Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
Thu Jun 11, 2015, 04:53 PM Jun 2015

Shall we go to war over Transnistria?

This is very obscure, but bear with me. Transnistria is a landlocked part of Moldova bordering on Ukraine.



Why is this important? Because Russia has about 1000 soldiers there who need to be supplied with food, clothing, ammo, etc. and the only way to supply them is by crossing over Ukraine. President Poroshenko of Ukraine (whose shaky regime is backed by the US) has denied Russia permission to cross its territory. Putin is contemplating an airlift (like what we did in Berlin during the Cold War), but what happens if the Ukrainian air defense shoots down a Russian plane? The new cold war could suddenly heat up in a big way, and we would be involved.



This all relates to Kerry's recent visit to Sochi (the Black Sea resort where Putin has a dacha) and the Obama administration's subsequent attack on Kerry for not having rattled sabers menacingly enough during the four hours when he was talking with Putin. It seems that Kerry, who has seen war, is out of step with Obama, who has not.

For details, listen to
http://johnbatchelorshow.com/podcasts/tues-6915-hr-2-jbs-stephen-f-cohen-nyu-princeton-professor-emeritus-author-soviet-fates-and

33 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Shall we go to war over Transnistria? (Original Post) Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 OP
Why on Earth does Russia have troops there in the first place? KamaAina Jun 2015 #1
Russia refers to them as "peacekeepers". Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #2
Uh-huh. And if you believe that, I've got a bridge I'd like to show you. KamaAina Jun 2015 #3
Piece keepers. nt Xipe Totec Jun 2015 #4
It's complicated. Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #10
It's complicated. Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #11
Holy crap. I thought I knew geography...I thought this was a 1984 thread. JanMichael Jun 2015 #5
Moldove is not Russia-centric. Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #6
Moldova, no. But Transnistria ... Yah. Igel Jun 2015 #7
What's the difference between ethnicity and culture? Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #19
One can be a member of an ethnicity and not brought up in its respective culture. NuclearDem Jun 2015 #21
For example - I'm ethnically German, but my culture is distinctly American. NutmegYankee Jun 2015 #28
So ethnicity is the culture of your ancestors? Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #29
Most Americans identify based on their ancestry. NutmegYankee Jun 2015 #30
USA going there would be like Russia sending troops to defend Honduras from US backed coup Cheese Sandwich Jun 2015 #8
If we adopt that attitude, we might run out of enemies. Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #18
Transnistria is a clusterfuck, and is very different from the Georgia and Ukraine situations. Xithras Jun 2015 #9
PLACES THAT DON'T EXIST: TRANSDNIESTRIA KG Jun 2015 #12
Obviously the place exists, Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #13
Fascinating video. hunter Jun 2015 #31
We have always been at war with Transnistria Recursion Jun 2015 #14
Huh? Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #17
Doing nothing would be the best option for now jakeXT Jun 2015 #15
I agree. Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #16
Ukraine is Russia's back yard? snooper2 Jun 2015 #20
You seem to be confused. NuclearDem Jun 2015 #22
"Back yard" is just a metaphor. Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #27
Ukraine is an independent country, not a "backyard" davidn3600 Jun 2015 #24
the same way the New World is our back yard. Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #26
So in your reach to defend Russia, you are defending the Monroe Doctrine? You don't see the problem stevenleser Jun 2015 #32
I'm not defending Russia. Lionel Mandrake Jun 2015 #33
Hells no. Unless they join NATO, which won't happen. LeftinOH Jun 2015 #23
The headline is misleading. Snobblevitch Jun 2015 #25

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
10. It's complicated.
Thu Jun 11, 2015, 08:52 PM
Jun 2015

My original answer was flippant. See the posts by Igel (#7) and Xithras (#9) for serious answers to this question.

JanMichael

(24,885 posts)
5. Holy crap. I thought I knew geography...I thought this was a 1984 thread.
Thu Jun 11, 2015, 05:40 PM
Jun 2015

Sum of a gun.

Isn't Moldova still Russia centric?

Igel

(35,300 posts)
7. Moldova, no. But Transnistria ... Yah.
Thu Jun 11, 2015, 07:08 PM
Jun 2015

Russian's the official language in Transnistria. It's the important language. It's the one used. Moldova wants Moldovan, which is just a dialectal variant of Romanian with few problems with mutual intelligibility.

