Moldovan government's commentary on 25th anniversary of ceasing fire at Dniester

Chisinau, 28 July /MOLDPRES/ - The 25th anniversary of the signing of the Agreement on the principles of peaceful settlement of the armed conflict from Moldova’s Transnistrian region by the then presidents of Moldova and Russia was marked on 21 July.

The retrospective assessment of the political importance of this act is incontestable: it put an end to an armed conflict and bloodsheds, thus making the life of the ordinary people from the two banks of Dniester prevail. Bringing our deep homage to all those who lost their lives for the defence of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Moldova, as well as to all those who remained alive in the wake of the spring-summer 1992 hostilities at Dniester, looking at the situation from the perspective of the present days, we can understand even better the price we had to pay for our freedom and for the peace to return again to our land and homes. This is the most valuable lesson we learned from the tragic events we experienced in 1992.     

At the same time, we have to recognize, regretfully, the fact that many other goals put down in the 1992 Agreement just remained dead letter. The saddest ascertaining in this respect is the fact that our country has to face, in continuation, a breakaway conflict, which represents a serious obstacle to the further development of our society, generating, at the same time, a multitude of problems and difficulties for the ordinary people from both banks of Dniester. The efforts undertaken during this quarter of century, which has passed, to peacefully settle this conflict within different formats of talks, based on the observance of Moldova’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and the free choosing of its development way, have not yielded the results expected. Or, the main reason of this political failure must be sought, first of all, in the geopolitical interests and the historical stereotypes of the Russian Federation, which, to all appearances, is in continuation in process of looking for a civilized model of edifying its relations with Moldova, based on mutual respect, non-interference with the domestic affairs and other generally recognized fundamental principles of the international law.        

We appreciate the positive contribution of the peacekeeping operation, carried out at Dniester in late July 1992, within which the military contingent of Russia played a decisive role in separating the forces engaged in war, to the observance of the ceasefire regime and the maintenance of relative peace in the Security Zone. As time passed, however, we had to find out the fact that this operation failed to ensure the full demilitarization of the Security Zone and remove all obstacles to the free movement of people, goods and services between the two banks of Dniester, just as it was provided for in the Moldovan Russian-Agreement from 1992. Moreover, the concerned peacekeeping operation, glorified by some people, has turned into a factor of conservation of the Transnistrian conflict, or the biased attitude and the likings of the Russian peacekeepers for the breakaway Tiraspol regime are absolutely obvious. Namely for this reason, the Moldovan authorities started demanding, for a long time, legitimately and naturally, the transformation of this operation into a multinational civilian mission with international mandate, being firmly confident that this fact will contribute to the strengthening of trust and creation of a friendlier atmosphere for carrying out the process of negotiations on identifying a viable solution to the Transnistrian problem. Or, just as we see it well, Chisinau’s voice has not been heard, not to say that it was ignored.      

In the same context, we have to remind, bitterly, one more important stipulation of the 1992 Agreement and namely the one dealing with the commitment of the Russian Federation’s military forces (the former 14th army deployed in the region) to strictly observe the principle of neutrality in relation to the two conflicting sides. What neutrality one could speak about when we all see how, in the last period, the Russian troops have been holding military exercises jointly with the power wielding forces of the Tiraspol regime, including by forcing the Dniester river. Moreover, Russia’s leadership took the commitment to negotiate with Moldova an agreement on the status, way and terms of the withdrawal of its military formations from Moldova’s territory. The concerned agreement, which was negotiated during two years and signed on 21 October 1994, also remained dead letter, because of the Russian side’s refusal to enforce it.

As a result of concerted political and diplomatic efforts, at the summit of OSCE and the one of the states parties to the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty, held in Istanbul on 18-19 November 1999, pertinent decisions were adopted on the Russian Federation’s commitment to withdraw its troops and ammunitions from Moldova’s territory, the commitment which, just as it is well-known, was forgotten by this country too. Despite these unfriendly circumstances, the Moldovan authorities have spoken out and will further speak out consistently for the withdrawal of the Russian troops and ammunitions illegally deployed on the territory of our country, with the violation of the provisions of Moldova’s Constitution and the generally accepted fundamental principles of the international law. In these circumstances, Russia’s pretentions to be an impartial mediator and guarantor of the understandings agreed within the process of negotiations on the Transnistrian conflict settlement sound queerly, taking into account its refusal to fulfill its own commitments.         

Russia’s intentions to solemnly mark the 25th anniversary of the holding of the present peacekeeping operation are perceived in the same way. Or, in the lack of a plan of joint actions, occasioned by this event, the carrying out of such actions unilaterally is able to harm the relations between the two countries, which Moldova wants to be friendly and of mutual respect. Such “holiday’ actions, the unfriendly spirit of which is well-felt, might negatively affect the further holding of the process of talks on the peaceful settlement of the Transnistrian problem, based on the observance of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Moldova, with the adoption of a special legal status for Transnistria.    

In the light of the aforementioned, we must recognize the fact that, for us, the 25th anniversary of the end of the tragic events at Dniester from 1992 represents rather a “holiday with tears in eyes”, just as a famous song puts it. We believe that we should render justice to those who consider that, to mark this event, it would be more properly to lower flags half mast.