|
Russia says it is willing to guarantee Trandniestria's reunification with Moldova in exchange for Moldova's intentions to join NATO. It is thought that the papers concerning this agreement are to be signed sometime soon. The president of Moldova, Vladimir Voronin, has told Kommersant how he and Russia plan to carry out an "anti-Kosovo", or opposite stance, scenario with Transdiestria. Voronin has also suggested that Moldova may drop out of GUAM, the regional organization including Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova.
Question: Over the last time, you have been even radiating optimism about the prospect for the Transnistrian conflict settlement. If one listens what you say, it could seem that Moldova will reunify if not today, than tomorrow. Has the count-down started already?
Answer: No problem can be solved, if the person who generates the idea of the problem's settlement does not believe in its success, and is not an optimist. Therefore, during all these years, even after the difficult 2003 year, I would not cease to be optimist, and would not stop considering that, in one way or another, we will solve this problem. As for the ""timing", I think that now we can say that the count-down has started, and the day when we will settle this problem for good will come soon. The relations which are now established between us and Russia represent the principal foundation for me to express optimism which I can no longer hide.
Q: Earlier, you were speaking about some secret, obscure forces from Russia which used to hinder your country's unification. What kind of forces are they, and where they are hiding?
A: The day swallowed them. After the darkest night, the day always comes, and the sun rises. And the evil spirits, as it is known, are afraid of light. If to speak seriously, two factors have played the principal role. First of all, the implementation of the joint control on the Transnistrian segment of the border between Moldova and Ukraine, and the appearance of the European Union's (EU) Mission there. The second factor, and maybe the most important one, is the registration of the economic agents from Transnistria with Moldova's state official structures. I.e. giving them the status of legal economic agents, and not of representatives of a breakaway unrecognized area.
Q: I.e. the underground money flows have been interrupted?
A: There is not this underground interest in Transnistria now. If we take the calendar, and see how the Transnistrian authorities behaved in the period when new rules were established at the border, this thing can be easily noticed. Everything was silent as long as there was not control. But once the control was established, a row on the economic blockade against the region was made. To understand that the things are not like this, it is sufficiently to compare the indexes as regards Transnistrian foreign economic relations in 2007, after 90 per cent of the region's export-oriented enterprises registered in Moldova, with the 2005 year, which the Transnistrians consider to be the most favourable period. It is clearly seen that the export from the left bank of the Dniestre river increased 19 per cent. Hence, the problem does not reside in the so-called blockade. But in the fact that we closed the channels of which the official statistics kept no record, and which used to bring fabulous, magnificent incomes, which the Transnistrian authorities were dividing with the forces about which I have spoken above.
Q: You said that you were not holding secret negotiations with Moscow, and were not discussing secret plans on the conflict's settlement. But I assure you that nobody understands well how namely the Transnistrian problem can be settled.
A: It is true what I say that there are no secret negotiations. And the problem will be settled only on the basis of the law on Transnistria's status, elaborated in 2005. At that time, we adopted the law on the main provisions of the special juridical status of the settlements from the left bank of Dniestre (Transnistria). At the same time, the parliament unanimously voted it. It was a surprising thing, as all the opposition with no exception voted this law. A draft law on the status as such was elaborated on the basis on the main provisions. The draft law stipulates everything: what rights, obligations, what form of government will be established in Transnistria after Moldova's reunification into one state, as it was. As a continuation of this law, it was adopted a mechanism of guarantees of the fact that the two sides - Chisinau and Tiraspol - commit to observe both this law and the "road map" for this mechanism. I.e. there is one schedule: when and what kind of measures are to be carried out. It provides for the fact when the monetary systems will be unified, the establishment of single customs bodies in all Moldova and many other things.
Here are those three basic documents we introduce in the package of settlement. Over the last time, the need appeared to adopt also a declaration on the recognition of Moldova's permanent neutrality. Under the Constitution, our country is neutral anyway. But now it is desirable that this status be fixed in a declaration stipulating that everybody recognize our neutrality. All the sides which participate in the process of negotiations in the 5+2 format should sign this document, excepting Tiraspol. I.e. Moldova, as a sovereign state, as well as Russia, Ukraine, the USA, the EU and the OSCE.
Q: Is this declaration ready?
A: We prepare a draft declaration.
Q: Russia should like it. Moscow has repeatedly dropped hints that it is interested in Moldova's neutrality. But what the USA and the EU say in this respect?
A: In general, each country decides by itself whether it wants to be neutral or not. These are our domestic affairs, it is about the state's sovereignty here. We do not ask for their agreement, but request the international recognition of the status of neutral country.
