[0]

OSCE passes judgment on a referendum which is was not part of and which it did not send any observers to

CHISINAU (Tiraspol Times) - The Head of the OSCE Mission to Moldova, Louis O'Neill, stated at a news conference Thursday that the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe won't recognize neither the referendum held last Sunday in PMR nor its results. This was not news to anyone: The OSCE had already given its verdict on the referendum well in advance of the voting, and decided not to send any observers to monitor it.

Nevertheless, O'Neill stated the OSCE could not recognize the referendum because it was "organized without providing democratic conditions for holding it", in his words. He also claimed to know that pressure and intimidation was put on voters, and therefore the voting could not be free. He provided no proof to back up any of his claims. Journalists noted that the OSCE also did not prepared a formal report analyzing the referendum or its results, and in fact could not do so becuase the organization did not send any observers and was therefore not able to monitor the voting process first-hand.

In Chisinau, Moldovan citizen Marina Vozian-Waters wanted to know how anyone could state categorically that there was fraud, asking:
" - I thought Moldova and EU refused to go to Transdniestr and observe the referendum. Please, correct me if I am mistaken."

Similar questions were heard elsewhere, with one political analyst asking:
" - If they intended all along to prove that there were violations, why did they refuse to send observers? They would have been able to then provide proof of fraud rather than mere empty accusations. Where were the observers who are supposed to defend democracy? It is all talk, and wild-eyed talk at that, and no action to help young and aspiring democracies improve."

First-hand observers report clean, fair vote

Moldovan journalist and politician Victor Josu, deputy editor-in-chief of Moldavskiye Vedomosti and an accredited observer at Sunday's referendum, emphasized the openness, transparency and glasnost of the referendum process.

Statements from the 174 international observers also confirm a calm and democratic voting process with no indication of fraud or irregularities of any kind. For example, Italian observers Stefanio Vernole and Alberto Askari called the voting process "democratic and transparent." The summary of the observers' conclusions stated "that practically all polling stations displayed information in all three national languages; that no incidents of voter intimidation had been found" and that polling stations were easily accessible to all voters all over Pridnestrovie, an unrecognized country also known in the West as Transnistria and Trans-Dniester.

215 accredited journalists, mostly from Western Europe, also covered Pridnestrovie's referendum first-hand. None of their articles indicated that there was any kind of voter intimidation or fraud. Instead, as Reuters reported, "young people dance in a square in Tiraspol," noting a festive atmosphere: "Shopwindows are dressed up in in the red-and-green separatist flag. Young people stroll through Tiraspol's streets." Press reports published in New York and Washington described voters with tears in their eyes when the results were announced.

In the two-question referendum, voters were also asked whether they wanted to abandon independence and reunite with Moldova, with whom PMR fought a 1992 war that killed more than 1,000 people. Final results showed that 94.6 percent voted against a union with Moldova, and 3.4 percent supported it.

Voter unity = fraud

According to Louis O'Neill, it was not necessary for the OSCE to actually go to PMR and observe the referendum in order to state categorically that there was fraud. It was enough, he said, to just look at the results. In his words, the very result of the referendum indicates it was non-democratic: He found it hard to believe that as many as 97% of the voters can agree on something. But others say that he is out to lunch on that one.

" - Of course, OSCE has to grasp for straws here," says Petru Gladchi, a civil society activist from Tiraspol.
" - Because they didn't participate in the referendum, did not want to help organize it, and did not even send observers even though Tiraspol invited them. So now they don't know what they are talking about and they have nothing to go on, so they have to say that the result smells fishy."

He notes that this is very weak base on which to base a fraud accusation on, and that if that is the best which OSCE can do, then they must also ask Ukraine to give up its independence.

" - Nearby Ukraine held a similar independence referendum, on 1 December 1991. The vote passed with 97% in favor, and Ukraine confirmed its independence. But if such a strong show of unity is an indicator of fraud, then I guess that Ukraine has to turn in its statehood to the OSCE. As of today, Ukraine can no longer be called a state, because it was formed on the basis of what O'Neill thinks is an improbable, fraudulent result," comments Gladchi, ending with a "goodbye Ukraine, you have no claim to statehood because in the eyes of the OSCE, unity is automatically the same as fraud. They don't need to actually see anything or observe for themselves. They just know."