The Effective Factors on European Union’s Engagement in Transnistria Conflict Resolution Process Based on Regional Security Complex Model

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Assistant Professor of Regional Studies, Faculty of Law and Political Science,Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Extended Abstract     
Introduction
Transnistria is located between Moldova and Ukraine. After 28 years, the conflict remains unresolved. The region wants to join Russia, and as a result, it can be interpreted as a Russian-Moldovan conflict. On September 2, 1992, Transnistria decided to secede from Moldova. The violent phase of the conflict lasted four months and led to Russia's intervention by the 14th Army. Transnistria's independence has never been recognized internationally. Transnistria is a geopolitical conflict, not an ethnic one. This conflict is called (Frozen). This conflict is a major source of security threats such as organized crime, violation of the rule of law, and illegal immigration. Despite these considerations, the European Union gradually entered the international arena of conflict resolution as a foreign actor. Russia and the European Union are two important players in the Transnistrian conflict resolution process. Since 2003, the will of the EU has been to play an active role in Transnistria conflict resolution, and since 2005 the 5+2 talks have begun. The EU's most important policy in the region is the Eastern Partnership, which is part of the European Neighborhood policy. This means that conflict resolution is driven by indirect tools, and therefore not very successful. All things considered, the question arises as to why, despite the efforts of the EU, the Transnistrian conflict remains frozen and there is no clear prospect to resolve this problem.
 
Methodology
The data collection method in this study is qualitative and is based on the documentary method. This research is in line with the theoretical modeling method. In this regard, the theory of regional security complexes Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver has been applied. In terms of the level of analysis, this research is three-level and examines the issue in national, regional, and international dimensions.
 
Results and Discussion
The analyzes of regional security complexes takes place during a process that includes the internal dimension of government (includes Transnistria strengths and weaknesses), state's relationship with other governments (includes Transnistria relations with Romania, Moldova, and Ukraine), the connection of the region with its nearby regions ( includes Transnistria relations with European Union), and  The relationship between government and superior powers ( includes Transnistria Relations with Russia). Depending on the pattern of conflict in Transnistria, the type of security complex in it can be called Centralized. This focus can be based on a superior power, a great power, a regional power or an institution. Transnistria is part of a security complex based on a superior power (Russia) and an institution (the European Union). It can be argued that Transnistria is part of Russia's regional security complex and the intricacies of the complex and its intersection with the security complex proposed in the Eastern Partnership do not allow the EU to resolve the conflict.
 
Conclusions
As Buzan and Weaver rightly point it, security threats are more common among close governments. That is why the European Union intervened in the Transnistrian conflict. At the same time, the issue of Transnistria is affecting Russia's security. Security patterns are interconnected and affect each other. If Moldova has a closer relationship with the European Union, this affects Russia. Russia is gradually losing control of the region and becoming weaker. As a result, Russia resists against this issue. The complexities within the region do not allow the EU to use an effective solution to resolve the conflict. In particular, high levels of corruption in Moldova and Transnistria are hampering EU reform. Russia also has a wide range of software and hardware in the region. So far, Russia's policies have been more successful than those of the European Union

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Abdi, M; Farajirad, A.R; Ghorbaninejad, R (2020). " Expounding Geopolitical Factors Affecting the Formation of Strategic Relations", Geopolitics Quarterly, 16(57): 1-36. [In Persian]
  2. Adam, V (2017). Romanian involvement in theTransnistrian War. Netherlands: Leiden University.
  3. Baltag, Do; Bosse, G (2016)."The EU Eastern Partnership with Moldova: A Best Case Scenario for EU Security Community Building." In External Governance as Security Community Building: the Limits and Potential of European Neighbourhood policy, by Pernille Ricker, 49-79. London: Palgrave.
  4. Bobick, M.S (2014). "Separatism redux: Crimea, Transnistria, and Eurasia's de facto states". Anthropology Today 30 (3) : 3-8.
  5. Bosse, G (2010). "The EU's Relations with Moldova: Governance, Partnership or Ignorance?" Europe-Asia Studies 62 (8): 1291-1309.
  6. Brown, J. E. (2015). Europanization Postponed: The Role of Veto Players in Shaping Convergence with the EUs Conflict Resolution & Internal Market Integration Policies in Moldova & Georgia. Chapel Hill .
  7. Buzan, B; Wæver, O (2003). Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Calus, K (2015). Power Politics on the Outskirts of the EU: Why Transnistria Matters. London: LSEE.
  9. Cazat, L (2019). The Eastern Partnership in Moldova: the 10th anniversary. 9 3. https://eulogos.blogactiv.eu/2019/07/31/the-eastern-partnership-in-moldova-the-10th-anniversary/.

