Transdinyester Sorununun Konfederal Yaklaşım Temelinde Analizi

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 120 - 147, 30.08.2023

Hakan Kolçak Osman Ercan

Öz

Transdinyester meselesi, bu makalede konfederal birlik perspektifinden incelenmektedir. Çalışmanın hareket noktası, Moldova’nın merkezî Kişinev yönetimi ile Tiraspol merkezli Transdinyester otoritesi arasında koronavirüs salgını döneminde görülen sınırlı iş birliği adımlarıdır. Kişinev-Tiraspol arasında pandemi döneminde beliren yumuşama, ideolojik farklılıkların ve tarihsel çatışmaların yarattığı düşman algısı ve yerleşmiş karşıtlıkların ikinci plana atılmasını temin edecek potansiyeli ortaya çıkarmıştır. Çalışmanın ana teması, uyuşmazlığın iki tarafının konfederalleşmeyi sağlayacak iş birliği ve ortaklık temelinde ortaya koyabileceği anayasal ve hukuki girişimlerin, düşman algısı ve ideolojik farklılıkları tedricî olarak ortadan kaldıracak olma potansiyelidir. Konfederalleşme, iki taraf için de ideolojik ya da bölgesel ve ülkesel sadakatlerin yerini konfederal yapılara olan bağlılığa bırakmasına imkân tanımaktadır. Tarihsel açıdan konfederalleşmenin beklenen bir çıktısı olarak beliren karşılıklı saygı ve güvene dayalı siyasi ve sosyal ortam sebebiyle Moldova ve Transdinyester, federalleşme veya konfederalleşme yolunda dönüşüm geçirebilecek kapasitededir. Zira bahsedilen bütünleşmeci hukuki yaklaşım, bazı devletlerce takip edilerek başarılı olmuştur. Tarihî örnekleri referans göstererek Transdinyester sorununu irdeleyen bu çalışma, Moldova’nın siyasi, ekonomik ve askerî kapasitesi ile Rusya-Ukrayna Savaşı kaynaklı faktörleri göz önünde bulundurmaktadır. Nihai olarak konfederalleşmenin muhtemel bir seçenek şeklinde ortaya konduğu çalışma ile yeterince incelenmemiş Transdinyester sorunu hususunda Türkçe öğretiye katkı sunulması amaçlanmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Moldova, Transdinyester, Donmuş İhtilaf, Konfederalizm, Egemenlik

An Analysis of the Transnistrian Issue Based on a Confederal Approach

Öz

This article examines the Transnistrian issue from the perspective of confederal unity. The starting point of this study is some limited cooperative steps between Chișinău and Tiraspol during the coronavirus outbreak. The softening relations of Chișinău and Tiraspol during the pandemic have revealed a potential that could push aside bilateral animosities and antagonisms created by ideological differences. The main theme of the study is the potential of the constitutional and legal initiatives to be put forward by the two sides of the conflict based on cooperation and partnership. The cooperation and partnership between the two would ensure confederalization to gradually eliminate animosities and ideological differences. Confederalization would allow both sides to replace ideological, regional, and national loyalties with confederal allegiances. Due to the political and social environment based on mutual respect and trust, which has historically emerged as an expected outcome of confederalization, Moldova and Transnistria are capable of transforming towards federalization or confederalization. This is because the aforementioned integrative legal approach has historically been successful in some states. This study examines the Transnistrian conflict by taking into account some examples of successful confederal unions and considers Moldova’s current political, economic and military capabilities along with the ongoing Russo-Ukraine War. In this study, confederalization is argued as a possible option to solve the Transnistrian conflict and the ultimate aim of the study is to contribute to the literature in Turkish on the underresearched Transnistrian issue.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Moldova, Transnistria, Frozen Conflict, Confederalism, Sovereignty

