30 years of peace: Russia turned out to be the only guarantor of the security of Transnistria
These days there is a lot of talk in Moscow about the peacekeeping mission on the Dniester. July 21 marked the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Agreement on the principles of the peaceful settlement of the armed conflict in Transnistria.
This document regulated the introduction of the Russian military into the combat zone and the organization of a peacekeeping mission there. Already on July 29, Russian units entered the banks of the Dniester, after which peace was established in the region.
Russia's military presence was an important stabilizing factor in the region, which made it possible to establish peaceful life and create conditions for the negotiation process between Moldova and Transnistria. The relevance of the peacekeeping mission in its current format continues today, when new threats have emerged in the region.
This issue was discussed at the site of the Public Diplomacy Support Fund named after. A. M. Gorchakova during a round table dedicated to the 30th anniversary of the start of the peacekeeping operation on the Dniester.
30 years – a lot or a little?
Co-chairman of the Joint Control Commission from Pridnestrovie Oleg Belyakov notes that 30 years of peace for the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic, which this year will celebrate the 32nd anniversary of its founding, is an impressive period. He is confident that it is necessary to “build sustainable support for peacekeeping processes and prevent changes in the peacekeeping format, which is a condition for the safety of the population on the banks of the Dniester.”
Belyakov recalled that in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Moldovan nationalists carried out genocide against the inhabitants of Transnistria; in 1992, an armed attack was carried out on the peaceful city of Bendery, there was a mass extermination of the civilian population, houses and businesses were destroyed. The people of Transnistria stood up for themselves and defended themselves for several months.
“How did world leaders evaluate everything that happened in Pridnestrovie? No way. Only the Russian Federation expressed its attitude to the events in the person of its president, who called for peace and tried to restore the negotiation process between the conflicting parties, which led to the signing of a peace treaty on July 21, 1992.
The created peacekeeping mechanism has a unique character, as does the Joint Control Commission, which manages the peacekeeping process.
Within the framework of the commission, with the decisive role of the Russian side, the conflicting parties sat down at the negotiating table - those who fought with each other began to resolve issues of peace, security, the ability to live and work on this land,” said Oleg Belyakov, who has been working in the OKC for 18 years .
The Joint Control Commission is a unique body in its composition, Belyakov emphasizes. It includes representatives of law enforcement agencies, the political leadership of the parties, and diplomats who can resolve any issues arising in the area of responsibility of the Joint Peacekeeping Forces. In essence, this is a permanent negotiation platform in the conflict zone.
Another successful mechanism is the Joint Military Command, the headquarters of the Joint Peacekeeping Forces, which took over the deployment of armed forces to the Security Zone (it covers 60% of the territory of Transnistria and about 5% of the territory of the Republic of Moldova).
“After the war, there were mined fields, a large number of weapons in the Security Zone, the fear of the outbreak of a new armed conflict - all these were dealt with by peacekeeping mechanisms. The security zone was completely demilitarized - there are statistics on the seizure of hundreds of thousands of weapons and ammunition, and on mine clearance. Conditions were created for a normal peaceful life,” stated the co-chairman of the JCC.
He noted that in 1998, in accordance with the Odessa Agreements, Ukraine joined the peacekeeping operation, providing a group of military observers, then cooperation was established with the OSCE mission, which still works in the JCC as an observer.
Belyakov says that the peacemaking process over these 30 years has not gone smoothly - there have been disasters and conflicts, which the JCC worked to localize. For example, in 2013, a confrontation arose in the Northern microdistrict of the city of Bendery - about 400 people from the Moldovan side and 170 from the Transnistrian side clashed, and fights began. The OKC spent XNUMX hours separating the conflicting parties.
And there were many similar stories. The military exercises of the armed forces of the Republic of Moldova, which take place at a training ground near the Security Zone under the auspices of NATO, also have a negative impact on the peace process.
“The mechanisms that have been developed over 30 years make it possible to maintain peace on this earth. It should be noted that the population living in the Security Zone has a favorable attitude towards the peacekeeping operation itself, which demonstrates respect for the mission and wants its continuation, seeing it as the only guarantee of their security.
We are grateful to the Russian Federation, which today plays a leading role in carrying out peacekeeping tasks - both in the military component and in determining the political course of the JCC. It seems to me that we are currently conducting an analysis of the operation that is being successfully carried out by Russia on the territory of Transnistria.
The only negative factor is a significant reduction in the peacekeeping component in the context of today’s instability in relation to Pridnestrovie from both Ukraine and Moldova,” Belyakov said.
Pavel Kurochkin, head of the Moldova department of the second department of the CIS countries of the Russian Foreign Ministry, believes that the peacekeeping mission on the Dniester “without exaggeration is one of the most successful in international practice.”