10. Cenusa, D (2019). EU Policy Strangthening Resilience in Moldova, Ukrain and Georgia between the Rule of Law and Oligarchic Influence. Brussels: CEPS.

11. Christou, G (2012). "European Union Security Logics to the East: The European Neighbourhood Policy and the Eastern Partnership." In European Security Governance, by George Christou & Stuart Croft, 77-95. London: Routledge.

12. Claus, K (2013).  An Aided Economy: The Charecteristics of the Transnistria Economic Model. Warsaw: OSW.

13. Crombois, J (2010). "Eu Crisis MAnagement and ESDP Operations in the Eastern Neighbourhood ." In Multilateral Security and ESDP Operations, by Daniela Irrera Fulvio Attinà, 125-145. London: Routledge.

14. Crombois, J (2019)."The Eastern Partnership: Geopolitics and Policy Ietria." European View 18 (1): 89-96.

15. Damen, M (2019). Three Eastern Partnership Neighbours: Ukrain, Moldova & Belarus. 11 1. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/171/trois-vois -ins-du-partenariat-oriental-ukraine-moldavie-et-bielorussie.

16. De Waal,T; Nikolaus V.T (2020). Beyond Frozen conflict: Scenarios for the Separatist Disputies of Eastern Europe. London: CEPS.

17. Delcour, L (2015). "Moldova and the EU’s Neighborhood Policy: What partnership?" Revue d’études comparatives Est-Ouest 1 (46): 137-159. doi:10. 4074/S0338059915001060.

18. Delcour, L; Katryna, W (2017). "Between The Eastern Partnership and The Eurasian Economic Union: Competing Region-Building Projects in the Common Neighbourhood." In Theorizing The European Neighbourhood Policy, by Sieglinde Gstohle & Simon Schunz, 187-207. London: Routledge.

19. DeWaal, T (2020). "Transnisdnistria Today." In Beyond Frozen Conflict: Scenarios for the Sepratist Disputes of Eastern Europe, by Thomas De Waal & Nikolaus Von Twickel, 135-158. London: CEPS.

20. Dobrescu, M (2015). The EU Potential for Domestic Change Beyond Its Borders. London: London School of Economics.

21. Dura, G (2011). "The EU and Moldova Third Sector: Partners in Solving The Transnistrian Conflictg." In The European Union,Civil Society and Conflict, by Nathalie Tocci, 75-95. London: Routledge.

22. Emerson, M (2019). Scenarios for a Wider Europe. Brussels: CEPS.

23. Fogarti, P (2010). "Riding Three Horses: Moldova Enduring Identity as a Strategy for Survival." In Russia and Europe: Building Bridges, Digging Trenches, by Bertil Nygren Kjell Engelbrekt, 230-249. London: Routledge.

24. Friedrich, E.S (2015). Eastern Partnership Revisited: Associated Countries in Focus. Warsaw: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.

25. Gromadzki, G (2015). The Eastern Partnership After 5 Years: Time for Deep Rethinking. Luxamburg: European Parlament.

26. Gumene, V (2019). Transnistria: DCFTA`s Implications for Foreign Trade. Stokholm: CEPS.

27. Hafeznia, M.R (2016). "Active Geostrategic Faults in the World", Geopolitics Quarterly, 12(44): 1-12. [In Persian]

28. Hill, W.H (2012). Russia, the Near Abroad, and the West: Lessons from the Moldova-Transdniestria Conflict. Washington: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.

29. Infotag (2019). PMR Debth to Gazprom Exceeds US 6 Billion. 3 2. http://www.infotag.md/finances-en/275416/.

30. Karimi, M (2019). " Spatial Reflections of Regional Legal Treaties: A Case Study of the EU Legal Treaties." Geopolitics Quarterly 15(56): 52-78 [In Persian].

31. Karniewicz, T; Petrovicka, M; Natasha, W (2010). The EU and Conflict Resolution in Transnistria. Zurich: New Dimensions of Security in Europe.

