Motto: "Before becoming history and even before taking place, a lot of major events are prepared in laboratories" Moscow has come up with a somehow shocking hypothesis, having echoes in Bucharest, Chisinau and, more recently, in Tyraspol. The outstanding Russian politician Stanislav Belkovski, representative of the Russian Council for National Strategy, has placed a new element in the Transdnistria conflict issue, starting from the idea that the future unification of Romania and the Republic of Moldavia is inevitable and therefore the Bucharest diplomacy is highly interested in attending negotiations as active factor. Bucharest might be supporting a kind of self-ruling for Transdnistria. The award is to be the Republic of Moldavia as it can be tempted by the idea of unification because it would enter NATO and EU sooner. Considering the hypothesis, that can also be a subtle offer of Moscow, Adrian Severin has warned it could be a trap. Yesterday ZIUA published a very interesting material on it taken by the agency "Russia Today" from the Russian newspaper Dnestrovski Kurier, published in Tyraspol. The issue is violently taken up again. Tyraspol is coming up with the idea that EU states might entitle Adrian Severin to negotiate on Transdnistria. Is this exchange a storm in a teacup caused for the sake of political debate or is it the prelude of a diplomat, academic game that can do away with the tension in the area and find a solution? When the Transdnistria conflict burst out, many balanced people pointed to, but few understood that the Republic of Moldavia had been outrageously entrapped when it had charged the Tyraspol Officials with secession. Then they tried to prevent the autonomy status of the region. The issue got hot, guns fired, people died, there was important damage. The wounds then caused are still bleeding and enraging Romanians, Russians, Transdnistria and Gagauzya people. Included in the Soviet Union, the Socialist Moldavian Republic was an artificial state unit. Because it stretched beyond the Nistru to a space that was not Romanian, historically. Transdnistria was only occasionally and temporarily ruled by some Romanian state authority. As it happened in the time of Stefan cel Mare (Stephen the Great), sometimes it was used as block in order to keep back attacks from Crimea. Even during World War II, many Romanian generals wished to stop at the Nistru, so that later we could no longer be rated as the aggressor state. Unfortunately, the pact Antonescu - Hitler was stronger than the mind. But at the time there was no authority claiming Transdnistria was Romanian territory. The same line is to be noticed in the interesting article published by the Tyraspol newspaper. Using the title "Admitting? Maybe..." author Alla Ostavnaia is reviewing some recent diplomat and political approaches. She is claiming that on April 19 Mircea Geoana presented to the OSCE representative in Chisinau the Romanian vision on Transdnistria perspective. Geoana insisted on the idea that that the negotiation process must consider the long - term strategy with view to the Republic of Moldavia joining EU and NATO. The author is pushing too far the real state of things, saying Moldavia's chances to the Euro - Atlantic world are real only if in the future this territory is included in Romania. She is also claiming that Romanian active diplomats are showing signs of it. But it would not be possible unless Transdnistria were given right to self-ruling. By such version Romania would inherently turn into the lawyer of Tyraspol. If Gagauzya is involved at this point - Severin this move might cause more pressure, including tension between Romania and Turkey -, then Ankara too might be attracted to dialogue and then to negotiations. The topic is highly complex. So this is why I believe it to be interesting for the ZIUA staff and the Foundation "Romania - Russia" to organise an international debate to be attended by diplomats, historians, experts in politics from all the states involved. Behind the curtains of some Executives, there might be shaping ideas, hypotheses, offers and even counter offers. But anyway, we can only allude to a rather far away future. With or without the Transdnistria issue, I fear neither Bucharest nor Chisinau are ready to speak it up or to decide on reunification. Even if it is Romania and not Cyprus, even if now both populations belong to the same people, culture and religion, I am afraid the results of e referendum would also be negative.

Sorin ROSCA STANESCU