Kaynakça

• Anckar, D. (2020). Small states: Politics and policies. G. Baldacchino ve A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of small states (ss. 38-54). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Asker, A. & Özpınar, Z. (2021). Azerbaycan’ı zafere götüren büyük taarruz: 44 günlük savaşın anatomisi. Avrasya İncelemeleri Dergisi, 10(1), 83-106.
• Axyonova, V. & Gawrich, A. (2018). Regional organizations and secessionist entities: Analysing practices of the EU and the OSCE in post-Soviet protracted conflict areas. Ethnopolitics, 17(4), 408-425.
• Bajon, T. (2018). Liechtenstein and the European Union: A micro-Switzerland?. Journal of Political Science and Public Affairs, 6(4), 1-5.
• Baldacchino, G. (2018). Mainstreaming the study of small states and territories. Small States & Territories, 1(1), 3-16.
• Baldacchino, G. & Wivel, A. (2020). Small states: Concepts and theories. G. Baldacchino & A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of small states (ss. 2-19). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Benedikter, T. (2009). The world’s modern autonomy systems: Concepts and experiences of regional territorial autonomy. EURAC Institute of Minority Rights.
• Blakkisrud, H. & Kolstø, P. (2011). From secessionist conflict toward a functioning state: Processes of state- and nation-building in Transnistria. Post-Soviet Affairs, 27(2), 178-210.
• Borsi, M. (2007). Transnistria – An unrecognized country within Moldova. Journal for Labour and Social Affairs in Eastern Europe, 10(4), 45-50.
• Braun, A. (1978). Romanian foreign policy since 1965: The political and military limits of autonomy. Praeger Publishers.
• Bruszt, L. & Langbein, J. (2017). Varieties of dis-embedded liberalism: EU integration strategies in the eastern peripheries of Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 24(2), 297-315.
• Burian, A. (2011). The Transnistrian conflict – the prospects of its resolution: A view from Kishinev. Moldavian Journal of International Law and International Relations, 21(3), 101-123.
• Cantir, C. & Kennedy, R. (2015). Balancing on the shoulders of giants: Moldova’s foreign policy toward Russia and the European Union. Foreign Policy Analysis, 11(4), 397-416.
• Cimmino, R. (2019). The Transnistrian gambit: Russia in Moldova. Harvard International Review, 40(1), 15-17.
• Clark, C. U. (1927). Bessarabia: Russia and Roumania on the Black Sea. Dodd, Mead & Company.
• Cojocaru, N. (2006). Nationalism and identity in Transnistria. Innovation, 19(3-4), 261-272.
• Coppieters, B. (2019). Abkhazia, Transnistria and North Cyprus: Recognition and non-recognition in ceasefire and trade agreements. Ideology and Politics, 1(12), 10-38.
• Corbett, J. & Connell, J. (2020). Small states in the Pacific. G. Baldacchino & A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of small states (ss. 343-360). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Cornea, S. (2011). The Tsarist administration in Bessarabia: The preferential administrative regime to rule over the Transdanubian settlers (1818-1828). Journal of Danubian Studies and Research, 1(1), 63-71.
• Crisis Group. (2020). The COVID-19 challenge in post-Soviet breakaway statelets. Crisis Group Publication Office.
• Cusco, A. (2009). Estate interest vs. state service: The (un)easy integration of the Bessarabian nobility into the Russian imperial system. European Review of History, 16(1), 15-32 . Cusco, A. (2017). A contested borderland: Competing Russian and Romanian visions of Bessarabia in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. Central European University Press.
• Dembińska, M. (2019). Carving out the nation with the enemy’s kin: Double strategy of boundary-making in Transnistria and Abkhazia. Nations and Nationalism, 25(1), 298-317.
• Dembińska, M. & Mérand, F. (2019). The role of international brokers in frozen conflicts: The case of Transnistria. Asia Europe Journal, 17(1), 15-30.
• Dumieński, Z. (2014). Microstates as modern protected states: Towards a new definition of micro-statehood. Institute of International Affairs.
• Dumitru, D. (2010). Through the eyes of the survivors: Jewish-Gentile relations in Bessarabia and Transnistria during the Holocaust. A. Weiss-Wendt (Ed.), Eradicating differences: The treatment of minorities in Nazi-dominated Europe (ss. 203-228). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
