The Conflict in Transnistria: Origins, History and Prospects of Resolution



The article provideaanalysis of thGenesis, the unfoldingand the specificity of the flow of the Transnistrianconflict, conclusions and forecasts on the situation in post-Soviet Moldova, with the use of securitcommunities’politicatheory.


Table of Contents:

1. Formulation of the problem

2. The specifics of the conflict: events and facts

3. Conclusion


1. Formulation of the problem

The purpose of this work is to give aanalysis of the genesis, unfoldinand specificity of the course of the Transnistriaconflict, to draconclusions and predictions about the situation in the post-Soviet Moldova, usingmodern political science theory.

According to some politicaanalysts, the Transnistrian conflict within the overall range of the Balkan conflicts [1,2]. As a result of the frozen Transnistrian conflict, on the territory of the former Moldavian SSR, a state formation wasformed, including the Republic of Moldova and the Transnistrian Moldavian RepublicUsing the terminologof politologist Karl Deutsch, the author othe concept of securitcommunities in international relations, this state-territoriaentitcan be describeaaamalgamic” securitcommunity. According to K. Deutsch, the maincharacteristic of any securitcommunity is the mutuaconfidencof its members that none of them will resort to force, no matter what disputearise between them.

And therare two types of securitcommunities – “amalgamic” and pluralistic”. Karl Deutsch emphasizes the essential difference between integration and amalgamation.

Integration implies the formation of a full-fledgecommunity, while amalgam primarily involves the creation of aformal organization, the establishment of politicainstitutions [34].

Thus, a pluralistiassociation does not necessarily imply thexistencocommon formalized political institutions.The followers of K. Deutsch, Emanuel Adleand MichaeBarnett, define the pluralistiassociation as follows: «themember states of thicommunity must be the bearers of thcommon basic values developed by social and politicalinstitutions; states should be readanable to quickland adequately respond to changes in relationships, which isachieved through loyalty to each otheand having a sense ocommunitybesides this, the states should beintegrated with each other to the extent that thedo not seany other way of developing relations other than peaceful» [5]

For Adleand Barnett, a securitcommunitbased on the strong confidence of its members in the peacefuldevelopment of relationships cannot emerge if there is no mutual trust and common identitamong its members. K.Deutsch and his followers agree that a sense of communitshould first arise in people’s heads, and only then beembodied in one form or another in interstate relations. It is believed that thisense of community appears as a resultof close interaction between representatives of national societies, thanks to which they get to know each other betterand are penetrated by mutual trust [6]

Examples of pluralistic” associations include the European Community/EuropeanUnion, ASEAN, Eurasian Economic Union. The amalgacommunitcaexist without integration, without a sense ofcommunityaexample of which is the situation in post-Soviet Moldova with the Republic of Moldova andTransnistrian Moldavian Republic [7]. And it seems that a serious practical problem is that the Republic of Moldovaand Transnistrian Moldavian Republigo on to forming a pluralistic” securitcommunity.


2. The specifics of the conflictevents and facts

In order to analyze the events in Transnistria, it is necessary to return to the second half of the 80s, since the sourcesof the conflict originate from there.

First, you need to point out that the policy of «perestroika»proclaimed M. Gorbachev in the mid-1980s, led to anincrease in sociaactivity of the population. In the national republics this waexpressed in the creation and rapid growth of social movements uniting representatives of the titular nationality

IMoldova, the specificity of theideological orientation of the nationamovement consisted in the proclamation of the thesis about the identity of theMoldovaand Romanian languageand in calls for the unification of Moldova and Romania (especiallgiven thecomplex history of Bessarabia’s annexation to the USSR).

A significant part of the national intelligentsia and the leadership of the Moldavian SSsupported nationalist sentiments.

In March 1988, at the congress of the Union of Writers of the USSR in Moscow, a proposal was made toimpart state status to the languages of the titular nations of all republics of the Soviet Union. Part of the Moldovanintelligentsiattracted the possibility of obtaining ethnic preferences. In the volume#4/1988 of thNistru” magazine,which was publisheby the MSSWriters’ Union, a prograwas published with demands to recognize the identity of the Moldovaand Romanian languageand to translate the Moldavian language intLatin script. 

