The search for a comprehensive political settlement in Transnistria: explaining the failure to reach agreement

ABSTRACT

This article proposes an evaluation of conflict settlement proposals in the case of the Transnistrian conflict and is concerned with the following research question: What explains the failure of international mediation in the Transnistrian conflict? It proposes an analysis of the failure of the Kozak Memorandum by assessing the value of scholarly arguments that centre on concepts such as ‘ripeness’ and ‘spoilers’ in explaining the failure of third-party mediation. It argues that competing attempts by external mediators to propose a solution to this conflict have created internal pressures for both Moldova and Transnistria, deepening the existing divisions between primary parties and hindering the possibility of delivering a mutually acceptable solution.¹

¹ The research leading to these results has received funding from the EEA Grants 2014–2021, under Project ‘Interdisciplinary Research on Russia’s Geopolitics in the Black Sea and the Arctic Ocean’, contract no. 35/2021.

KEYWORDS:

• Peacebuilding, mediation
• political settlement
• ripeness
• spoilers
• Transnistria

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

¹ The research leading to these results has received funding from the EEA Grants 2014–2021, under Project ‘Interdisciplinary Research on Russia’s Geopolitics in the Black Sea and the Arctic Ocean’, contract no. 35/2021.

² Derek Beach and Rasmus Brun Pedersen, Process-Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines (University of Michigan Press, 2019).

³ Jack S. Levy, ‘Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference’, Conflict Management and Peace Science 25, no. 1 (February 2008): 1–18.

⁴ Ion Marandici, ‘Structural Bias, Polarized Mediation and Conflict Resolution Failure: A Comparative Examination of the Disputes in Transnistria and Donbas’, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, July 13, 2022, 1–25; John Beyer, ‘Transnistria: In Search of a Settlement for Moldova’s Breakaway Region’, St Antony’s International Review 6, no. 1 (May 1 2010): 165–87; Stefan Wolff, ‘A Resolvable Frozen Conflict? Designing a Settlement for Transnistria’, Nationalities Papers 39, no. 6 (November 2011): 863–70; and Cristian Urse, ‘Solving Transnistria: Any Optimists Left?’ Connections 7, no. 1 (2008): 57–75.

⁵ Claus Neukirch, ‘Transdniestria and Moldova: Cold Peace at the Dniester’, Helsinki Monitor 12, no. 2 (2001): 122–35.

⁶ The Republic of Moldova and The Russian Federation, ‘Agreement on the Principles of a Peaceful Settlement of the Armed Conflict in the Pridnestrovian Region of the Republic of Moldova’, July 21, 1992, http://mfa-pmr.org/en/SfB.

⁷ Claus Neukirch, ‘The OSCE Mission to Moldova’, OSCE Yearbook, 2003, 13.

⁸ European Commission, The Government of the Republic of Moldova, and The Government of Ukraine, ‘Memorandum of Understanding between the European Commission, the Government of the Republic of Moldova and the Government of Ukraine on the Border Assistance Mission to the Republic of Moldova and the Ukraine’, October 7, 2005, https://eubam.org/wpcontent/uploads/2015/11/memorandum_of_understanding_en.pdf.

⁹ Maxim Shashenkov, ‘Russian Peacekeeping in the “near Abroad”’, Survival 36, no. 3 (September 1994): 46–69.

¹⁰ CSCE, ‘Report No. 13 by the CSCE Mission to Moldova’ (CSCE, November 13 1993), 1, https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/4/b/42307.pdf.

¹¹ Ibid., 2–3.

¹² CSCE, ‘Report No. 13 by the CSCE Mission to Moldova’.

¹³ The Republic of Moldova et al., ‘Memorandum on the Bases for Normalization of Relations between the Republic of Moldova and Pridnestrovie (The Moscow Memorandum)’, May 8, 1997, http://mfa-pmr.org/en/cCy.

