Will Moldova hit Transnistria any time soon?

[GMantis]

Who is supposed to be doing the hitting? The mighty Moldovan Army?

The easiest way for the "sore" to go would be for Moldova to join the EU. Then, once most Transnistrians go and obtain Moldovan passports they might, actually, want to rejoin.

Moldova joining the EU is much less likely than Turkey joining the EU. Apart from it being the poorest country in Europe, the EU is not going to accept a country with a major territorial dispute.

[GMantis]

 the EU is not going to accept a country with a major territorial dispute.

A country like Cyprus, you mean?

Cyprus has strong backing from Greece and is much better economically. Moldova has bad relations with Romania, its most likely sponsor. And the EU is very hesitant about continued expansion.

[GMantis]

Cyprus is only in due to blackmail [/simplified, but not much].

How was it blackmail?

[GMantis]

Cyprus is only in due to blackmail [/simplified, but not much].

How was it blackmail?

At numerous times during the many years of preparation of the Big Eastward Expansion, Greece (usually subtly) threatened that they'd veto any major eypansion that didn't also include (South) Cyprus.

What makes things more complex is, of course, that South Cyprus had to make some pretty serious efforts at reunification as part of the price of getting in. Though timing and smallprint made it so that in the end they had the choice between getting in together with the North or without it, with sadly predictable outcome (whatever you think of the Annan plan's merits)

This proves my point about the low probability of Moldova entering the EU: Romania simply hasn't the same leverage as no mass expansion is likely in the short term. And this presumes that Romania would wish to use its leverage, which looks doubtful at the moment.

[GMantis]

Why the rest of the world lets Russia keep troops there is the better question.

Their official role as peacekeepers is not denied. The dispute is on the heavy equipment stockpiled.
Of course, as last year's events demonstrated not having Russian troops would be rather harmful for Transnistria.

[GMantis]

Not having Russian troops wouldn't be harmful to anyone but that dictatorship, it would mean that illegitimate state would fall. As for the rest of the world "allowing" them there, no one can do anything about them except for Moldova and Ukraine, Ukraine won't attack Russian troops for obvious reason and Moldova is the issue here.

Yes, Moldova is the issue, as they destroyed the best plan to end the division:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kozak_memorandum

[GMantis]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That sounds even more ridiculous than the Cyprus unification plan.

That applied only to laws which would be joint competences between the different units in the federation, ordinary laws could be passed through the lower house with a two third majority.

[GMantis]

*sigh*

Once again, please look at a map. Unlike Georgia, Russia does not border Moldova.

I don't understand why you think that's important. Russia already is projecting its power into Moldovan territory by keeping Transnistria quasi independent. They have planes, hellicopters, tanks, military envoys. Just because you can't throw a stone into Russia from Transnistria, doesn't mean Russia can't put its military there in hours.

And it's already been pointed out, there is already Russian military there.

How will these Russian reinforcements get there? By violating Ukrainian airspace or by violating Romanian airspace?

[GMantis]

I certainly hope that Moldova doesn't interfere with Transnistria. And, given it's communist government, I doubt it will.

lol wut!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_border_conflict

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_border_conflict

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Pact_invasion_of_Czechoslovakia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_invasion_of_Hungary

He thought wronlgy that because the current government is communist, it's pro-Russian. In fact, it's very anti-Russian and it was Voronin who sabotaged the Kozak plan for reunification.

[GMantis]

*sigh*

Once again, please look at a map. Unlike Georgia, Russia does not border Moldova.

I don't understand why you think that's important. Russia already is projecting its power into Moldovan territory by keeping Transnistria quasi independent. They have planes, hellicopters, tanks, military envoys. Just because you can't throw a stone into Russia from Transnistria, doesn't mean Russia can't put its military there in hours.

And it's already been pointed out, there is already Russian military there.

How will these Russian reinforcements get there? By violating Ukrainian airspace or by violating Romanian airspace?

If Russia declares that its nationals are being attacked by Moldova in any effort to "hit" Transnistria, it would have no problem "violating Ukrainian airspace" to send reinforcements.

I think you are right. After all, unlike Georgia, Moldova could not pretend to act in response of Russian aggression.

[GMantis]

Unwanted Russian military in your country isn't an act of aggression?

They're there as part of an internationally agreed ceasefire. As Moldova bears part of the blame for the war in Transnistria, their wishes are not the only one that matter.
And considering the way Moldova obtained these territories, regarding them as part of Moldova is rather doubtfull. After all, if Moldova regards the Ribentrop-Molotov pact and its consequences as illegitimate, then why haven't they given up a territory which is theirs only because it was given to them by the Soviets.

[GMantis]

Really, you're just going to blame Moldova in this and not mention Russia once?  How shocking coming from you. 

I said that Moldova was partly to blame for starting the war. That implied that the other part of the blame was Transnistria's.

Anyway, link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

On the other hand:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Control_Commission

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The question is more about the heavy equipment stockpiled in Transnistria.

Now, are you arguing for Transnistria independence?  A return to Moscow rule?  Against Moldova?

A good solution would be to return the territory to the Ukraine, which it was a part of until 1940.

[GMantis]

Well Ukranians are only the third largest group in Moldova, while Moldovans are a plurality, so there's not much more of an argument for that. Plus the primary reason for the rebellion, fear of reunion with Romania, is not happening (though it would be better for everyone involved--except Romania.)

Now if back in 1992 the region was annexed to Ukraine instead off putting it under a mob-ran dictatorship, it would be a better outcome no doubt than what happened and not entirely unacceptable. But backing up such a regime in such a region is rather indefensible, considering there's plenty of other parallel situations where that hasn't occured. How would anyone react to Austrian-backed guerillas in South Tyrol, or Turkish-backed guerillas in Bulgaria? (You did get a comparable situation with Albanian guerillas in Serbia I suppose that many supported, but those aren't the same countries supporting it here. Both sides just need some consistency.)

The idea to give Transnistria to the Ukraine was in answer to the Moldovan claim that the Ribentrop-Molotov pact and its consequences were illegitimate. Therefore a way to rectify the pact would be to return Transnistria to the Ukraine. The mixed population of Russians and mainly Russian speaking Ukrainians matches the population distribution in the neighbouring Odessa Oblast.
Of course,  Ukraine can't afford to encourage secession and redrawing borders, which is why nothing like this will happen in the close future. By the same argument as above, the Budjak region and the eastern Chernivtsi Oblast
should be returned to Moldova, and by a similar argument the Crimea should be returned to Russia.