Alena Arshinova: 2008 - the year of hopes which didn't come true
English // 17:48, 15 декабря 2008 // 2723
Many experts and politicians regarded year 2008 as perspective from the point of view of positive advancement in case of settlement of the Moldo-Transniestrian conflict. It was affirmed, that guarantors, intermediaries and participants of long-term opposition are ready to make real steps towards to each other. Open sources and political lobbies said about signing of the serious documents marking the beginning of the final phase of the settlement of the conflict. There were a lot of gossips, versions and expert estimations in a connection to visits of the Moldavian leaders to Moscow and Russian leaders to Kishinev. There were many talks about mutual interests, measures of trust and historical chances. But what do we have now on the eve of year 2008? At the beginning let's speak about trust measures. Not even a small measure of trust and has not been realized. The enterprises of Transniestria are still in a condition of the economic blockade, and, moreover, it is a question if in 2009 Kishinev will not prolong a preferential mode of their taxation, the republic economic situation will be essentially worsen. In transport sphere of the party and could not solve a question with start of a diesel engine Kishinev - Tiraspol - Odessa. Ten thousand people in summer heat suffered in turns lasting many hours on border with Ukraine, but politicians and have not found time to cross through the ambitions and to solve this elementary question. The exchange of information blows between the parties also did not promote settlement process. In the conditions of cold war the precipice between conflicting parties only went deep.
This year was said a lot that the EU and the USA are ready to invest large funds to support new peacemaking initiatives, but it did not happen. Financing of the separate programs which do not influence the strategy of the settlement is not counted. Some public meetings of the leaders of science and production association, journalists and businessmen had a positive resonance, but the real influence on the settlement process they did not rendered.
The matter is that the disagreements between political and economical elite of Moldova and Transniestria have strengthened for these years. They concern economy, geopolitics and strategy of further development of RM and PMR. But the maximum, what can do the Kishinev management is to offer Transniestria being autonomous as a part of Moldova. I’m assured that the politicians extending this method understand that it is totally impractical. Transniestria is not recognized, but nevertheless it is the really existing independent state. From the moment of its creation, for 19 years already it suffers disputed relations with Moldova. These relations include war of 1992, economic and information blockade. On this context the autonomy offer sounds like a kind of concealed refusal of any productive dialogue.
That's why IYC-PDP «"PRORIV!" offered and continues to suggest to concentrate efforts on the initial phase not on a final format of settlement of the conflict, but to concrete measures of trust which will sustain the intensity discharge in a zone of Moldo-Transniestrian opposition. Our initiatives were directed to the realization of some kind of real actions on releasing economic systems, transport highways and to the simultaneous increase of the standard of living, both in RM and in PMR. We offered «an intensity discharge» in the information-political sphere and have shown on our personal example the readiness for the dialogue at the level of a civil society.
Year 2008 has shown that our approach is the most productive. Other methods appeared to be completely failed. In 2008 the sides not even converged but t broke away. The recognition of Abkhazia has and South Ossetia gave to the citizens of Transniestria new hopes but has seriously alarmed Kishinev. There was an activisation of radical forces completely rejecting any forms of the negotiations. In these conditions there can be a final freezing of the conflict with the future of Georgia and Ossetia scenario. It will result not only the tragedy of the regional scale, but seriously destabilizes at the whole Balkan direction. Complex measures of trust between conflicting parties can be the only preventive maintenance of such variant of succession of the events. They should affect first of all economy, transport, law and information-political field. These actions should be supported, with both ruling elite of RM and PMR, and civil society of the sides. It is time to understand, that only refusal from the dictatorship and rough imposing of unacceptable conditions for one of the conflict sides can promote its peaceful settlement. And still it is important to remember, that "bad" peace is better than "good" war.
This year was said a lot that the EU and the USA are ready to invest large funds to support new peacemaking initiatives, but it did not happen. Financing of the separate programs which do not influence the strategy of the settlement is not counted. Some public meetings of the leaders of science and production association, journalists and businessmen had a positive resonance, but the real influence on the settlement process they did not rendered.
The matter is that the disagreements between political and economical elite of Moldova and Transniestria have strengthened for these years. They concern economy, geopolitics and strategy of further development of RM and PMR. But the maximum, what can do the Kishinev management is to offer Transniestria being autonomous as a part of Moldova. I’m assured that the politicians extending this method understand that it is totally impractical. Transniestria is not recognized, but nevertheless it is the really existing independent state. From the moment of its creation, for 19 years already it suffers disputed relations with Moldova. These relations include war of 1992, economic and information blockade. On this context the autonomy offer sounds like a kind of concealed refusal of any productive dialogue.
That's why IYC-PDP «"PRORIV!" offered and continues to suggest to concentrate efforts on the initial phase not on a final format of settlement of the conflict, but to concrete measures of trust which will sustain the intensity discharge in a zone of Moldo-Transniestrian opposition. Our initiatives were directed to the realization of some kind of real actions on releasing economic systems, transport highways and to the simultaneous increase of the standard of living, both in RM and in PMR. We offered «an intensity discharge» in the information-political sphere and have shown on our personal example the readiness for the dialogue at the level of a civil society.
Year 2008 has shown that our approach is the most productive. Other methods appeared to be completely failed. In 2008 the sides not even converged but t broke away. The recognition of Abkhazia has and South Ossetia gave to the citizens of Transniestria new hopes but has seriously alarmed Kishinev. There was an activisation of radical forces completely rejecting any forms of the negotiations. In these conditions there can be a final freezing of the conflict with the future of Georgia and Ossetia scenario. It will result not only the tragedy of the regional scale, but seriously destabilizes at the whole Balkan direction. Complex measures of trust between conflicting parties can be the only preventive maintenance of such variant of succession of the events. They should affect first of all economy, transport, law and information-political field. These actions should be supported, with both ruling elite of RM and PMR, and civil society of the sides. It is time to understand, that only refusal from the dictatorship and rough imposing of unacceptable conditions for one of the conflict sides can promote its peaceful settlement. And still it is important to remember, that "bad" peace is better than "good" war.