¹⁴ Anatol Țăranu and Mihai Gribincea, eds., ‘Acordul cu privire la bazele relaţiilor între Republica Moldova şi Transnistria (aşa-numitul „Proiectul Primakov”)(СОГЛАШЕНИЕ ОБ ОСНОВАХ ВЗАИМООТНОШЕНИЙ РЕСПУБЛИКИ МОЛДОВА И ПРИДНЕСТРОВЬЯ) 2000’, in Conflictul transnistrean: culegere de documente și materiale (1989–2012), vol. 2 (Chișinău: Lexicon-Prim, 2012), 473–76.

¹⁵ Russia, Ukraine, and OSCE, ‘Working Document on the Status of Transnistria Proposed at the Permanent Meeting on Political Issues in the Transnistrian Settlement Negotiation Process (The Kiev Document)’, July 2 2002.

¹⁶ William H. Hill, ‘Appendix C: The Kozak Memorandum November 23 Redaction/23/11/2003’, in Russia, the Near Abroad, and the West: Lessons from the Moldova-Transdniestria Conflict (Washington, D.C.: Baltimore: Woodrow Wilson Center Press/Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012), 207–20.

¹⁷ OSCE, ‘Proposals and Recommendations of the Mediators from the OSCE, the Russian Federation, Ukraine with Regards to the Transdniestrian Settlement (The Mediators Document),’ (CIO.GAL/11/04: OSCE, February 13, 2004), https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/a/4/23585.pdf.

¹⁸ Ukraine Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘Ukrainian Transnistrian conflict settlement plan (The Yushchenko Plan)’, in Conflictul Transnistrean Culegere de documente şi materiale, ed. Anatol Taranu and Mihai Gribincea, vol. 3 (2003–2006), Culegere de documente şi materiale (1989–2012) (Chișinău: Politcon, 2005).

¹⁹ CSCE, ‘Report No. 13 by the CSCE Mission to Moldova’.

²⁰ Ibid.

²¹ Ibid.

²² The Republic of Moldova et al., ‘Memorandum on the Bases for Normalization of Relations Between the Republic of Moldova and Pridnestrovie (The Moscow Memorandum)’; Țăranu and Gribincea, ‘Acordul cu privire la bazele relaţiilor între Republica Moldova şi Transnistria (aşa-numitul „Proiectul Primakov”)(СОГЛАШЕНИЕ ОБ ОСНОВАХ ВЗАИМООТНОШЕНИЙ РЕСПУБЛИКИ МОЛДОВА И ПРИДНЕСТРОВЬЯ) 2000’.

²³ Russia, Ukraine, and OSCE, ‘Working Document on the Status of Transnistria Proposed at the Permanent Meeting on Political Issues in the Transnistrian Settlement Negotiation Process (The Kiev Document)’.

²⁴ Neukirch, ‘The OSCE Mission to Moldova’, 150.

²⁵ Russia, Ukraine, and OSCE, ‘Working Document on the Status of Transnistria Proposed at the Permanent Meeting on Political Issues in the Transnistrian Settlement Negotiation Process (The Kiev Document)’.

²⁶ OSCE, ‘Proposals and Recommendations of the Mediators from the OSCE, the Russian Federation, Ukraine with Regards to the Transdniestrian Settlement (The Mediators Document)’.

²⁷ Ukraine Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘Ukrainian Transnistrian conflict settlement plan (The Yushchenko Plan)’.

²⁸ Irina. F Selivanova, ‘U.S. and Russian Policymaking With Respect to the Use of Force’ (RAND Corporation, January 1, 1996), https://www.rand.org/pubs/conf_proceedings/CF129.html.

²⁹ Celestine Bohlen, ‘Russia Takes Over Command of Army in Moldova’, The New York Times, April 2, 1992.

³⁰ Selivanova, ‘U.S. and Russian Policymaking With Respect to the Use of Force’.

³¹ Ibid., 68.

