Rodrigo de Souza – Pike & Hurricane

Afghanistan and Private Military Companies: Interview with Tim Foxley

Rodrigo de Souza — Mon, 29 Dec 2014 11:16:54 +0000

Following our last issue on PMCs (Private Military Companies) and Afghanistan, we interviewed Tim Foxley, an Afghanistan political and military analyst, on what he predicted would be the future of this central Asian country and which role PMCs would play after the departure of most foreign troops at the end of 2014.

Pike and Hurricane: What started your interest in this field and how did you end up working as an analyst for the British Government?

Tim Foxley: I joined (actually, I think “drifted into” is a more accurate description) the UK Ministry of Defence in 1987 after graduating with a Bachelor’s Degree in 1986. This was during the time of the Cold War and when the Soviet Army was experiencing its own difficulties with counter insurgency in Afghanistan. After five fruitless and bored years of working in a finance and administration branch I got the chance to transfer over and become a political/military analyst in 1992. My “qualifications” as such were a fairly standard history and politics degree, a thesis on the evolution of trench warfare in the First World War, and an interest in military history more generally. During the 1990s, amongst the areas I looked at were security in Eastern Europe and the Balkans. In the mid/late 1990s I spent some months in Sarajevo and also looked at the Kosovo conflict in 1999.

P&C: Why did you choose to become specialized in Afghanistan?

Tim Foxley: The subject of Afghanistan was more or less chosen for me! Perhaps like many analysts at the time, the events of 9/11 proved difficult to avoid. I was reassigned to a South Asian team in November 2001 and told to get on with looking at the ground conflict and start trying to understand Taliban and militia groups across the country. It was very highly-pressurised hard work, providing political and military analysis – threat assessments, security briefings and longer-term strategic analysis.

If I had a particular “lessons learned” moment from that early period, it was that during a fast moving and unexpected international crisis, far reaching decisions with strategic impact are often made when the decision makers know least about the area in which they will be operating.

P&H: Although it is hard to predict, what are the possible scenarios for the future of Afghanistan after the withdrawal of most foreign troops?

Tim Foxley: Someone once said that making predictions is difficult, particularly about the future. At the risk of parroting what most Western governments tend to say when asked this sort of question, all lot of progress has been made, but a lot of challenges remain. By any analysis, Afghanistan is going to be struggling for years. It is not enough to list out the “statistics of progress” – kilometers of road built, number of girls going to school, size of the Afghan National Army, etc. At the end of this year, almost all the international troops will have departed, baring a residual force of approximately 10,000 (remember this is down from a peak of around 140,000 in 2011) and the Taliban, although bloodied an unlikely to capture Kabul, are undefeated.

Afghanistan can clearly go in several directions after 2014. For me, the most optimistic outcome is a slow and painful improvement over several years in the security situation, leading to development of the political and economic roots that are still only quite small. The array of negative solutions include a gradual deterioration of the security situation, a more rapid collapse of the Afghan army in the face of a resurgent Taliban, the implosion of government in some form of coup, or the fragmentation of the country back into smaller, warlord-dominated fiefdoms.

I am more of a pessimist than an optimist. There are too many things that can go wrong. The new President, Ashraf Ghani, is dynamic, energetic and, as far as I can tell, honest. But he faces a lot of problems and there appear as yet to be no realistic plans for engaging in peace dialogue with the Taliban. The Taliban is certainly more emboldened this year, as ISAF forces pull out, and is engaging in larger scale operations now that they have less fear of US airpower. Two weeks ago, reports were coming out form Afghanistan that the Afghan Army is suffering “unsustainable” casualty rates.

The Master’s thesis I wrote last year as part of the Malmö University Peace and Conflict Studies, suggested that a five to ten year military stalemate was plausible and that perhaps an even greater risk than the military capabilities of the Taliban was the risk of government inertia or failure, and a battle for political control of parts of the armed forces. This might see a return to the brutal civil war of the 1990s.