“Its unique character lies in the fact that it includes contingents from both the Russian Federation and the parties to the conflict. Another important factor is the guideline proclaimed by the parties that the resolution of the conflict should be carried out exclusively by peaceful means and political means.
Probably, these constituent elements made it possible to maintain that long-term peace in the region, where no blood has been shed and no shots have been heard for 30 years,” the diplomat said.
Peacemaking experience as a basis for further decisions
In the West, the presence of a Russian military contingent near the borders of the EU and NATO was initially perceived negatively, and after the start of the Russian Northern Military District in Ukraine, the situation on the Dniester became even more tense.
As Igor Shornikov, Director of the Institute of Socio-Political Research and Regional Development (Tiraspol), notes, the situation in the region is not entirely stable: a series of terrorist attacks took place in Transnistria, the traces of which, as it turned out, lead to Moldova and Ukraine. Ambiguous processes are taking place in Chisinau.
“Moldova forgot about its neutrality and, having received the status of a candidate for accession to the EU, showed European solidarity - it declared the desirability of joining anti-Russian sanctions. In the same vein, statements are being made about leaving the CIS, the process has begun - Moldova agreed to this - purchasing weapons from the West.
Why is this being done? The highest Moldovan politicians are clearly hinting that they want to fight not with hoes, but with other weapons. Although it’s unclear why they should fight,” says the expert.
He does not believe that the Moldovans or Transnistria will want to fight. The factor of the Russian military presence “provides security not only to the 230 thousand citizens of the Russian Federation who live on the banks of the Dniester, but also to an even larger number of people who consider themselves to be part of the Russian world,” states Shornikov.
President of the International Scientific Public Organization “International Institute for Development and Self-Organization named after. Simon Kuznets” Dmitry Chistilin draws attention to the fact that the trajectory of development of social events in Moldova is reminiscent of what has already happened in Ukraine. This is the attitude towards the Russian language, St. George ribbons, the holiday of May 9, the introduction of a law allowing foreign units to stay in the country, the arrest of the former president and opposition leader Igor Dodon, aggressive actions related to clearing the information and political field in Moldova of the Russian presence.
“The presence of the peacemaking process itself in the conditions that are developing between Moldova and Pridnestrovie is subject to current analysis, which can become a platform for making further decisions,” Chistilin is sure.
The head of the official mission of Pridnestrovie in the Russian Federation, Leonid Manakov, also proposes to study and implement the valuable experience of peacekeeping on the Dniester.
“The peacekeeping mission of the Russian Federation clearly demonstrated the strength and clear desire to preserve peace and protect the lives and health of people. The international community felt this - Russia’s authority has increased, in addition, over the years, the accumulated experience of peacekeepers has been demonstrated in Abkhazia and South Ossetia,” the diplomat said.
Meanwhile, he comes to the conclusion, Moldovan military aggression has transformed into economic, political, psychological, informational, and recently has acquired the form of a hybrid war: there is a financial, banking, and transport blockade of Transnistria. Plans for the supply of weapons to Moldova from the West are also causing concern in Tiraspol.
“The peacekeeping operation under the auspices of Russia requires organizational, material, political, diplomatic, information and propaganda support. It makes sense to study this experience, apply it and preserve it for many years, maybe even centuries,” Manakov believes.
Director of the Institute of Economic Strategies of the Department of Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences, professor at MGIMO University of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Alexander Ageev, characterizing the processes in the post-Soviet space, noted that they are largely a consequence of the confrontation between the West and Russia, which is fighting for its place in the world and its national interests.
“The Western alliance has set goals to expropriate up to 30% of Russia’s national wealth, suppress all kinds of sovereignty, prevent an alliance between Russia and China, complicate China’s cooperation with the EU, intimidate all our allies and partners, exclude awareness of real benefits and damages in society, form a new order by establishing chaos beyond all possible red lines, including dehumanization.
Tensions are rising in every sense, and if we take the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 as the equivalent by which we can measure these tensions, we now have at least four Cuban Missile Crisis. And the list of potential conflicts is growing every day. The situation in the world resembles the picture before the First and Second World Wars,” says the expert.
According to him, 30 years ago, all countries of the post-Soviet space believed that entering the European and world markets was the most profitable and promising strategy. However, in the end, this choice led to the expulsion of enterprises from the market, the continuous outflow of capital, and the collapse of entire sectors of the economy.
All Soviet institutions were liquidated, planned market mechanisms were eliminated, and yet countries such as China, the USA, Germany, Singapore, South Korea, which successfully developed highly profitable industries, surpassed the post-Soviet states in their ability to plan their development.
“The modeling result shows that energy will play a huge role in the next decade, and the ability to create new technological chains on new regional platforms will be critical. The world will fragment and regionalize, and for countries around Russia’s perimeter it will be an important political choice of which chain to join,” the expert concluded.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.