³² Charles Herbert, ‘Moldovans Fear War Will Resume in the Spring Charles Hebbert, in the Moldovan Capital, Kishinyov, Explains the Background to a Forgotten War’, The Irish Times, March 19, 1993.

³³ CSCE, ‘Report No. 13 by the CSCE Mission to Moldova’, 8.

³⁴ Official Kremlin Int’l News Broadcast, ‘Press Briefing by RF Foreign Ministry Deputy Spokesman Mikhail Demurin’, Federal Information Systems Corporation, March 28, 1995.

³⁵ Maria Raquel Freire, Conflict and Security in the Former Soviet Union: The Role of the OSCE (London: Routledge, 2017).

³⁶ The Republic of Moldova et al., ‘Memorandum on the Bases for Normalization of Relations Between the Republic of Moldova and Pridnestrovie (The Moscow Memorandum)’.

³⁷ Official Kremlin Int’l News Broadcast, ‘Foreign Ministry Press Briefing’, Federal Information Systems Corporation, October 23, 1998.

³⁸ Igor Munteanu, ‘Moldova and the OSCE’, OSCE Yearbook, 1999, 12; Freire, Conflict and Security in the Former Soviet Union.

³⁹ Official Kremlin Int’l News Broadcast, ‘Foreign Ministry Press Briefing’.

⁴⁰ ITAR-TASS, ‘Itar-Tass Domestic News Digest of November 9–3’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, November 8, 1998.

⁴¹ OSCE, ‘Istanbul Document’ (Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, November 19, 1999), https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/6/5/39569.pdf.

⁴² Neukirch, ‘The OSCE Mission to Moldova’, 155.

⁴³ Țăranu and Gribincea, ‘Acordul cu privire la bazele relaţiilor între Republica Moldova şi Transnistria (aşa-numitul „Proiectul Primakov”)(СОГЛАШЕНИЕ ОБ ОСНОВАХ ВЗАИМООТНОШЕНИЙ РЕСПУБЛИКИ МОЛДОВА И ПРИДНЕСТРОВЬЯ) 2000’.

⁴⁴ Russia, Ukraine, and OSCE, ‘Working Document on the Status of Transnistria Proposed at the Permanent Meeting on Political Issues in the Transnistrian Settlement Negotiation Process (The Kiev Document)’.

⁴⁵ OSCE, ‘Proposals and Recommendations of the Mediators from the OSCE, the Russian Federation, Ukraine with Regards to the Transdniestrian Settlement (The Mediators Document)’.

⁴⁶ Paragraph 18 of the Kozak Memorandum Hill, ‘Appendix C: The Kozak Memorandum November 23 Redaction/23/11/2003’.

⁴⁷ ‘Russia and the OSCE- The Influence of Interested Third and Disinterested Fourth Parties on the Conflicts in Estonia and Moldova’, JEMIE – Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe (July 2001): 19.

⁴⁸ Hill, ‘Appendix C: The Kozak Memorandum November 23 Redaction/23/11/2003’.

⁴⁹ OSCE, ‘Proposals and Recommendations of the Mediators from the OSCE, the Russian Federation, Ukraine with Regards to the Transdniestrian Settlement (The Mediators Document)’.

⁵⁰ Christine Bell, ‘What We Talk about When We Talk about Political Settlements’, 2015, 30.

⁵¹ Barbara F. Walter, Committing to Peace: The Successful Settlement of Civil Wars (Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 2002), 6.

⁵² Jacob Bercovitch and Allison Houston, ‘Why Do They Do It like This? An Analysis of the Factors Influencing Mediation Behavior in International Conflicts’, The Journal of Conflict Resolution 44, no. 2 (2000): 170–202.

⁵³ Mats Berdal, ‘The Afterlife of Peace Agreements’, in International Law and Peace Settlements, ed. Marc Weller, Mark Retter, and Andrea Varga, 1st ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2021), 139.

⁵⁴ Isak Svensson, ‘Who Brings Which Peace? Neutral versus Biased Mediation and Institutional Peace Arrangements in Civil Wars’, The Journal of Conflict Resolution 53, no. 3 (2009): 440.

⁵⁵ I. W. Zartman, Ripeness: The Hurting Stalemate and Beyond, ed. P. Stern and D. Druckman (Washington: National Academy Press, 2000), 226.

⁵⁶ Dean G. Pruitt, ‘The Evolution of Readiness Theory’, in Handbook of International Negotiation: Interpersonal, Intercultural, and Diplomatic Perspectives (Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG, 2015), 126.

⁵⁷ Ibid., 126.

⁵⁸ I. William Zartman, ‘Mutually Enticing Opportunities and Durable Settlements’, in I William Zartman: A Pioneer in Conflict Management and Area Studies, ed. I. William Zartman, vol. 23, Pioneers in Arts, Humanities, Science, Engineering, Practice (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019), 173–94.

⁵⁹ Edward Newman and Oliver P. Richmond, Challenges to Peacebuilding: Managing Spoilers During Conflict Resolution (Tokyo, JAPAN: United Nations University Press, 2006).

⁶⁰ Ibid., 8.

⁶¹ William H. Hill, Russia, the Near Abroad, and the West: Lessons from the Moldova-Transdniestria Conflict, Illustrated edition (Washington, D.C.: Baltimore: Woodrow Wilson Center Press/Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013), 73.

⁶² Hill, Russia, the Near Abroad, and the West.

⁶³ For an understanding of the internal political context in the Republic of Moldova and the way in which it has affected its interactions with Transnistria see Ana Maria Albulescu, Incomplete Secession after Unresolved Conflicts: Political Order and Escalation in the Post-Soviet Space (London: Routledge, 2021).

⁶⁴ BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, ‘Official Accuses Dnister Region Leaders of Stalling Conflict Settlement’, British Broadcasting Corporation, February 5, 2000.

⁶⁵ ITAR-TASS, ‘Moldova, Dniester Region Positive about Moscow’s Settlement Plan’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, November 20, 2003.

⁶⁶ BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, ‘Official Accuses Dnestr Region Leaders of Stalling Conflict Settlement’.

⁶⁷ BBC Monitoring Kiev Unit, ‘Moldova, Dnestr Region Agree to Continue Dialogue despite Setbacks’, British Broadcasting Corporation, May 16, 2000.

⁶⁸ What The Papers Say (Russia), ‘Prospects of OSCE Intervening in Settlement of Transnistria Conflict Does Not Suit Tiraspol’, Agency WPS/CIS DEFENSE, November 1 2000; Valery Demidetsky, ‘Moldova Pres, Transdniester Leader to Discuss Region Status’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, June 20, 2001.

⁶⁹ Igorʹ Nikolaevich Smirnov, To Live on Our Land (Tiraspol: Tipar, 2004), 134.

⁷⁰ Freire, Conflict and Security in the Former Soviet Union.

⁷¹ Marandici, ‘Structural Bias, Polarized Mediation and Conflict Resolution Failure’.

⁷² Hill, Russia, the Near Abroad, and the West, 73.

⁷³ Raisa Stetsyura, ‘Kuchma Suggests Meeting on Dniester Settlement’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, January 18, 2002.

⁷⁴ Hill, Russia, the Near Abroad, and the West.

⁷⁵ Anatol Țăranu and Mihai Gribincea, eds., ‘Proiectul Acordului”Cu privire la reglementarea treptată şi deplină a relaţiilor dintre Republica Moldova şi Transnistria” 12/1998’, in Conflictul transnistrean: culegere de documente și materiale (1989–2012), vol. 2 (Chișinău: Lexicon-Prim, 2012), 360–63.

⁷⁶ Valery Demidetsky, ‘Kuchma Calls for Summit towards Dniester Settlement’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, October 22, 1998; Valery Demidetsky, ‘Kuchma Offers Settlement Plan to Moldavia, Dniester Area’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, July 21, 1999; Lev Ryabchikov, ‘Kuchma Supports Russia’s Proposals to Dniester Settlement’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, July 31, 2000; Stetsyura, ‘Kuchma Suggests Meeting on Dniester Settlement’.

⁷⁷ Anatol Țăranu and Mihai Gribincea, eds., ‘Vladimir Voronin la „Europa Liberă” vorbeşte despre motivele pentru care nu a semnat proiectul”Memorandumului Kozak”27/11/2003’, in Conflictul transnistrean: culegere de documente și materiale (1989–2012), vol. 3 (Chișinău: Lexicon-Prim, 2012), 148–50.

⁷⁸ Petru Beregoi, ‘Planul Kozak și vigilența lui Voronin. Cine l-a vizitat a doua zi la Președinție după ce l-a întors din drum pe Putin’, Realitatea.md, January 31, 2022, sec. Homepage, https://realitatea.md/planul-kozak-si-vigilenta-lui-voronin-cine-l-a-vizitat-a-doua-zi-la-presedintie-dupa-ce-l-a-intors-din-drum-pe-putin/; Stiri.md, ‘După 17 Ani, Voronin Oferă Detalii Despre Memorandumul Propus de Kozak – Stiri.Md’, Stiri.Md, December 20, 2020, https://stiri.md/article/politica/dupa-17-ani-voronin-ofera-detalii-despre-memorandumul-propus-de-kozak.

⁷⁹ Valery Demidetsky, ‘Moldovan President Promises to Delay Russian Plan Signing’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, November 25 2003; Valery Demidetsky, ‘Opposition Demands Rejection of Russian Plan for Dniester Rgn’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, November 30, 2003.

⁸⁰ Stephen John Stedman, ‘Spoiler Problems in Peace Processes’, International Security 22, no. 2 (1997): 5.

⁸¹ TASS, ‘Dniester Settlement Plan to Be Signed after Agreeing with Europe’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, November 25, 2003.

⁸² Valery Demidetsky, ‘Dniester Settlement Plan Not Signed over Moldova’s Inconsistency’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, November 25, 2003.

⁸³ Valery Demidetsky, ‘Transdniester Settlement Should Benefit All – President’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, December 26, 2003.

⁸⁴ TASS, ‘Moscow Regrets Moldova’s Refusal to Sign Settlement Plan’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, November 25 2003. Vadim Lagutinm and Nikolai Teterin, ‘Plan of Dniester Settlment Foiled Because of Pressure from Outside’, ITAR-TASS News Agency, December 1, 2003.

⁸⁵ Anatol Țăranu and Mihai Gribincea, eds., ‘Preşedintele în exerciţiu al OSCE despre lacunele planului rusesc de reglementare a conflictului transnistrean 26/11/2003’, in Conflictul transnistrean: culegere de documente și materiale (1989–2012), vol. 3 (Chișinău: Lexicon-Prim, 2012), 147–48.

⁸⁶ Anatol Țăranu and Mihai Gribincea, eds., ‘Discursul Reprezentantului Permanent al Federaţiei Ruse, A.I.Alexeev, la şedinţa Consiliului Permanent al OSCE 27/11/2003’, in Conflictul transnistrean: culegere de documente și materiale (1989–2012), vol. 3 (Chișinău: Lexicon-Prim, 2012), 151–52.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the EEA Grants 2014-2021 [contract no. 35/2021].

Notes on contributors

Ana Maria Albulescu

Ana Maria Albulescu has a PhD in War Studies Research from King’s College London, UK. She is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Romanian Centre for Russian Studies, University of Bucharest. She is the author of Albulescu, A.M. (2021) Incomplete Secession after Unresolved Conflicts: Political Order and Escalation in the Post-Soviet Space. London: Routledge