Institute for War and Peace Reporting
Nov. 3, 2004
Comment: In Search of a Solution
It is in the interests of both Russia and the European Union to solve a
problem knocking at both their doors.
By Nicholas Whyte in Brussels (BCR No 524, 03-Nov-04)
Moldova is soon to become one of the European Union’s newest
neighbours. With the expected entry of Romania in 2007, the EU will
share a long frontier with the poorest country in Europe, which suffers
from an uneasy sense of identity and uncertain borders.
The unrecognised separatist region of Transdniester has been out of the
control of Moldova’s capital, Chisinau, since 1992 and is essentially a
mafia-run fiefdom which survives thanks only to criminal profits and
support from certain circles in Russia and Ukraine – and the security
presence of the 14th Russian Army.
The region is a prime location for money laundering and the production
and illegal export of weapons. Firearms produced in and trafficked from
Transdniester are said to lack serial numbers, making them untraceable
and therefore ideal for organised crime.
In the current situation, such activities can be conducted in and from
Transdniester very easily and with impunity, as international law
enforcement bodies are not allowed there, and international
governmental and non-governmental organisations are unable to operate
normally within its borders.
As a result, it is difficult to provide training for officials or
provide expertise on legislation, awareness-raising campaigns and
witness protection programmes relating to trafficking issues when the
authorities are not recognised internationally and are resistant to
international pressure and intervention.
The civil war in Moldova was relatively mild by post-Soviet standards
when you consider the Georgian civil war, the Armenian-Azerbaijani war
over Nagorny Karabakh, or the decade of implosion in Chechnya. But this
does not make a long-term solution any easier to find.
A Russian attempt to break the deadlock, the so-called Kozak Memorandum
of November 2003, foundered on two issues: the constitutional set-up of
a reunited Moldovan state, and Russia’s continued military presence in
Transdniester.
Russian officials admitted afterwards that their negotiator Dmitry
Kozak – an adviser to President Vladimir Putin – failed to get the
necessary buy-in to the plan from Washington and the EU via the
existing OSCE negotiating mechanism.
However, the EU’s new European Neighbourhood Policy – which is designed
to improve stability and security in areas soon to border on the EU
following its expansion – has raised expectations in Moldova.
The European Commission will shortly be publishing an Action Plan for
the country, which should contain clear benchmarks for the country for
development of democracy, rule of law and human rights. After an
initial period when Chisinau got a relatively good bill of health on
this score, the 2003 local elections and continuing state harassment of
journalists and media indicate a worrying trend.
A regime of visa sanctions against the Transdniestrian leadership,
imposed in early 2003 in frustration with their failure to move the
peace process forward, was intensified in July 2004 in reaction to
Tiraspol’s harassment of Moldovan-language schools.
Tensions also rose in the divided town of Tighina/Bendery in autumn
2004, when Transdniestrian militia seized control of a vital railway
station.
The EU has a clear interest in helping to clean up the serious problems
caused by poverty and endemic crime in Moldova, as both threaten to
bring even greater problems with Romania’s succession in perhaps fewer
than three years’ time.
And whether or not one believes Chisinau’s claims that Transdniestrian
arms are flowing to Caucasian rebels, it surely cannot be in Russia’s
long-term interests to allow the dispute to continue to fester.
At present, international actors are unwilling to invest resources in
Moldova; the painful memory of last year’s botched Kozak plan lingers.
What is needed is a joint EU-Russia effort to find a solution, in the
context of the European Neighbourhood Policy and also of Russian’s 1999
commitment to withdraw its troops and equipment from Moldova, and
specifically from Transdniestria.
The EU’s designated new external relations commissioner, Benita
Ferrero-Waldner, has had some experience of the issue from her time as
Chair-in-office of the OSCE in 2000.
Perhaps Brussels and Moscow will find the necessary time and energy to
resolve this comparatively minor problem soon.
Nicholas Whyte is Europe Programme Director of the International Crisis
Group in Brussels.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress