Transnistrian Settlement Process: Contribution of Ukraine and Conclusions for Donbas

  • Post category:Issue XXII

Ihor Lossovskyi
First-Class Envoy Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary PhD in Physics and Mathematic

DOI: 10.37837/2707-7683-2021-42

Abstract. The article highlights the role and place of Ukraine, which has just celebrated the 30th anniversary of its independence’s resumption, in the Transnistrian settlement process. The article contains an analysis of the first state peacekeeping experience of Ukraine and updated plans for further steps in light of the national interests of our state.
The author of the article argues that an analysis of the mistakes made during the settlement will help prevent a repetition of such failures in countering Russian aggression in Donbas. Refusal of Russian ‘peacekeepers’ in Transnistria and reorientation to the mechanisms of international observation missions are to meet the world peacekeeping criteria, as well as the interests and positions of Moldova, Ukraine, the European Union, the United States and the OSCE as an international organisation responsible for security issues in the European region.
In particular, the article notes that Ukraine and Moldova are interested in stabilising the situation in Transnistria, as it will reduce the region’s criminality, significantly limit the flow of smuggled goods to Ukraine, and put a barrier against illegal migration to the EU. The fact of an active conflict so close to Ukrainian borders becomes a potential threat of Ukraine possibly being drawn into a confrontation. The active participation of Ukraine in the peacekeeping process is concurrently of great importance for improving the image of our state in the international arena.
The 30-year experience of the Transnistrian settlement process becomes a vivid example for Ukraine of effective counteraction to Russian expansionist intentions. A careful study of the mistakes made by Moldova and Ukraine is imperative to determine our further actions in Donbas.
Keywords: Transnistrian conflict, Moldova, national security of Ukraine, Russia, Donbas.

Download Article (ukr)