• Ganohariti, R. (2020). Dual citizenship in de facto states: Comparative case study of Abkhazia and Transnistria. Nationalities Papers, 48(1), 175-192.
• Graham, M. (1944). The legal status of the Bukovina and Bessarabia. The American Journal of International Law, 38(4), 667-673.
• Hanks, R. (2009). ‘Multi-vector politics’ and Kazakhstan’s emerging role as a geo-strategic player in Central Asia. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 11(3), 257-267.
• Harzl, B. (2021). The EU and the de facto states of the East European periphery: Constraints in international and European Law. F. Bossuyt & P. Elsuwege (Eds.), Principled pragmatism in practice: The EU’s policy towards Russia after Crimea (ss. 163-179). Brill Publishers.
• Hegarty, T. (2001). The politics of language in Moldova. C. O’Reilly (Ed.), Language, ethnicity and the state – Volume 2: Minority languages in Eastern Europe post-1989 (ss. 123-154). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Hitchins, K. (2014). A concise history of Romania. Cambridge University Press.
• Isachenko, D. & Schlichte, K. (2007). The crook ways of state-building: How Uganda and Transnistria muddle through the international system. Humboldt University Institute for Social Sciences.
• İrdem, İ. (2020). Anayasal düzen ve idari yapı. Polis Akademisi Yayınları.
• King, C. (2000). The Moldovans: Romania, Russia and the politics of culture. Hoover Institution Press.
• Kolçak, H. (2017). Associate statehood for Scotland as the way to stay in both the United Kingdom and the European Union: The Liechtenstein example. Romanian Journal of European Affairs, 17(1), 40-58.
• Kolçak, H. (2020). Confederal agreements: A proposal to resolve secession-related minority issues. Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(1), 208-232.
• Kolossov, V. & O’Loughlin, J. (1998). Pseudo-states as harbingers of a new geopolitics: The example of the Trans-Dniester Moldovan Republic (TMR). Geopolitics, 3(1), 151-176.
• Kosienkowski, M. (2020). The patron-client relationship between Russia and Transnistria. T. Hoch & V. Kopeček (Eds.). De facto states in Eurasia (ss. 183-207). Routledge.
• Kurt, S. (2021). Donmuş çatışma çözümüne iki farklı yaklaşım: Azerbaycan ve Gürcistan. Giresun Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 7(1), 138-161.
• Kymlicka, W., Raviot, J. & Lee, S. (1997). Living together: International aspects of federal systems. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 5(1), 1-50.
• Lapidoth, R. (1997). Autonomy: Flexible solutions to ethnic conflicts. United States Institute for Peace Press. Lewis, C. (2020). Contemporary Russian messianism under Putin and Russian foreign policy in Ukraine and Syria. The Slavonic and East European Review, 98(3), 531-559.
• Lister, F. (1996). The European Union, the United Nations, and the revival of confederal governance. Greenwood Press.
• Livezeanu, I. (1995). Cultural politics in Greater Romania: Regionalism, nation building & ethnic struggle, 1918-1930. Cornell University Press.
• Lozka, K. (2021). Closer together or further apart? The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the conflicts in the EU’s Eastern Neighbourhood. European View, 20(1), 97-105.
• Maass, M. (2020). Small states: Surviving, perishing and proliferating through history. G. Baldacchino & A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of small states (ss. 20-37). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Manz-Christ, G. (2009). The Principality of Liechtenstein – Encounter with a small state. Government Spokesperson’s Press and Information Office.
• Marandici, I. (2020). Multiethnic parastates and nation-building: The case of the Transnistrian imagined community. Nationalities Papers, 48(1), 61-82.
• Mautner, M. (1981). West Bank and Gaza: The case for associate statehood. Yale Journal of International Law, 6(2), 297-360.
• Mitrasca, M. (2002). Moldova: A Romanian province under Russian rule. Algora Publishing.
• Mitrofanova, A. (2015). Transnistrian conflict in the context of post-Soviet nation-building. Sociolinguistic Studies, 9(2-3), 191-216.
