MEETING WITH NEW OSCE MOLDOVA HEAD OF MISSION

C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 000272

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/03/2017
TAGS: PREL PGOV RS
SUBJECT: MEETING WITH NEW OSCE MOLDOVA HEAD OF MISSION

Classified By: Ambassador William J. Burns for reasons 1.4
(b,d).


1. (C) In a February 1 meeting with the Ambassador, recently
appointed OSCE Head of Mission for Moldova Philip Remler
reviewed the highlights of his round of meetings with the
"5 2" partners on Transnistria status negotiations. In
Moscow, Remler discussed possible ways forward with DFM
Karasin, National Security Council Deputy Secretary Zubakov,
and MFA Transnistria Special Negotiator Nesterushkin. Remler
noted that Moldovan Reintegration Minister Sova, Presidential
Advisor Tkaciuk, and Transnistria Parliamentary Speaker
Shevchuk were in Moscow to discuss (separately) the remaining
obstacles to a possible agreement.


2. (C) Remler told the Ambassador that Zubakov and Karasin
seemed more "enthusiastic" about the prospects for a
Transnistria settlement in the near future. Ambassador
agreed, noting that Putin foreign policy advisor Sergey
Prikhodko strongly suggested in a February 1 meeting that the
Kremlin has put pressure on Chisinau and Tiraspol to reach a
settlement prior to Putin's departure. Given the looming
Kosovo CDI, Russia would like to show the West that there is
a right way and a wrong way to resolve frozen conflicts, and
that Russia's "negotiated" approach was the right way.


3. (C) According to Remler's discussions with Russian
officials, Russia was particularly concerned about
"guarantees" that Moldova would keep its neutrality vis-a-vis
NATO. Given Ukraine's announced intent to seek a NATO
Membership Action Plan at the NATO Summit in Bucharest,
Russian sensitivities about Moldova's stance on eventual NATO
membership were heightened. Based on his discussions with
Moldovan and Transnistrian leaders, Remler believes Moldova
is not interested in NATO membership and thus would be
willing to satisfy Russian concerns in the form of a
guarantee. Remler noted that the Russians did not have a
problem with Moldova eventually seeking EU membership. GOR
officials also told Remler that Russia insisted on
maintaining its peacekeeping forces (PKF) in Transnistria at
least until a settlement had been reached.


4. (C) Remler said that he had identified clarifying the
technical and legal aspects of railroad links as one area of
cooperation between Chisinau and Tiraspol. Both sides agreed
collaboration on this subject was necessary and was a
realistic confidence building measure. Remler proposed
forming a working group on railroad links to the 5 2 members.
Chisinau, Tiraspol, and Moscow were on board; the Europeans
were considering the idea, but remain focused on returning to
final status negotiations. Remler believes that a 3 2
meeting could be held as early as the end of February, and he
promised to develop a roadmap on a return to final status
negotiations in time for the meeting. Ideally, the 3 2
meeting would lead to the resumption of formal 5 2
negotiations.


5. (C) The Russians indicated to Remler that that they were
"fed up" with Smirnov and would like to replace him, but did
not know with whom. Remler said that Russia viewed
Transnistria's leadership as divided into two camps: the
status quo Smirnov camp and the more progressive Shevchuk
camp. Smirnov opposes the resumption of formal negotiations
between Chisinau and Tiraspol, and Remler recounted Litskai's
comments after an informal 5 2 gathering in the Chisinau
Russian ambassador's residence that the "siloviki" in the
Smirnov administration were pressuring Smirnov to engage in
military action in villages along the West Bank in an effort
to undermine negotiations. Shevchuk, on the other hand,
represented those business leaders who have found it
profitable to receive trade preferences from EU countries in
exchange for their willingness to trade with Moldovan
companies. Remler commented that the EU possessed
considerable leverage over a settlement, given the economic
incentives they could provide to both sides in exchange for
cooperation between each other.
BURNS