Transnistrian conflict

Аннотация. В данной статье автор, опираясь на экспертные мнения, анализирует текущее состояние урегулирования конфликта в Приднестровье, соотношение влияния внешних акторов на стороны конфликта, изменение внешнеполитических ориентиров в Приднестровье в связи со сменой власти в этой непризнанной республике. Автор дает свое видение относительно наиболее распространенных опасений, ка-сающихся возможного переформатирования переговорного процесса. Ключевые слова: конфликт в Приднестровье, урегулирование кон-фликта, переговорный процесс, формат «5+2», Молдова, Россия, Ев-ропейский союз, европеизация, евроинтеграция. Summary. In this article the author, relying on expert opinions, analyzes the current state of the settlement of the conflict in Transdnistria, the influence of actors on the parties to the conflict, the change in foreign policy guidelines in Transdnistria in connection with the change of power in this unrecognized republic. The author gives his vision of the most common fears related to the possible reformatting of the negotiation process.

The essay aims to analyse causes, aspects and consequences of the brief Transnistrian ethic civil war and following frozen conflict affecting Moldova since the early 90s where the Romanian ethnic group tried to subjugate and prevail over the Russian one. Although Transnistria is a small and insignificant region in the European scenario still officially included in Moldova, the poorest country in Europe, it has involved resolution's efforts from either Moldova and Russia.

The Republic of Moldova was one of fifteen states to emerge from the dissolution of the Soviet Union. With weak historical legacy of statehood, deteriorating economy and serious national divisions, the young state lacked many of the prerequisites deemed necessary for successful democratization. From the very beginning of independence, Moldova became the battleground of Romanianists, propagating for the Romanian character of Moldova’s majority population, and Moldovanists, who viewed the people as a separate nation. In the literature on democracy and democratization, a divided nation is singled out as a serious threat to statehood and democratization efforts alike. Without a nation in place it is generally understood that democracy cannot take root.

Nevertheless, Moldova in a few years time managed to make considerable progress on its path towards democracy. A main theme of the dissertation is thus the issue of national division and how it has affected political developments in general and democracy in specific. This picture is then further expanded by including close analysis of political support.

The dissertation contributes to discussions about how nation and democracy goes together in transitional states with no legacy of either of them. The analysis shows that national division in Moldova works on different levels. While political actors often seek support from the electorate according to their positions on the nation, national identity by itself does not suffice to explain differences in political support. Instead other aspects, such as generational values, degree of urbanity and level of education, play a much larger role. Democracy, as a platform where different political ideas and ambitions may form, can both complicate transitions since it provides opportunities for conflicts, but democracy also holds the prospects to find ways to resolve disagreements. In the long run, this carries the seed of consolidation of both democracy and nation alike.

""During the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine, the second largest country in Europe came close to a violent break-up similar to that in neighboring Moldova, which witnessed a violent secession of the Transdniestria region. Numerous elections, including the hotly contested 2004 presidential elections in Ukraine, and surveys of public opinion showed significant regional divisions in these post-Soviet countries. Western parts of Ukraine and Moldova, as well as the Muslim Crimean Tatars, were vocal supporters of independence, nationalist, and pro-Western parties and politicians. In contrast, Eastern regions, as well as the Orthodox Turkic-speaking Gagauz, consistently expressed pro-Russian and pro-Communist political orientations. Which factors ? historical legacies, religion, economy, ethnicity, or political leadership ? could explain these divisions? Why was Ukraine able to avoid a violent break-up, in contrast to Moldova?
This is the first book to offer a systematic and comparative analysis of the regional political divisions in post-Soviet Ukraine and Moldova. The study examines voting behavior and political attitudes in two groups of regions: those which were under Russian, Ottoman, and Soviet rule; and those which were under Austro-Hungarian, Polish, Romanian, and Czechoslovak rule until World War I or World War II. This book attributes the regional political divisions to the differences in historical experience. This study helps us to better understand regional cleavages and conflicts, not only in Ukraine and Moldova, but also in other cleft countries.""