Q: Yes, but they will have to sign the declaration.
A: Yes. But I do not see what would prevent them from doing it. If any state of structure of the mentioned ones has doubts that, with such a formula, Moldova is likely to have problems as regards the European integration in future, we firmly say that it is not like this. Nobody raises the problem that the European integration should necessarily go through NATO. We cooperate with the Alliance within some programmes which do not provide for the accession to this structure.
Q: It means that the declaration is the fourth document in the package?
A: Yes. We propose namely the tackling in package. Moreover, all these documents, except for the text of the declaration, which is still under elaboration, are ready. At the last meeting with Vladimir Putin, before the CIS summit, we discussed the issue that time is ripe to start the negotiations in the 5+2 format with a single issue: the consideration of this package. Moreover, following our proposal, these negotiations should switch to a regime of activity within sessions, and not like this - we met, visited some tourism units and we let ourselves go. The sides' representatives should sit down at the table of negotiations, and work as much as it is necessary, so as to analyse the whole package.
Q: Are there chances that such a course of negotiations will end with the conflict's final settlement?
A: There are chances that the negotiating partners will agree that these documents contain not only the mechanism of settlement, but also the mechanism of functioning of Transnistria as part of Moldova in its capacity of autonomous region.
Q: Suppose that they reach such a conclusion? What happens next?
A: If this happens, we will meet at the level of heads of state, and will sign these documents together. Then the implementation of the "road map" will start. It will be very good, if we solve the Transnistrian problem till the parliamentary elections due in 2009. In this case, MPs from Transnistria will get into the parliament, and it will thus take into account the interests of all the country. I would very much like that Transnistrians reach the new parliament too.
Q: But are you ready to sit down at the same table with Transnistrian leader Igor Smirnov, and to shake his hands, after everything which has happened between you?
A: If the problem of the country's reunification in line with the international norms is at stake, I will sit down at the same table with anyone you wish. My personal ambitions should not prevail over the national interests, and they will not prevail. I will hold negotiations, and will sign the concerned documents. But this should be the final decision. I cannot start again that delay which has been dragging till present.
Q: The law on Transnistria's status, passed in 2005, was criticized both by Moscow and by Tiraspol. Their leaders said that the law was adopted without taking into consideration Transnistria's opinion. Now, there are no pretensions?
Q: This draft law should be simply read attentively. Transnistria is given there so many powers and rights, that many advanced republics which are members of Russia and other federative states do not have them.
Q: And how Transnistria will be named in the law?
A: Autonomy with wide powers of republic.
Q: According to this model, Moldova will become a federation?
A: No, it will remain a unitary state with two autonomous formations - Gagauzia and Transnistria. The coat of arms, flag, the state languages it deems as necessary will remain in Transnistria. Certainly, the Moldovan language will be the state language, under the Constitution, but all the rest of the languages can function on the region's areas, just as so far. By the way, under our legislation, the Russian language has the status of language of inter-ethnical communication in Moldova. The Transnistrians want the Ukrainian to be like this too. Please, why not!
Q: After the frequent visits to Chisinau by Deputy Secretary of the Russian Security Council Yuriy Zubakov, there was an impression that the negotiations are held exclusively in the format Voronin-Zubakov. But how the USA and the EU participate in this process?
A: The mission of Yuriy Zubakov is much wider than Transnistria's problem as such. To seriously deal with the settlement of this problem, we should first get out of the deadlock in which we got in 2003, when we did not sign the document which was named "Kozak memorandum." This fact was not simple, but we succeeded due to the mission of Yuriy Zubakov and Vladimir Putin personally. Only Vladimir Putin could overcome what happened at that time. The merit of Zubakov resides in the fact that we have a package of documents now, and we got closer to the problem's settlement. But we should not put a point here. If we had consultations only with Zubakov, we would have been in an area of secrecy, and we would have been suspected of holding negotiations at the back of the other participants in the process. But we inform our partners about all the issues we want to solve in concert with Russia. When the western press was writing that, allegedly, everything is wrapped in mystery, I was personally summoning the ambassadors of the EU countries at the presidency, and was informing them on what we settle and on what things we agree. These subjects were discussed with representatives of the U.S. Department of State as well. Of course, there is a small dose of confidentiality. But it will have no longer sense soon. We will have nothing to make a secret of.
Q: The package was elaborated only by the Moldovan side?
