It is not a matter of if, but of when ... you bring our boys into this part of Eastern Europe, and some of them will die. The only question is: How many American soldiers will it take before the United States realizes that Transdniestria is not worth dying over.
But apparently eager for yet another lesson in the law of unintended consequences, someone in Washington now wants to go to war on the Dniester. "The United States is considering and discussing with our NATO allies options where we can propose to the Russians an alternative peacekeeping force for Transdniestria," U.S. arms official Paula DeSutter told a news briefing on Tuesday, 5 June 2007. Did she at least say it with a straight face?
The proposal - if it is serious, and this is hard to believe - sounds like it came out of the same Washington think-tank that created the likes of Douglas Feith, former third man at the Pentagon and Pentagon's undersecretary for policy. General Tommy Franks, when he was commander of operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, called him "the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the Earth." That is a direct quote.
This is about the most moronic idea ever and it deserves to be shot down in flames.
Hello, defense dudes? In case you haven't noticed, there is already a multinational peacekeeping force in place. It consists of troops from four countries (or, well, three, if you decide in your wisdom that Transdniestria doesn't yet deserve to be called a country).
This quadripartite peacekeeping solution is the world's most successful peacekeeping force. Ever. In terms on men, it is one of the smallest. In terms of budget, it is extremely cheap to run. In terms of intrusiveness, it is about as non-intrusive as any peacekeeping force anywhere can be. And where it matters most, it is a roaring success: It keeps the peace.
Yes, read that again. In an era of peacekeeping bungling, limping from disaster to disaster in Somalia, Kosovo, Darfur, Lebanon, and a bunch of other flash points, there is one little place where the peace is actually being kept: Transdniestria.
Since Moldova agreed to sign its ceasefire in 1992, not a single life has been lost to the conflict. Read that again: Not one dead. There have been plenty of confrontations. Sometimes weapons have been drawn. From time to time, the former warring parties engage in tense stand-offs. Why did none of them escalate? Because this particular peacekeeping operation actually works.
Moldova itself is a willing partner in this peacekeeping operation, which was set up following the 1992 cease fire - incidentally, an agreement bearing the signature of Moldova's president. It was later confirmed in subsequent agreements and treaties, including 1995 and 1997 deals which enlarged the format to include Ukraine.
A fifth multinational element, the 56-member country Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), already participates in all peacekeeping planning meetings.
No one dies because the current Transdniestria peacekeeping format is a success. This is in stark contrast to the frequent ethnic Kosovo violence, which ten times as many NATO forces appear to be unable to control - despite a budget more than a hundred times as bloated as the lean, effective and jointly funded Moldova / Transnistria / Russia / Ukraine operation.
Besides, the international troops from these four sides already know the lay of the land. It is their part of the world. Someone from Ukraine, for instance, is operating in what is pretty much already his own neighborhood. He knows the mentality, and he knows what to say - in the local language - to defuse any kind of heated situation. Why should we send these people home if they are doing a great job? And why should we even consider replacing them with American boys from halfway around the globe, considering that equally good results are not at all guaranteed..?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. So far, for fifteen years and counting, peace has not broken down. We can thank a small group of multinational peacekeepers for that. They are doing a great job of their one and only task: Preventing bloodshed and further loss of lives.
The corollary to this is that any peace, anywhere, can be easily broken by masked men with guns. It will not be hard for Moldovan irregulars - with the implicit backing of anyone who wants to stir up trouble - to stage manage an incident with a few kills. The resulting bloodsplattering will spill into the headlines, as was the plan, to create the false impression of an ineffective peacekeeping force in need of NATO reinforcements.
You read it here first.
The author, Steve Hill, is a conflict resolution specialist. In April, he published The How-To for peace and prosperity on the Dniester [1] which recommends acceptance of individual differences and separate identities as the key to lasting peace.