P&H: What role do you think PMCs (Private Military Companies) will play in this future?

Tim Foxley: Given the diminishing role of US military activity over the last few years and the negative publicity accorded to some of the “classic” PMCs (i.e. Blackwater/Xe/Academi), I do not see an upturn in large-scale PMC activities in Afghanistan for the medium term (the next 2-3 years). Of course, many private security groups will remain – personal protection for individuals and embassy protection for example. The trend might reverse if the Afghan army suffers military reverses and recruitment problems.

P&H: Do you think increasing the use of PMCs will be norm in the future of warfare for post-conflict areas and how legal issues will be handled?

I am not sure about the “norm” but, given the West’s difficulties with complex conflicts and an apparent reluctance to directly put “boots on the ground” for the next few years, PMCs might form a less risky way of engaging. Mercenaries of various sorts will always be a quick, easy solution – albeit expensive – to conflict situations around the world. However, there are many scandals associated with PMCs and the spectacular failures in Iraq still stick in the mind.

But we must be careful these days not to simply equate “PMC” with American multi-million dollar corporations using primarily ex-Special Forces. I think the definitions might begin to blur – with the legal implications likely struggling to keep up – and become more complex. I am starting to wonder if armed local civilian groups might start to encroach into the area previously occupied by PMCs. In Afghanistan, local militia groups (effectively warlords) jumped onto the bandwagon a few years ago, providing “protection” for the movement of supplies along dangerous roads. Often their relationship with local insurgent groups is “complex”, to say the least. I think they would prefer to see themselves as PMCs and present themselves as such. Although in a slightly different context, I would also be interested to understand more about the evolution of the volunteer militia battalions in Eastern Ukraine. A study of their activities, funding, command structure and political/criminal connections might be very interesting.

By Rodrigo de Souza

Image Credit:

Image 1: DVIDSHUB, licensed under CC BY 2.0

Image 2: The U.S. Army, licensed under CC BY 2.0

The post Afghanistan and Private Military Companies: Interview with Tim Foxley appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

The Rise of Private Military Companies

Rodrigo de Souza — Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:09:54 +0000

In the last decades, the reliance on private military companies (PMCs) to accomplish military tasks previously undertaken by regular soldiers has never been so large. Both the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq gave a new dimension to the use of “soldiers for hire.” With the pending withdrawal of most foreign troops from Afghanistan, by the end of 2014, western countries will be relying more than ever on PMCs to do the job that was previously executed by the regular military.

The use of PMCs started during the 20th century when some countries, corporations, and groups started to make use of soldiers for hire in a more professional way instead of regular national armies. They employed companies (the PMCs) that would supply “contractors” (civilians) to do the job of soldiers, mostly in so-called proxy wars or dirty wars, usually in Africa or Asia. This professionalisation of fighting was responsible for the emergence of PMCs. The justification of the use of PMCs came mostly from the reduction in cost, as the price of PMCs is far below the amount necessary to keep standing armies for long periods of time, especially when great battles between states were and still are becoming less and less frequent.

However, during the past century, the knowledge of the existence of PMCs was reserved for insiders or scholars of the subject. Nevertheless, this auxiliary role performed by PMCs changed with the American War on Terror. This gave a completely new dimension to the use of PMCs in the battlefield as in order to be able to fight in two different wars (Afghanistan and Iraq) at the same time, the United States had to start making extensive use of PMCs.

Nevertheless, there are a number of issues that can arise with the use of PMCs. One of these issues was highlighted by an incident in 2007 in Iraq. In this case, Blackwater (now called Academi) contractors killed 17 innocent civilians at Nisour Square in Baghdad. The whole legal process involved in punishing those responsible for the incident was hampered by the fact that PMCs lie in a gray area of the international judicial system.

