Sensation or Provocation? Deputy Prime Minister Sova Proposed to Change the Status of Moldova to Reach Agreement with Tiraspol

RTA expert Dorin Mocanu studied the scandal about the draft Declaration on the Transdniestrian settlement, which the Moldovan Deputy Prime Minister proposes to sign in Bratislava For several days, the Moldovan media have been hyping a new story around the Transdniestrian settlement. The journalists’ attention focused on the leak of some internal interdepartmental correspondence in Chisinau, which is directly related to the negotiations with unrecognized Transdniestria. At the beginning of October Bratislava will host a regular meeting of the 5+2 format on the Transdniestrian settlement. Until that time, the Coordination Commission on the Transdniestrian problem, which includes representatives of all branches of the Moldovan government and some state institutions, is to meet in Chisinau. Before the Commission, the office of Moldovan Deputy Prime Minister Vasile Sova, responsible for the reintegration of the Left Bank, sent out a draft “Declaration on further strengthening the joint efforts of mediators and observers in the 5+2 format in achieving a comprehensive and sustainable settlement of the Transdniestrian issue”. The long title of the document conceals several initiatives of Vasile Shova, which have provoked the scandal. The opposition Democratic Party in the person of its leader, former Prime Minister Pavel Filip, sent an angry letter to Prime Minister Maia Sandu asking for clarification on the document. Democrats brought a lot of claims to the content of the Declaration and tried to do it as publicly as possible, largely this let topic leak to the media. The greatest indignation among former associates of Plahotniuc was caused by the idea of Vasile Sova to create two separate legal entities within one state, as Transdniestria would be given the equal status of a full-fledged legal entity like the right-bank Moldova. As a result, Tiraspol in the process of settlement of the conflict would receive a voice equivalent to Chisinau, and at any level of negotiations. It is interesting that the PDM noted in its request that the Declaration is proposed to be signed at the level of Moldova’s international partners. That is, in the future, Chisinau may simply be pushed away from the development of the final settlement model. Among other things, such a joint declaration is a document that in general concerns the status of Moldova itself, and Deputy Prime Minister Sova actually proposes to change it and recognize the existence of two equivalent territories within the borders of Moldova. Social media of Moldova, which in recent years have become a vivid indicator of social and political sentiment in the country, are full of conspiracy theories and guesses: many believe that the international community has already made a decision on the Transdniestrian settlement and will impose a federation model of unification on the Moldovan state in the near future. By this logic, the Sova’s Declaration is a document that was handed down to Chisinau for one purpose: to check how Moldovan politicians will react to the need to agree on a document on its status, which Moldova itself does not sign. The hypothesis that everything is settled without us seems plausible. At the same time, it is possible that the insistence of Igor Dodon and his adviser Vasile Sova to launch political negotiations on Transdniestria in 2020 forces them to apply strange methods for international practice. The attempt to persuade international players to sign the draft joint declaration on the “special status of Moldova” prepared by Chisinau cannot be called anything else. Regardless of the success of this idea, which was born, obviously, in the camp of the PSRM, this brings disappointing conclusions. Apparently, it is no longer the fear of ‘federalization’, but the Transdniestrian issue itself is becoming a toxic topic in Moldova’s domestic policy. Attempts to start a real settlement of the conflict turn into an uncontrolled flow of adventurous ideas, uncoordinated initiatives and conspiracy interpretations, because of which the country’s leadership is forced to swear allegiance to the ideas of territorial integrity of the one and undivided Moldova on a weekly basis. Obviously, the coalition leaders will sooner or later have to listen to the advice of experts, diplomats and Dmitry Kozak, who persistently suggested not to rush to the solution of the Transdniestrian issue. Otherwise, the issue, which requires national unity, will simply provoke an even greater split of society, the government, and in particular the ruling coalition today.