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

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.