This legal problem comes first because of the diverse origin of these military contractors. Most of them are former American military serviceman, but some are also former Special Forces from countries like Russia, Poland, or The United Kingdom. Others are veterans from the Balkan Wars, South African officers from the time of the Apartheid, and ex-French Foreign Legionaries. Secondly, since PMCs also are base in locations from all corners of the globe,
some situations in the battlefield can end up outside of international jurisdiction. Imagine a French veteran hired by Academi, an American company, working in Iraq, who kills an innocent civilian. Should he be put on trial in France, the US, or Iraq? So far, the lack of international governance in these situations leaves the use of PMCs in a legal limbo.

There are also moral issues in employing these kinds of companies. On several occasions, they were accused of crossing moral boundaries in the name of profit. One of the first PMCs in the world, Executive Outcomes from South Africa, was accused of engaging in mercenary activities during its actions in the Angolan Civil War in the 90s. These actions would be illegal under the Geneva Convention article 47. Moreover, there was Sandline International, which was accused of atrocities against local native populations in Papua New Guinea when acting for the advancement of big international mining companies’ agendas. Finally, several PMCs have also been accused of orchestrating coups d’états in African countries.

However, these legal and moral issues have not been preventing a growing use of PMCs by countries, corporations, international organizations, and even individuals. Cost benefit and professionalism are the main attractions in the use of contractors. Some argue that PMCs should even be employed in UN missions around the globe, as the UN itself has been criticized several times for employing poorly trained troops from underdeveloped countries.

One example of the massive use of PMCs despite these legal and moral issues can be seen in Afghanistan. PMCs have been present on the ground in Afghanistan since the beginning of the American invasion in 2001. They were there mostly helping in the training of the ANA (Afghanistan National Army) and securing international embassies and authorities. These kinds of activities expose contractors to almost the same kind of risks as regular soldiers. The risks involved can be seen in the number of contractors killed in 2011 in Afghanistan, which reached at least 430 contractors from American PMCs. This number was even higher than the number of American soldiers killed for that same year, 418. With the increasing use of contractors working for PMCs in Afghanistan, this disparity only continue to increase.

In the second part of this article that will be featured in our next month’s issue, we will interview Tim Foxley, an Afghanistan intelligence specialist, about what he believes the future will be of this central Asian country as well as the role that PMCs will play in their future.

By Rodrigo de Souza

Image credit:

Picture 1: Defence Images, licensed under CC BY 2.0

Picture 2: Royal Navy Media Archive, licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

The post The Rise of Private Military Companies appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Activism Through Sport: Running the Palestine Marathon

Rodrigo de Souza — Fri, 30 May 2014 17:53:29 +0000

The very first time I heard about the Right to Movement Palestine Marathon was with a little bit of sadness. The very first marathon had just happened and I missed it, this was about a year ago. However, as a student of International Relations, passionate about foreign affair and an avid runner, I knew I could not let the second one pass without being part of it.

The Israeli-Palestine conflict is one of the most important events of the second half of the 20^th century and continues to be unresolved in the first decades of the 21^st century. It’s a source of violence in the Middle East that spreads its consequences throughout the near region and the world. These consequences come in the form of refugees and terrorist acts that shape the foreign relations of the biggest economy and most powerful military in the planet… the United States. Therefore, for anyone involved in foreign affairs, this struggle is a great source of interest. At the same time, it is such a complex situation that it is really difficult even for the most knowledgeable ones to give an opinion without seeming biased. However, there is a clear power difference in this fight between the parties and it resembles to David against Goliath. In this case, David wouldn’t represent the king of Israel but the Palestinians who are much weaker economically and militarily in comparison to Israel. This is my motivation to run. Although I can’t give a solution and point fingers in such a complex issue, I know Palestinians have an uphill battle to achieve their rights and that’s the reason why they need the help of the international community since they can’t couple with this struggle on their own.

