Abstract
The geopolitical and legal paradox of Transnistria is examined as a de facto political entity located within the internationally recognized borders of Moldova that lacks formal international recognition. Through a qualitative, analytical, and philosophical approach grounded in realist and anti-cosmopolitan perspectives, the analysis explores Transnistria’s strategic relevance in the post-Soviet space, with particular attention to Russian foreign policy and regional power dynamics. Central to the discussion is the feasibility of a peaceful and legally legitimate integration of Transnistria into the Russian Federation under international law, especially in light of local referendums, demographic configurations, and enduring pro-Russian identity narratives. The study revisits historical processes of Russification, arguing that Transnistria’s Russian-ethnic and political identity cannot be reduced to Soviet-era construction, as it predates the formation of the USSR. It further examines the 1990–1992 conflict, the post-ceasefire status quo, and Russia’s sustained military, political, and economic involvement in the region. Through comparative references to other unrecognized entities, the analysis highlights the constraints imposed by sovereignty, territorial integrity, self-determination, and non-intervention, positioning Transnistria as a paradigmatic frozen conflict that challenges the normative foundations of the contemporary international order.
References
1. Adrian R. The next Crimea? Getting Russia’s Transnistria policy right. London: LSE Research Online; 2016. Disponible en: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/68611/1/The_next_Crimea_LSERO.pdf
2. Akpinar Ö. A Frozen Conflict Zone in Moldova: Why No Solution Found in Transnistria. Bayterek Uluslararası Akademik Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2021;4(2):179–193.
3. Alpert L. Russia steps up military plan in Crimea. The Wall Street Journal. 2014 Mar 26. Disponible en: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527023046794045794461532858444564
4. Bahcheli T, Bartmann B, Srebrnik H. De Facto States: The Quest for Sovereignty. Routledge; 2003.
5. Balmaceda M. Privatization and Elite Defection in De Facto States: The Case of Transnistria, 1991–2012. Communist and Post-Communist Studies. 2013;46(4):445–454.
6. Brzezinski Z. The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. New York: Basic Books; 1997.
7. Butchenko M, Vikhrov M. The phenomenon of the People’s Republics in Donbas. Carnegie Moscow Center; 2016. Disponible en: https://carnegie.ru/2016/04/12/ru-pub-63295
8. Butin F. A Human Security Perspective on Transnistria: Reassessing the Situation within the “Black Hole of Europe.” Human Security Journal. 2007;(3).
9. Cárdenas Gracia J. Escisión y anexión de Estados. El caso de la República de Texas (1836-1845). Anuario Mexicano de Derecho Internacional. 2023;23:425–462. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.22201/iij.24487872e.2023.23.17905
10. Carrère d'Encausse H. Decline of an Empire: The Soviet Socialist Republics in Revolt. New York: Newsweek Books; 1979.
11. Danilenko GM. The New Russian Constitution and International Law. Am J Int Law. 1994;88(3):451–470.
12. Dawisha K. Putin's kleptocracy: Who owns Russia. New York: Simon & Schuster; 2014.
13. Dugin A. The Fourth Political Theory. Arktos; 2012. p. 22–26.
14. Dzenisevich U. How the annexation of Crimea changed the geopolitical games for Belarus. Beyond the EU; 2014. Disponible en: http://beyondthe.eu/crimearussiabelarus/
15. Ermacora F. Rights of Minorities and Self-Determination in the Framework of the CSCE. In: The Human Dimension of the Helsinki Process. Brill Nijhoff; 1991. p. 197–206.
16. Federal Migration Service of the Russian Federation. The concept for the Russian Federation's state policy on migration up to 2025. Moscow; 2012.
17. Fierman W. Russian in post-Soviet Central Asia: A comparison with the states of the Baltic and South Caucasus. Europe-Asia Studies. 2012;64(6):1077-1100.
18. Gershman C. Former Soviet states stand up to Russia. Will the U.S.? The Washington Post; 2013.
19. Gessen M. The man without a face: The unlikely rise of Vladimir Putin. New York: Riverhead Trade; 2013.
20. Government of the Republic of Moldova. Soglashenie o printsipakh mirnogo uregulirovaniia vooruzhennogo konflikta v Pridnevstrovskom regione Respubliki Moldova. 1992 Jul 21. Disponible en: https://gov.md/sites/default/files/1992-07-21-rumoscowagr_on_principles_of_peaceful_settlem.pdf
21. Gudim A. Transnistria: Conflicts and pragmatism of the economy. Centrul de Investigaţii Strategice şi Reforme; 2006.
22. Hamilton P. Professor Stephen Walt on the crisis in Ukraine. Boston Global Forum; 2014.
23. Harzl B. The Law and Politics of Engaging De Facto States: Injecting New Ideas for an Enhanced EU Role. Brookings Institution Press; 2018.