In September 1988, The Letter 66” was published, in which Moldovan writers demanded recognition of the state language onlyMoldovan on the basis oLatin script. In the autumn, a series of demonstrations were held, at which morand moreradical slogans sounded: Moldavia for MoldovansSuitcase-Station-Russia”The Russians – beyond the Dniester, the Jews – into the Dniester” [8].

In 1988-89 in the wake of perestroika, numerous nationalist organizations appeared in Moldovaacting undeanti-Soviet and anti-Russian slogans. At the end of 1988, the formation of the Popular Front of Moldova began. The unionists, who, under the slogan One language, onnation!” called upon to join Romania, became moractiveSince 1991, the two main Moldovan newspapers began to appear under the epigraph on thfirst page (above the titleWeare Romanians – and thats it!” [9].

On February 16, 1989, on behalf of the Writers’ Union of Moldova, the draft law On thFunctioning of Languageson the Territory of the Moldavian SSR” was published. According to this project, parents were deprived of the right tochoose the language of instruction of children, and for using a language other than the state (and the state language meant, in fact, Romanian) for official communication, administrative and, in some cases, crimina[10].

On March 30, 1989, the draft law On the State Language” wapublished, prepareby a working group of theSupreme Council of the MSSR, in which Moldovan was proclaimed the only state languageIn Transnistria (this territory, where Moldovans did not constitute most of the population, waartificially united with Bessarabia after itsaccession to the USSR) both of these bills were perceiveas discriminatorywhich led to the emergence of a spontaneous social movement that favored the introduction of two official state languages in Moldova: Moldovan and RussianIt should be noted that not only the Russian, but the numerous Ukrainian populations of Transnistria opposed the introduction of Moldovan (Romanian) languagas the only statelanguageSome Moldovans from Transnistria also opposed the translation of Moldovan writing intLati[9].

In May 1989, the PopulaFront of Moldova wacreated, uniting a number of nationalist organizations. Inopposition to it, “Interdvizhenie” (The International Movement) appeared in Transnistria, later called Unitate-Unity[11].

On May 23, 1989, the Tiraspol City Council appealed to the Presidium of the MSSSupreme Council to adopt alaw on the functioning of two state languages in the republic – Moldovaand Russian, and also to extend the timeframe for discussing draft laws to the Plenum of the CentraCommittee of the CPSU on interethnic relations and hold anational referendum [9].

On August 2, 1989, on the day of the celebration of the 49th anniversary of the founding of the MSSR, about a hundred people from the Vatra” informaassociation gathered in the town of Bender in the Oktyabrsky” park.They put on mourning bandages, attached black bows to their clothes, openetricolors” (Romanian national flagsand arrangeaunauthorized procession through the streets of the city. Thecalled the arrived policofficers’ occupiers” andStalinistsPolice detained 14 protesters, among whom were residents of Tiraspol, Causeand Ialoven. Theadministrative organizers of the procession N. RakovitaI. Nikolaeand A. Mirzu were brought tadministrativeresponsibilit[12].

On August 10, 1989, it became known that at the upcoming 13th session of the Supreme Council of the MSSR, noteven the draft law of March 30, 1989 would be discussed, but it’s even more rigid version, whicenvisageconductingoffice worexclusively in Moldovan.

In response, on August 11, 1989 in Tiraspol, the Joint Council of Labour Collectives (OSTKwacreated, opposing this bill, which, according to the founders and leaders of the OSTK, could lead to discrimination based on nationality in the exercise of the right to wor[11].

On August 16, 1989, by a decision of the OSTK, a precautionary strike was held with the demand to postpone thesession of the Supreme Soviet. More than 30 thousand people took part in the strike. MSSR leadership did notrespond to the demands of the strikerand confirmed the decision to hold a session at which it was planned to discuss the law on the official state language. Thiswas the impetus for a large-scale political strike that began on August 21. Icoveremanenterprises, institutions and organizations of Tiraspol, Bendeand Rybnitsa

By August 29, 1989, when the session of the Supreme Councilopened, the OSTK was transformed into the RepublicaStrike Committee, and 170 enterprises participated in the strike, including the Mezon, the Schetmash, the Alpha, the Electropribor and other Chisinau factories. More than 400labor collectives did not join the strike but declared their solidarity with the striker[9].

