Voronin Is Not Against GUUAM If GUUAM Is Not Against CIS
On May 17 President Vladimir Voronin of Moldova arrived in Kyiv on an official visit. The press conference of Presidents Leonid Kuchma and Vladimir Voronin the following day revealed very few concrete details of what the heads of state agreed upon. All that is more or less clear after this meeting is that the GUUAM summit will be held June 6-7 in Yalta with participation of all the presidents, including that of Moldova. In other words, Moldova is so far not going to bury GUUAM, which many feared. Yet, some reservations remain.
On the eve of his Kyiv visit, Mr. Voronin told Interfax that Chisinau was prepared to take part in GUUAM (an informal association of Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, and Moldova) provided this association does not run counter to the common goals and objectives of the CIS. But, should GUUAM or the Eurasian Commonwealth (Mr. Voronin has already spoken about the desire to cooperate with the latter) contradict this then, to quote him, “these structures will not be supported by us.” Mr. Kuchma said at the press conference that GUUAM is not a military-political alliance (which the Eurasian Commonwealth could become in the future) but an organization which can help solve economic problems. Mr. Voronin shared this view.
The Transnistria issue, in its turn, will remain open for quite a long time. First, because Tiraspol gives reason to suspect it is unwilling to achieve a real settlement which cannot but provide for Chisenau’s complete control over the territory, military facilities, finances, and customs. Mr. Kuchma noted at the Kyiv summit that Ukraine still wants Moldova to be a united state, with Transnistria being granted broad powers, and reiterated that Kyiv expects Russia to withdraw all its weapons from the region. Mr. Voronin thanked Ukraine for participating in the settlement process. Meanwhile, Russia’s RIA Novosty Agency released on May 18 an interview with Igor Smirnov, the leader of Transnistria, in which he noted that today it is the Russian contingent that “really ensures the guarantees of security in Transnistria” and also said that he had suggested that Mr. Voronin not insist on this contingent to be withdrawn before a complete settlement. Taking into account that both sides have already made propagandistic gestures and that it was very difficult even to send in observers from Ukraine, a memorandum guarantor, the question can be also put as follows: who then guarantees instability in the region?
The Kyiv summit ended with the signing of a joint statement and four agreements, leaving a host of problems unsolved. This concerns borders, transit of goods, problems of property, free trade, and a customs union. There is also Mr. Voronin’s proposal to restore the united electricity system of Russia, Ukraine, and Moldova with the prospect of exporting electrical power to the Balkans (experts doubt the feasibility of this idea). Finally, still unclear are developments in the CIS which seems to exist only for the sake of its own bureaucracy.
