 | WHAT ON EARTH IS THIS? Pridnestrovie claims it is a state. But opponents of independence say it isn't. We report, you decide. [more] |  | | |  | A RIVER OF BLOOD was the promise to Moldova's Slavic minority in 1990. Ethnic conflict played a role in independence struggles on both sides of the Dniester river. [more] |
| ||||||
Voronin's recent statement
Based on the past, what's to keep Voronin from changing his mind? Pridnestrovie and Pridnestrovie's greatest critics in the West seem to depict a Moldovan leader, who geo-politically dances all over the place.
We're living in a spin era, where even the more authoritarian of governments need to further explain their questionable policies. Since August of this year, the Moldovan government has enhanced its military ties with NATO in a fighting force qualitative way. This concerns Pridnestrovie (Trans-Dniester), which was attacked by Moldova in 1992.
In the earlier part of this year, it appeared to some that Moldova was moving closer to Russia. Moldovan President Vladimir Voronin continues find himself in a quagmire among competing geopolitical sympathies. Any option he chooses will be met with a good deal of criticism.
This leads to Voronin's latest explanation of Moldovan military aims. In a move designed to dispel the belief of a future military attack on Pridnestrovie, he:
- proposed setting up a joint Pridnestrovian-Moldovan armed forces;
- claimed that the enhancement of Moldova's military is for non-combative reasons;
- stated an opposition to using force in resolving the former Moldavian SSR conflict between Pridnestrovie and Moldova.
The first highlighted point is problematical for reasons having to do with Moldova's military ties with NATO and Pridnestrovie's desire to keep a greater distance from that organization. The second claim leaves one to ask why the increase in Moldovan arms upgrades, joint NATO-Moldova military training exercises and Chisinau's stated desire to see Russia militarily de-emphasized and replaced with a greater non-Russian military presence in the former Moldavian SSR? It's one thing to have a peace time military engaged in purely civilian activities like fixing roads and harvesting. Quite another when the military's ability to better effectively wage war is developed.
The last highlighted point relates to the two just before it. Based on the past, what's to keep Voronin from changing his mind? Pridnestrovie and Pridnestrovie's greatest critics in the West seem to depict a Moldovan leader, who geo-politically dances all over the place. Voronin's previous back peddling has no doubt influenced Pridnestrovie's rejection of his recent overture to form a joint former Moldavian SSR armed forces and discuss other issues.
For Russia and Pridnestrovie, one major diplomatic eyesore remains constant. Several years after Moldova's failure to forcefully take over Pridnestrovie in 1992, Russia brokered a deal which would've united the former Moldavian SSR; one with Pridnestrovie having a degree of autonomy. Moldova backed out of that deal at the last moment for reasons likely having to do with influential forces in the West not desiring such an arrangement. An agreement that would've placed the Russian military on former Moldavian SSR territory for an extended period.
Michael Averko is a New York based independent foreign policy analyst and media critic. Among his recent writings, Averko's latest analysis of the Kosovo crisis was published by Reuters earlier this month.
| more about - | |||||
| |||||
Both Transnistria and Moldova will benefit if they choose freedom and democracy instead of imposed solutions that the voters have already rejected. And this freedom is the only realistic choice that Moldova has left for Transnistria says regular Tiraspol Times columnist John Moynihan. . . 