After the 1991 separatist region of Transnistria developed its own education system, provided with normative acts, including curriculum and textbooks. History education is part of the official discourse and focuses on Transnistrian interests. In many cases, textbooks are based on Soviet historiography, and Western neighbors are treated as enemies. The author of present article analyzes, in particular, Chapter IX of the textbook for the ninth grade, which deals with the formation of the separatist republic and the Dniester War of 1992, which is described by the authors of the textbook as "Moldova's military aggression against the transnistrian people." The facts presented in this textbook are unilateral, trying to demonstrate the "aggression of Moldova" on the districts on the left bank of the Dniester. Although, at the end of the topic, the authors consider that this military conflict was "a bloody war", they insist more on the "sufferings, losses and victims" of the inhabitants of this region. There is a total lack of critical, comparative and balanced approach to these sensitive events for the recent history of the Republic of Moldova. The discourse is aggressive and hateful, which is not acceptable, it is against international conventions and agreements between the representatives of the warring parties. The main problem in relations between Chisinau and Tiraspol is the lack of effective communication. But education should be one of the most important tools in conflict resolution.

I conflitti congelati e gli Stati de facto costituiscono un argomento rilevante
perché continuano a creare una situazione di incertezza all’interno dell’Unione
Europea relativamente alla sicurezza e allo sviluppo economico di tutta l’area. Nell’ultimo secolo, i diritti umani nelle zone dei conflitti congelati oppure nei territori che sono sotto controllo di amministrazioni de facto non sono sufficientemente noti, promossi o difesi. Le persone che vivono queste realtà sono spesso privati dei propri diritti e delle libertà fondamentali. Tutto questo succede per almeno tre cause importanti ed evidenti.

W niniejszej pracy autor zwraca uwagę na zagadnienie Naddniestrzańskiej Republiki Mołdawskiej.
Głównym celem analizy jest dokładne przedstawienie organizmu tego nieuznawanego państwa. Autor
opisuje genezę rozpoczęcia procesu państwotwórczego, ukazuje bezpośrednie przyczyny powstania
Naddniestrza, a także obrazuje skutki jakie przyniosło utworzenie quasi-państwa. W pracy
prezentowana jest rola Naddniestrza jako przedmiotu rozgrywki geopolitycznej. Autor ukazuje historię
konfliktu między Naddniestrzem a Mołdawią, opisuje proces pokojowy umożliwiający zatrzymanie
rozlewu krwi jak również okrzepnięcie naddniestrzańskiej państwowości. Przybliża mechanizmy
jakimi posługują się politycy w rozgrywaniu nieuregulowanej w świetle prawa międzynarodowego
sytuacji Naddniestrzańskiej Republiki Mołdawskiej. Charakteryzuje także społeczeństwo
separatystycznej republiki. Jednocześnie w pracy ukazana jest rzeczywistość funkcjonowania
parapaństwa. Zwracając uwagę na obecną sytuację gospodarczą i polityczną Naddniestrza oraz próby
utworzenia naddniestrzańskiej tożsamości możliwa staje się ocena funkcjonowania
naddniestrzańskiego organizmu państwowego, podsumowania jego efektywności, a także określenia
prognozy na najbliższą przyszłość w kontekście problemów rozgrywki geopolitycznej i wyzwań z
jakimi musi mierzyć się Naddniestrzańska Republika Mołdawska.

The article examines the external activity of Transnistria, a quasi-state that has been outside of Moldovan control since 1992. The paper presents the policy of the Transnistrian region toward Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Western countries and organizations, as well as other breakaway states like Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Nagorno-Karabakh. The main research question is whether Transnistria’s foreign policy has undergone changes and, more generally, what can be expected in this field following the landmark 2011 presidential elections. Then, Igor Smirnov, Transnistria’s seemingly unshakable leader, unexpectedly failed to be re-elected for his fifth term and was replaced by a young politician, Yevgeniy Shevchuk. The paper concludes that the strategy driving the quasi-state’s external activity has remained unchanged. Primary goals regarding the status of Transnistria—namely keeping the status quo, which means maintaining the de facto independence of the Transnistrian region—and its main external partners are still in place. The exception is that Shevchuk would like to establish positive working relations with Western actors. The most significant change between the departure of Smirnov and the arrival of Shevchuk is a tactical one. While Smirnov’s approach was, in short, confrontational, excessively self-interested, highly politicized, and partially isolationist in its nature, the quasi-state’s foreign policy under the new president has many more positive elements. Shevchuk’s approach is more pragmatic, constructive, cooperative, active, and economized. This stabilizes the situation in the region and gives hope for the activation of the Transnistrian conflict settlement process. Crucially, the new Transnistrian president may not be as entrenched as his predecessor on the topic of reintegration with Moldova.