The same desire to help was the reason why a group of Danish runners and activists together with local Palestinians in Bethlehem created an organisation called The Right to Movement. This institution is responsible for the creation of the Palestine Marathon which first happened in 2013. Their pledge is to create awareness about the restrictions on movement that Palestinians endure in their everyday life. According to their website, “Palestinians cannot move freely on roads or from one city to another. The Palestinians right to move is controlled by their ID, permits, which city they live in, or who they are married to. The environment that Palestinians were supposed to move freely in is occupied and thus controlled by a foreign army. An army that controls their movement with roadblocks, checkpoints, military zones, an illegal wall and a complex set of discriminatory laws”.

This restriction on Palestinian’s right to movement is highlighted by the fact that the race organisation had problems finding the necessary 42.192 kilometres stretch of roads necessary for an official Marathon without reaching a wall or checkpoint. To solve this problem the full marathon race was performed doing two laps on a shorter distance. This issue highlights the point of the whole event, to show that Palestinians don’t have one of the basic rights stipulated in the United Nations Human Rights declaration. The right is enshrined in Article 13 which stipulates that “everyone has the right to freedom of movement”.

The race took place in Bethlehem, the birth place of Jesus. It started in front of the Church of Nativity, where Christians believe the physical location where Christ was born, adding to the grandiosity of the event. The first kilometres are run next to the Wall which by many Israelis is referred to as the “separation barrier” and by many Palestinians as “apartheid wall.” In 2004, the International Court of Justice deemed the Wall illegal as it is not build on the 1967 border, the so-called Green Line, but instead is built inside the Palestinian territories thus separating Palestinians from Palestinians and Palestinians from their land. Palestinians need permits to cross the wall through military check points whereas Israelis can move freely from one side to the other. The Palestinian side of the Wall has graffiti that symbolises their struggle.

After a few kilometres and alongside the wall we ran through the Palestinian refugee camp of Al Ayda, where the entrance is marked by a huge key. This key symbolises the actual keys from the houses where many Palestinian used to live before being expelled during the creation of Israel. Even today, some keep the original keys as a wish to return to their original land. Runners go through a second refugee camp, Ad Dheisheh, which has 13,000 registered inhabitants, a third of them unemployed. The result is a view of poverty and a life of difficulties.

Besides some foreign faces, the great majority were local runners. The total number of athletes added up to more than 2,500 from 38 different countries, which is quite a respectable number since this is only the second year of this event and the travel conditions and security concerns (which were non-existent) can drive off many competitors. Of those runners, 35% were female, which is also respectable considering the circumstances.

Running in a majority Muslim region has its particularities. What surprised me the most was the beautiful prayers coming out of the local mosques. Personally, it gave me a quite relaxing feeling which is not common for someone who is preparing to run for more than 3 hours straight. Aside from that, clothing precautions have to be taken in regards to female runners. Although few wore the full head-covering, nearly all (including the foreigners) had to cover their knees as well as shoulders. All of these safeguards added to the difficulties of running a Marathon since the weather was really hot which apparently didn’t change the local boys culture of also running with long pants, even though we were not instructed to do so.

According to the organisation, the race was a great success and another one will follow next year, in an attempt to make of it an annual event. This will fulfil the organisers’ wishes, that like any other country, Palestine should also have the right to host its own Marathon.

By Rodrigo de Souza

Image credit:

Picture 1: israeltourism, licensed under CC BY 2.0

Picture 2: Brian Negin, licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The post Activism Through Sport: Running the Palestine Marathon appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

BDS: The Weapon of the Day in the Israeli-Palestine Conflict

Rodrigo de Souza — Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:39:50 +0000

BDS, or Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, aimed towards Israel, is not a new movement. It first started in 2005 and was created by Palestinian activists. However, in the last few months it has really started to gain some momentum. Its goal is to put economic pressure on Israel until, according to the movement’s website, “it complies with international law and Palestinian rights”. The BDS movement has a lot of similarities with the Anti-Apartheid Movement (AMM) in South Africa. The AMM started with international boycotts in an attempt to end the South African system of apartheid where a minority white population had the political and social control over the majority black population.