32. Koolae, E (2017). Politics and government in Central Eurasia. Tehran: SAMT. [In Persian]

33. Korostelevaa, E (2010). "Moldova's European Choice: 'Between Two Stools'?" Europe-Asia Studies 8 (2): 1267 -1289. doi:10.1080/09668136.2010.504383.

34. Küchler, F (2012). The Role of the European Union in Moldova’s Transnistria Conflict. ibidem.

35. Lavrelashvili, T (2018). "Resilience-building in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine: Towards a tailored regional approach from the EU." European View 17 (2): 189-196. doi:10.1177/1781685818805680.

36. Lippert, B (2019). A Geopalitically Aware EU and Its Eastern European Neighbours: More Realism, More Investment. Berlin: SWP.

37. Michael, E; Kovziridze, T (2016). Deepening EU–Georgian Relations. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.

38. Mirfakhraee, H (2016). "The Impacts of Disagreements Between the EU Member States on the Union’s Position in the World System", Geopolitics Quarterly, 12(43): 152-167. [In Persian]

39. Montesano, F; vander Togt,T; Zweers, W (2016). The Europeanisation of Moldova: Is the EU on the Right Track? Hague: Clingendael Report.

40. Niemann, A; DeWekker, T (2010). "Normative Power Europe? Eu Relations With Moldova." SSRN. 10 22. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1695420.

41. Niemann, A; DeWekker, T (2010). "Normative power Europe? EU relations with Moldova." European Integration online Papers 14 (1): 1-41. doi:10.1695/20 10014.

42. Petrovicka, M; Wunsch, N (2010). The EU and Conflict Resolution in Transnistria. New Dimentions of Security in Europe.

43. Popescu, N (2005(a)). The EU and Transnistria: From Deadlock to Sustainable Settlement. Paris: IPF.

44. Popescu, N (2005). The EU and South Caucasus: Learning Lessons from Moldova and Ukraine. Paris: IPF.

45. Popescu, N (2011). EU Foreign Policy and Post-Soviet Conflicts: Stealth Intervention. London: Routledge.

46. Population Data (2019). Transnistria. 8 5. https://en.populationdata.net/countries/ transnistria/.

47. Prohnițchi, V; Lupușor, A (2013). Transnistria andthe Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement: a little stone that overturns a great wain? Chisinau: Ventru Analytic Independent.

48. Sazmand, B; Joukar, M (2016). " Regional Security Complex, Dynamics and Relationships Patterns of the Persian Gulf region Countries", Geopolitics Quarterly, 12 (42): 151-177. [In Persian]

49. Schmidtke, O; Yekelchyk, S (2008). Europe's last frontier? Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine between Russia and the European Union. London: Palgrave.

50. Sendhardt, B (2015). "Introduction." In Eastern Partnership Revisited, by Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Institute, 7-9. Warsaw: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Institute.

51. Staeger, U (2017). "Turning a Problem into a Solution: The Potential of Interregionalism Between the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union." In Theorizing the European Neighbourhood Policy, by Simon Schunz Sieglinde Gstöhl, 207-226. London: Routledge.

52. Vaahl, M (2005). The Europeanisation of the Transnistrian Conflict. Berlin: CEPS.

53. Vaahl, M; Emerson, M (2004). "Moldova & The Transnistria Conflict." In Europeanization and Conflict Resolution: Case Studies from the European Periphery, by Bruno Coppieters, Michael Emerson, Michel Huysseune, Tamara Kozviridze, Gergana Noutcheva, Assistant Professor at the Political Science Department Gergana Noutcheva Associate Professor of Political Science Bruno Coppieters, 149-175. Gent: Academia Press.

54. VanSeeters, M (2010). European Influence in Moldova: The role of the European Union on Nation-Buildibg in Moldova. Nijmegan: Radboud University.

55. Verdun, A; Chira, G (2008). "From neighbourhood to membership: Moldova’s persuasion strategy towards the EU." Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 8 (4): 431-444. doi:10.1080/14683850802556418.

56. Woehrel, S (2014). Moldova: Background and U.S. Policy. Washington: Congressional Research Service.

Zimmerly, K.E (2009). Georgia: Frozen Conflict and the Role of Displaced Persons. Denver: University of Denver University of Denver

Volume 17, Issue 63
July 2021
Pages 170-195
  • Receive Date: 15 May 2020
  • Revise Date: 12 January 2021
  • Accept Date: 22 April 2021
  • First Publish Date: 22 April 2021