Russian is the 2nd most numerous ethnicity in Transnistria, barely behind "Moldovan." Ukrainian isn't far behind. Note that most of the Ukrainians are, in fact, Russian speakers. It's easy to overlook this fact: Ethnicity, culture, and language are, as always, distinct. (Linguists know these things. It's ethnic advocates who become blazingly stupid as soon as they need the three to be the same thing.)

In response to having Moldovan made the principle language there was sudden concern in the '90s about "ethnic minorities" and Russian troops got involved. Remember that at the time Ukraine had no need of a real army: It was essentially a satrapy of Russia, with all the push to be really separate from Russia of a wet noodle. (This independence-minded Ukraine kept flip-flopping, but most of the leaders were self-centered and knew their bread was buttered by Moscow. Their policies were unacceptable to the West.) Transnistria was essentially Russia-adjacent.

In other words, in response to a Moldova that was explicitly returning to looking West, Transnistria gave a nice pro-Russian border zone. Originally it was, as is the LNR and DNR in Ukraine, openly atavistic: It wanted to return to a Soviet-style planned economy. It wasn't able to do that nicely, so it's mixed now. But still it's pro-Russian and most of its leaders are quasi-Stalinist.

Russification continues. If you want your kid to be educated in Moldovan, you pay for it and risk problems upon graduation. Unless you get the right passport, you can't travel much outside of the "Russian world", of which Transnistria is a crown jewel.

While the Russian Army's size is smaller, nonetheless it's important in Transnistria. One of the bigwigs in Transnistria had no trouble transferring, with few changes in job description, from the relatively pacified Transnistria to the more problematic Donbas last year: He felt right at home among the neo-Stalinists and nationalists there.

To a limited extent, of course, the problem with Transnistria is one of power: If it re-merges with Moldova, not only is the ethnic minority situation worse (because Russification has continued apace for an additional 15-20 years), but more importantly those with power and wealth will suddenly be on the wrong side of history. And the Great Poutine in Moscou will be have a cheesy meltdown, I'm afraid.

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
19. What's the difference between ethnicity and culture?
Fri Jun 12, 2015, 04:30 PM
Jun 2015

Language is part of culture, but it's a distinct part. I get that. But I always thought ethnicity and culture were synonyms.

By the way, I can't parse your last sentence.

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
28. For example - I'm ethnically German, but my culture is distinctly American.
Fri Jun 12, 2015, 09:51 PM
Jun 2015

2000 years ago my ancestors chased down Roman legionaries in the Teutoburg forest and hacked them down with axes and swords. Today - I speak a mixed Latin-German language.

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
29. So ethnicity is the culture of your ancestors?
Sat Jun 13, 2015, 01:44 PM
Jun 2015

I've seen the Hermannsdenkmal in the Teutoburg forest. Very impressive. Certainly the Romans decided that was a forest too far.

NutmegYankee

(16,199 posts)
30. Most Americans identify based on their ancestry.
Sat Jun 13, 2015, 01:57 PM
Jun 2015

The USA is such a new country that most inhabitants still identify with the ethnic group of their ancestors. In the future, we my just identify as "Americans" without distinctions. One of the things I love about this country is the mishmash of cultures and traditions that we continue to blend.

My family actually had first generation sons fight in the Continental Army, and yet even today we practice some distinctly German traditions on holidays.

 

Cheese Sandwich

(9,086 posts)
8. USA going there would be like Russia sending troops to defend Honduras from US backed coup
Thu Jun 11, 2015, 07:11 PM
Jun 2015

So no lets just stay out of it and clean our own messes instead of trying to dominate way over there.

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
18. If we adopt that attitude, we might run out of enemies.
Fri Jun 12, 2015, 02:17 PM
Jun 2015

The dread prospect of peace would strike fear into the hearts of generals, admirals, and military contractors.

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
9. Transnistria is a clusterfuck, and is very different from the Georgia and Ukraine situations.
Thu Jun 11, 2015, 07:32 PM
Jun 2015

Historically, Bessarabia had closer connections to Romania (the Bessarrabians are essentially a Romanian people) and wasn't really an area within the Russian sphere of influence. The Dneister River was the eastern border of Bessarabia, which was part of Romania prior to WW2.

The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact with the Nazi's stated that the Soviet's would get Bessarabia, which became the Moldovan SSR within the Soviet Union. Even though Bessarabia had never extended across the Dneister, the Transneister area eventually got folded into the Moldovan SSR within the Soviet Union. In the late 1980's, as Romanian and Moldovan nationalists came to power and began stripping ethnic Russians of recognition and rights, this became a real problem in Transneistria which had never been Romanian and had been ethnically Russian and Ukrainian for centuries.

