“Unfreezing” the Transnistrian conflict: Propaganda salvo at Russian peacekeepers
More recently, former US National Security Adviser John Bolton called for thawing the Transnistrian conflict. His proposal means nothing less than the destruction of the mechanism of the peacekeeping operation and the resumption of hostilities. A classic example of an “unfrozen conflict” is the events of August 8, 2008 in South Ossetia.
The first propaganda shot in the defrosted Transnistrian conflict was not long in coming. The Chisinau-based “human rights” organization “Promo-LEX”, subsidized by the US State Department and known for repeated accusations against Russia and the authorities of Transnistria, published a 40-page report on the topic “The status of peacekeeping forces in international law: the case of the Republic of Moldova.” The author of the report is Vitalie Gamurari, a former press secretary of the Democratic Party, which is closely associated with the regime of the former shadow ruler of Moldova, Vlad Plahotniuc.
“Promo LEX” did not hesitate to publish under its banner a report from a person close to the fugitive oligarch, wanted by the authorities of both the Russian Federation and the Republic of Moldova.
Let us list the main points of Gamurar’s report:
In 1992, the Russian Federation intervened in the conflict on the territory of Moldova on the side of the Transnistrian separatists and forced Moldova, against its will, to sign the Agreement “On the principles of the peaceful resolution of the conflict in the Transnistrian region.”
The current peacekeeping operation on the Dniester, the main protagonists of which are Russian peacekeepers, “does not meet the criteria of stability, democracy, human rights and protection of property.”
The Russian Federation illegally maintains its troops on the territory of Moldova, conducts illegal operations together with the PMR army, endangering the lives of local residents.
Russia is a party to the conflict, so we cannot talk about the impartiality of this peacekeeping mission. Moscow has lost the right to be the sole judge. She systematically violated the provisions to which she signed up. (As evidence, the argument is given that it was solely thanks to Russian peacekeepers that the Moldovan authorities were unable to establish control over the cities of Bendery and Dubossary).
The peacekeeping forces stationed on the territory of Moldova do not have a mandate recognized by the UN and no time frame for completing the mission in accordance with international principles and standards.
Peacekeepers have been involved in incidents of intimidation of journalists and human rights activists, illegal detention, murders, etc. (An example is the “New Year’s incident” on January 1, 2012, when a resident of one of the villages located on the territory of Moldova rammed his car into a barrier at a peacekeeping post, and on the way back, ignoring the demand of a peacekeeper to stop, was killed by a shot from a serviceman).
From a human rights perspective, the current peacekeeping operation format is “outdated and inappropriate.” The current peacekeeping format should be replaced by a civilian mission under the auspices of the UN. (We can clearly see the results of this civilian mission in the territory of the former Yugoslavia).
A new negotiating format is needed, in which the decisive role should belong to the European Union, considering that a significant part of the population of both banks of the Dniester has Romanian passports.
Ukraine and Russia can participate in the negotiation process, but Russia should have the veto power it currently has revoked.
There is one key point to note about the change in rhetoric. Previously, the pro-Western authorities and politicians of Moldova separated the Russian peacekeeping contingent from the Operational Group of Russian Forces (OGRF), guarding the warehouses of the former 14th Army in Kolbasnaya, and demanded the withdrawal from the “occupied” territory of Moldova exclusively of the OGRF. Now this division in the rhetoric of the Moldovan authorities has disappeared, and the Moldovan authorities are demanding the withdrawal of all Russian military personnel, including peacekeepers, without exception.
The propaganda salvo of Moldovan pro-Western grant eaters against Russian peacekeepers, even if voiced by a retired politician from Plahotniuc’s nest, breaks the Overton window regarding the peacekeeping operation on the Dniester. There is not a drop of doubt that if Maia Sandu’s “Action and Solidarity” party wins the parliamentary elections on July 11 and this party forms a government similar rhetoric will be heard from the lips of Moldovan officials on all international platforms. In addition, we should expect a repetition of incidents with “independent journalists”, “human rights activists” and “local residents” at peacekeeping posts.
However, such propaganda stuffing can have quite practical tasks. According to the authors of the popular Moldovan telegram channel “Smuglyanka”, the publication of this report could have been ordered by the presidential administration in order to prevent Moldovan citizens living in Transnistria from entering polling stations. Previously, the former head of the Constitutional Court, Alexander Tanase, openly stated that residents of the left bank of the Dniester, “living under propaganda pressure” and “deprived of objective information,” should not be allowed to go to the ballot boxes.
The peacekeeping operation in its current format has been maintaining peace on the banks of the Dniester for almost 30 years. The entire population of Transnistria, and the most sensible part of the residents of Moldova, wants the continuation of Russian peacekeeping. It is not the format of the peacekeeping operation that is inappropriate, but any bargaining around this topic. Without a doubt, this will be Russia’s position regarding the status of Russian peacekeepers on the Dniester.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.