MOLDOVA: SOVIET
WAYS SURFACE IN A CORNER
by Zoltán Dujisin
(http://www.ipsterraviva.net/Europe/article.aspx?id=3942)
BUDAPEST (IPS)
- After the breakaway Moldovan region of Transnistria voted for independence in
a referendum last month, Russian diplomacy seems to indicate willingness to
recognise a de facto state whose legitimacy the international community
persistently denies.
One year after its independence in 1991, a brief civil war erupted in Moldova, a former Soviet republic of 4.5
million, after a fringe of land east of the river Dniester
proclaimed independence.
Russian peacekeeping forces, siding with the Transnistrians on this stretch
apparently to protect its Russian and Ukrainian population, enforced a
ceasefire and have since remained in the area, though in decreased numbers.
Seventy-eight percent of the 400,000 voters registered in Transnistria
participated in the Sep. 17 referendum, and 97 percent of them backed
independence from Moldova
and an eventual union with Russia.
Electoral events in Transnistria have always been internationally ignored, but
factions in the Russian state Duma (parliament) now hint at diplomatic
recognition. A recent Duma statement notes that the international community
should "take into consideration" the referendum's results.
The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OCSE) mission in Moldova has
refused to recognise the vote, claiming it was neither free nor fair.
Transnistrian officials accused the OSCE of making unsubstantiated statements,
as the organisation did not accept the region's invitation to monitor the
elections.
While there have not been reports of serious violations, Western observers
point to the lack of democratic mechanisms ensuring a fair public opinion
debate.
Transnistria is generally believed to have an authoritarian and
Russian-controlled regime, though the extent of such control is open to debate.
Its capital Tiraspol
boasts all the institutions and symbols of a state, including a parliament and
a well controlled public discourse and educational system. But the region is
often perceived as a centre for illicit activities related to arms, drugs and
human trafficking.
A European Union border monitoring mission has concluded that the extent of
criminal activities across borders had been puffed up by Moldovan officials.
After the victory, the leader of the breakaway region Igor Smirnov announced
plans to bring social, customs, financial and education policies in line with Moscow so as to
facilitate a future merger.
Following a visit to Russia
by Smirnov, Russian deputy foreign minister Grigoriy Karasin held talks with
both Moldovan and Transnistrian authorities, calling for a resumption of
negotiations between the two parts..
While talks are likely to continue, the deadlock is based on disagreements over
the region's status. The Transnistrian leadership demands a co-federal state,
whereas Moldova
has only offered autonomy.
The vote came in the context of an agreement between Moldova
and Ukraine stipulating that
all Transnistrian goods must receive customs clearance in Moldova.
The move, which Transnistrian authorities called an economic blockade and which
Russia opposed, was
justified by Moldova
as arising from a need to combat widespread smuggling.
Additionally, recent joint military exercises between nominally neutral Moldova and
North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) forces were described by
Transnistrian officials as an act of intimidation.
While pro-European feelings grow in Moldova,
"Russia
is perceived as the best supporter and friend of the Transnistrian
people," Razvan Dumitru, fellow at University College London told IPS.
"Through combined factors of illegal economic activities, support from Moscow and defiance of
international regulations of borders, the region has managed to maintain a
higher standard of living for its citizens," says Dumitru.
The regime enjoys popular support, according to several local reports. Many
citizens uphold a more 'Soviet' concept of democracy focusing on social justice
and benefits, and are unwilling to dismantle their system in favour of
liberal-democratic models, these reports suggest.
Pluralism is allowed only to the extent that it will not threaten the regime,
as even the opposition is keen on maintaining the benefits resulting from
political autonomy.
The main political parties in Transnistria supported the referendum, but some
local NGOs have criticised authorities for pressuring its citizens to
participate in the referendum. They see it as a political move by Smirnov to
enhance his popularity ahead of a Dec. 10 presidential vote.
Opposition papers call the vote a publicity stunt and criticise the president
for not holding the referendum in line with Moldovan legislation, which would
have facilitated recognition.
An OSCE delegation is planning to visit Transnistria to reassess its capacity
to hold democratic elections, and is likely to suggest improvements that could
take years to materialise. Only once these standards have been met is the
self-proclaimed republic likely to spot any signs of international acceptance.
In the meantime Transnistrian officials keep all options open and accuse the
West of double standards, pointing to examples in the former Yugoslav regions
of Montenegro
and Kosovo.
Moscow is awaiting the results of negotiations on Kosovo's status to assume a
more definite position, but it is aware of the economic burden the absorption
of a Transnistrian enclave would carry, while it fears encouraging many of the
independent-minded regions within Russia.
The Moldovan government accuses Russia
of tampering with its territorial integrity and has called the referendum
"a farce". (END)
Amana S. Ferro