An overwhelming illustration of the international activities of Transnistria, which despite its status as an unrecognized de-facto state, possesses a quite active “foreign policy.” The author manages to show both the dependence and relative autonomy of Tiraspol, which makes his paper an important contribution to the understanding of the real position of Transnistria in international and regional context.
Andrey Devyatkov, Tyumen State University, Russia

This paper is an obligatory read for all those who consider Transnistria a Russian geopolitical conspiracy. There are more interests at play than that of a proto-imperial Kremlin seeking to keep Moldova in Russia’s fold, and the paper successfully rejects this simplistic, so-called mainstream interpretation.
Octavian Milevschi, National School of Political Science and Public Administration, Bucharest, Romania

An interesting and pioneering academic analysis that presents the continuities and differences of Transnistrian external policy under the rule of Igor Smirnov and Yevgeniy Shevchuk.
Kálmán Mizsei, former European Union Special Representative for the Republic of Moldova (2007–2011)

Not indisputable, but a very interesting article on Transnistrian foreign policy, in which the discourse differs greatly from the traditional Western view on this issue.
Nina Shtanski, foreign minister of unrecognized Transnistria

While working to seal off Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia after the 2008 war, Russia
promised to play a constructive role in Nagorno-Karabakh and the Transnistrian conflict. This
paper aims to assess how Russia delivered on its renewed peace-making pledge. It also will
spell out how Armenia, Azerbaijan and Moldova have reacted to the new Russian undertaking
to revive negotiations within the Minsk Group, the “5+2” format or other formulas with the
direct participation of Moscow. The paper will address how other international stakeholders
have adapted to the 2008 post-conflict situation and will uncover the developments relevant
for the conflict resolution process in the breakaway regions. It will conclude with an analysis
on prospective strategies to be employed by all sides and regional players in dealing with the
conflicts in the Eastern neighborhood and what could be done in 2013 to push the negotiations
forward.

What are the implications and the history of the conflict?
How are international actors participating in this struggle for independence?
This paper will answer these questions and offer an interesting point of view on how this conflict is forcing Russia and USA to sit on the same table.

Quando diventiamo un popolo? Quando smettiamo di esserlo? E che c’entrano queste enormi questioni con i nostri rapporti con ciascun altro e con tutti gli altri insieme?

Nazione e narrazione si mescolano in uno studio sulla Transnistria, Paese situato ai confini dell'Europa e non riconosciuto dall' ONU, ma che possiede una forte identità e una propria natura.

A veinticinco años de la caída de la Unión Soviética, cuatro repúblicas aún luchan por ser reconocidas internacionalmente en el marco de interminables disputas territoriales. Pese a que han concluido los periodos de guerra la violencia sigue latente: son los conflictos congelados, resabio de aquel 1991 en que todo cambió.

Această publicaţie a fost finanţată de către Fondul de Prevenire a Conflictelor al Guvernului Regatului Unit al Marii Britanii şi Irlandei de Nord prin intermediul Ambasadei Marii Britanii la Chişinău. Opiniile şi terminologia prezentate în această publicaţie sunt cele ale autorilor şi nu reprezintă punctul de vedere al guvernului britanic.

Esasen geçmişi çok eskilere dayanan Transdinyester Sorunu, Sovyetler Birliği’nin dağılma emareleri gösterdiği 1980’lı yılların sonlarında Moldova Sovyet Sosyalist Cumhuriyeti (SSC) içerisinde sıcak çatışmaya dönüşen bir anlaşmazlıktır. Bu sorun toprak temelli bir anlaşmazlık olarak görülmektedir. Ancak bu problemin ortaya çıkmasında dönemin Rus yönetiminin önemli bir payı bulunmakta olup, Rus Çarlığı’nın 18. yüzyılda bugünkü Moldova topraklarını ele geçirmesini takiben söz konusu topraklara Rus ve Slav nüfusu iskan etmesinin sorunun temel nedenlerinden biri olduğu söylenebilir. Bu nedenle çalışmada, temel referans nesnesi olarak devleti alan ve devletin güvenliğine yönelik en önemli tehdit kategorisi olarak da askeri tehditleri gören klasik güvenlik çalışmalarının yerine, Kopenhag Okulu temsilcileri tarafından geliştirilen Güvenlikleştirme Teorisi tercih edilmiştir. Çünkü bu teorinin bir alt sektörü olan Toplumsal Güvenlik referans nesneleri arasına kimliği de eklemekte ve Moldova’daki ayrılıkçılık probleminin de temelinde yer aldığı düşünülen “göç”, “yatay rekabet” ve “dikey rekabet” gibi tehditleri de güvenlik analizlerine dahil etmektedir. Bu doğrultuda yapılan inceleme sonucunda sorunun esasen kimlik temelli bir anlaşmazlık olduğu ve tarihsel süreçte Rus Çarlığı tarafından bölgeye teşvik edilen Slav göçleri sonucunda, bölgenin etnik yapısının bugünkü etnik Moldova nüfusunu da teşkil eden Romenlerin aleyhine değiştirilmesine dayandığı tespit olunmuştur.

