4 ms·

As someone who lived in proximity to this region, the issue is not exactly as black and white as you may feel.

by d_silin 6y ago

1024core 6y ago
Please enlighten us. You seem to know something about the subject; why stop at a 1-line dismissive comment?
- rabite 6y ago
  Because slavic politics is a powder keg and you have to be extremely conservative about what you say for fear of angering somebody who might want to kill you for saying it. Most of the people in Transnistria very much value their independent status, it allows them a degree of practical freedom in commerce that they would not have otherwise. They also typically are not limited by the nation's independent status as they also nearly universally hold Ukrainian or Moldovan citizenship in addition to Transnistrian. Furthermore, the practical matter of it is that the PMR (Transnistria) military cannot hope to withstand say, a prolonged assault with the Ukrainian military. Though both Ukraine and Moldova officially declare Transnistria illegitimate and their rightful clay, extremely prominent and well connected people in both countries also greatly benefit from its existence. Lots of border and jurisdictional games to play. Nobody seriously wants it to go away.
  - chrisweekly 6y ago
    Thank you for your helpful comment; in the spirit of reciprocity, by "their rightful clay," I _think_ you meant "their rightful soil" -- in which case, FYI, "soil" in particular is occasionally used to refer to "land" as in "native soil", ie "homeland". But "clay" doesn't work there, the idiom is strictly "soil". HTH! :)
    - unmole 6y ago
      I'm pretty sure rightful clay was a polandball reference.
      - chrisweekly 6y ago
        whoa; TIL
      - rabite 6y ago
        You would be correct, and also clay rhymed easy with play and away and thus made the text have a nice, soft flow to it.
    - icebraining 6y ago
      rabite AKA weev is american, so that was most likely on purpose.
- d_silin 6y ago
  Because it is a story worth a book, if all the context is to be included. I only replied to say that such conficts are almost always more complex than they seem on surface. A very abridged version is that Transnistria independence is a result of war between two factions, and neither of them hold the moral high ground. After the fall of USSR in 1991 Moldovan nationalism became stronger and pushed for pro-Moldavian and pro-Romanian views even in the regions of that were historically dominated by Russian and Ukrainian population. Local population rebelled against that, and Russian state used this conflict to their advantage using 14th army, stationed there. On a side note, Ukrainian and Russian nationalist volunteers also came to assistance of Transnistria against Moldova. Some of those people were fighting on the same side in 1992 only to be fighting against each other in 2014. And here I stop. Because this scenario (ethnic minority region in a conflict with the rest of country) has happened multiple times in the history. Rarely one side is 100% right or wrong.

As someone who lived in proximity to this region, the issue is not exactly as black and white as you may feel.

1024core 6y ago

Please enlighten us. You seem to know something about the subject; why stop at a 1-line dismissive comment?

rabite 6y ago
Because slavic politics is a powder keg and you have to be extremely conservative about what you say for fear of angering somebody who might want to kill you for saying it. Most of the people in Transnistria very much value their independent status, it allows them a degree of practical freedom in commerce that they would not have otherwise. They also typically are not limited by the nation's independent status as they also nearly universally hold Ukrainian or Moldovan citizenship in addition to Transnistrian. Furthermore, the practical matter of it is that the PMR (Transnistria) military cannot hope to withstand say, a prolonged assault with the Ukrainian military. Though both Ukraine and Moldova officially declare Transnistria illegitimate and their rightful clay, extremely prominent and well connected people in both countries also greatly benefit from its existence. Lots of border and jurisdictional games to play. Nobody seriously wants it to go away.
- chrisweekly 6y ago
  Thank you for your helpful comment; in the spirit of reciprocity, by "their rightful clay," I _think_ you meant "their rightful soil" -- in which case, FYI, "soil" in particular is occasionally used to refer to "land" as in "native soil", ie "homeland". But "clay" doesn't work there, the idiom is strictly "soil". HTH! :)
  - unmole 6y ago
    I'm pretty sure rightful clay was a polandball reference.
    - chrisweekly 6y ago
      whoa; TIL
    - rabite 6y ago
      You would be correct, and also clay rhymed easy with play and away and thus made the text have a nice, soft flow to it.
  - icebraining 6y ago
    rabite AKA weev is american, so that was most likely on purpose.
d_silin 6y ago
Because it is a story worth a book, if all the context is to be included. I only replied to say that such conficts are almost always more complex than they seem on surface. A very abridged version is that Transnistria independence is a result of war between two factions, and neither of them hold the moral high ground. After the fall of USSR in 1991 Moldovan nationalism became stronger and pushed for pro-Moldavian and pro-Romanian views even in the regions of that were historically dominated by Russian and Ukrainian population. Local population rebelled against that, and Russian state used this conflict to their advantage using 14th army, stationed there. On a side note, Ukrainian and Russian nationalist volunteers also came to assistance of Transnistria against Moldova. Some of those people were fighting on the same side in 1992 only to be fighting against each other in 2014. And here I stop. Because this scenario (ethnic minority region in a conflict with the rest of country) has happened multiple times in the history. Rarely one side is 100% right or wrong.