1. Institute for
Development and
Moldova’s Foreign Policy statewatch Social Initiatives
“Viitorul”
Issue 15, December 2010
OppOrtunities in
MOldOvan-GerMan relatiOns
Leonid Litra and Dumitru Rusu
Next topics
Moldova’s Foreign Policy Statewatch represents a series of brief
analyses, written by local and foreign experts, dedicated to the
to be covered:
most topical subjects related to the foreign policy of Moldova,
major developments in the Black Sea Region, cooperation with post-election bid of the
international organizations and peace building activities in the region. geopolitical visits in
It aims to create a common platform for discussion and to bring Moldova
together experts, commentators, officials and diplomats who are
concerned with the perspectives of European Integration of Moldova. Liberalization of the
It is also pertaining to offer to Moldova’s diplomats and analysts a airline market in Moldova
valuable tribune for debating the most interesting and controversial
points of view that could help Moldova to find its path to EU.
G
ermany is a reliable partner of Moldova that constantly
encourages the European integration demarche of Chisinau
and supports in an operational way the reforms that refers,
through others, to the education, democratization and
security. The recent efforts of retaking the negotiations
on transnistrian conflict in the frame of 5+2 negotiations
format and the increasing efforts of finding a new solution
for country reintegration involved the EU and especially
Germany.

2. 2 Moldova’s Foreign Policy statewatch
Germany’s proposal of solving the
transnistrian conflict
During a speech in Berlin from 2008 of the Russian President Dimitri Medvedev,
he proposed a treaty on new security architecture in Europe. The proposal of
Medvedev, grosso modo speaking, has been ignored and forgotten, the Europeans
reactions reflecting in a big part the idea of discussing this subject inside OSCE,
while Medvedev’s proposal was undermining the existing security treaties like
OSCE or CFE 1 (Treaty of Conventional Armed Forces in Europe). This proposal
was returned on the agenda of the important players, due to Germany, 2 years
after it was launched. The Berlin proposal suggests withdrawing the Russian
weapons from Transnistria in exchange for promoting by Germany a new treaty
regarding the new security architecture in Europe. The mechanism of discussing
these conflicts is the Political and Security Committee between EU and Russia. 2
What could be the finalité of the
Russian-German discussions?
The dialogue between Russia and Germany has already evolved enough to
consider this opportunity a real one. Moreover, the memorandum from Meseberg 3
signed by Medvedev and Merkel transposes in the operational phase the format
where the security problems will be approached. Brussels was surprised by the
result of the Russian-German discussions, lately also joined by France, even if the
EU was not formally consulted and in end, the EU blessed this initiative. 4 In his
turn, Medvedev, explained that every idea has its own founders, so that a good
initiative should be bilaterally discussed. 5
In Moldova, the mass media is very optimistic regarding the discussions
between Russia and Germany, as if in the case of some positive evolutions the
problem would be solved already. Although there are attempts to have a technical
approach to transnistrian problem, many people from Moldova, especially the ethnic
minorities, didn’t escape the mentality of the cold war and conspiracy theories,
even if it is felt a competition between Russia and the EU in their neighborhood.
Russia remains a power that influences the foreign relations of Moldova, and also
the internal policy. Through others, Russia has been very reserved even at the
1 Herpen, Marcel H. Van: (2008), Medvedev’s proposal for a pan-European security pact: its six hidden objectives and how the west should
respond, Cicero Working Paper 08-03
2 Germany asked Russia to withdraw troops in Transnistria, ActMedia, http://www.actmedia.eu/top+story/germany+asked+russia+to+with
draw+troops+in+transnistria/28112
3 Memorandum, meeting of Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Dimitri Medvedev on 4-5 June 2010 in Meseberg, http://www.
bundesregierung.de/nsc_true/Content/DE/__Anlagen/2010/2010-06-05-meseberg-memorandum,property=publicationFile.pdf/2010-06-05-
meseberg-memorandum
4 Russia and Germany suggest creation of high-level Russia-EU security committee, European Forum, 8/06/2010, http://www.europeanfo-
rum.net/news/899/russia_germany_suggest_creation_of_high_level_russia_eu_security_committee
5 Rettaman, Andrew; Germany and Russia call for a new EU security committee, EU Observer, 07/06/2010, http://euobserver.com/9/30223
str. iacob hîncu 10/1, chişinău Md-2005 republic of Moldova 373 / 22 221844 phone 373 / 22 245714 fax office@viitorul.org www.viitorul.org

