Conflict resolution and Pridnestrovie's international relations
The key to effective conflict resolution starts with understanding Pridnestrovie's view of the issues and the country's closer incorporation in international partnerships. By doing so, the achievement of permanent and lasting peace on both sides of the Dniester becomes easy.
Valeri Litskai, Pridnestrovie's Minister of Foreign Affairs
“ - Europe and Pridnestrovie share the same views on many of the most important international issues. We support peace, wellbeing and sustainable development within Europe and beyond. I have every confidence that Pridnestrovie can find its rightful place in international organizations and forums”, said the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He expressed hope that further development and signing of bilateral agreements will open up new venues for cooperation.
“ - I have no doubt that we shall continue fostering and developing our cooperation in international organizations, and join our efforts towards making relations between Pridnestrovie and other states closer and more dynamic,” said Litskai.
Clear goals and a cohesive policy ... on one side of the border
Pridnestrovie's success in building a nation is the result of a set of clear goals and a cohesive strategy for achieving them. In contrast, Moldova is considered unprincipled and untrustworthy by the government in Pridnestrovie.
“ - There are no guarantees that the Republic of Moldova will protect its statehood,” said Rouslan Slobodeniuc, the Pridnestrovian First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs.
“ - When their foreign policy changes five or six times, we cannot say we live next to serious neighbors. We are ready to fulfill European demands,” said Mr. Slobodeniuc, but “the Moldovan attitude changes radically” so that “in order to be in line with European demands, PMR must be in line with the Republic of Moldova’s demands. We have invited European investors, but Moldova has done everything it could to limit our contacts with Europe.”
Nevertheless, the European Union is in Pridnestrovie already and the Pridnestrovian Ministry of Foreign Affairs declared itself pleased with the implementation of the European monitoring on its borders and territory. As of November 2005, a $6 million international observer program put European Union inspectors on several Pridnestrovian border posts. The monthly reports from the EU supervising mission has so far only produced a "clean bill of health" for Pridnestrovie, proving to the world that the young nation is not involved in weapons manufacture or arms smuggling as Moldova had irresponsibly claimed.
Permanent peace on both banks of the Dniester
Now the solution for better relations lies in understanding Pridnestrovie's view of itself. And according to the country's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it is possible to establish a stable, lasting and permanent peace on both banks of the Dniester.
The Pridnestrovian issue, however, will not be solved if Chisinau sticks to its position of refusing to grasp Pridnestrovie's point of view, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said recently:
“ - As long as the official Chisinau insists on solving the conflict according to Moldovan leaders’ position, on the basis of Moldova’s legislation, neglecting the previous initiatives on conflict solving, I cannot see any chance of making progress,” Sergei Lavrov told after meeting with Czech Foreign Minister Cyril Svoboda in December 2005.
Key to understanding Pridnestrovie's worldview is recognizing the efforts which its people put into the past fifteen years of constructing the country from the smoldering ruins of the failed Soviet model. Moldova will never willfully admit that Pridnestrovie is today a successful state. But more and more international analysts "get it". As early as 2001, Steven D. Roper - a American specialist who worked in international conflict resolution with the U.S. government - recognized that "many Transnistrians today see their region as an independent state, and Transnistria is a de facto state."
In the years since then, both the status and viability of Pridnestrovie (Transnistria) as a sovereign entity has been enhanced and solidified. When surveyed by U.S. pollsters, Pridnestrovians displayed great trust in the country's democratic institutions. Living standards improved and are surpassed those of Moldova. And even the European Union recognized Pridnestrovie's democratic reforms and its development of an open, market-oriented economy.
These are all moves in the right direction. But the scorched earth diplomacy with which Moldova responded, made certain that Chisinau’s strategy was more that just one more hostile sortie against the much smaller Pridnestrovie. Hemispheric public opinion now deserves to be sharply focused on the lack of merit of Chisinau's territorial claim and how its negotiators deliberately distorts and employs misinformation to torpedo any hope of settlement with Pridnestrovie. It is an example of using diplomacy to worsen, rather than improve, relations between the two growing antagonists.