In response to the strike, the Popular Front organized a rally in Chisinau, called the Great National Assembly,whiccalled for the exclusion of the Russian language from the public life of the republic. About 500 thousandpeople from the whole MSSR took part in the meeting. As a result, on August 31, 1989, the Supreme Council gave theMoldovan language the status of the state language. This dawas later declared a festive holiday in Moldova [12].

After the adoption of the law on the state language, manenterprises joined the strikePresident Mikhail Gorbachevtried to convince business leaders to suspend the strike, but this proposal was rejecteat a rally in Tiraspol. The strike wanevertheless stopped on September 21, 1989 after the plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU, when it became clear that substantial assistance from the centraleadership would not follow [13].

Meanwhile, under the control of the OSTK, thThe Striking Tiraspol” and the The Labour Tiraspol” newspapersbegan to issue

On November 3-4, 1989, th2nConference of the OSTK was held, where a proposal was made tocreate autonomin Transnistria. On November 4, 1989, during the conference of authorized labor collectives of Tiraspol, a resolution was passed instructing the OSTK to consider the possibility of holding a referendum on the issue of autonomy before the XIVSession of the Supreme Council of the MSSR.

On December 3, 1989, a referendum waheld in Rybnitsa on thexpediency of creating the Transnistrian Autonomous Socialist Republic. 91,1% of those who took part in the referendum were in favor of creatinautonomy.January 29, 1990 a similareferendum was held in Tiraspol [9].

The confrontation between Moldova and Transnistria began to grow after the election of a necomposition of theSupreme Council of the MSSR on Februar25, 1990, in which Transnistrian representatives, being in the minority,were unable to exerany influence on legislative activitySoon afterepeated threats, psychological pressurandbeatings, they left the parliament session. One of the members of the Supreme Soviet of the MSSR, a MoldovaI.Rusu, wrote that since May 1990, fist-type lawlessness, the threat of physical violence has become the mainarguments of parliamentardemocrats” [9].

On May 20, 1990, supporters of thPopular Front of Moldova broke up a rallof motherand beat more than 20deputies, mainly from Transnistria. Deputies from Transnistria ISmirnov, V. Rylyakov, PZalozhkov and deputies-leaders of the International Movement A. LisetskyPShornikov, I. Russu werattacke[13]. On May 17, theLiteratura SArta (Literaturand Art)” newspaper publisheaannouncement about the upcoming rally of thePopular Front near Bender. One of the phrases of the announcement was: Lets demonstrate to everyone that Tiginawas, is and remains a RomaniacityIn the working groups of enterprises of the city of Bender, suggesting theprovocative nature of the action, the creation of self-defense units began [14].

The rallwas scheduled for May 20 and, according to the application of the organizers, was to be held in thearea of Varnitsa. It waannounced that the rally will be devoted to the laws on languages, the transition to the Latialphabet and the adoption of new state symbols.

About 3 thousand people, brought by the PopulaFront from Chisinaand ruraareaoMoldova, took part in it. At the rally, there were calls to go to Bendeand hoist the tricolor” flag over the City Council, but Ion Hadârcă, the chairman of the executivcommittee of the Popular Front, asked in his speech to refrainfrom this. A resolution was passed expressing distrust of the deputies of the MSSR, representing Bender, anddemanding that the citauthorities place a tricolor flag over the citcouncil. After the end of thrally, most of its participants dispersed, but a small motorcade attempted to break througinto Bender.

However, in this case, the citauthorities set up a train, which blocked the railroad. Members of the PopulaFront managed to unhook the cars and move on, but aftecolliding with one of the workers' self-defense detachments Bender theleft their decision to enter the city. The next day, the incident waprosecuted [9].

IJune 1990, the head of Moldova, MirceSnegur, left the CPSU. The former main Moldovacommunist became aseparatist, however, more moderate than the radicals from the Popular Front. M. Snegur was in favor of secession fromthe USSR but waagainst joining RomaniaIn the same month, the 1st Congress of Transnistrian Deputies of all levelswas held in Parkany

On June 23, the MSSSupreme Council approved the Conclusion of a special commission on the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, in which the creation of the MSSR was declarean illegal act, and Bessarabiand NorthernBukovina – the occupied Romanian territorie[12].