Avrupa içindeki sorunların ana çıkış kaynağını oluşturan Rusya ile Avrupa Birliği arasındaki(büyük tabloda ise ABD ile Rusya arasında) etki alanı mücadelesi ve güç kontrolü meselesidir. Bu bağlamda isimlendirdiğimiz ‘‘Avrupa’nın fay hatları’’ tabiri, bu karşılıklı mücadelenin ihtilaflı sınır bölgeleri üzerinden cereyan eden bunalımları ifade etmek içindir. Seri makale düzeni ile aktarılacak olan Avrupa fay hatlarının ilki, Moldova sınırları içerisindeki Transdinyester üzerinedir. Bu makalede Transdinyester toprakları üzerinde Rusya ile Avrupa Birliği arasındaki hegemonya mücadelesinden, sorunu oluşturan sebeplerden ve Moldova’nın siyasi yapısından bahsedilecek ve sorunun çözümü için atılan adımların yeterliliği ve geleceği üzerine değerlendirmelerde bulunulacaktır

https://eupress.ru/books/index/item/id/351 - Эта книга дает наиболее полную на сегодня панораму современной политики памяти в России и Восточной Европе. В ней рассказано о том, как прошлое используется в политических целях в различных регионах России — от Калининграда до Забайкалья, а также в Белоруссии, Украине, Молдове и непризнанных республиках Донбасса и Приднестровья. Анализируется деятельность самых разных мнемонических акторов — от Русской православной церкви и Российского военно-исторического общества до «Последнего адреса», от парков «Россия — моя история» до «Бессмертного полка».  Среди авторов книги — как ведущие российские и зарубежные специалисты в изучении политики памяти, так и молодые исследователи. Книга, подготовленная в Центре по изучению культурной памяти и символической политики Европейского университета в Санкт-Петербурге, будет интересна преподавателям и студентам, а также широкому кругу читателей — всем, кто интересуется проблемами исторической памяти и политического использования прошлого в наше время.

The research investigates the Transnistrian Moldovan Republic's Concept of the Foreign Policy from 2012 and its aftermath. Relational objectives with other states were the focus of the research. The proposed and de facto relations of TMR with the Russian World, Ukraine and the European Union were expressly analyzed. While researching this topic, it became obvious that the population of the Transnistrian region had a particular affinity for the various Eurasian political structures. Despite their desire to assert themselves as an independent state entity, the citizens of the TMR also advocate for their integration into the Russian Federation. Ukraine is found as a necessary "window to the world" for the survival of the separatist regime in Tiraspol. At the same time, Ukraine is also the state that has disappointed the population of the Transnistrian region the most. Collaboration with the European Union is avoided in the Concept. However, during the period addressed in the research paper, the EU has shown that it can also be a considerable geopolitical agent in the region. The research concluded that although the Russian Federation had lost its supremacy over exports from the East Dniester region, it retained its strong influence through its monopoly on Transnistrian imports, the control they have on the media, and its armed presence in the region.

More than two decades after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, relations between Russia and its former states are unstable. One of these former states is Moldova, which declared independence on August 27, 1991. A strip of the territory of the country located on the east side of the Dniester River has been a de facto state since 1990 under the name of Transnistria or the Dniester Republic. The region containing Moldova and Transnistria has a history of changing borders and authorities. From 1806 until 1812, the region was ceded to Imperial Russia after the Russo-Turkish War. Following the Crimean War in 1856, the southern parts of Bessarabia returned to Moldavian rule. During the Bolshevik agitation in 1917, the Romanian Army intervened and soon after the region of Bessarabia was declared independent within the union of the Kingdom of Romania. Thus a big part of the country (Moldova today) was united with Romania. After 1940 the Soviet Union put pressure on the Romanian authority to withdraw from Bessarabia and soon after the Red Army retook the region. The area which was named the Moldovan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (MASSR) was changed to Moldovan Soviet Socialist Republic (MSSR). Only after the dissolution of the USSR, Moldova declared independence and became the Republic of Moldova.  Finally, Transnistria declared its independence after the war with Moldova and the region started to be ruled by a separate government called the Pridnestrovian (or Transnistrian) Moldavian Republic. The conflict did not last long and therefore it did not cause many casualties. Even though geographically the location of the conflict was close to the European Union (EU) borders, the tensions did not create any serious threat to the Euro-Atlantic Security (EAS). And since the ceasefire, no further fighting took place. The effects of this conflict are more economically based than they are on security. In addition to the economic factors, the relations between the two parties are badly affected.  Before the conflict started, Transnistrian Moldovan Republic (TMR) within the territory of Moldova declared its independence in 1991 and its autonomous status affected the geopolitics of the region, particularly the ‘Euro-Atlantization’ of Moldova (Akgun, 2013:16).

