Over the last week or so, there have been a series of unexplained explosions in Transnistria, a breakaway region in eastern Moldova run by Russian-backed separatists that border western Ukraine. Russian politicians have subsequently blamed Ukraine for the violence, and the Russian state media has already called for Russian intervention in Transnistria to try and protect its ethnic Russian population. So in this article, we're going to take a look at whether Russia actually claims Transnistria and if it does, what might happen next?
For those who don't know, Transnistria is a region in the east of Moldova that's been de facto independent from Moldova proper since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Moldovan SSR declared the official language to be Moldovan. Ethnic Russians in Moldova massed in Transnistria. And declared themselves a separate Soviet republic called the Pridnas-Trovian Moldavian Soviet Republic a year later. Gorbachev, however, unknowingly knew the declaration, so when the Soviet Union collapsed, Moldova claimed Transnistria as part of Moldova, but the Transnistrians, unsurprisingly didn't agree, and a war broke out. Since then, little progress has been made. Moldova still claims Transnistria as its own, but Transnistria essentially acts as an independent separate state with its currency, passport, and parliament.
While Russia, like most of the international community, doesn't formally recognize Transnistria's independence, it does maintain special relations with the region. Russia is Transnistria's biggest export market, and since 2005, Russia has provided free gas to the region while also providing pensions to about 150,000 Transnistrians. Russia also maintains a permanent military presence in the region of about 1,500 peacekeepers and performs regular military exercises, which Russia claims are about maintaining stability in the region. Russia even opened a consulate there in 2012, despite the complaints of the Moldovan government. The local people likely care because a massive majority of Transnistrians reject Moldova and favour a session into Russia proper. A 2006 referendum found that 98% of Transnistrians were in favour of potential future assession into Russia, and every Transnistria leader since the Soviet Union has expressed support for eventual Russian accession.
So you get the idea. Transnistria is a pro-Russian separatist state with special economic, military, and political relations with Russia. So perhaps it's unsurprising that since Russia invaded Ukraine, many analysts have expressed concerns that Transnistria could be Putin's next target, and while things have escalated recently, a Russian invasion of Moldova was always on the cards. After all, Transnistria is like Donbas in many respects; it's a pro-Russian separatist state with a permanent Russian military presence about which Russia has expressed concerns about the cultural oppression of ethnic Russians, so it certainly looks pretty similar. Only last year, the Moldavian Supreme Court overturned a language law passed by pro-Russian Moldavian MPs that granted the Russian language special status, and last week, the Moldavian parliament passed a law prohibiting Saint George's orange and black striped ribbons. Russia frequently employs the zed symbol to demonstrate public support for the government and military, as well as the pro-war zed symbol.
It's not just that annexation of Transnistria would be consistent with Putin's new Russia policy, a historical region that informs Putin's imperial ambitions. You might even remember that in early March, Belarusian president Lukashenko presented a map indicating that Russia would be launching an offensive against Ukraine from Transnistria, suggesting that Transnistria was always meant to play a role in this war. Belarusian officials claimed this was just a mistake and no offence has been staged from Transnistria just yet, but things certainly have heated up in the last few days. That's because, shortly after Lavrov announced that rush had begun quote phase two of the special military operation, a senior Russian commander stated that Russia's new offensive's goal was to seize control of southern Ukraine and gain access to Transnistria. Military officials raised the issue of oppression of Russian speakers in Transnistria. in the context of Russia's military campaign in Ukraine.
Then on Monday, talk turned to action, with Transnistria's state security ministry in Tirisfal being shelled by a grenade launcher. A day later, on Tuesday, there were explosions at two radio towers broadcasting Russian state media. On the same day, Russia launched a missile strike against a bridge connecting Odesa and neighbouring Romania, presumably to limit Ukraine's ability to defend against an attack launched from Transnistria. There are even reports that Transnistrians received texts claiming that Russia was invading Transnistria, which Ukraine categorically denied. Both Transnistria and Russia have blamed Ukraine for the violence, and on Wednesday, Transnistria accused Russian security forces of drone attacks against the country. In reaction, Transnistria declared a red level of terror threat for 15 days, as well as stepped up security checks on roads and its frontier with Moldova. And postponing a parade to commemorate their World War II victory on May 9th.
A Russian state media outlet subsequently published an article claiming that the west was trying to destroy Moldova, and a Russian tabloid claimed that the US was trying to open a second front in Transnistria to help Ukraine. Unsurprisingly, Ukraine denied responsibility for the attacks and Moldova blamed them on internal factions within Transnistria who disagreed over the war with Ukraine. In reaction to all of this, though, Moldova held its security council meeting on Tuesday where they agreed to step up patrols and vehicle checks near the buffer zone with Transnistria as well as impose regular security checks on critical infrastructure. If you get the idea, then there's been a notable uptick in violence in Transnistria just a few days after Russian military officials started talking about the oppression of its local Russian population and the possibility of a land bridge into the region. This is why many analysts have started warning about the possibility of either Russian forces using Transnistria to attack Odessa from the west or even claiming Transnistria as part of the Russian federation.
If either of these things happened, it would almost certainly provoke a reaction from Moldova, and this is particularly worrying because it could in turn provoke a reaction from Romania, a NATO member. Many Moldovans have dual citizenship, and the two countries share traditions, cultures, and even languages. I should say at this point that I think that Russian intervention in Transnistria is unlikely. Russia's deputy foreign minister said on Tuesday that Russia would like to avoid a scenario in which Transnistria is dragged into the war and the Russian army would probably struggle to do it even if they wanted to. Given the number of Ukrainian forces in the east and Moldovan forces in the north.
The Russian army has also faced myriad logistical issues throughout the war, and it's hard to see how they'd supply a force in Transnistria with no direct line of communication from Russia. Nonetheless, similar reasoning also applied to Ukraine and Russia still ended up invading, and Putin may set his sights on a weaker opposition like Moldova or Transnistria if he can't win in Ukraine but still needs to claim some sort of military victory. All in all, Russian intervention in Transnistria has a non-zero probability and this should probably worry everyone because it could end up involving a NATO member state.