IJuly 1990, the Popular Front issued a demand for the renaming of Moldova into the Romanian Republic ofMoldova. All thicaused a negative reaction from the residents of Transnistria and Gagauzia (where the majoritareTurkic Gagauz). On July 31, the Presidium of the Tiraspol City Council, in response to the actions of Chisinau, proclaimed that if the MSSR wacreated illegally, then the lefbank of the Dniester waalso illegally included in it.

Therefore, the presidium does not consider itself bound bany obligations to the leadership of the SSR ofMoldova” [15].

Locaauthorities in Transnistria and Gagauzia held referendums on the functioning of languages. As a result of which Moldovan, Russiaand Ukrainian were proclaimed official languages in Transnistriaand Moldavian, Gagauzand Russian were proclaimed official languages in Gagauzia. Following this, on August 19, 1990 the independenceof Gagauzia was proclaimed, and on September 2, 1990, at the 2nExtraordinary Congress of Deputies of all levels ofTransnistria, the Transnistrian Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic was formed within the USSR. At the same time, itstemporarSupreme Soviet waelected with IgoSmirnov achairmaand a decision was made on the need to developa constitution of the TMSSbDecember 1, 1990. [9].

The formation of the TMSScaused a negative reaction both from the official Chisinaand nationalistorganizations, and from the government of the USSR. Wcaagree with point of view oZurabTodua, the political scientist and Deputy of the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova, that the separatist movements in Transnistria and Gagauzia was a response to Chisinaus reluctance to take intaccount theinterests of ethnic communities [16].

At the end of 1990, Nicolae Dabija, the editor-in-chief of the LiteraturSi Arta” newspaper, published the brochureMoldova over Dniester – Our Native Land, in which he actively opposed secession. IDecember 1990, MikhailGorbachev signed a decree in whicattention was drawn to the fact that in important cases, citizenship. The decreecalled on the Moldovan leadership to revise certain provisions from the section” Liberation of Languages on theTerritory of the Moldavian SS“and the Decreof the SupremSoviet of the USSR on the order of itentry so thatthe interests oall nationalities living on its territorare respected. The decrealso contained the requirement to takeall necessarmeasures to normalize the situation, unconditionally respect the rights of citizens of any nationalityand prevent incitement of ethniconflicts”. At the same time, the decisions on the proclamation of the Gagauz Republic andthe TMSSR were considered null and void [9].

From December 1989 to November 1990, local referendums were held in the cities and districts of Transnistria regarding the formation of the Transnistrian Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic. Of the 472 thousand registeredvoters, 370 thousand, or 79%, voted. Of these, over 355 thousand, that is, 95,8% of the voters, or 75,3% of the numberof voters included in the lists, spoke in favor of the formation of the TMSSR. Only 1.9% voted against [18].

On March 17, 1991, an All-USSR Referendum on the preservation of the USSR was held, but Moldovaauthorities prevented the referendum from taking place in the republic, thereforcentral republican referendum commissions werenot created, and voting waheld only in military units. Of the 701000 who voted for the preservation of the SovietUnion, 98,3% were in favor. IBender, 73 000 participated in the referendum – 77,2% of the 94 000 listed residents of the citand neighboring villages. Of these, 98,9% were in favor of preserving the USSR, less than 1% were against (620 people) [19].

The holding of a referendum in Transnistria has increased dissatisfaction with Chisinaauthorities. The situation worseneaftethe coupof the Emergency Committee on August 19-21, 1991. After its failure, a rallwaheld in Chisinau, at which therewere calls for Moldova to leave thSoviet Union. The OSTK Tiraspol Presidium, for its part, supported the StateEmergency Committee, publishing in the Labor Tiraspol a statement: stabilization of the socio-political situation [9].

On 23 August 1991, the Communist Party of Moldova was dissolved. On August 22, 1991, detachments of theChisinau policarrested some of the deputies of the Supreme and local councils of Transnistria. August 25, 1991 in Tiraspol adopted the Declaration of Independence of the TMSSR. On August 27, 1991, after Russiand Ukraine, Moldova declares its independenceand on August 29, 1991, in Kiev, the Chisinau special servicearrested the Chairmaof thSupreme Council of the TMSPR, Igor Smirnov. StepanTopal, the leadeoGagauzia waalso arrested [12].