• O’Loughlin, J., Kolossov, V. & Toal, G. (2014). Inside the Soviet de facto states: A comparison of attitudes in Abkhazia, Nagorny Karabakh, South Ossetia, and Transnistria. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 55(5), 423-456.
• Özgen, C. (2021). 44 günün ardından: 2020 Karabağ Savaşı’nın askeri açıdan analizi. Giresun Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 7(1), 104-123.
• Panke, D. & Gurol, J. (2020). Small states: Challenges and coping strategies in the UN General Assembly. G. Baldacchino & A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of small states (ss. 83-97). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Patlis, L. (2018). The discourse on asymmetrical devolution in Moldova: Gagauzia and Transnistria in focus. Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 17(3), 87-111.
• Pisciotta, B. (2020). Russian revisionism in the Putin era: An overview of post-communist military interventions in Georgia, Ukraine, and Syria. Italian Political Science Review, 50(1), 87-106.
• Rezvani, B. (2020). Russian foreign policy and geopolitics in the post-Soviet space and the Middle East: Tajikistan, Georgia, Ukraine and Syria. Middle Eastern Studies, 56(6), 878-899.
• Rigamonti, C. (2011). The new Swiss patent litigation system. Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law, 2(1), 3-17.
• Roper, S. (2001). Regionalism in Moldova: The case of Transnistria and Gagauzia. Regional & Federal Studies, 11(3), 101-122.
• Roper, S. (2004). Federalization and constitution-making as an instrument of conflict resolution. Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, 12(4), 527-539.
• Sanchez, A. (2009). The ‘frozen’ Southeast: How the Moldova-Transnistria question has become a European geo-security issue. The Journal of Slavic Military Studies, 22(2), 153-176.
• Sarapuu, K. & Randma-Liiv, T. (2020). Small states: Public management and policy-making. G. Baldacchino & A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of small states (ss. 55-69). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Solonari, V. (2016). Nationalist utopianism, orientalist imagination, and economic exploitation: Romanian aims and policies in Transnistria, 1941-1944. Slavic Review, 75(3), 583-605.
• Teifukova, R. & Erol, M. S. (2017). Russian hybrid war: From theory to practice. Uluslararası Kriz ve Siyaset Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(2), 33-67.
• Tudoroiu, T. (2012). The European Union, Russia, and the future of the Transnistrian frozen conflict. East European Politics and Societies, 26(1), 135-161.
• Urse, C. (2008). Transnistria: Any optimists left?. Connections, 7(1), 57-76.
• Vahl, M. & Emerson, M. (2004). Moldova and the Transnistrian conflict. Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 5(1), 1-29.
• Valiyeva, K. (2020). Moldova’s breakaway Transnistria: The origins, nature, and current dynamics. A. Askerov, S. Brooks & L. Tchantouridzé (Eds.), Post-Soviet conflicts: The thirty years’ crisis (ss. 279-302). Lexington Books.
• Veenendaal, W. (2015). A big prince in a tiny realm: Smallness, monarchy, and political legitimacy in the Principality of Liechtenstein. Swiss Political Science Review, 21(2), 333-349.
• Veenendaal, W. (2020). Politics of the four European microstates: Andorra, Liechtenstein, Monaco and San Marino. G. Baldacchino & A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of small states (ss. 150-167). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Voronovici, A. (2020). International separatism and the political use of ‘historical statehood’ in the unrecognized Republics of Transnistria and Donbass. Problems of Post-Communism, 67(3), 288-302.
• Wivel, A. (2020). Small States in Europe. G. Baldacchino & A. Wivel (Eds.), Handbook on the politics of small states (ss. 99-112). Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Wolff, S. (2011). A resolvable frozen conflict? Designing a settlement for Transnistria. Nationalities Papers, 39(6), 863-870.
• Wolfschwenger, J. & Saxinger, K. (2020). Federalism, national identity and overcoming frozen conflicts: Moldova’s experience. Ethnopolitics, 19(4), 356-368.
• Yüksel, S. (2019). Küçük Kaynarca’dan Yaş Antlaşmasına kadar Eflak-Boğdan üzerinde Osmanlı-Rus nüfuz mücadelesi. Belleten, 83(297), 605-632.