US Pushes for the Resumption of the Transdniestrian Settlement

Sergiu CEBAN

Authoritative statements have increasingly begun to circulate around the American establishment that the White House should take more decisive actions, including with regard to Moldova and its unresolved territorial conflict

The media continues to get information about the upcoming next Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin’s meeting. Yesterday, the Kremlin press service reported that, although the date has not yet been set, Moscow expects to hold a summit of the two presidents before the end of the year. According to Dmitry Peskov, it can be held via videoconference. There is no doubt that one of the topics of the upcoming meeting will be the situation on the NATO eastern flank. It is for this reason that information hysteria has been actively escalated in recent weeks and the parties’ positions based on a whole complex of factors are being tested. The exaggeration of a possible military offensive by Russia into Ukraine is the most obvious at the moment, which provokes all kinds of reactions and statements from the leadership and generals of the North Atlantic bloc. A number of experts believe that everything that is happening on the eastern borders of NATO is a consequence of the completed cycle of Euro-Atlantic expansion. The next logical step should be broad international agreements on the strategic status of the territorial interlayer between the bloc and Russia. The notorious European neighborhood for Brussels and the near abroad for Moscow include, as we know, three countries - Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova. In order to keep these states in the orbit of their influence and ensure their own interests, Brussels and Moscow use a diverse arsenal of tools and means – from allocating financial resources and rotating loyal political elites to interstate integration projects (Minsk agreements) and controlling Kiev and Chisinau through the so-called frozen conflicts in the eastern regions of these countries. Experts have already calculated that during the period of Donald Trump’s isolationist policy, the US military and political presence in the Black Sea region was much more expressed than under the current Joe Biden administration, which nominally advocates America’s strategic return to the European continent. For this reason, authoritative statements have increasingly begun to circulate around the American establishment that the White House should take more decisive actions, including on the Black Sea. The strongest resonance was recently caused by the passages of Donald Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton. In an article for one of the American publications, he expressed alarm at the fact that Moscow seeks to influence the so-called “grey zone” from the inside of Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus and Transcaucasia. At the same time, according to the ex-official, the West’s unwillingness to confront Russia in this space demonstrates its weakness. Bolton believes that the United States and NATO should turn to an offensive policy and begin to “unravel” frozen conflicts in order to unlock the opportunity for the “grey zone” states to integrate into North Atlantic structures. He suggested that NATO clearly define which of the post-Soviet states already meet the criteria for membership in the bloc, and unequivocally convey to Moscow its intentions in the region, as well as the will to achieve its goals. The American politician is confident that one of the main priorities of the North Atlantic Alliance’s strike against the Kremlin’s interests and positions in the post-Soviet area should be the liquidation of the Trans-Dniester Republic, which, as the war-monger noted, is an artificial entity entirely dependent on Russia. Another distracting factor, according to Bolton, may be the increased attention of the international community to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Georgia’s occupied provinces. Mr. Bolton is remembered to have expressed the view of Washington’s conservative wing on geopolitical prospects of Moldova back in August 2019 during his visit to Chisinau. The then adviser to the US President, via cautious diplomatic words, confirmed US readiness to support the Russia-proposed disposal of ammunition from Cobasna depots and provide the necessary technical assistance. But it seems that old weapons elimination implied, among other things, the curtailment of the Transdniestrian project per se, which Moscow can hardly approve. In the first half of this year, John Bolton has already made statements about our country, hinting that the frozen conflict on the territory of Moldova is already fit for unfreezing. As for the Russia-invented “independent” Transdniestria, it exists separately from Chisinau only due to the continued military presence of the Russian Federation. According to Bolton, simply drawing global attention to this anomaly would shock the Kremlin, whereas the new Moldovan government would enable Washington to intensify its activities. Despite the fact that Bolton currently does not hold any official positions, he retains, one way or another, the status of one of the influential speakers whose words are heeded in certain political circles, especially by the radical wing representatives of the American establishment. The present-day posture of the United States after a series of failures in the international arena is actually creating the demand for politicians of this stature, as well as for Washington’s quick revenge, primarily in the confrontation with Moscow and Beijing. Comments by various Moldovan public and political figures aside, Chisinau has not yet officially responded to Bolton’s coercive model of resolving the Transdniestrian issue. In that sense, internal and external observers are not particularly optimistic about the fact that the negotiation process was again put on hold at the height of the political season, and there is still no clarity on the appointment of a deputy prime minister for reintegration. There is a feeling that the country’s leadership should come out with a clear position as soon as possible showing that they don’t back the forceful unfreezing of the conflict and that they don’t want Moldova to become one of the epicenters of the West-Moscow confrontation. Our country will barely benefit somehow from being involved in the wrangle between geopolitical titans, which can bring about nothing but irreversible implications, with a completely opposite effect for the country’s territorial integrity.