On September 1, the deputies of the Tiraspol City Council, Galina Andreeva and Svetlana Migulya, headed theWomenStrike Committee and held a many-thousand womens rally in the centeof Tiraspol, at which a resolutionwaadopted demanding the release of arrested Transnistrian and Gagauz politicians and the formation of the peoplesguard. After the rally, the women blocked the railroad, thus starting the so-callerailway blockade”In the followingdays, the blockade spread to Bender. 

On September 2, the 4tCongress of Deputies of Transnistria of all levelsapproved the constitution, the flaand the coat of arms of the TMSSR. In September, the Supreme Council of Transnistria decided to establish the Republican Guard. Reassignment of Transnistrian internaaffairs departmentsbegins. On September 25, Moldovan policentered Dubossary, where they used weapons against civilians, and over 100 people were beaten. In response to this, one of the leaders of Transnistria, Grigory Marakutsa, headed the policand proceeded to the creation of paramilitary forces. Under public pressure, on October 1, Moldovan OPON forces was withdrawn from Dubossarand ISmirnov and other Transnistrian deputies were release[12].

On November 5, by the decision of the Supreme Council, the name of the TMSSR wachanged to a new one –the Transnistrian Moldavian Republi(Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic). On December 1, the first referendum onindependencof the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic was held. 78% of voters took part in the voting, 97,7% of thereferendum participants voteYes” [17].

On December 13, the daafter the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR ratified the Belavezha Accords, the Moldovanpolice made the third attempt tattack Dubossary. During the 40- minute firefight of the policand the TransnistrianRepublican Guard, four policemen and threguardsmefrom Rybnitsa were shot: Russian A. Patergin, Ukrainian V. Shcherbatyand Moldovan Y. Turcan. 15 people were wounded, about 20 guardsmen were missingIn response,hostage-takinby police officers in Transnistria began. IBender, the chairman of the citexecutive committee,Vyacheslav Kogut, introduced a state of emergency. However, to date information about the collision on December 13is vercontroversial. The claims that guardsmen fired on the Moldovan police post in the morning or that the police tried to break into the center of Dubossary have not yebeeconfirmed.

At December 14, clashes in Dubossarcontinued. A police lieutenant was killed. Two buses with Moldovanpolicemen were sent to Bender. Cossacks and volunteers from different regions of Russia began to arrive inTransnistria. On December 14 and 15, two meetings of M. Snegur and ISmirnov were held in Chisinau, duringwhich decisions were made to create a “conciliation commission”, to withdraarmed units to places of permanentdeployment, to remove roadblocks and to release the woundeand detained. On December 18, Russia recognized the independence of Moldova, on December 21, Ukraine recognized the independence of Moldova. On the same day, M.Snegur signean agreement on the accession of Moldova to the CIS [9].

During the winter of 1991-92 relations betweeChisinaand Tiraspol were exacerbated. Several minor clashesoccurred, one of which in the first days of the spring of 1992 causethe outbreak of large-scale hostilities.

On April 1, 1992 a unit of the Moldovan policeaccompanieby two BTR-70 armored personnecarriers,entered to Bender. The policattempted to disarm the Transnistrian guardsmen. Under the crossfire hit the bus with the workers of the cotton spinning mill. There were deaand woundedon both sides. One woman died, and several civilians were injured.

On April 30, a deputand Transnistrian politician Nikolai Ostapenko was killed by Moldovan terroristfrom the Ilascu group in the village of Karagash in the vicinitof Tiraspol. Mobilization began in Transnistria. 14 thousandworkers were given weapons. By order of the Transnistriacommand, bridgeacross the Dniester near Criulyaandthe village of Bychok were blown up. The defense of the dam of the Dubossary power station and the Rybnitsa bridgewas organize[20].

The battle for Bender took place on June 19-21, 1992. On this dayregular units of the Moldavian armand armorecolumns of the Ministry of Internal Affairs were sent tBender.

