In Transdniester, presidential candidates disagree on common state with Moldova

Igor Smirnov, seeking re-election as the president of Pridnestrovie, rules out a union state with Moldova

TIRASPOL (Tiraspol Times) - "Impossible" is the word that incumbent president Igor Smirnov of Pridnestrovie used on the campaign trail this weekend when asked about the possibilities of a future common state with Moldova.

" - Pridnestrovie considers a common state with Moldova impossible," said Smirnov who is seeking re-election on 10 December. “We do not refuse to build a state with common borders within with Moldova, but Chisinau has consistently derailed all previous accords. Moldova’s authorities say that they are going to the European Union and NATO; well, we have conducted a referendum,” Smirnov told reporters, confirming that 94% of voters in the 17 September referendum turned down a union with Moldova. Turnout was a record 78% and of those who voted, 97% also supported the continuation of the de facto independence which has characterized the unrecognized country since it declared independence in 1990, more than 16 years ago.

He said that Moldova and Pridnestrovie “have driven apart after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they have different economic systems, different education systems, and a whole generation has grown up with different values”.

Smirnov also said that along with other post-Soviet states, Pridnestrovie has formed the association For Democracy and Human Rights, “approaching a new stage of relations with the aim of coordinating their actions down te road to the international recognition”. The association has jointly petitioned the UN with an address in connection with the initiative of the GUAM countries to put on the UN General Assembly’s agenda the issue of “frozen conflicts”.
“ - The opinion of other sides should be also heard in the UN,” Smirnov said.

Opposition candidate advocates common state

Although not making it his main campaign issue, opposition candidate Andrey Safonov took issue with Smirnov's outright rejection of union with Moldova.

" - A common state is possible," says Safonov, "provided that voters on both sides of the Dniester agree to the conditions through a democratic referendum." He envisions a confederation, similar to unofficial Belgian-led OSCE proposals and not unlike the Kozak memorandum which PMR agreed to in 2003 and which was initially also agreed to by Moldova, before a last-minute change of mind. A common state with Moldova is a sensitive issue in Pridnestrovie, where politicians normally either advocate independent statehood or else do their best to avoid discussing the issue altogether. It is not popular with voters, as polls show that the majority of the electorate support independent statehood. According to a referendum held in September on the issue, 94% reject a union with Moldova, although analysts say that this number might change depending on how the issue is presented and how favorable the conditions for such a union are presented to Pridnestrovie. Even so, there is general agreement that the issue has little popular appeal and that the overwhelming majority of the citizens in the unrecognized country view Moldova as the last thing that they should ever be part of.

Andrey Safonov sees himself as the main opposition candidate in a field of four, all aiming to secure the presidential seat in the 10 December election. He is an outspoken critic of Smirnov and owner of an opposition newspaper which has received funding from the West. Asked by journalists, he refused to elaborate on the money which he received from the United States Embassy in Chisinau.

" - What matters in this election is change, and I am the candidate for change. There are many voters who want change in Pridnestrovie, and I am the man that will provide that."

Both candidates: "End the blockade"

Both candidates agree that a political solution must be found which is based on mutual understanding and negotiations, and rule out any application of war or other forms of pressure, including economic warfare, blockades and trade boycotts.

The talks of Chisinau and Tiraspol in the 5 + 2 format (Moldova, Pridnestrovie and mediators from Russia, Ukraine, and OSCE as the first five, with EU and US observers as the final two) broke off in February as the Moldovan delegation accused Tiraspol of intractability. Although Moldova later accused Pridnestrovie of walking out, OSCE diplomats who organized the talks certify that this is a lie: The talks ended when Moldova simply refused to show up. Later that same week, the conflict escalated when instead of political and diplomatic talks, economic pressure was brought to bear on Tiraspol: In March, Ukraine introduced at the request of Moldova, a new customs regime on Pridnestrovie's border, by which all enterprises of the unrecognised country are forced to register their exports in Chisinau.

Tiraspol met the move as an “economic blockade” and pointed out that it contradicted the country´s right to freedom in external economic activity, as per a protocol previously signed by the two sides at the behest of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, OSCE. Within months, the effect of the Moldova-orchestrated move resulted in more than $300 million dollars of losses for Pridnestrovie-based exporters. The attempt to force a solution through a campaign of economic pressure was seen as "ham-fisted" by Western analysts, and called "pig-headed" by a U.S. diplomat who felt that "with the move, Chisinau painted itself into a corner." It effectively ended all status resolution talks, with Igor Smirnov repeating Saturday that Pridnestrovie could only return to the negotiating table once the economic warfare had ended. He conditioned his side's participation by the signing a transit protocol, enabling exporters from landlocked Pridnestrovie to send their exports to third countries on the basis of the customs legislation of these receiving countries.

Such a protocol calls for “providing international guarantees and not making new attempts to exert economic pressure in the future”. It conforms to international law and existing precedent, and would be in line with similar protocols existing for other autonomous territories and unrecognized countries elsewhere in the world. Pridnestrovie, also called Transnistria and Transdniester, among other unofficial names, is not the first unrecognized country to find itself in a similar situation. Under international norms, negotitions on diplomatic status are traditionally kept separate from trade issues, as interrupting the latter has serious detrimental effects on ordinary citizens. As a policy, it is counter-productive, increases radicalism and only leads to more intractability among negotiating parties.

Or, as Ion Maurer, a citizen of Rybnitsa, says:
" - I am a Moldovan, but Moldova has long lost any goodwill that they may have had here. They are digging themselves into a deep, deep hole and I can't see how they can ever hope to get out of it. Like me, most other Moldovans in Transdniestria will never agree to any unified state with Moldova. It is a big no. The leaders in Chisinau act as if they hate us and only want to hurt us, so why do they think that would we want to have any kind of common state with them, ever? It is nuts." (With information from Itar-Tass)

See also:
» Landslide win for independence vote in Pridnestrovie's referendum