KOSOVO EXAMPLE SPUR HOPES FOR TRANSDNIESTRIA, NAGORNO KARABAKH
By Times staff
Tiraspol Times & Weekly Review, Moldova
Jul y 17 2007
Politicians in different "frozen conflicts" in the former Soviet Union
are following Kosovo’s developments closely. In Nagorno Karabakh, they
are seen as a way to achieve recognition under a new scenario. And in
Transdniestria, the President stated that his country has a stronger
historical and legal case for independence than Kosovo.
Photo: An independence monument in Transdniestria shows the new
country’s flag and its initials "PMR" in cyrillic letters
STEPANAKERT (Tiraspol Times) – International recognition of Kosovo
as an independent state would give new impetus to the sovereignty
claim of ‘de faco’ independent states like Nagorno Karabakh and
Transdniestria, among others, say politicians from these new and
emerging countries. Whatever the outcome on Kosovo it can create a
legal precedent which under international law can be equally applied
to similar territorial disputes elsewhere.
" – The Kosovo model of conflict settlement could be an example for
the resolution of other conflicts," Masis Mailyan, a senior Nagorno
Karabakh government minister, told the Reuters news agency on Tuesday.
" – If it (Kosovo) is recognized, then it is interesting to me in
that an unrecognized country has won recognition in spite of the
opinion of its former sovereign rulers."
" – In this sense the Kosovo model is an interesting one for us. That
is to say, we could achieve recognition under a new scenario."
U.S. President George W. Bush has stated that the time has come for
Kosovo independence and that Kosovo will become independent sooner
rather than later.
The current president of Transdniestria, Igor Smirnov, says his state
has a better case for independence than Kosovo.
Transdniestria: Better claim to independence than Kosovo Igor Smirnov,
the President of Transdniestria, said in an interview in March 2007
that historically and under international law, his republic’s claim
to statehood is much stronger than Kosovo’s.
" – Pridnestrovie has a much stronger legal and historical basis
for recognized sovereignty than Kosovo," said Smirnov, referring to
Transdniestria by its official, constitutional name.
In Kosovo, the Muslim majority has announced that it is not prepared to
wait for the United Nations but will announce a unilateral declaration
of independence. If this happens, the United States and some European
states have indicated their willingness to recognize Kosovo as a
sovereign state in contravention of an earlier United Nations Security
Council resolution.
States like Nagorno Karabakh and Transdniestria, which have no
U.N. authorized peacekeepers and whose current status have never
been the subject of Security Council resolutions, have an easier way
to internationally recognized independence than Kosovo. Whereas the
legality of Kosovo independence hinges on the UN Security Council,
and its five permanent veto-wielding members, no such requirement is
needed for legal independence for Transdniestria, Nagorno Karabakh
or other ‘de facto’ independent states.
Few of today’s countries have been created by the United Nations. The
majority of today’s states declared independence through the use of
unilateral declarations, with no need for any prior UN agreement or
Security Council resolution. In some cases, they had to fight wars
to secure their people’s right to self-determination. Transndiestria
defended its wish for independence in 1992 against Moldovan military
attacks. Over 1,000 people lost their lives and an estimated 100,000
became refugees. In Nagorno Karabakh’s case, it’s fight to split from
Azerbaijan was the bloodiest of the former Soviet Union’s independence
wars, with about 35,000 people killed and over a million forced to
flee their homes.
In Nagorno Karabakh, the ethnic Armenian majority drove out
Azerbaijan’s forces and now runs its own affairs with support
from neighboring Armenia, but no state has recognized its actual
independence. Similar developments happened in Transdniestria, where
the majority population of ethnic Slavs defended successfully itself
against Moldova. Many locally resident Moldovans fought on the side
of Transdniestria and against a wish to be incorporated against their
will into the newly created Republic of Moldova on the other side of
the Dniester river.
In both cases, peace talks lasting more than 15 years have failed to
make significant progress. Although Montenegro became independent
in 2006 following the resuls of an independence referendum,
the international community will not allow Nagorno Karabakh or
Transdniestria the same right. However, independent observers and
human rights groups have noted that under international law it will
not be possible to reach a negotiated status settlement solution
without taking the will of the people into account, as expressed
democratically in a free and fair referendum on independence.
Union denounced by Moldova as "null and void" Elsewhere in the
former Soviet Union, South Ossetia and Abkhazia have successfully
withstood claims from Georgia against ruling their territories. Like
Transdniestria, they are also seeking international recognition and
view developments in Kosovo as a precedent.
The short-lived union of Moldova and Transdniestria was a forced
marriage which was imposed by Stalin and Hitler in 1940. Using a
secret protocol under the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the two dictators
attempted to carve up Europe between them. In 1940, the Soviet Union
invaded Romania and grabbed a piece of land – today’s Moldova – which
it united with a slice of old Russian land, today’s Transdniestria.
The union was undone a year later, in 1941, but was restored in 1944
thanks to Soviet victories in World War II.
Imposed against the will of the people, from 1944 until 1990 the two
sides were joined in an unnatural marriage known as the Moldavian
SSR. This union was denounced by Moldova in 1990 as illegal, and again
in Moldova’s own independence declaration of 1991 which denounced its
incorporation into the Soviet Union as illegal and declared that the
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was "null and void" from the beginning.
Transdniestria, too, did not want to be part of this union either.
One year before the Moldavian SSR dissolved, and Moldova declared
independence as the Republic of Moldova, Transdniestria had already
left the union. Transdniestria declared independence in 1990, and
Moldova did so one year later. Legally speaking, Transdniestria was
never part of today’s Republic of Moldova, notwithstanding Moldovan
territorial claims to the contrary. (With information from Reuters)