A: the draft law on the main principles of Transnistria's status as part of Moldova and the subsequent law on the status represent a fruit not of an invention of the moment, but of the negotiations which have been held during all those 16 years of the conflict's existence. We took into consideration everything which Transnistria has formerly proposed? This represents a sum of everything which we have sketched. We have not simply sat down, and outlined everything just as we want.
Q: It means that it is about a revival of a kind of "memorandum Kozak-2". Is it dead and was buried?
A: We took many elements and positions for the future draft law on the status. There are only general principles, which have been invented long ago.
Q: When the 5+2 format will meet? Helsinki and St Petersburg have been named already.
A: When I met Vladimir Putin, I said that Helsinki and St Petersburg are discussed as places of holding the meetings. He said me that it is not a thing of principle.
Q: Was he making lobbyism for his native city?
A: This is not the problem. We have long ago lost the taste for our own wishes in our posts. Putin regards these tasks more broadly. What he is interested in is the fact how to settle the problem. And where this fact will happen is just something secondary.
Q: What will be with the law which bans the privatization in Transnistria without Chisinau's agreement and with the recognition of the Russian business people's rights, who purchased patrimony there? Will you abrogate this law?
A: If this patrimony was privatized legally, even in line with the Transnistrian laws, there will be no problems. If the law was violated however, controls will be made, but certainly, the concerned bodies from Transnistria will check.
Q: The law itself will be abrogated, however?
A: It has been abrogated already. We will not oblige the current owners to re-privatise the units, and neither will we nationalize them. Over 90 per cent of the patrimony is turned private in Moldova at present. An intense additional privatization of the state's shares at several enterprises is carried out in Moldova. Nobody should think that we will take everything back.
Q: What will happen with the Russian peacekeepers after the settlement? Is this a problem for you?
A: We return here again to neutrality, according to which the presence of any troops is completely ruled out on our territory. The peacekeeping tasks have been conscientiously fulfilled several years ago. Therefore, we raise the problem of forces of civilian guarantee. We allow the presence of civilian observers, but not of military peacekeepers. But anyway, there still two armies - Moldovan and Transnistrian. The rehabilitation processes should take place. Although, I see Moldova not only neutral but also demilitarized in future.
Q: Is such a position understood in Moscow?
A: Frankly speaking, yes. The problem is raised differently: if they leave, all of them leave. And not as follows: somebody has left, and somebody occupied their place. We do not want to replace the current peacekeepers by any others. We affirm that the status of neutrality should be punctually observed, and no foreign servicemen should be on our territory. This is a correct position, and we will defend it.
Q: Your western colleagues understand this fact?
A: I do not think that we are of such a great interest for somebody from the strategic viewpoint.
Q: Now about the strategy. Moldova, unlike such countries of GUAM as Georgia and Ukraine, does not intend to joint the NATO. Does it make any sense to remain in the group of Those four, which Moscow considers to be anti-Russian?
A: When GUAM was set up, it set other goals. There were discussions about the construction of the oil pipeline - Odessa - Brody. But when I looked on the map of the route of this pipeline, I saw that Moldova is avoided by it very far. And, in general, something strange started last year. Debates on the creation of our own peacekeeping forces began. I asked what for? I was answered that we everybody, allegedly, have conflicts. And what's with it? We have internationally recognized peacekeeping forces - what for to create the other ones? I said them: end these games. Thanks God, the decisions within GUAM are taken by consensus, and when we gave up signing the document, the result was that this idea failed.
Q: Can Moldova follow the example of Uzbekistan and leave GUAM?
A: The parliament takes such decisions. In general, however, there should be a benefit from the presence in any organization. If there isn't, neither there is interest. If there is not interest, the presence becomes burdensome. The prospect is nebulous with our GUAM. If there is no economic interest, we do not need to be a member of it as a counter-weight against somebody.
Q: Aren't you worried by the fact that if Ukraine is accepted in NATO, Moldova will find itself nestled between the North Atlantic Alliance's countries, as Romania is a NATO member already?
A: What should we do in such a case? The geography cannot be changed. We will just be such a buffer with a neutral status.
Q: If Transnistria reunifies with Moldova, however, what will happen to the gas debt amassed by Tiraspol to Gazprom, which exceeds 1.5 billion dollars.
A: It will remain as a heritage. And we will settle it further on. We know who is guilty of this situation, as the population paid for the gas consumption, but the payments were not transferred to Gazprom. But no money will be got from this knowledge. We will solve the problem along with Russia and the EU. Possibly, Russia will also help us for the sake of the reunification process, in which it has the decisive role.
 |
