level American diplomat stated.

The Moldovan delegation to the Vienna conference reiterated in its turn the need to transform the current peacekeeping mechanism, which “has repeatedly demonstrated its incapacity to control the situation and solve current problems in the security zone”. Moldova joined the US and other states parties to the CFE Treaty, and conditioned ratification of the adapted Treaty with the fulfilment by Russia of its Istanbul commitments regarding Moldova.

Deputy Head of Russian Delegation to the Vienna Conference, Mihail Ulianov, said the Kremlin was ready to examine the US proposals regarding the deployment of an international peacekeeping mechanism in Transnistria. But as the Vienna conference ended with no result having only exacerbated the division between Russia and the West on a number of issues of European security, it might happen so that Russia will change its mind. All the more so as the Transnistrian leader, Igor Smirnov, has already declared he would not allow deployment of a “foreign” peace operation in the region. And as Russia has since long claimed it could not withdraw its ammunition from Transnistria because it was hindered to do so by the Transnistrian authorities, Russian officials could again blame the intransigence of the Transnistrian leader for not agreeing to the US proposals on an international peace operation in the region.

Voronin, Putin talk Transnistrian problem

At the CIS Summit in Saint Petersburg on 10–11 June, President Voronin had a meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. Press services of the two presidents published little information regarding the contents of the discussion, and only mentioned that they tackled bilateral relations and Transnistrian settlement.

Earlier international media reported about an alleged settlement plan negotiated in secret by Moldova and Russia, and which was to be signed during the Voronin-Putin meeting in Saint Petersburg. Chisinau officials have denied the existence of such a plan, as well as any intention to sign a bilateral agreement with Russia on Transnistria. However, such statements came only late after a series of questions raised by media and civil society.

It seems Western counterparts were equally concerned with the rumours of a Moldovan-Russian deal on Transnistria. Thus, on the eve of his departure to Saint Petersburg, President Voronin met with US Ambassador to Moldova, Michael D.Kirby, and the Head of the EC Delegation to Moldova, Cesare de Montis, with whom he discussed, among other things, the Transnistrian problem. On the same day, Voronin had a telephone conversation with the EU High Commissioner for CFSP, Javier Solana.

It is to be noted, that on the eve of the Saint Petersburg Summit, representatives of civil society organisations and international think tanks published an Open Letter for a European settlement of the Transnistrian conflict. The authors have expressed concern regarding the non-transparent way in which Moldovan-Russian negotiations on Transnistria are being held, outside of the “5+2” format, which fact could irrevocably compromise the European prospects of Moldova. The signatories have called Moldovan authorities to found their Transnistrian settlement efforts on the objective of European integration of Moldova, and on the principles and legislation adopted by Moldova on this issue.

In response to this open letter, the Ministry of Reintegration issued a communique in which it rejected the “accusations” against the Moldovan authorities, which “have acted in a transparent manner both towards its foreign partners and the civil society and political class of Moldova”. At the same time, Ministry of Reintegration regretted the fact that a series of its partners from the civil society have forgotten about the consultations carried out regularly with the Ministry and qualified as “deliberate disinformation the publication of the open letter which puts under question mark the objectivity of signatory organisations”.

The exact contents of the Saint Petersburg meeting remains a mystery, one of its announced results — the resumption of Moldovan wine exports to Russia — having more of an electoral character and, according to analysts, little immediate practical application. It seems though that discussions between the two heads of state will continue — on 15 June, for the third time in 2007, Chisinau was visited by the Deputy Secretary of the Russian Secuirty Council, Iuri Zubakov, who this time led the traditional discussions about “bilateral relations” in the context of a new Putin-Voronin meeting planned for end of June.

May 16–31, 2007 June 16–30, 2007