New Meeting of Dodon and Krasnoselsky: Why Now?

Sergei Isaenko Last week Igor Dodon’s working meeting with the leader of Transdniestria Vadim Krasnoselsky was officially announced. It is scheduled for October 29. As expected, the politicians will discuss the situation in the negotiations on the Transdniestrian settlement. They are also likely to pay attention to the upcoming Bavarian conference on confidence-building measures (an annual event organized by the OSCE together with the German government), which is scheduled for early November. The upcoming meeting will be only the first this year. Significantly, there were three of them in 2018, and they all fell into their own special context. However, the goals of each side have always been generally clear. Dodon sought to demonstrate openness to regular contacts at the highest level and his exceptional influence in relations with Transdniestria. Tiraspol counted on the assistance of the President of the Republic of Moldova in solving urgent problems. Despite the ostentatious courtesy during personal meetings, the relations of the two leaders can hardly be called good. Moreover, since last year, the mutual rhetoric of Dodon and Krasnoselsky has been hardened, increasingly making their further contacts meaningless. However, judging by the recent announcement, meetings with the Tiraspol leader are still useful for Dodon. It remains only to understand the reason for the current contact. It is noteworthy that the information about the meeting with the head of the left bank came up after Dodon’s conversation with Vasile Sova. The Deputy Prime Minister for reintegration reported to the President on the results of the latest meeting in the 5+2 format. There is reason to believe that Chisinau wished to discuss the negotiation process at the highest level just on the heels of the Bratislava meeting. As you know, it ended with Chisinau’s refusal to sign the OSCE-proposed protocol of the meeting. As a result, the attention of international partners was focused personally on Mr. Dodon and his colleague in the Moldovan government Vasile Sova, who are responsible for the situation in the negotiations with Tiraspol. The difficult situation in which the President found himself after the demarche of his ex-adviser in Bratislava, apparently, requires urgent correction. It can be assumed that for the head of state the meeting with the Transdniestrian leader will be an excellent occasion to maneuver and try to coordinate positions on the most pressing issues of interest to Chisinau and Tiraspol. This is especially important before the Bavarian conference, during which more compromise approaches are expected from the parties. Nevertheless, the difficult nature of the relationship between the Moldovan President and the Transdniestrian administration threatens to deprive their negotiations of any prospects. Addressing the crisis in the Moldovan-Transdniestrian dialogue may require something more than just an adjustment of positions. In this case, there is a high probability of personnel castling in the government of Moldova, even the removal of the Transdniestrian theme from the influence of Igor Dodon. After all, Prime Minister Maia Sandu has long made no secret of her dissatisfaction with the attempts of the presidential team to rush the Transdniestrian settlement. She has repeatedly (and clearly to spite Dodon) stated that the time for a final solution to the conflict has not yet come. A member of her government, Foreign Minister Nicu Popescu previously supported the continuation of the tactics of ‘small steps’ and confidence-building with Transdniestria. Taking into account the sad outcome of the latest 5+2 meeting the meeting of Dodon and Krasnoselsky will receive special attention, including from the outside. The international participants in the Transdniestrian settlement obviously did not expect such a failure after the relative stability in the negotiations of the past three years and will now wait for the situation to be corrected as soon as possible. First of all, of course, from Moldova — after all, the adventurous tactics of its representative led to the Bratislava failure and aggravation in relations between Tiraspol and Chisinau. The results of communication with Krasnoselsky will make it clear whether the President managed to save the situation and find a compromise with Tiraspol. Otherwise, Dodon will probably have to sacrifice an important chess piece in the person of the Moldovan negotiator to absolve himself of responsibility to Russian and Western partners. However, in such a scenario, the President risks losing his de facto monopoly on dialogue with Transdniestria and thereby losing the most important trump card in the run-up to the presidential elections in 2020.