EU special representative for Moldova Kalman Mizsei has recently visited Kyiv and held talks with Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Petro Poroshenko on regulating the situation in Transnistria. Previously Vienna and Tiraspol hosted 5+2 Format meetings attended by Moldova, Transnistria, Russia, Ukraine, OSCE, and US and EU monitors.
What results have been achieved by the participants of the 5+2 Format by now? What expectations does Brussel pin on Kyiv concerning the regulation of the Transnistrian conflict? These and other questions are answered below by Kalman MIZSEI.
Mr. Mizsei, you have stated in an interview that neither Chisinau, nor Tiraspol benefit from delaying the process of negotiations concerning the solution of the Transnistrian conflict as no investments are flowing to either the Republic of Moldova or the Trans-Dniester Republic, their population is shrinking, and the living standard remain low. It would seem that this should have prompted them to seek ways to compromise. Why aren’t they doing this?
“Above all, I want to note that the international economic crisis has, of course, affected the economic situation on both sides of the Dniester, with the heaviest impact on Transnistria, which remains in isolation and whose industry is traditionally oriented on metal and cement production, i.e., goods that are most susceptible to economic cycles.
“The crisis has caused Transnistria to seek a compromise. But certainly the question remains why Tiraspol still does not agree to proceed. Psychologically, we understand that a conflict situation is approached differently by the political sides. Therefore, it is not easy to adopt a reasonable decision. However, Chisinau’s and Tiraspol’s leadership should start with measures to build trust, move on to political negotiations, come to an agreement, and do everything in order to gradually remove obstacles to mutually beneficial economic cooperation as well as economic re-integration. All this would meet the interests of the populace.”
You are holding talks with the leadership of the unrecognized Trans-Dniester Republic. Can you see that Tiraspol is interested in speeding up the process of regulation the Transnistrian situation in some way and integrate into Moldova?
“Without doubt, the difference is obvious if you look at the rhetoric in Transnistria. But when you see people suffer because of the unresolved conflict, it is fairly easy to understand how important it is to boost the people’s living standards. We indeed have a promising dialogue with Transnistria based on mutually beneficial initiatives. This can be illustrated by the fact that Moldova supports providing vaccines to the region and by the prospects of renewal of railroad connection and other cooperation initiatives.”
What can you say about the roles that other participants — the EU, US, Russia, and Ukraine — have been playing?
“We have had a 5+2 Format meeting in Vienna and 3+2 meeting in Chisinau, followed by a 5+2 meeting in Tiraspol. The atmosphere of all these meetings was good. Of course, the approaches differ. We should bring these approaches closer to each other. However, I can note that the interests coincide on many questions. And where there are differences, a reasonable balance can be achieved through negotiations and consultations.”
The EU has elected its president and foreign minister. Can one expect that the EU changes its approach toward the Transnistrian problem in this connection?
“You know, the role of the European Union in Moldova has been constantly growing in the past years. After Romania entered the European Union, the latter began to border on Moldova. The EU is Moldova’s strongest economic partner. When the Lisbon Treaty comes into force, it will also have a positive impact on the EU’s foreign policy. This will foster more integrated aid and economic and donor projects in Moldova and Transnistria. I expect this support to increase in the future, especially for the population of Transnistria. However, it does not mean that changes in the EU will be revolutionary, and everything will change dramatically on December 1. Everything will be done gradually and, at the same time, the importance of the EU for the economies of Moldova and Transnistria will be increasing.”
What can you tell about Kyiv’s role in the solution of Transnistrian problem? On your visit to Ukraine, have you seen that with the new foreign minister, Ukraine, as a country that neighbors on Moldova and Tiraspol, has started to pay more attention to this topic or show more activity?
“I have had productive consultations with the Ukrainian Foreign Minister. I have noticed that Mr. Poroshenko has a positive European approach. Kyiv has a strong understanding of how important the solution of the Transnistrian conflict is. Kyiv is our strategic partner in this process. We are continuing these consultations irrespective of Ukraine’s political calendar. We are sure that continuity prevails in Ukraine’s foreign policy concerning Moldova and the resolution of the Transnistrian conflict.
“At the same time, I want to note two important things. First, the resolution of all open questions between Kyiv and Chisinau naturally has a positive impact on settling the Transnistrian conflict. Second, the approaches of the EU and Ukraine should be constantly coordinated. Therefore, consultations like this should be held quite often.”
