Today a round table took place in the conference hall of the T.G. Shevchenko Pridnestrovian State University titled “Pridnestrovie-Moldova: civilized divorce”. Deputy Chairperson of the Government of the PMR on International Cooperation, Minister of Foreign Affairs Nina Shtanski, deputy ministers Vitaly Ignatiev and Igor Shornikov, rector of the Pridnestrovian State University Stepan Beril, first pro-rector Natalia Nikiforova, director of Institute of History and Public Administration Ilya Galinsky, researcher officers of the university, representatives of Presidential Administration of the PMR, members of the Supreme Council of the PMR, members of the Public Chamber of the PMR and representatives of the expert society of the republic participated in the discussion.
During the event participants exchanged opinions on actual threats which face Pridnestrovie in the context of the upcoming summit of Eastern Partnership in Vilnius and discussed conditions and perspectives of ‘civilized divorce' between Moldova and Pridnestrovie about the necessity of which informed President of the PMR Yevgeny Shevchuk during the conference in Landshut.
Nina Shtanski called attention of the participants to the fact that today a new vector of development of economics of neighboring republics – of Ukraine and of Moldova – is formed. “To some extent it is also a divorce, but between a much different “couple”, – she said. Head of the PMR's MFA noted that this process is taking place at a time when Moldova-Pridnestrovie relations are not settled, when a blockade initiated in 2006 which lead to disastrous consequences which Pridnestrovie is still facing and has to overcome daily, still exist.
Nina Shtanski pointed out: in reality Pridnestrovie will get one more trade regime. According to her, the regime of 2006 gave birth to a number of unresolved problems which now become a background for new risks and challenges and hardly anyone can predict the result of their overlapping. “Today we may define from 2 to 4 scenarios according to which situation can develop. Any scenario brings us difficulties. There is no scenario which allows us to avoid negative consequences for our economics”, – head of foreign-political office of the PMR said.
We have enough data to be confident that this agreement is by no means taking interests of our economic agents, the difference between economic systems, the difference between fiscal and credit systems, the lack relations in banking sector between Moldova and Pridnestrovie into account. Besides the structure of our production is not taken into account: our major budget revenue generating enterprises have no analogues in Moldova and in framework of negotiations between Moldova and the EU these elements did not become negotiating points”, – diplomat pointed out.
Head of PMR's MFA expressed her opinion that for Pridnestrovie it is “useless and unproductive” to try to fit into the trade regime formed by the European Union for Moldova and Ukraine. That is the reason for the republic to define its own format of economic relations with the EU. “Under current circumstances we could develop a certain formula which should be defined here and discussed with us and to take into account those facts we have here. This formula should also serve the interests of our citizens, of producers and of the state”, – Nina Shtanski said.
During the discussion director of independent center of analytic studies “New Age” Elena Bobkova presented the results of sociological monitoring “Geopolitical Choice of Pridnestrovie”. According to her, 60.8% of Pridnestrovians support the course on Eurasian integration of the republic and understand challenges which are threatening the republic in context of results of the Eastern Partnership summit. At the same time 79.3% of respondents support the idea of ‘civilized divorce' between Pridnestrovie and Moldova, proposed by the President of the PMR Yevgeny Shevchuk. At the same time 82.6% of respondents stand for perspective of reintegration between Pridnestrovie and Russia. Answering the question about what can be defined as a national idea of Pridnestrovie, 20.4% of respondents answered that it should be ‘affirmation of independence of the PMR' and 34% – that it is ‘reunion with Russia'. The majority – 38.8% – defined national idea as a parallel process of affirmation of independence of the PMR and reunion with Russia. According to Elena Bobkova, the results prove the high level of common support of the foreign-political course of the republic.
In conclusion Nina Shtanski gave a high rating to the expert discussion which took place today. She pointed out that format of expert communication should be kept and grow into a number of meetings for operative exchange of views.
