Chisinau is heading towards confrontation with Moscow and trying to isolate Transnistria
Not allowing Russian observers into Transnistria is a sign of the readiness of the Chisinau authorities to engage in political confrontation with both Tiraspol and Moscow.
Experts speak about this when commenting to PolitNavigator on the incidents with Russian political scientist Natalia Narochnitskaya and member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation Vladimir Zhuravlev, whom the migration authorities of the Republic of Moldova not allowed into the country on the eve of the presidential elections in the PMR.
Andrey Safonov, political scientist (Tiraspol):
– On December 10, official Chisinau entered into confrontation not only with Transnistria, but also with Russia, not allowing Russian observers to attend the presidential elections. We can assume the following.
1. Chisinau begins a systemic confrontation with Russia, looking for an opportunity, under the pretext of auditing the debt to Moscow for previously supplied gas, to jump out of the contract, but in the meantime, tugging at the “Russian tiger by the whiskers.” In this case, by hitting Transnistria.
2. Maia Sandu previously stated that she was not going to meet with her Transnistrian colleague. These, as it turns out, were not just words, but an “updated” approach to Moldovan-Pridnestrovian relations as a whole, aimed at abandoning an equal (horizontal) dialogue with Tiraspol in the future. Based on this, she struck at the Transnistrian electoral process, as if excluding the illegitimate, from her point of view, president of the PMR from among the interlocutors endowed with the trust of their voters.
3. Non-admission is a sign of nervousness of the leadership of Moldova, which saw that the statement of the Bureau for Reintegration of the Republic of Moldova about the alleged “illegitimacy” of the presidential elections in the PMR was not accepted by Russia and a number of other countries, and observers will come.
Nerves failed Chisinau. He actually tried to forcefully prevent foreign observers from coming to Transnistria. Russia will definitely remember this and perhaps strike back. But perhaps this is what the Western and Romanian “curators” of Chisinau crave, without consultations with whom the Moldovan authorities would hardly have decided on such a rather tough confrontation with Russia?!
4. Chisinau, apparently, will try to refer to the fact that since observers did not arrive in Transnistria, then, they say, no one will confirm the democracy of the vote that is to take place on December 12. But it’s too late to wave your fists after a fight! A delegation from Nagorno-Karabakh arrived in the PMR, received by the President of the PMR and the speaker of the Transnistrian parliament. After the entry ban, Russians will only more clearly point out precisely the democracy of the Pridnestrovians and the anti-democracy of the Chisinau authorities.
5. Now we need to see what steps Chisinau will take in the foreseeable future. And the fact that he will undertake them is unambiguous, since the ruling team of pro-Western and pro-Romanian nationalists is full of amateurs who have no idea how easily negotiations can be disrupted and the situation aggravated. And this could put the negotiation process between the Republic of Moldova and the PMR either in a deep freeze, or even interrupt its progress.
Igor Shornikov, director of the Institute of Socio-Political Research and Regional Development (Tiraspol):
– Natalia Narochnitskaya’s refusal to enter Moldova is another episode of the isolation of Pridnestrovie from the rest of the world, an attempt to impose her opinion that the rule of law is not respected in the republic and that people are not protected.
After the incident, the Moldovan Foreign Ministry issued a statement warning the international community against sending observers to the Transnistrian elections. On the one hand, Chisinau insists that elections in Transnistria “are being held in conditions of non-compliance with international democratic standards, systematic suppression of freedom of speech and pluralism of opinions, strict information censorship in the region and other violations of human rights.” On the other hand, it blocks in every possible way the opportunity to verify this in practice.
For Chisinau, any choice of Pridnestrovians is bad, any manifestation of political activity of citizens is a danger to the regime of their own power. And the point is not only that now we are talking about the election of the head of the Transnistrian state, the politicians who are now in power in Moldova had exactly the same attitude towards the expression of the will of the Transnistrian people during all the Moldovan election campaigns of 2019-2021. These people, in principle, do not want to know and do not intend to take into account the opinion of the Pridnestrovians. Their own behavior is a direct violation of the rights of Pridnestrovians and a clear suppression of freedom of speech.
