On February 3 and 4 the Austrian Minister for Foreign Affairs and acting OSCE chairman Sebastian Kurz visited Chisinau and Tiraspol to meet with high officials from both banks of Nistru river and to discuss the Transnistrian settlement process in the coming year. The Austrian Chairmanship made “frozen conflicts” to one of its key priorities along with fighting radicalism in Europe and supporting dialogue on arms control. As it was in the German case, the official program of Austrian OSCE Chairmanship contains a claim about Austria’s wish to “gain a resolution of the Transnistrian conflict”. At the beginning of January Kurz visited Ukraine. This time his agenda included both Georgia and Moldova.
First press-conferences of Mr. Kurz as OSCE chairman revealed two key aspects of his approach to European security. On the one hand, he said that Ukrainian crisis should be not the only one priority at the European security agenda. A peaceful coexistence on the European continent should be also provided, so Kurz. Austria holds itself out as a “bridge” between East and West, and rightly so: the country became neutral in 1955 as a result of a Soviet-Western arrangement. As Mr. Kurz pointed out, the “bloc mentality” should go back into historical textbooks. So his way of thinking about European security does not seem to be very much “normative” and so critical towards Russia.
On the other hand, while admitting that Austria will proceed with fulfilling the agenda of the German Chairmanship Kurz argued that he will at the same time be more inclusive toward various opinions from other capitals. It is good news for Moldova which was to some extent frustrated about German “pressure” over the issue of the Transnistrian conflict settlement in the previous year. Austrian diplomats usually stress the point that OSCE is an organization based on consensus, so it is always difficult to gain resuls, but they will do their best.
During his visit to Moldova the Austrian Foreign Minister did not make any outstanding statements. It is more interesting which messages were delivered to him by the conflict parties. He visited Tiraspol just for a couple of hours. Transnistrian leader Krasnoselsky spoke out the same things: “yes” to realization of the Berlin protocol and small steps policy and “no” to discussions on political status.
Much more difficult was the dialogue with Moldovan counterparts. They formulated a large list of issues which in their opinion should amend the agenda of negotiations. Actually the issues of both political and more technical nature were tackled. Purely political issues were put forward by the prime-minister Pavel Filip. He argued that Austria should consider the following:
- “Small steps” or confidence-building measures must be discussed jointly with “Basket III”, so the issue of a political status for Transnistria in the Moldovan state.
- Russian forces should be withdrawn from Moldova.
- The military mission should be replaced by a police mission with a respective international mandate.
And the Moldovan Minister for Foreign Affairs and European integration Andrei Galbur spoke about issues of a more technical nature:
– Free movement of people, goods and services between two banks of Nistru;
– Opening of a bridge close to settlements Gura Bâcului and Bâcioc;
– Enabling favorable conditions for functioning of schools with Latin script in Transnistria;
– Free access of farmers of the Dubăsari disctrict to their land beyond the road Tiraspol- Râbniţa;
– Respect for human rights in the Transnistrian region.
It is remarkable that the statement of Mr. Galbur contained the word “etc.”, so the list of issues seems to be open for any further amendments.
Unfortunately Moldova still does not demonstrate any interest toward trust-building measures in relations with the left bank. While Moldova during the German OSCE chairmanship was in defensive position and simply reacted to the agenda established by Berlin, this time Chisinau is acting offensively by putting forward its own vision. And this vision is based on the philosophy of preconditions which are demanded from counteragents: it is Tiraspol and Russia which have to make radical compromises, not Moldova.
Another aspect which embarrassed the Austrian negotiators was the difference in positions of the Government and the President Dodon whom Mr. Kurz also met during his visit. The Austrian mass-media (DiePresse, Kleine Zeitung) reported that the Austrian Foreign Ministry got two papers on the Transnistrian settlement and should now push Moldovans to elaborate a common vision.
The fact that the Transnistrian settlement is a much policized issue in Moldova is not new. Currently the ruling Democratic Party poses itself as defender of national interests and European integration of the country against Dodon’s “federalization plan”. On January 18 the party made the following statement: “Regarding the issue of federalization of the country, an idea promoted by socialists and President Igor Dodon, PDM believes that this is not a solution that contributes to the country’s reunification, but rather opens a wide road toward breaking it. It is an approach that can lead to a wrong and dangerous negotiation process… PDM has supported and still strongly supports the unitary character of the State of the Republic of Moldova and will work towards the reunification of country’s territorial integrity”. So the Moldovan government will not invest any political capital in the conflict settlement. The closer the elections the more radical become the positions of key Moldovan political forces.
Again the only one thing which the diplomats seem to agree on is that a new round of negotiations within 5+2 format is needed. The meeting is awaited in the second quarter of this year and it will take place in Vienna. But the prospects for any solutions (political or even technical) look blurry at this moment.
Articolul este publicat în cadrul proiectului „Dosarele conflictului transnistrean. Soluții pentru dezvoltarea societății pe cele două maluri ale Nistrului” este finanțat de către Ministerul Afacerilor Externe (MAE) prin programul României de cooperare pentru dezvoltare (RoAid) și implementat cu sprijinul Programului Națiunilor Unite pentru Dezvoltare (UNDP) – Centrul Regional pentru Europa și Asia Centrală.
