Andrei Stratan: "There are no secret plans or other documents"

Moldova's Foreign Minister Andrei Stratan has been characterized as a hardline nationalist unable to compromise (Photo: RM MFA)

KIEV - Outside the existing "5+2" settlement format, there are no additional plans or other documents related to the settlement of Moldova's territorial claim to Pridnestrove. That is the key message by Moldova's Foreign Minister who is denying some apparently unsubstantiated reports of a secret deal by a writer for the Jamestown think-tank and his colleague from The Economist, a British weekly.

Profile by The Tiraspol Times & Weekly Review: Moldova's Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrei Stratan considers himself to be the Foreign Minister of Pridnestrovie, too. According to his view of the world, Pridnestrovie - which he calls Transnistria, or Trans-Dniestria - is part of Moldova. And since he is the foreign minister of Moldova, that means - ipso facto - that he is the foreign minister of 555,000 citizens who overwhelmingly rejected Moldovan rule and who insist on independent statehood.

Although Moldova is unable to exercise sovereign control over the 4,163 sq km territory, Moldova still believes that the settlement process should end in the incorporation of Pridnestrovie under Moldovan rule. In this interview, which Stratan gave to ZN during an official visit to Ukraine in the first week of June 2007, he shares his views on the settlement process and his hopes for restarting it in the direction that Moldova favors.

When meeting with the Ukrainian President, did you assure him that the “Yushchenko plan” implementation was still a priority in the Trans-Dniestria settlement?

" - During our meeting President Yushchenko confirmed Ukraine’s policy of supporting the state sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of the Republic of Moldova. I, in turn, expressed our appreciation of Ukraine’s contribution towards resolving the Trans-Dniestria conflict. The convincing evidence of the above is that the package of documents on the Trans-Dniestria settlement prepared by Moldova is based, alongside the Moldovan Parliament resolutions passed in 2005, on president Yushchenko’s initiatives. There are no other documents; neither are there any plans in Moldova to change its position vis-à-vis Trans-Dniestria. We want the final decision to be made in the “5+2” format."

Dismissing the rumours about “other documents”, do you also refute the existence of some separate agreements between Moldova and Russia leading to “Kozak plan-2” that has, allegedly, been already discussed with your Russian colleagues?

" - We do not carry out any separate talks with the Russian Federation. Yet meeting with our Western partners we always insist on the necessity of continuing the dialogue with Russia, which is one of the key participants in the Trans-Dniestria negotiation process. Today we are waiting for the Russian Federation’s response to the above package of documents.

On 6 April 2007, I met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who told me the Russian comments and recommendations for the documents were being summarized and systematized. We hope the Presidents of Moldova and Russia discuss this issue when they meet at the St Petersburg summit. I repeat, emphatically, no other documents exist. On Wednesday our President had a telephone conversation with Javier Solana and assured him that the upcoming negotiations will focus on this comprehensive document."

Doesn’t it worry you that Russia has been “summarizing and systematizing” Moldova’s proposal for almost a year now? Why, do you think, is Moscow sustaining such a long pause?

" - The last time our representatives discussed the document in Moscow was in January, i.e. less than a year ago. Of course we would have liked to have gotten Russia’s response sooner so that we could have discussed it with our negotiating partners in the “5+2” format. Our President has emphasized on numerous occasions that we will never engage in separate talks, agreements or contacts of any kind. We want to be transparent, and we want all other negotiating partners to have an opportunity to study Russia’s proposals with respect to the documents."

Does that mean there will be no “Kozak plan-2”?

" - “Kozak plan-2” is out of the question. So is “Kozak plan-3”."

What about “Zubakov plan-1”?

(Yuri Zubakov is Deputy Secretary of the Russian Council for National Security, reportedly, in charge of preparing new Russian proposals on the Trans-Dniestria conflict resolution.)
" - As I have told you, there are no additional plans or other documents. It is true, we are looking forward to receiving the Russian proposals as we want to understand their attitude to the package of documents we have worked out."

Do you think it likely that the “5+2” talks will be resumed at the end of June in Vynnytsia? Who is holding them back?

" - We hope the agreements reached by various negotiating partners on a bilateral basis will result in the fully-fledged “5+2” talks in Vynnytsia or Odessa. We also hope that the Trans-Dniestria negotiators will recognize the need to get back to the discussion in this format."

