On the parallels and differences between Transnistria and the Donbas

Serhii Pyrozhkov served as Ukraine’s ambassador to Moldova for seven years and eight months. It is clear that after so many years of dealing with Moldovan and Transnistrian elites, he is our best expert on the situation in that country.

Before being sent to Moldovan capital Chisinau, the diplomat served as deputy secretary of the National Security and Defense Council for six years. Pyrozhkov was the first director of the National Institute for Strategic Studies; he is also Ukraine’s only demographer to become a full member of the National Academy of Sciences. He retired from the diplomatic service on December 14 and gladly responded to The Day’s request to come to our office and talk about the peculiarities of the Transnistrian peace process, the causes of a decade-long freeze in relations between Ukraine and Moldova, and his efforts that contributed to border   demarcation with the unrecognized Trans-Dniester Republic.

Pyrozhkov also spoke about the similarities and differences between the Transnistrian conflict and ongoing developments in the Donbas which result from the Russian aggression, as well as Russia’s dealings with Moldovan political elites following that country signing the Association Agreement with the EU.

He also explained why the Moldovan society stayed split following the November parliamentary elections, as evidenced by the nearly 50 percent support for the Customs Union.

The Day’s guest went on to reveal reasons for Transnistria’s industrial survival and the difficulties it would face from January 1, 2016, when the unrecognized republic will lose access to preferential treatment which the EU affords Moldovan imports.

Can a Transnistria-like situation now existing in the Donbas stop Ukraine’s integration into the EU? What unresolved issues are left in our country’s relations with Moldova? Can the Russian army units stationed in Transnistria attack Ukraine from the rear?