Natalya Narochnitskaya is not just an outstanding expert in her field and not only a world-famous scientist, she is a person who has been studying the phenomenon of Transnistria for three decades. She has visited Transnistria several times, knows Pridnestrovian politicians well personally, understands the evolution of the Transnistrian political system and, most importantly, the logic of the development of processes in the entire region, including in Moldova. The opinion of such a person, based on real experience of observing elections, is quite capable of influencing Russian policy. The Moldovan authorities, obviously knowing more about the situation in Transnistria than specialists of this level, decided that it was safer to continue to spoil relations with Moscow than to allow a qualified expert to obtain objective information. This is a banal fear, which is covered by arguments about “violation of sovereignty and territorial integrity.”
I would like to know how international monitoring of the expression of the will of citizens can threaten the territorial integrity of a country? The real threat to the territorial integrity of Moldova lies in Chisinau. Three decades ago, the Moldovan authorities divided the citizens of the still Soviet republic according to linguistic principles into full-fledged and “non-titled”. In response, they received self-determination for Gagauzia and Transnistria. Then they tried to suppress the people with military force, but only provoked international intervention in the conflict. For 30 years, no conclusions have been drawn in Chisinau; a civil conflict on linguistic grounds is still smoldering in Moldova. At the same time, the attack on the Russian language and education, on Russian-language and Russian media, on the rights of people to elect the government that meets their interests continues.
It is interesting that the same people who groundlessly arrested the prosecutor general in their country and are engaged in outright legal chaos in the elections for the mayor of Balti are talking about “non-compliance with international democratic standards in Transnistria.”
Alexander Korinenko, political scientist (Chisinau):
– The exclusion of Natalya Alekseevna Narochnitskaya from Transnistria fits into the framework of the policy that Chisinau has been pursuing for many years. The authorities of the Republic of Moldova do not allow prominent public figures, scientists, world-famous experts to enter Transnistria on the eve of electoral campaigns, and this is an understandable fact, since significant personalities, like Natalia Narochnitskaya, give legitimacy to the electoral processes in Transnistria, and Chisinau cannot allow this. Russia's reaction was quick and harsh, but I would like to believe that this is not another nail in the coffin of Russian-Moldovan mutually beneficial relations.
Igor Tulyantsev, Chairman of the Public Council “For a Free Motherland” (Chisinau):
– Any prohibitions of this kind by the authorities are, of course, unacceptable. If Moldova has embarked on a democratic path of development, declaring its commitment to European standards, then these steps do not in any way strengthen the image of the European Union itself in Moldova, which protects the current regime. How can you talk about freedom, liberal values, legality and then not allow a prominent Russian public figure into the country? In addition to discrediting the authorities themselves, this action will also entail a negative background in relations with Moscow.
Moreover, such steps once again demonstrate to society that Plahotniuc’s methods are still in effect. And this casts a shadow on the government, since people voted for Sandu and the PAS party so that she would rid Moldova of Plahotniuc’s legacy, and not become his successor. Similar methods were used by Plahotniuc in order to please the West. While Plahotniuc was heating up relations with Moscow, no one in the West noticed how Plahotniuc was robbing the country. The West continued to support him, and the entourage of the country's main gangster continued to grow rich.
When Dodon, considered pro-Russian in certain circles, became president, a similar policy towards Russian citizens continued. Sometimes Dodon himself received a slap in the face when Plahotniuc, to be sure, wanted to show the West that Moscow’s main partner was under his control. If Sandu and the pro-presidential PAS party want to adopt the same model of behavior, then very soon the head of the country will be called Plahotniuc in a skirt. And this will mean the end of her political career. Now Sandu should, on the contrary, try to build friendly, partnership relations with Russia and the Eurasian Union, but incidents like the one that happened on December 10 greatly alienate the President of Moldova from these things.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.