This paper outlines how a solution might be sought to the frozen conflict and how Transnistria can be reintegrated with a special status within the Republic of Moldova. The reintegration of Transnistria within Moldova is the given recommendation in this paper for many reasons are explained in this policy paper. Transnistria can not exist without the help of Russia and an internationally recognized Transnistria can not get financial aid forever from Russia. Therefore, it is unlikely that an independent Transnistria would be sustainable.

This publication was financed by the UK Government’s Conflict Prevention Pool through the British Embassy Chisinau. The opinions expressed herein and the terminology used are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the UK Government.

This paper examines the role of the European Union and its European Neighborhood Policy as well as the ambivalent role played by Ukraine in Transnistria. It shows, among other things, that Ukraine became more active in proposing solutions for the conflict in Transnistria after the Orange Revolution (2004). (Available only in German)

How have the Transnistrian authorities sought to consolidate de facto state-hood in the absence of international recognition? Starting from the idea that the time factor will eventually transform secessionists into state-builders, this article traces how the processes of state-and nation-building promoted by the Transnistrian de facto authorities have evolved since the early 1990s. Drawing on official sources, interviews, journalism, and the political science literature, the domestic dimensions of state-and nation-building in de facto state conflicts are examined. These include fulfillment of basic requirements of state-building, development of economic viability, and nation-building processes that attempt to create a unifying identity.

This paper will focus on the Transnistrian conflict. This paper thusly has two objectives. The first is to argue that the nature of the Transnistrian conflict is quite different from the other frozen conflicts – it is not an ethnic conflict. The important factors that led to the conflicts in the South Caucasus were ethnic differences and desire for more autonomy. In contrast, the Transnistrian conflict was primarily the product of the old elites’ willingness and determination to stay in power in the aftermath of the collapse of the USSR. The very fact that the conflict does not have an explicit ethnic vector affects the strategy that is needed to resolve the conflict. This raises the second objective of this paper. Unlike the traditional emphasis in the literature on the role of the Russian government in prolonging the conflict, this paper will take a look at both the Moldovan government and the European Union, which are not less culpable for the fact that the conflict remains unresolved. On the one hand, integration with economically poor and politically unstable Moldova is not appealing to Transnistrians. Moldova is unable to present itself as an attractive country which can offer Transnistrians favorable prospects; it is certainly not West Germany in 1989. Therefore, Chisinau cannot win the hearts and minds of even the young Transnistrian generation, which did not see any violence. On the other hand, the EU is not very interested in resolving the conflict. Even though one can argue that Russia has indeed an invested interest in maintaining the status quo, the EU and Moldova contribute no less to the prolonging of the conflict.

Given the circumstances of the Soviet breakdown, not all the countries in the East had the success of the Baltic ones and had to struggle to impose their authority on all their territories. In the early ‘90s, many of the new states from the East were on the edge of civil war and in the middle of crisis with their secessionist regions. Because European Union was not prepared for all these struggles, it chose to focus on the Balkans and on the accession procedures for the Central and Eastern Europe.  Transnistria became a point of interest for the EU as soon as Romania joined it and the last frontier to the East was with Republic of Moldova. The initiatives of the European Neighbourhood Policy in the East aimed at gathering the states around a set of values and Moldova was a success story. Unfortunately, there is still the unsolved problem of Transnistria. In this paper I argue that the inconsistencies in the European Union’s influence and the continuous compromises of Chiºinãu contributed to the strengthening of Tiraspol and the perpetuating of this unstable situation.

This paper is in Romanian.