References

  1. Perepelytsia, H. (2001). Konflikt v Pridnestrovye. Prichiny, problemy i prognoz razvitiya [Conflict in Transnistria. Causes, Problems, and Development Forecast]. Kyiv: Stylos. [in Russian].
  2. Vitman, K. (2008). Prydnistrovia: perspektyvy rozviazannia konfliktu [Transnistria: Prospects of the Conflict Resolution]. Politychnyi menedzment, 4 Etnopolitolohiia, pp. 101–106. [online]. Available at: https://ipiend.gov.ua/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/vitman_prydnistrov_ia.pdf. [in Ukrainian].
  3. Vitman, K. (2009). ‘Prydnistrovskyi konflikt: suchasnyi etap vrehuliuvannia’ [Transnistrian Conflict: Current Stage of Settlement], in Kivalov, S. et al. (eds). Aktualni problemy polityky: Zbirnyk naukovykh prats [Current Issues of Politics: A Collection of Scientific Works]. Odesa: Fenix. [online]. Available at: http://dspace.onua.edu.ua/bitstream/handle/11300/194/app-37_Vitman_K_M_%25289-20%2529.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [in Ukrainian].
  4. Kuchyk, O. (2011). Uchast Ukrainy u vrehuliuvanni etnopolitychnykh konfliktiv na postradianskomu prostori [Ukraine’s Participation in the Settlement of Ethnopolitical Conflicts in the Post-Soviet Countries]. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu, Issue 28, pp. 3–12. [online]. Available at: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/VLNU_Mv_2011_28_3 [in Ukrainian].
  5. Hetmanchuk, A. (2013). ‘Pozytsii Ukrainy shchodo prydnistrovskoho konfliktu’, Hlavkom, 24 January [online]. Available at: http://glavcom.ua/articles/9409.html [in Ukrainian].
  6. Zvezdova, O. (2013). Ukraina u vyrishenni Prydnistrovskoho konfliktu na suchasnomu etapi [Ukrainian Position in the Settlement of Transnistrian Conflict on Current Stage]. Naukovi pratsi Chornomorskoho derzhavnoho universytetu imeni Petra Mohyly. Politolohiia. Vol. 212, Issue 200, pp. 29–32 [online]. Available at: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Npchdupol_2013_212_200_7 [in Ukrainian].
  7. Pyrozhkov, S. (2015). ‘Prydnistrovskyi konflikt ta viina na Donbasi’ [Transnistrian Conflict and War in Donbas]. Diplomatic Ukraine, vol. 16. Kyiv: Directorate-General for Rendering Services to Diplomatic Missions, pp. 661– [in Ukrainian].
  8. Hladchenko, I. (2015). Lokalni konflikty u Prydnistrovi ta na Skhodi Ukrainy: porivnialna kharakterystyka [Local Conflicts in Transnistria and the East of Ukraine: Comparative Characteristics]. Naukovi pratsi istorychnoho fakultetu Zaporizkoho natsionalnoho universytetu, Vo 2, Issue 44, pp. 18–21. [in Ukrainian].
  9. Hladchenko, I. (2015). Spivpratsia Ukrainy ta Moldovy shchodo vyrishennia prydnistrovskoho konfliktu (1992–2015 rr.) [Cooperation between Ukraine and Moldova in Resolving Transnistrian Conflict (1992–2015)]. Visnyk Donetskoho natsionalnoho Universytetu, 1–2, pp. 467–473. [in Ukrainian].
  10. Malyshev, D. (2020). Pridnestrovskiy konflikt i voprosy uregulirovaniya [Transnistrian Conflict and Issues of Settlement]. Mezhdunarodnaya zhyzn, 9 [online]. Available at: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/material/2400 [in Russian].
  11. Bulatov, Yu. (2019). Rossiysko-moldavskiye otnosheniya v tsarstvovaniye pervykh Romanovykh [Russian-Moldovan Relations during the Reign of the First Romanovs]. Mezhdunarodnaya zhyzn, 8 [online]. Available at: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/material/2232 [in Russian].
  12. Bulatov, Yu. (2019). Moldaviya i politika Doma Romanovykh vo vremena Russko-turetskikh voyn (1710–1812 gg.) [Moldova and the Politics of the House of Romanov during the Russo-Turkish wars (1710-1812)]. Mezhdunarodnaya zhyzn, 11. [online]. Available at: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/material/2275 [in Russian]. 10.21557/iaf.57888950
  13. Bulatov, Yu. (2020). Istoriya prisoedineniya Bessarabii k Rossii. Novoye prochteniye temy – urok ne vprok? [The History of the Annexation of Bessarabia to Russia. A New Perception of the Topic – A Useful Lesson?]. Mezhdunarodnaya zhyzn, 1. [online]. Available at: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/material/2299 [in Russian].
  14. Zatyliuk, Ya. (2013). ‘Falsyfikat istorychnoho dzherela’ [Falsification of Historical Source], in Smolii, V. et al. (eds). Entsyklopediia Istorii Ukrainy [The Encyclopedia of History of Ukraine]. Institute of History of Ukraine of the NAS of Ukraine. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. [in Ukrainian].
  15. Dashkevych, Ya. (2011). ‘Yak Moskoviia pryvlasnyla istoriiu Kyivskoi Rusi’, Universum [online]. Available at: https://universum.lviv.ua/journal/2011/6/dashk.htm [in Ukrainian].
  16. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (1992). ‘Soglashenie o printsipakh mirnogo uregulirovaniya vooruzhennogo konflikta v Pridnestrovskom regione Respubliki Moldova’ [online]. Available at: http://mfa-pmr.org/ru/sGv [in Russian].
  17. European Court of Human Rights (2004). Delo Ilashku i drugiye protiv Moldovy i Rossii: Resheniye ESPCh ot 08.07.2004 [Ilaşcu and Others v. Moldova and Russia: Decision of the ECHR of 8 July 2004] [online]. Available at: http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/russian/euro/Rilascucase.html [in Russian].
  18. Filipenko, A. (2020). ‘Antiprimer Moldovy: chto dal Kishinevu “myagkiy podkhod” v dialoge s Pridnestrovyem’, Yevropeiska pravda, 9 December [online]. Available at: https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/rus/articles/2020/12/9/7117202/ [in Russian].
  19. Sydorenko, S. (2020). ‘“Yim potriben prezydent, shcho bude pidlehlym Rosii”: yak holosuie Prydnistrovia za 28 rokiv pislia viiny’, Yevropeiska pravda, 24 November [online]. Available at: https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/interview/2020/11/24/7116868/ [in Ukrainian].
  20. Yastrebchak, V. (2020). ‘Plan Yushchenko v istorii moldo-pridnestrovskogo uregulirovaniya’, Regnum, 3 July [online]. Available at: https://regnum.ru/news/polit/3001179.html [in Russian].
  21. Chernyavskiy, S. (2017). Pridnestrovye v tiskakh ukrainskogo krizisa. K 25-letiyu nachala pridnestrovskogo konflikta [Transnistria in the Grip of the Ukrainian Crisis. On the 25th Anniversary of the Beginning of the Transnistrian Conflict]. Mezhdunarodnaya zhyzn, 8. [online]. Available at: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/material/1896 [in Russian]. 10.21557/iaf.49755776
  22. OSCE (1999). Stambulskiy document 1999 goda [Istanbul Document 1999]. Istanbul, pp. 52– [online]. Available at: https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/7/1/39573.pdf [in Russian].
  23. Office of the President of Ukraine (2021). Deklaratsiia Batumskoho samitu, skhvalena hlavamy derzhav Asotsiiovanoho trio – Hruzii, Respubliky Moldova ta Ukrainy [online]. Available at: https://www.president.gov.ua/news/deklaraciya-batumskogo-samitu-shvalena-glavami-derzhav-asoci-69609 [in Ukrainian].
  24. Yevteyev, S., Dynges, A. (2013). Strategiya SShA i YeS v protsesse uregulirovaniya Pridnestrovskoy regionalnoy problem [US and EU Strategy in the Process of Resolving the Transnistrian Regional Problem]. Visnyk studentskoho naukovoho tovarystva DonNU imeni Vasylia Stusa.
  25. Gavrilova, S. (2020). Osnovnyye napravleniya politiki Yevrosoyuza v Chernomorskom regione [The Main Directions of the EU Policy in the Black Sea Region]. Mezhdunarodnaya zhyzn, 4. [online]. Available at: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/material/2336 [in Russian].
  26. Lossovskyi, I. (2018). Zovnishnopolitychna stratehiia Rosii shchodo krain postradianskoho prostoru yak realizatsiia ‘novoi doktryny obmezhenoho suverenitetu’ [Foreign Policy Strategy of Russia with respect to Post-Soviet Countries as the Implementation of the ‘New Doctrine of Limited Sovereignty’]. Stratehichna panorama, NISD, 2, pp. 19–30. [online]. Available at: https://niss-panorama.com/index.php/journal/article/view/79/81 [in Ukrainian].