VZCZCXRO9141
RR RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHCH #0107/01 0351615
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 041615Z FEB 08
FM AMEMBASSY CHISINAU
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 6224
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 CHISINAU 000107 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EUR/UMB, L/T, EUR DAS - DKRAMER 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/04/2018 
TAGS: PREL PBTS MARR MD RU
SUBJECT: MOLDOVANS, RUSSIANS AGREE TO NEUTRALITY LANGUAGE AS BASIS 
FOR TRANSNISTRIA SETTLEMENT 
 
 
Classified By: Charge Kelly Keiderling for reasons 1.4(b) and (d) 
 
¶1. (U) This is an action message.  See para. 8. 
 
¶2. (C) Summary:  In a state of "cautious optimism" about his 
consultations in Moscow, Presidential Advisor Marc Tkaciuk described 
the outlines of a three-paragraph agreement on neutrality that 
Moldovan officials reached with their Russian counterparts and that 
could serve as the basis for a settlement to the Transnistrian 
conflict.  Tkaciuk requested a USG reaction to the document as 
quickly as possible.  Should draft language in this document be 
acceptable to the U.S. (and presumably the EU and Ukraine), Tkaciuk 
said the following step would be to incorporate the language into a 
general document to which the 5+2 could agree.  End Summary 
 
Agreement on Neutrality, Little Discussion of Russian Forces 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) On February 4 Presidential Advisor Marc Tkaciuk met with 
Charge d'Affaires and Pol/Econ Chief to inform the USG about his 
January 31-February 1 consultations in Moscow, which followed 
discussions by Presidents Voronin and Putin the previous week. 
According to press reports, in addition to Tkaciuk, the Moldovan 
delegation included Minister for Reintegration Vasile Sova and the 
head of the MFA Treaty Department, Dumitru Socolan.  Media report 
that Tkaciuk and Sova's Russian interlocutors were Yuriy Zubakov, 
Valeriy Kenyakin, Valeriy Nesteruskin and Nikolay Fomin. 
 
¶4. (C) Tkaciuk described the two rounds of discussions as difficult, 
especially the debate about Moldova's neutrality.  The Russians 
wanted international guarantees of Moldova's neutrality, arguing that 
Moldova's constitutional guarantees were insufficient.  The Moldovan 
officials argued that the international community would not guarantee 
a sovereign state's neutrality; little precedent existed for such 
guarantees.  Responding to the Russians' concerns about Moldovan 
union with Romania, Tkaciuk pointed out that the autonomous Moldovan 
region of Gagauzia already has guarantees that it can secede from 
Moldova, if Moldova becomes part of another state.  After much 
negotiation, the two sides agreed to the formulation in para. 13. 
 
¶5. (C) Tkaciuk said that the two sides had not discussed at length 
the issue of Russian forces and ammunition stockpiles in 
Transnistria.  He said his Russian interlocutors promised the Russian 
peacekeeping troops and ammunition would be removed "immediately 
after the settlement."  Tkaciuk noted that such language was vague 
and told us he asked the Russians for a more precise definition of 
"immediately."  The Russians responded inconclusively that they 
didn't want their forces to remain in Transnistria.  Tkaciuk stressed 
that a final resolution to withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers and 
ammunition would have to be addressed in a holistic fashion as part 
of an overall settlement. 
 
Next Steps, Request for U.S. Support 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶6. (C) If the U.S. (and presumably the EU and Ukraine) agreed to the 
language about neutrality, Tkaciuk said the next step would be to 
incorporate that language into a general document the 5+2 could 
accept.  The Russians asked that a general 5+2 agreement be based on 
the unsigned 2004 Pact (later changed to Declaration) on Stability 
and Security for Moldova.  Tkaciuk noted that back in 2004, when the 
U.S., EU, Ukraine and even Romania had agreed to this declaration, 
the Russian Federation had rejected it.  The Moldovan side told the 
Russians that they would consider the idea and would need to consult 
with partners (the U.S., EU, Ukraine) about developments to date. 
 
¶7. (C) Tkaciuk said that Moldova wanted U.S. support for the language 
on neutrality that the Moldovans and Russians had worked out (para. 
13).  Additionally, he asked for U.S. reaction to the idea of using 
the 2004 declaration as the basis for discussion for a general 5+2 
agreement.  The declaration would have to be updated, Tkaciuk noted. 
For example, the language on neutrality would be incorporated into a 
declaration-like document and wording about Moldovan federation would 
have to be removed. 
 
¶8. (C) Action request:  Post requests Washington's reaction to the 
language on neutrality in para. 13 and thoughts about using the 2004 
declaration as the basis for a 5+2 general agreement. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶9. (C) Tkaciuk's optimism was tempered by caution.  As he noted, the 
Moldovans have been riding the ups and downs of the Transnistria 
conflict for many years.  Still, we share his measured optimism and 
believe that the Moldovan-Russian willingness to agree to neutrality 
language represents a modest advance. 
 
¶10. (C) We note problematic language in the neutrality document.  The 
agreed-to language avoids the word "guarantee" but burdens states 
 
CHISINAU 00000107  002 OF 002 
 
 
with assuming the responsibility to respect Moldova's permanent 
neutrality and not to allow the use of weapons, threat of force and 
pressures against Moldova's sovereignty and neutral status.  Instead, 
the U.S. could pledge to support, in so far as we are able, a future 
Moldovan request for assistance in the event of the threat of force 
or economic or other pressures against Moldovan sovereignty and 
neutrality.  The final sentence in the Moldovan-Russian neutrality 
document about the UN Security Council may provide us a way around 
this language; we could ask the Moldovans and Russians to accept 
language that would have the international community in general and 
the UN in particular address any threats to Moldovan neutrality and 
sovereignty. 
 
¶11. (C) The use of the word "permanent" to describe Moldova's 
neutrality is also problematic.  It may be possible to qualify such 
language by noting that the U.S. will support/respect any Moldovan 
decision about its neutrality. 
 
¶12. (C) A positive element in the neutrality document is the use of 
the word "recognize" in paragraph two, instead of having the U.S. 
guarantee Moldova's neutrality.  End Comment. 
 
Neutrality Document Agreed to by Moldova and Russia 
--------------------------------------------- ------ 
 
¶13. Post's informal translation follows.  Perhaps the Department's 
professional translators can improve our quick translation. 
 
(Begin text) Consistent with its constitutional status of permanent 
neutrality, the Republic of Moldova will not permit the stationing of 
armed forces and military installations of other states on its 
territory, and consistent with supporting its non-aligned status, 
will not apply to join any military or military-political 
international or regional organization and will appeal to the UN 
Security Council for corresponding support in the international 
recognition of said status. 
 
The Russian Federation, U.S., Ukraine, European Union and OSCE 
recognize such a realization of constitutional status on permanent 
neutrality of the Republic of Moldova as a reliable condition for 
peaceful settlement of the Transnistria conflict, the 
re-establishment of sovereignty and territorial integrity of the 
Republic of Moldova within internationally recognized borders, and 
the basis for further enhancing the stability and security of a 
unified Moldovan state. 
 
With this the Russian Federation, U.S., Ukraine and the states of the 
European Union commit themselves to respecting the permanent 
neutrality of the Republic of Moldova, and not to permit use of armed 
force against it, threats of force, economic and other pressures that 
would diminish its sovereignty, territorial integrity and neutral 
status.  In the event such measures of pressure, aggression or 
threats of aggression should take place in connection with the 
Republic of Moldova, Moldova will appeal to the UN Security Council 
to provide its security. (End text) 
KEIDERLING