3. Moldova’s Foreign Policy statewatch 3
beginning of launching the Eastern Partnership initiative, taking into consideration
the fact that Moscow wanted to make sure that the integration process of EU
does not collide with the integration processes from the region that are guided by
Russia.
The possibility of Moldova to include Transnistria on the agenda of important
actors in the region has appeared on the background of a general desire to revise
the layout, in which Moldova was framed too, and namely because of this, the
Transnistria appearance on the Russian-German agenda must be seen in a larger
context. On the one hand, Russia must prove the availability of having a serious
dialogue with Germany, implicitly the EU, through cooperation on solving the
transnistrian conflict, on the other hand, the EU will promote a more inclusive
policy toward Russia and it will discuss a possible security revision in Europe. 6
The fact that Germany requires Russia for evidence of seriousness in this dialogue
and it starts from the transnistrian conflict proves that the transnistrian conflict is
instrumental in this dialogue. At the same time, Russia believes the discussions
on the new security architecture in Europe must not be conditioned by Germany 7,
and is also willing to validate its gains from Georgia and Ukraine and to limit
the implication of the US in this region. On the other side, it is noteworthy the
experience of the commitments assumed by Russia at the OSCE Summit from
Istanbul (1999) and those assumed by Russia in the Sarkozy Agreement which
regards to the Russian-Georgian war, and much more is questioned the efficiency
of a such kind of agreement if the EU did not manage to build a consolidated
position towards Russia. Until this moment the US manifested its disinterest in this
proposal, because an unofficial replacement of the NATO-Russian Council by the
EU-Russian Committee is not wanted and because of big priorities of the US are
Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, China and just partially Russia.
Why there are small chances?
According to the provided information, the scenario would be the following:
Russia contributes to solve the transnistrian conflict and Germany will promote the
idea of a pact for the new security architecture in Europe. Chances of this scenario
are small because the main problem is the disproportionate reciprocity of Russia
and Germany. It is hard to imagine how Russia could make an effort and solve
the transnistrian conflict in return for a promise that may be limited to an endless
discussion. Would Russia agree to change Transnistria for a promise?
On the other side, there is the fact that in spite of the positive actions on
the tactical level, which can be observed by restoring the train circulation through
Transnistria or by intensifying the contacts between the constitutional authorities
from Moldova and the representatives from Transnistria, on the strategic level with
a long-range, the EU and Russia’s views are different. The European Union is
6 Inayeh, Alina: 2010, Joint EU-Russia crisis management in Europe? Interesting idea…, The German Marshall Fund of the United States Blog,
12/06/2010, http://blog.gmfus.org/2010/06/12/joint-eu-russian-crisis-management-in-europe-interesting-idea/
7 Konstantin Kosaciov în Germany asked Russia to withdraw troops in Transnistria, ActMedia, http://www.actmedia.eu/top+story/germany+
asked+russia+to+withdraw+troops+in+transnistria/28112a
str. iacob hîncu 10/1, chişinău Md-2005 republic of Moldova 373 / 22 221844 phone 373 / 22 245714 fax office@viitorul.org www.viitorul.org

4. 4 Moldova’s Foreign Policy statewatch
pleading for a bigger influence of the EU and the US in the negotiations format and
supports the idea of withdrawal the troops by Russia from the Transnistrian region,
and the replacement of the Russian peacekeepers mission by a multinational civil
mission with an international mandate. On the other side, Russia is saying that
withdrawing its troops would provoke a secessionist 8 war and that Moldova is
not able to manage efficiently the governmental act because of political crisis,
even though the president Medvedev has much more positive opinions, but which
seem not to be supported by the Russian executive. Eventually, the Russia’s
unwillingness is obvious and the fact that all the opportunities of retaking the
official negotiations in format 5+2 have been missed, most likely, intentionally,
even after the OSCE Summit from Astana. 9
Conclusions
Russian-German discussions regarding Transnistria provide a good
opportunity to externalize the Moldova’s problem and to intensify the finding of a
solution for Transnistria. At the same time, the incentives are small for Russia in
order to sustain the official position of Moldova and the EU. Germany’s offer must
have an economic component that would tent Russia to become more cooperative.
Ultimately, as the ambassador of an EU state in Moldova says: the result of
Russian-German talks is obvious because the question is not about retaking or not
of the official negotiations, but on the contrary, the main question is when these
negotiations will take place? But, the problem of different strategic views of the EU
and the Russian Federation minimizes the hopes from these negotiations.
At the same time, all the expectations related to the OSCE Summit from
Astana from the beginning of December did not bring added value to the transnistrian
settlement and the ideas of Russian-German consultations were not developed.
Finally, it is not clear yet why does Russia need a new mechanism of
consultations or a new OSCE Summit to withdraw the troops from Transnistria if it
really wants to do this?
8 Russia is warning: the troops withdrawal from Transnistria would lead to a war, România Liberă, 15/11/2010, http://www.romanialibera.ro/
actualitate/mapamond/rusia-avertizeaza-retragerea-trupelor-din-transnistria-ar-duce-la-reizbucnirea-razboiului-206087.html
9 Osipov about the OSCE Summit: It wasn’t a consensus. From three tentative documents, it was legitimated only one, 06/12/2010, Unime-
dia, http://unimedia.md/?mod=news&id=27033
This publication was produced by idis “viitorul” with the financial support of soros Foundation
Moldova and the national endowment for democracy. The opinions expressed in this publicati-
on reflect the author’s/authors’ position and don’t necessary represent the views of the donors.
str. iacob hîncu 10/1, chişinău Md-2005 republic of Moldova 373 / 22 221844 phone 373 / 22 245714 fax office@viitorul.org www.viitorul.org
str. iacob hîncu 10/1, chişinău Md-2005 republic of Moldova 373 / 22 221844 phone 373 / 22 245714 fax
office@viitorul.org www.viitorul.org