At that time, the President and Commander-in-chief of Moldova was MirceSnegur, the speakeof the Parliamentwas Alexandru Moșanu, the head of the Government waValery Muravsky, the Minister oDefense was GeneraIon Costaş [20].

Bloody battles began in Bender. On June 20, Moldovan troops reached the BendeBridge over the Dniester. Theassault of the citexecutive committee, defendeby Transnistrians, began. Chisinau tried to use aircraft to blow upthe bridge, but the bombs hit the residentiaareas of the village of ParcanyIn the location of the Russian regiment inthe village therwaaexplosion that killed 26 soldiers. In the meantime, volunteers from the 14tArmy, manof whom had local families, went over to the Transnistrian side. Theyalong with the Cossacks, Republicaguardians andmilitia, broke intBendeand drove the Moldovan troops out of most of the cit[9].

Volunteers from Russiarrived in Transnistria. In such a situation, the Russian leadership could no longer maintainneutralityand on July 7, 1992, plenipotentiary representatives of the Russian president, leby General AlexanderLebed, arrived in the region and ordered to block the approaches to the citand the bridgacross the Dniester.Meanwhile, in Chisinau, left-wing political forces began speaking for the resignation of thgovernment and parliament, whicallowecivil war. The head of government and defense ministeresigned.

It wapossible to reacagreements on a cease-fireand on July 21 in Moscow, B. Yeltsin and M. Snegur in thepresence of ISmirnov signeaagreement On the principleof settling the armeconflicin the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova.

According to various estimates, the losses during the conflict weras follows: by mid-July950 people were killed on both sides, about 4.5 thousand were wounded. Only the Transnistrian side lost about 500people dead, 899 were injured, and about 50 were missing, but experts believe that the realosses were large [20].

During the events of the summer of 1992, at least 489 people died in Bender, of whom 132 were civilians, 5 werechildren. 1242 people were wounded, of whom 698 are civilians, 18 archildren. Gone missing – 87 people. Subsequently, 40 people died from injuries. 1280 residential buildings were destroyeand damaged, of which 60 were destroyed. 19 publieducation facilities (including 3 schools), 15 healthcare facilities were destroyed. 46 industrial transport and constructioenterprises were damaged. Five multi-storresidential buildings of state housing stock arenot subjecto restoration, 603 state houseare partially damaged.

The city was damaged in excess of 10 billion rubles at 1992 price[21].

After July 1992, the Transnistrian conflicentered a peaceful phase. In the course of numerous negotiationsmediated by Russia, Ukraine and the OSCE, aagreement on the status of Transnistria has not yebeen reached.Relations between the parties to the conflict remain tense, but no more militaraction has taken place.

Moving to the stage of peaceful settlement, the Transnistrian conflicremains one of the most complicated problemsof the region [22, 23]. The situation is aggravated by the fact that the views of the partiein several positions, inparticular, on the issue otheir own security, are radically different. 

Industrialized Transnistria blameagrarian Moldova for multibillion- dollar debts, a negativeimport-export balanceand a consuming nature of the economy.

Based on these judgments, the opinion of the unprofitability of association with Moldova is spread in Transnistria.The Moldovan side, in turn, represents the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic in the form of a so-calleblack hole,a smuggling zone and a criminal regim[24].

Wagree with the point of view of politicascientist ZurabTodua that the war for a long time spread the left andright banks of Moldova. Now it is difficult to unite the country.

Transnistria will always have a reason to remember the waand the victimand TMR’s Government to abandonany settlement plan. And the Moldavan national radicals in Chisinau will always have a reason to accuse the supportersof the compromise of betrayal of national interests” if they think that Moldova has made excessive concessions [17].

In the summeof 2001, relations betweeTransnistrian Moldavian Republiand the Republic of Moldova began toworseagain. On September 1, 2001, Moldova replaced the customs stamps, as a result of which the PMR enterpriseshad to obtain permits for export in Chisinau, which led to the disruption of the export enterprise[25].