If the Trans-Dniestria business agents are in favour of these developments, while the Trans-Dnistria authorities claim the resolution runs counter to the previous agreements, does it mean that there is a conflict between the administration and private business in the region?

" - Something must be going on in the region. You know, when Resolution #815 was passed, the Trans-Dnistria authorities also complained about the same things. Yet life has proven the feasibility of this regulatory effort, and companies in the region have started dealing in normal, legitimate business."

Complaints about the new resolution are heard beyond Tiraspol as well: in Ukraine there is significant skepticism regarding this document, as it was prepared and adopted without any consultations with the Ukrainian party. Do you think it was done in the spirit of declared “strategic partnership”?

" - Last week we received a memorandum from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Ukraine on this issue and promptly responded to it. We are prepared to hold a working meeting at a relevant level in Chisinau on order to discuss all concerns.

The resolution takes effect on 1 July 2007, and we allowed a three-month leeway for the Trans-Dnistria businesses that import raw and other materials from other countries. We understand that proper conditions should be created so that business in the region develops in a dynamic, sustainable and lawful way."

Does Moldova consider Igor Smirnov’s discharge from office critical for the Trans-Dniestria settlement?

" - In the process of settlement, certain reforms should take place in order to democratize the region, as envisioned in the Yushchenko plan. It is essential for the Moldovan people residing in Trans-Dniestria to be able to elect their representatives in a civilized, democratic manner. It is not about particular persons…"

But, in fact, it is. Among the most frequently mentioned names are those of Vice President Korolev, purportedly, suiting Moscow more than the incumbent President, and of Speaker Shevchuk being favoured by Western negotiators…

" - Chisinau has never regarded this issue as a prerequisite to negotiations. We do not care about relations between Smirnov and Shevchuk. We approach the issue in a multidimensional, comprehensive way."

Is there a Romanian factor at work in the region, specifically in the context of Moldovan nationals’ massive obtaining of Romanian citizenship?

" - You should know that Romania is not participating in the Trans-Dniestria negotiations."

And yet, Mr. Basescu did come up with some proposals of his own for resolving the conflict, some of which were perceived sympathetically in Moldova…

" - That is true, but Romania does not even have observer status. As an EU member it is entitled to contribute to the discussion but not to come up with its own proposals. As for Romanian citizenship, now that Romania and Bulgaria are EU members, a lot of people are striving to get passports allowing them to move freely within the European Union. Thus all the fuss around the Romanian citizenship is being escalated artificially."

Does that mean you have no regrets about amending the legislation to allow dual citizenship in Moldova?

" - We believe it was a correct move and a correct amendment. Of course, we are worried about the approach that the Romanian authorities sometimes take, in particular, their reluctance to sign a fundamental interstate treaty with Moldova."

By signing the fundamental treaty and the state border agreement with Moldova, Romania could have facilitated the Trans-Dniestria settlement. Don’t you think?

" - I do. So far we have not received any plausible explanation of Romania’s unwillingness to sign the border agreement with Moldova. Both documents are extremely important for our countries. Romania acceded to NATO in 2005, and to the EU in 2007, so it should behave as a European country. When it finally appreciates the need for and value of these treaties, it will help all of us to speed up the “5+2” negotiations and make a breakthrough in the Trans-Dniestria settlement.

We approached the EU with our concerns over this issue. On 18-19 June 2007, the Moldova-EU Council session will be held, and we are going to raise these topics then."

You were one of the first high-ranking officials in Moldova to declare, a few years ago, that Russia had occupied part of your country’s territory. How consistent are your efforts to transform Russia’s mission today?

" - We have always drawn the international community’s attention to the need for the Russian Federation to respect its obligations to the Republic of Moldova, which it undertook at the 1999 OSCE summit in Istanbul. We feel disappointed with Russia’s ceasing to withdraw its armaments from Moldova two years ago. According to the Constitution, the Republic of Moldova is a neutral state, and any other country’s military presence here disagrees with our national legislation. A security strategy of the Republic of Moldova was adopted recently. It provides answers to many issues relating to our country’s development: its unwavering course towards European integration and military neutrality, which does not preclude cooperation with NATO."

See also:
» "Peacekeepers must leave", says Moldova's foreign minister
» Fears of new war as Moldova upgrades military capacity