Transnistria “Threatens” to Hold a Referendum

Sergiu CEBAN

The official statement by the Transnistrian administration that it is ready to conduct a referendum on its territory on the attitude towards the EU resonated strongly on the right bank of the Dniester, making people wonder about Tiraspol’s real motives

About a century ago, a political entity first emerged on the left bank of the Dniester, which left a deep mark on Moldova’s history. One could say that it still echoes loudly to this day. The emergence of the Moldavian ASSR not only brought the Dniester region out of its peripheral state, but also, by and large, became the basis for the emergence of the modern Moldovan state, no matter how some of our historians and politicians deny it. The annexation of the left-bank regions to the historical Bessarabia played a cruel joke in the geopolitical fate of Moldova, which has had to solve the difficult issue of territorial unity for more than three decades. Some experts are still convinced that we have been deliberately burdened with a “political weight” for the sake of slowing down the pro-Western course of the country and therefore we should just unshackle this yoke around neck. Others, on the contrary, believe that the Transnistrian issue will be resolved through rethinking and formation of an optimal model of Moldova, in which interethnic, intercultural, interlingual and, consequently, political consent should reign. As they say, nobody has a future without knowing the past. The former, by the way, will be determined very soon at the referendum and presidential elections, which are just days away. These two events combined may have to some extent a decisive influence on the nature of the Transnistrian conflict settlement. It seemed that all the recent visits of foreign visitors to Chisinau were solely aimed at promoting the incumbent president in the electoral race. However, just a week before the vote, the OSCE intervened in the general process, literally dragging the Transnistrian issue into the electoral context. The OSCE’s desire to keep it in focus is perhaps commendable, but it hardly helped the ruling regime on the eve of important electoral events. The meetings on the two banks basically showed nothing new. As before, we focus on assisting Transnistrian economic agents in carrying out export-import operations in strict compliance with legal requirements, ensuring freedom of movement and respect for human rights in the region. In addition, the functioning of Romanian-language schools and farmers cultivating land in Transnistria are highlighted. Tiraspol similarly raised the already annoying topics. The only exception to all this viscous inertia was the fact that on the day of the OSCE delegation’s arrival, the local office of the political representative published an official message that resonated strongly on the right bank. In brief, Tiraspol declared the readiness to hold on its territory a referendum on the attitude towards the European Union “on the basis of an agreement between the parties and with the participation of international observers”. Whether this was discussed at the meeting with OSCE representatives is not yet known. The specific narrative coupled with the factor of subjective perception of the text led to the fact that the media, experts, politicians and the government each perceived this message in their own way. Of course, the Reintegration Bureau reacted, although we think that it should have bided time. Nevertheless, just a few hours later, the office of Deputy Prime Minister Oleg Serebrian, in fact, gave an unambiguously negative feedback. As we know, earlier Tiraspol tried, at least officially, to distance itself from the electoral processes on the right bank, but this time it did exactly the opposite. The suddenness of the move, perhaps, corresponds to the importance of the moment. The authorities, probably for the first time in three decades of independence, will agree with the people on the strategic vector of the republic’s development. Such a historical fork in the road on the left bank of the Dniester was not missed. Disputes about the form and terms of Moldova’s integration into the European Union have been going on for the second year in a row. At the same time, the region was more of a passive observer, apparently waiting for an offer from Chisinau and Brussels. But having apparently received nothing clear, it dared to take the initiative and confuse everyone’s cards a little, at the same time reminding that it would not hurt to ask the opinion of the authorities and the population of the left bank. I mean, by reaching out, it’s actually putting everyone in a tough spot. Of course, Moldova could completely ignore such a demarche and focus on more pressing issues, but we chose to grasp the underlying motives behind the statement of the Transnistrian administration and to uncover the subtleties. The text analysis reveals the following semantic chain: you declare the integration of the left bank into the EU together with the whole Moldova – we were waiting for a dialogue – we were ready to discuss the format of involvement of all inhabitants of the region (not only Moldovan citizens) – no proposals followed – we consider it possible to hold a referendum on our territory to gauge the attitude to the European Union under agreed conditions. It is absolutely unclear what Chisinau should do now. Maybe we should first wait for the reaction of the EU representatives. On the one hand, the authorities insist that it is necessary to show loyalty to the EU at the start of negotiations, so a nationwide plebiscite is in great demand, and with as much involvement of people as possible, including the diaspora. On the other hand, providing an opportunity to express their attitude to the EU to the left-bank voter, who is mostly skeptical, is a big risk. In case of failure, this may, in fact, close the path to simultaneous European integration and reintegration. Moreover, as a result of the recognized vote, the region will receive serious arguments that strengthen its legal standing. At first glance, such a media bomb could well have been inspired by Moscow, which is interested in electoral sabotage, especially given that Russian representatives have already declared the referendum “discriminatory” against the residents of Transnistria and, therefore, illegitimate. Of course, in the current geopolitical circumstances, it is always tempting to find the “hand of Moscow” manipulating the actions of the left-bank elites. We are not going to whitewash the Kremlin and completely leave it behind the brackets, but any expert who is more or less familiar with the intricacies of the Transnistrian problem has long admitted that Tiraspol would sooner or later have its say on the referendum. Moreover, everyone knows his tendency to resort to such a form of self-expression while the regional space is on the verge of another geopolitical transformation. We should not rule out that behind-the-scenes consultations between Chisinau and Tiraspol about the referendum were held simultaneously on the territory of the right and left banks during the year, but yielded no result. Perhaps, simple mathematical calculations showed that an additional 100-200 thousand votes would change the balance of voting, and the left bank would in fact veto Moldova’s European future. It’s difficult to say what exactly caused this situation. But to be fair, we must admit that with such an open statement, Tiraspol still backed up its position and earned additional negotiating points. Obviously, everything will not end with just one statement, given that Transnistria has expressed its willingness to host the event. A lot will depend on the results of the referendum on the right bank. Most likely, Tiraspol will build on this indicator. In any case, the referendum is now looming over Chisinau like a sword of Damocles, and it will occasionally require attention and consideration in future political planning.