Abstract

Throughout the past decade, there have been numerous proposals advanced to end the frozen conflict between Moldova and the breakaway region of Transnistria. Since the short but intense civil war in the summer of 1992, Transnistria has retained independence from Moldovan central authorities and functioned as a de facto state. Similar to situations in other former Soviet areas such as Abkazia and South Ossetia, the Transnistrian leadership has been able to function because of Russian economic, political, and military support. Although the Moldovan leadership has changed over the years, those Transnistrian individuals that were most directly involved with the civil war have been able to maintain their positions. This may promote continuity in discussions, but it also makes it very difficult to change negotiation positions and inject new ideas into the process. Indeed, what is striking about the current debate over the federalization of Moldova is how little new ground it covers. In July 2002, ambassadors from Russia, Ukraine, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) officially submitted to Moldova and Transnistria a project to federalize Moldova under joint mediation and guarantees by all three parties. President Voronin issued a draft plan for Moldova in February 2003 calling for a new constitution to be formed by Moldova, Transnistria, Russia, Ukraine, and the OSCE, transforming Moldova into a federation. Although the specifics of the debate have changed, the nature of the debate between the parties, such as whether the plan should be conceived as a federal or confederal solution, has remained the same. For the European Union (EU), the settling of the dispute between Moldova and Transnistria has become an important foreign policy issue, as the border of the EU will extend to Romania by 2007. (1) Transnistria is often cited as an area in which arms, drugs, and human smuggling are conducted with the help of government resources. In addition, many in Russia view the federalization plan for Moldova as a template for use in other former Soviet republics, such as Georgia and Azerbaijan. Therefore, the solution to this frozen conflict has wider implications for Europe and elsewhere. Since the federalization plan was first proposed in July 2002, there has been any significant change in the negotiating position of the Transnistrians and very little input from Moldovan civil society. This is why the federalization plan for Moldova has elicited such a strong negative response, both from Moldovan opposition parties and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). For many Moldovan opposition groups, any compromise with the Transnistrian leadership is viewed as a defeat and a capitulation to Russian interests. Therefore, the federalization process is both an important domestic and foreign policy issue for the Moldovan government. This article briefly examines some common concepts of federalism and then examines the federalization proposal and its domestic and foreign consequences for Moldova. The Idea of Federalism One of the reasons why the federalization plan for Moldova has been so problematic is that there is widespread disagreement among scholars and governmental participants as to the nature and conceptualization of federalism and even what a federal state should look like. Brzinski, Lancaster, and Tuschloff (1999) argue that there are three perceptions of federalism. One view is that federalism is a sociological process based on a group governance in which groups agree to power sharing and certain rules of the game. For example, Elazar (1994) argues that federalism is not to be found in a particular kind of structure but a particular set of relationships among the participants in a political system (15). Moreno (2001) argues that the federalization of Spain and the gradual devolution of powers to the autonomous communities were brought about by the agreed political will of these communities rather than by any institutional feature. …

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.