In 1990, while the entire region was still part of the Soviet Union, Transnistria declared its independence from the Moldovan Soviet Socialist Republic and became the Transnistrian SSR. Facing the very real possibility that this could lead to a civil war within the Soviet Union, Gorbechev issued an order invalidating the Transnistrian SSR and declaring that it was part of the Moldovan SSR. The secessionists never disarmed, however, and the Moldovan SSR never controlled the territory again.

In 1992, Moldova declared its independence from the Soviet Union. In that declaration, they declared that the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was illegal and that the Moldovan SSR was illegal and illegitimate. It disavowed any connections with the USSR and charted an independent course for the country (there are still large unionist movements in both Romania and Moldova pushing to rejoin the countries today). Transnistria, which had been de facto independent for a couple of years at that point, seized on that statement . They pointed out that Transnistria was only joined to Moldova due to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and that by disavowing the results and borders of that pact, they were also disavowing their claim to Transnistria. Because Transnistria had not historically been part of Bessarabia and had been essentially independent since 1990 anyway, they just declared their independence outright.

Predictably, this led to war. Eventually, both sides signed a ceasefire agreement that asked Russia to establish a peacekeeping force in the area to keep fighting from breaking out again. The original agreement said that the Russian forces would stay in place until both sides agreed that it was OK to remove them. To date, the ethnic Russians in Transnistria have not given that consent.

Russia and Moldova signed a treaty in 1994 stating that the region would be ceded to Moldova and that the Russian troops would be withdrawn, but that treaty was never ratified and never entered into force. The Istanbul Accords also would have committed Russia to pulling out its troops, but those were also never ratified. Russia's ratification of the CFE treaty obligated them to remove their heavy weapons from that region, which they did comply with.

It's Russia's position today that, barring any ratified treaties saying otherwise, that the original ceasefire terms Moldova agreed to in 1992 still apply. Under that treaty, they say that they are not obligated to leave until the Transnistrian rebel government asks them to do so.

And unlike the situations in Georgia and Ukraine, the current nation of Moldova has never actually controlled Transnistria. It's been essentially independent since both territories were still part of the Soviet Union.

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
13. Obviously the place exists,
Fri Jun 12, 2015, 12:14 AM
Jun 2015

whether it's officially recognized as a nation or not. That having been said, this travelogue is well worth watching. Thanks for posting it.

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
17. Huh?
Fri Jun 12, 2015, 12:37 PM
Jun 2015

Transnistria was part of the Soviet Union, against which we fought the Cold War (not with bullets or bombs). But Ronnie RayGun claims to have won that Cold War. The new Cold War against Putin's Russia started much later.

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
27. "Back yard" is just a metaphor.
Fri Jun 12, 2015, 07:33 PM
Jun 2015

Yes, Ukraine has been a separate country since the breakup of the Soviet Union. It's much closer to Russia, in many ways, than it is to us. We are out of line rattling sabers there, just as the Soviets were out of line sending nukes to Cuba in the 1960s.

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
26. the same way the New World is our back yard.
Fri Jun 12, 2015, 07:23 PM
Jun 2015

We don't own it, but we do have the Monroe Doctrine about it.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
32. So in your reach to defend Russia, you are defending the Monroe Doctrine? You don't see the problem
Sat Jun 13, 2015, 03:22 PM
Jun 2015

with this?

Lionel Mandrake

(4,076 posts)
33. I'm not defending Russia.
Sat Jun 13, 2015, 08:56 PM
Jun 2015

I'm suggesting it's not in our national interest to get into a fight with Russia over Ukraine, Georgia, or Transnistria. I don't approve of some things Russia has done or might do in these places. But that doesn't make it our job to fight injustice and promote virtue in these places.

Snobblevitch

(1,958 posts)
25. The headline is misleading.
Fri Jun 12, 2015, 06:10 PM
Jun 2015

Ukraine has the right to deny Russia to cross their border. I do not think Ukraine would shoot down a Russian plane flying to Transnistria. If there would be conflict in that end of Ukraine, it would be about Russia-Ukraine relations and Transnistria would be incidental to the situation.

I've been to Moldova, but we were advised to skip going to Transnistria.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Shall we go to war over T...