ABSTRACT

This paper analyzes the situation of some states (Abkhazia, Nagorno Karabakh, South Ossetia and Transnistria), de facto independent after the dissolution of the USSR, which have been being in a limbo for 25 years, hovering between being considered 'fake states' and from getting the international legal status to which aspire. There is the problem of identifying the objective requirements for their largely recognition, which otherwise remains merely a discretionary choice of the other actors in the international society, based on purely political requirements and economic interests. In a world made up of states, which are the main actors on the international stage, how can these entities get the 'certification' of de jure sovereign states?

RESUMO

Este artigo analisa a situação de alguns Estados (Abkhazia, Nagorno Karabakh, Ossétia do Sul e Transnístria), de facto independentes depois da dissolução da URSS, que estão há cerca de 25 anos no limbo, oscilando entre ser considerados 'Estados falsos' e recebendo o status legal internacional a que aspiram. Existe o problema de identificar os requisitos objetivos para o seu reconhecimento, em grande parte, que de outra forma parece apenas uma escolha discricionária dos outros atores na comunidade internacional, com base em requisitos puramente políticos e interesses econômicos. Num mundo feito de Estados, que são os principais actores na cena internacional, como podem estas entidades obter a 'certificação' de Estados soberanos de jure?

Some students of quasi-states say that these entities aim to obtain the acceptance of their independence by the international community. However, this thesis raises doubts, at least in case of Transnistria, a region with its capital in Tiraspol, that began functioning as a quasi-state in mid-1992 after gaining victory in a brief war with Moldova. The paper’s goal is to answer whether Transnistria really seeks international recognition as an independent state. It examines the position of two Transnistrian presidents—dominant figures in Transnistria’s political system—Igor Smirnov (1991–2011) and Yevgeniy Shevchuk (since December 2011), as well as of the party Obnovleniye (Renewal) which has controlled the Transnistrian parliament since 2005. The paper concludes that despite official declarations made by the Transnistrian authorities about seeking internationally recognised independence for their region, this nominal goal is not necessarily a real one. Generally, they position concerning Transnistria’s status is not so easily identified. They seem to be in favour of keeping the status quo and maintaining the quasi-state’s de facto independence. However, it appears that under conditions securing Transnistria’s rights and interests, the present Transnistrian president, Shevchuk, and the parliament controlled by the party Obnovleniye could truly support the idea of reintegration with Moldova.

The collapse of USSR in late 1980’s and the beginning of 1990’s was accompanied by a series of local and regional separatist movements that have rapidly burst out into local violent confrontations or civil wars, resulting in so-called “frozen conflicts” in Abkhazia and South Ossetia (Georgia), Transnistria (Moldova) and others. Since 2014, the Eastern part of Ukraine (Donetsk and Luhansk regions) is undergoing a seemingly similar scenario. Large numbers of people originating from conflict zones have migrated to Western Europe in search for peace, better economic conditions and personal and professional accomplishment. How do these migrants identify themselves once settled in destination countries? How do they define their own “national identity”, as persons originating from unrecognized “States”? In this paper, we compare the cases of these separatist regions in an attempt to offer an insight into a new topic, situated at the confluence of migration studies, geopolitics and ethnology.

Misja Pomocy Granicznej Unii Europejskiej dla Mołdawii i Ukrainy to inicjatywa oparta na współpracy państw Unii Europejskiej z Mołdawią i Ukrainą na granicy mołdawsko-ukraińskiej, de facto w pełni kontrolowanej przez separatystyczną Naddniestrzańską Republikę Mołdawską. Działalność EUBAM zakłada szkolenia służb granicznych zainteresowanych państw oraz pośredniczenie w rozwiązaniu konfliktu naddniestrzańskiego. Celem artykułu jest ukazanie funkcjonowania EUBAM, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem aktywności Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, w kontekście zwalczania przestępczości granicznej. Wykorzystanie metody historycznej oraz instytucjonalnej umożliwiło ukazanie współpracy służb państw Unii Europejskiej, w tym Polski, z odpowiednimi służbami Mołdawii i Ukrainy oraz przeanalizowanie głównych problemów z jakimi się one zmagają. Wyniki badania pokazują znaczne zaangażowanie Polski w misję EUBAM od początku jej istnienia i konkretne inicjatywy jakie podejmowano w jej zakresie.

Słowa kluczowe: Mołdawia, Ukraina, Naddniestrze, EUBAM, bezpieczeństwo graniczne, konflikt naddniestrzański