In 2003, the activity of the EU and the USA intensified, and Russia developed the socalleDmitri KozakMemorandum”, aimeat uniting Moldova with the MRas part of a federal Moldovan state. However, the memorandum was not adopted, since the then Moldovan leader, the head of the Communist Party, V. Voronin, at thelast moment refused to sign itciting his refusaby the lack of approval from the internationacommunity, which is necessarbecause of the course choseby Moldova for European integration. Indeed, the EU did not support the planproposed by Russiand, in fact, did everything to disrupt it. Even though Russia has withdrawn its troops from Transnistria, its position continues to be an important factor, especiallgiven the economic dependence of Transnistriaon Russia (the foreign trade of the unrecognized state is focused on Russia).

As of thiyear, the conflict remains unresolved and, according to some politicaanalysts, therare no prerequisitesfor a political decision soon, despite the change of presidents of Moldova and Transnistria. Icaalso be noted thatin most cases therare no forms of hostilitbetween ordinarcitizens of Moldova and Transnistria.


3. Conclusion

It should be noted that Transnistria is a factor that allows to actively influence the situation in the wider region – inthe Balkans. Thereforethe geopolitical value of the PMR is much higher than itactual share in the Balkan node.

In the period of aggravation, in 1992, the conflict was settled according to the scenario favorable to Russia.

The following factors can be noted that turned out to be favorable for Russia and worked” so thathe vector of control over the conflict was turned in the direction of our country:

-    Government bodies in the Republic were practicallcopied from the old union structures. By social, nationalcomposition and personaconnections, theare to Russia. This, in turn, provided opportunities for Russia toinfluence representatives of government bodies.

-    The peculiarity of the Transnistrian economy was that largenterprises, as a rule, worked for the formerall-Union market, primarily the Russian market, and depended on external relations both in terms of the supplyof ramaterials and components, and in terms of product sales. There is no doubt that the interest of somany business leaders laand continues to lie in the development and restoration of these ties. Because of this,they were interested in establishing relations with Russiaeconomic structures, whicenabled Russia to influence the development of the situation in the republic.

-    It is also necessary to note the development already in the PMR of commercial structures. Youngentrepreneurs, too, to Russia, becausthey wanted tenlist the support of the Russian business communityInaddition, in the PMRas in several other new states formed on the territory of the former USSR, the Russianruble continues to be valued.

-    The national factor was very important. Three main ethnic groups - Moldovans, Ukrainians and Russians live inTransnistria. And together, Ukrainians and Russians make up about 52% of the Republic’s population. Asignificant part of the Russians and Ukrainians of the PMR live in cities sucas Tiraspol, DubossaryBenderand several others. Economically, most of the Russiaand Ukrainian population wacloselassociated with anextremely limited number of largand super-large enterprises, which, in turn, are primarily focused on Russia.This also made it possible to influence the population from RussiaIaddition, most of the Moldovanpopulation of the PMR previousl(historically) lived in the territories of the Russian Empire and the USSR (itshould be noted that the rest of Moldova entered the USSR only in 1940) and also in the bulk of RussiaFoexample, Transnistrian Moldovans refused to translate Moldavian into Latin, unlike Moldovans living in Moldavia.

-    Many partieand public organizations of Transnistria were created as regional organizations of Russianstructures. For example, then the Transnistrian regional organization of the Democratic Reforms Movement, the Slavic Council of BessarabiSocio-politicaassociation, the South-WesterPartof EconomiFreedom, andthe South-Western Union of Industrialists EOLIexisted on the territory of the PMRIaddition, severalparties were closelassociated with related organizations in RussiaFor example, the Communist Party ofWorkers of Transnistria, the DemocratiParty of Transnistria and several others. Through these organizations,Russian politicians influenced the part of the PMR population that was involved in them.

-    It is also necessary to note the presence of such a factor as the presence of Russian troops on the territory ofthe Transnistrian Moldavian Republic, througwhich Russia had a very large influence on the development ofthe situation in Transnistria. Thus, it can be stated thaalong with the active actions of the residents ofTransnistria, the channels of indirect influencand regulation of the situation on the part of Russia, whichcreated a favorable opportunity foresolving the conflict.



Contributo selezionato da Filodiritto tra quelli pubblicati nei Proceedings “2nd Southeast Europe: History, Culture, Politics and Economy-2019”Per acquistare i Proceedings clicca qui.

Contribution selected by Filodiritto among those published in the Proceedings “2nd Southeast Europe: History, Culture, Politics and Economy-2019”To buy the Proceedings click here.


