Transnistrian Collapse

18.12.2024, 15:25
8,796

Kremlin arithmetic is definitely not about human destinies.

The authorities of the self-proclaimed Transnistrian Moldavian Republic declared a state of emergency in the energy sector on the eve of January 1, when gas deliveries from Russia along the Ukrainian route may finally stop. At the same time, it must be understood that this route for the delivery of gas to Transnistria is by no means the only one. There is also the Trans-Balkan gas pipeline.

Both Chisinau and Tiraspol expected that Gazprom would take measures to supply gas to Transnistria through this pipeline. However, December 16 passed – the last day when the Russian gas monopoly had a chance to book energy capacities.

Nothing happened. This means that after January 1, Transnistria risks being left without gas, and the whole of Moldova – without electricity generated precisely with the help of gas supplies from Russia to the Moldavian power plant located on the territory of Transnistria, in Dnestrovsk.

Why Gazprom did not make any attempts to help consumers from Transnistria – despite the fact that Russia has been supplying gas to the self-proclaimed republic for decades and did not demand payment for it – is not so difficult to explain. I think the Kremlin seeks to provoke an energy and economic crisis in the Republic of Moldova on the eve of the upcoming parliamentary elections in the country next year. In Moscow, it seems, no one thought of abandoning the idea of returning Moldova to the Russian "sphere of influence". The first attempt was made during the presidential election, when Maia Sandu managed to defeat the pro-Russian candidate Alexandr Stoianoglo only thanks to the votes from the diaspora.

But Moldova is, in fact, a parliamentary republic. If the president does not rely on a stable parliamentary majority, he actually has no real influence on what is happening in the state. Therefore, if the pro-Russian forces manage to win the elections to the country's parliament, they will effortlessly turn Maya Sandu into a ceremonial head of state – as it really looks, we could see on the example of at least the same Salome Zurabishvili in Georgia.

But in order for pro-European forces to have no chance in the parliamentary elections, and they could not win even with the help of diaspora voters, the Kremlin, I am sure, needs to organize a big crisis. Which, in fact, Russia is now trying to do – by creating conditions that will exclude the possibility of electricity supply from Transnistria. It is necessary that there would be no gas in Transnistria itself to achieve this...

But at the same time, it is important to understand that it is in Transnistria itself that the crisis will become much more serious than in the territory of the Republic of Moldova controlled from Chisinau. This is a real humanitarian catastrophe. It is possible that many residents will have to leave the region, and the Transnistrian authorities may simply collapse – if not immediately, then certainly after the Moldovan power plant has exhausted its last resource. That is, the Kremlin deliberately sacrifices the interests of the residents of the region, who voted for joining Russia several times?

I'm sure it is. Because Putin does not need Transnistria. He needs Moldova. He seems ready to sacrifice the future of the people remaining in Transnistria in exchange for a possible victory of pro-Russian political forces in the parliamentary elections. Kremlin arithmetic is definitely not about human destinies.

And this, of course, applies not only to Transnistria, but also to any region controlled or annexed by Russia. Putin, I am sure, does not need Abkhazia and South Ossetia – he needs all of Georgia. Putin doesn't need Crimea or Donbas – he needs all of Ukraine. If he has to sacrifice the future of the inhabitants of this or that occupied region to continue his efforts to occupy this or that former Soviet republic, I think he will do it without thinking for a moment.

Transnistrian Collapse

Follow Charter97.org social media accounts

Interview

Opinion