U.S. Ambassador to Moldova Derek Hogan lifted the veil on the plans of Washington to escalate the situation around the territories of Moldova’s left bank
The time of the election campaign is a time of loud speeches, many of which, especially from the mouths of our international friends, usually have a double or even triple meaning. Yesterday was marked by two significant statements at once, and they concerned the slightly cooled down theme of the Transnistrian settlement. But while the words of Russian President Vladimir Putin about the resolution of the conflict on the basis of sovereignty and territorial integrity of Moldova with a special “reliably guaranteed” status of Transnistria were not new, the speech of the US Ambassador Derek Hogan caused quite a stir.
Discarding the usual politeness about steps towards, good atmosphere of dialogue and other verbal nonsense with which international observers frame the negotiation process, Hogan said quite frankly that the left bank should be under full administrative control of Chisinau and for that a unified strategy for reintegration on the right bank should be developed. There was also a curtsey towards Maia Sandu, saying that when she was Prime Minister, at least the diplomat saw an attempt to find such a consensus.
The ambassador’s statements resonate for a number of reasons. That the US supports the territorial integrity of our country is a good thing. On the other hand, it is risky to rush into such a complicated issue and Chisinau knows it best. Especially since right now the reintegration is in a half-conscious state. As can be seen, contacts within the negotiation process are practically frozen. Not a single issue is being resolved. Tiraspol complains endlessly on all available to it platforms about the sanctions and restrictions allegedly imposed by the Moldovan side. The region’s authorities are now especially keen on the blockade of Transnistrian imports from 1 July and transports from 1 September and are threatening retaliatory measures along the way.
At the same time, many experts believe that the current extreme cooling of relations between Tiraspol and Chisinau is happening, if not at the dictation of the United States, then at least with direct assistance. There is a rational reasoning in this argument. Needless to say, how great is the influence of the United States in Moldovan affairs. Not unlike the European representative, Hogan has shown himself as an active and effective manager of political processes in the country. Not only the right-wing forces are reckoned with the all-powerful ambassador, which is quite natural, but also the left-wing ones who preferred not to piss off Washington and its ambassador, or viceroy, in Moldova before the elections.
Therefore, to assume that such an important for the U.S., as Hogan himself says, settlement of the Transnistrian problem is completely at the mercy of local officials is naive, to say the least.
It turns out that Washington is intentionally pushing Chisinau to strain relations with Tiraspol, and thus, with Moscow, which is hardly willing to tolerate a unilateral change of the status quo around the separatist region. This can only mean that a potential conflict scenario has already been launched and we are now witnessing its preparatory stage. The aim is to form a completely loyal ruling coalition after the elections, which will then act as a conduit for any ideas and solutions born in the bowels of the American administration.
The other day, colleagues speculated about possible points of view in the American establishment as to how exactly the Transnistrian conflict and the Russian military contingent located in its zone could be used to their advantage. Acting against it was seen by the expert as a radical scenario, with which I am inclined to disagree. The reality dictates its own rules, processes are accelerated, and everything hitherto unthinkable is transferred into the category of possible or even desirable, as if through the Overton Window.
It is thought that after the parliamentary elections, a full squeeze of the remnants of Russia’s influence in our country will be initiated: elimination of friendly political forces through bans or criminal prosecution, termination of Russian TV broadcasts, curtailing of bilateral relations, following the example of Ukraine. And the final act of this drama will be the expulsion of the Russian military and peacekeepers from Moldovan territory. For example, by means of a provocation that would force the Kremlin to react in the difficult conditions of lack of direct access to its grouping and the threat of new sanctions.
The above prognosis is confirmed by the fact that the US is now mobilising states with unresolved conflicts and tainted relations with Moscow, primarily Georgia and Ukraine, in a geopolitical scramble with Russia. The new White House administration, unlike its predecessors, is taking a keen interest in the Eastern European region, which the Secretary of State is regularly touring, issuing commissions and instructions. And in the forefront of American attention now is Kiev, which is noting both a sharp increase in U.S. military and technical assistance and “unprecedented intensity” of contacts between the two countries.
The strengthening of mutual integration of post-Soviet states under the North Atlantic banner, such as the recently established “Associative Trio” of Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, can also be considered a link in a common chain.
Recent developments around Donbass, where the conflict almost broke out again, and Transnistria have raised alarm bells and a strong sense that someone has decided to play with the two flashpoints in their geopolitical interests. Apparently, the conflict between the two powers is approaching a boiling point, and any even situational consensus, such as what was achieved in Moldova in 2019, is now ruled out.
Moreover, the Western partners, given the importance of the moment, have stopped even trying to adhere to the rules of decorum, essentially handing out directive instructions to the Moldovan authorities. This has not gone unnoticed by the Kremlin, which, through the Russian Foreign Ministry, regularly draws attention to EU and U.S. interference in Moldova’s internal affairs. But there is nothing to be surprised about – the time for diplomacy and compromise is passing, and Washington probably believes that only one geopolitical actor should remain in Moldova.
Semen Albu, RTA