1.   Bouzov V. (2018) Global Conflicts and DialoguoCivilizationfrothPerspectivof Southeast

Europe//SoutheasEurope: HistoryCulture, Politics, and Economy; Filodiritto Publisherpp63-69.

2.   Bouzov V.TaranA(2016)ThBalkans as a securitregionregional anglobal challenges// Governinfor thFuture:InterdisciplinarPerspectivefor a Sustainable Worldpp161-166.

3.   Deutsch K. et al.(1957Political community anthe North Atlantic areaInternational Organizatioin thLighoHistorical Experience.PrincetonPrincetoUniversitPressp228.

4.   Deutsch K. (1961) Security communities//InInternationaPolitics and ForeigPolicy: A Reader inResearch anTheory. EdbJames N. Rosenau. New York: FrePresspp98-105.

5.   Adler E., Barnett M. (1998) SecuritCommunities in TheoreticaPerspective//In SecurityCommunities. Edby E. Adler & M. Barnett. CambridgeCambridge UniversitPressp7.

6.   Nefedova E.V. (2008The theorosecurity community in thworks oKarl Deutsch anhis followers//Tomsk State UniversitBulletin,2008, N. 6 (3)p87(in Russian)

7.   EurasiaIntegratioProcess: Socio-Political Dimensio(2018)Edby G.I. Osadchaya. MoscowISB978-5-907063-15-0pp121-122(in Russian)

8.   Last Soviet bastion, URLhttp://www.vremia.ua/rubrics/sobytiya/2230.php(in Russian)

9.   ForminothPridnestrovian MoldaviaRepublic, URLhttp://www.proza.ru/2012/04/19/1899(in Russian)

10. Historof thRepublic oMoldova. From ancient times to thpresenda(2002) N. Milescu-SpatarAssociatioof Moldovan scientistsChisina(in Russian)

11Bodrov, S. (2012ThhistoroRussia withouanembellishment. FroRurik to tandemChapter1-95, URLhttp://maxpark.com/community/politic/content/1670548(in Russian)

12Chronologof eventthat led to the conflict on thDniesterURLhttp://gorod.tomsk.ru/index-1303191732.ph(in Russian)

13. URLhttp://pridnestrovie.ucoz.com/index/pridnestrovskij_konflikt/0-24(in Russian)

14Pridnestrovie” Newspaper08.08.2009, URL:http://www.pridnestrovie- daily.net/gazeta/articles/view.aspx?ArticleID=14431(inRussian)

15Todua Z. (2013Battle foMoldova: part 1 – Statists anunionists at thturothe XX-XXI centuriesChisinauISB978-9975-4272-1-0p9(in Russian)

16ReferendumiTransnistria, URLhttp://www.olvia.idknet.com/ol63-09-06.htmp71(iRussian)

17ReferendumiTransnistria, URLhttp://www.olvia.idknet.com/ol63-09-06.htmp73(iRussian)

18Thwill thawhave lost, URLhttp://www.vremyababurin.narod.ru/Num5_2001/N5_2001.htm(iRussian).

19. The conflict in TransnistriaURLhttp://www.e-reading.biz/chapter.php/1015433/1/Zhukov_-_Voyny_na_ruinah_SSSR.html, (in Russian)

20. Khudyakov, V. (1999In thblossominacacias the city.Bender: people, events, facts. – BenderPolygraphist, (iRussian)

21. Zhuravlev V. E. (2015) Geopoliticaaspects oEurasiaintegration//Vestninauki I obrazovaniya, Vol.

10ISSN2312-8089p377, in Russian)

22. Zhuravlev V.E. (2005Legitimatioof thTransnistrian state: structural anfunctional approachTiraspolISBN: 9975-9967-2-8p139-144(in Russian)

23Moldova and Transnistriaproblems andevelopment trend(2004)//MoldovaCurrendevelopment trends. – Russiapoliticalencyclopedia. Moscowp4(in Russian)

24Thposition of thPCRon the Transnistrian settlement is beneficial only to Romanian unions led by M. Ghimpu andof course, toBucharest, URLhttp://press.try.md/item.php?id=12281pp345-350(in Russian)

25. See: URLhttp://press.try.md/item.php?id=122819(in Russian)