24. Huntington SP. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York: Simon & Schuster; 1996.
25. Interfax. Parity between Belarusian and Russian language to be preserved in Belarus-Lukashenko. Russian & CIS Presidential Bulletin. 2009 Dec 31. Disponible en: http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=9&sid=642799ba-8284-428b-8f08-f3c580903e51%40sessionmgr4002&hid=4212&bdata=Jmxhbmc9ZXMmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl#db=bwh&AN=48527835
26. Interfax. Up to 80% of labor migrants do not know the Russian language-Federal Migration Service. Russia & CIS Business & Financial Newswire. 2012 Dec 24. Disponible en: http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=12&sid=642799ba-8284-428b-8f08-f3c580903e51%40sessionmgr4002&hid=421
27. Isachenko D. Frozen conflicts in the post-Soviet space: Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Nagorno-Karabakh. Eur J Futures Res. 2018;6(1):7.
28. Kennan GF. The Sources of Soviet Conduct. Foreign Affairs. 1947;25(4):566–582.
29. Kolstø P. Authoritarian Diffusion, or the Geopolitics of Self-Interest? Evidence from Russia’s Patron–Client Relations with Eurasia’s De Facto States. University of Oslo. 2021;73(5):890–912.
30. Leontiev L. Governance and Human Rights in Transnistria: Between Theory and Praxis. Demokratizatsiya. 2022;30(3):333–355.
31. Leontiev L. Governance and Human Rights in Transnistria: Between Theory and Praxis. Demokratizatsiya. 2022;30(3):333-355.
32. Marandici I, Leșanu A. The political economy of the post-Soviet de facto states: A paired comparison of Transnistria and the Donetsk People’s Republic. Problems of Post-Communism. 2021;68(4):339–351.
33. Marandici I. Structural bias, polarized mediation and conflict resolution failure: A comparative examination of the disputes in Transnistria and Donbas. Southeast Eur Black Sea Stud. 2023;23(1):89-113.
34. Mearsheimer JJ. The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities. Yale University Press; 2018.
35. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic. About Republic: Country Overview. 2022. Disponible en: https://mid.gospmr.org/en/about_republic
36. Morgenthau HJ. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: Knopf; 1948. p. 52.
37. Muth S. Linguistic landscapes on the other side of the border: Signs, language and the construction of cultural identity in Transnistria. Int J Sociol Lang. 2014;227:25–(hasta fin del artículo).
38. Necsutu M. Russia pledges more financial aid to Transnistria. Balkan Insight. 2018 Jan 22. Disponible en: https://balkaninsight.com/2018/01/22/russiato-give-financial-aid-to-transnistria-0122-2018/
39. Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). Agreement on Confidence Measures and Development of Contacts between Republic of Moldova and Transdniestria. 1998 Mar 20. Disponible en: https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/6/d/42310.pdf
40. Oxford University, editor. National Self-Determination and Secession. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998.
41. Peterka-Benton D. Arms trafficking in Transnistria: A European security threat? J Appl Secur Res. 2012;7(1):71-92.
42. Popescu N. Eurasian Union: The Real, the Imaginary and the Likely. EUISS Chaillot Paper 132/2014. European Union Institute for Security Studies; 2014.
43. Rogstad A. The Next Crimea? Getting Russia’s Transnistria Policy Right. Problems of Post-Communism. 2018;65(1):49–64.
44. Sato K. Mobilization of non-titular ethnicities during the last years of the Soviet Union: Gagauzia, Transnistria, and the Lithuanian Poles. Acta Slavica Iaponica. 2009;26:141-157.
45. Skordas A. Transnistria: Another domino on Russia's periphery. Yale J Int Aff. 2005;1:33.
46. Socor V. Russia's intentions in Moldova and Transnistria: From benign neglect to aggression. J Slavic Mil Stud. 2017;30(2):155–174.
47. Solonari V. Transnistria: A case of frozen conflict. In: Nationalism, Identity and Statehood in Post-Soviet Eurasia. Palgrave Macmillan; 2014. p. 73–92.
48. Spykman NJ. America's Strategy in World Politics: The United States and the Balance of Power. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company; 1944.
49. Tuminez AS. Nationalism, Ethnic Pressures, and the Breakup of the Soviet Union. J Cold War Stud. 2003;5(4):81–136.
50. Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP). PMR Number of Deaths. Uppsala: UCDP; 2023.
51. Waltz KN, Kahhat F. El poder y las relaciones internacionales: ensayos escogidos de Kenneth N. Waltz. México: CIDE; 2005. p. 45.
52. Warbrick C. Kosovo: The declaration of independence. Int Comp Law Q. 2008;57(3):675–690.
53. Watanabe M. Transnistria: A Non-Recognized State with Frozen Conflict. ERIA Discussion Paper Series. 2018; Vol. 2018-05.
54. Wolff S. A resolvable frozen conflict? Designing a settlement for Transnistria. Nationalities Papers. 2011;39(6):863–870
55. Wood SM. Princeton University. Encyclopedia Princetoniensis. Disponible en: https://pesd.princeton.edu/node/551
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Talya İşcan (Author)