A view from Transnistria: 10 points for moving away from war and transition to lasting peace in Ukraine
Tiraspol - Kyiv, May 11 (Navigator, Andrey Safonov) - So, the United States, engaged in a geopolitical struggle against the Russian Federation, nevertheless ignited a civil war in Ukraine. At the same time, neoconservatives and the financial elite of the United States, whose well-being increasingly depends on new and new armed conflicts, are least concerned about Kyiv, Donetsk, and Odessa. The dollar, which is not backed by a real base, is supported to a large extent by the arms race, military orders, the use of these weapons in ever new territories, the seizure of new markets, the destruction by force of competitors and those who simply disagree with the preservation of a unipolar world that is bursting at the seams.
Tiraspol political scientist Andrei Safonov, Minister of Science, Public Education, Culture and Religion of the PMR (1991-1992), writes about this in an author’s column for Navigator.
Subscribe to the news “Navigator - Kiev” в Facebook or In contact with
...The American strategy in Ukraine has an obvious goal: to simultaneously bleed Ukraine and deprive it of its economic and technological potential, to weaken the rising Russia by inciting a full-scale civil war at its side, to exclude the integration of the peoples of the former USSR with the participation of the most important core - Ukraine.
In addition to the United States, which is interested in a hard scenario, official Warsaw is seen in Ukraine, which is clearly pursuing a course to take weakened Ukraine (even in a reduced form) under its de facto protectorate. From the banks of the Dniester, this can be seen well, because in 1990-1992 Romania pursued a similar policy, seeking to annex the former Soviet Moldova. We survived the war in 1992.
Does Ukraine, which selflessly helped Transnistria back then, need to go through this in 2014?
Negotiations are more productive than mutual accusations
Referendum in the east of Ukraine - this is a reality, no matter who treats it and how. May 25 will become a reality in the part of Ukraine controlled by Kiev, and presidential election.
The parties to the confrontation in Ukraine can now pick each other, proving to each other the legality or illegality of each other’s actions, but this will not yield anything. Something similar happened between Moldova and Transnistria in the period between the referendums on the creation of Transnistrian statehood and the start of the 1992 war. I would like Ukrainians to learn a lesson from the mistakes of others and not repeat them, as now The choice is harsh: compromise or full-blown civil war.
This skirmish does not lead anywhere else because each side of the internal Ukrainian confrontation has firm political allies. In fact, on May 12, Russia said “yes” to the referendum, while the United States and its allies said a categorical “no.” On May 25, everything will be exactly the opposite: the West will warmly support the procedure and results of the elections, and Russia will take the opposite position.
The civil war in Ukraine, unfortunately, is flaring up. There are no points of contact between Kiev and the federalists. Their foreign policy guidelines are opposite. In fact, there are no unified security forces in the general sense (army, state security, police) in Ukraine, since they were pushed aside by the National Guard, militias, “territorial battalions”, private paramilitary formations sponsored by oligarchs, etc. that emerged on both sides of the conflict. Something similar was present in the former MSSR over 20 years ago.
As a result, the prospect of Ukraine sliding into anarchy cannot be ruled out.
We must act without delay!
Our Moldovan-Pridnestrovian experience teaches that the situation may lead either to war and the split of the former Soviet republic, or to negotiations and federalization. But this is a perspective. A what can be done nowso that the flames of the civil war do not recall the years 1917-1921?
I will propose the following possible measures, based, again, on the Moldovan-Transnistrian experience.
First. The parties to the conflict officially declare a ceasefire - and as soon as possible. In 1992, a truce on the Dniester was declared more than once, but it was also violated more than once. Therefore, it is immediately necessary to think through a mechanism for monitoring the maintenance of the truce.
Second. The Armed Forces of Ukraine must be withdrawn to places of permanent deployment and declared (to both sides of the conflict, as well as to the leadership of the Armed Forces of Ukraine) that the army can only be used to defend the country from an external enemy.
The third. The parties to the conflict announce that they will not avenge those previously fallen. This is very difficult, but without this, blood will flow for who knows how long.
Fourth. To monitor the situation in the conflict zone (in places of contact, first of all, between enemy troops), a body similar to the Joint Control Commission is being created, which effectively monitors the security zone in the area of the Moldovan-Transnistrian conflict to this day. Branches of such a Commission could be created wherever the situation is currently tense.
The fifth. After the creation of the JCC, the parties to the conflict can create a Unified Military Command, which would have the authority to send joint mobile groups to suppress a variety of provocations aimed at disrupting the truce.
The sixth. In order to remove real and potential contradictions between the authorities and voters, initiate the election of governors in Ukraine before May 25.
Seventh. Gradually transfer the maintenance of law and order and the fight against criminal crime only to the police, excluding from this all other formations, including those included for political reasons in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, since the population has different attitudes towards them.
Eighth. Kyiv and the federalists immediately begin political negotiations on a model for resolving the conflict. At the same time, it is logical to discuss the federal option. Discussions should also touch upon Ukraine’s foreign policy after peace has been consolidated in the country.
Ninth. If such negotiations begin, then Kyiv and the federalists can declare their readiness to create a Government of National Unity from all political forces and regions of Ukraine.
Tenth. The internal structure of Ukraine and its foreign policy status could be consolidated by the convening of either a large-scale Congress of Deputies of Ukraine at all levels (such a congress was convened during critical periods in the history of Transnistria), or a Constitutional Conference or a Constituent Assembly.
It is up to the Ukrainians to decide whether to do this or anything else.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.