The Writing is peace in Arabic (Salaam/Salam السلام) and Hebrew (Shalom שלום)

BDS pressure comes with the boycotting of products that are produced on Palestinian land occupied by Israel or of companies that somehow support Israel in their occupation. Disinvestments would seek the withdrawal of pension funds and investment portfolios’ money from Israeli ventures involved in constructing settlements. Finally, sanctions would come from diplomatic and economic forums of which Israel is a party, such as military alliances and labor unions. According to the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), who organises the whole strategy behind this movement, these different tactics would eventually put so much economic and political pressure towards Israel that it would reconsider its position and attitude regarding Palestine and seek a peace agreement.

Unfortunately, if someone mentions movements like BDS or other campaigns that openly criticise Israel, he or she can be accused of anti-Semitism, which discourages such serious discussions. But countries should be condemned when they occupy land that doesn’t belong to them, divert water supply from communities or restrict the free movement of a whole population. The peculiarity with Israel is that it wants to be recognised as a Jewish state, intrinsically linking religion and a sovereign state. In doing so, any attack on Israel’s actions as a country is soon viewed as an attack against the Jewish religion. Applying the same principle, criticism of the United States’ action would be minimised for fear that it would be seen as anti-Christian (although the US has a separation between religion and State, it has a strong Christian identity). Therefore, the situation described above, gives Israel the perfect defensive tool but doesn’t change the fact that as a State it has to answer for its actions.

That being said, for those who condemn the BDS movement, anti-Semitism is the preferred weapon. These opponents claim the real objective of the movement is the destruction of the state of Israel and that the goals defined by the movement, some like the end of colonisation of occupied Palestinian land or the return of Palestine’s refugees, would make Israel completely unviable as a country. Furthermore, opponents to the movement point out that even Palestinian Authority’s President Mahmoud Abbas rejects the BDS movement stating, “it is not in the Palestinians’ favour.” The president would be in favour of boycotting products from occupied land but not Israel, since he recognises Israel as a country.

On the supporting side of the movement, the main argument is the comparison of BDS with the Anti-Apartheid Movement against the white minority in South Africa. Supporters make the correlation between both movements and try to remind society that the AAM movement also received the same kind of criticism when it started yet it was ultimately responsible for the end of the oppression of the black majority in the African country. Supporters see both movements as peaceful protests against what they believe to be injustices. They also believe that attacking Israel economically is more efficient and just than launching rockets.

However, the main reason why BDS supporters believe it is a legitimate tool is that it has already had some remarkable victories, which are even recognised by Israel. According to Yair Lapid, Israel’s Finance Minister, Israel is starting to feel the consequences of the movement in its economy. Furthermore, as the movement gains popularity, it could reach a tipping point where Israel’s business owners may start pressuring for a peace agreement between both states. Even US Secretary of State John Kerry warned that Israel would suffer if its leaders failed to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians.

Indeed, the BDS movement is hurting Israel’s economy. PGGM, a large Dutch pension fund, has liquidated its holdings in five Israeli banks. Denmark’s largest bank, Danske Bank, has blacklisted Israeli Bank Hapoalim, because it finances the construction of illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories in the West Bank. The boycott of Israeli products has also been effective. Agrexco, Israel’s former largest exporter of agricultural produce, entered liquidation after its products were boycotted in European supermarkets. Even some western brands were targeted, like the sports brand New Balance for its sponsor of the Jerusalem Marathon. A full list of alleged achievements of the BDS movement can be found here.

It’s not the first time that Israel has suffered pressure from the outside world. In the 1960’s, a French arms ban against Israel led the country to develop its own military industrial complex which is one of the most modern and active in the world today. Arab countries have been boycotting Israel for decades without much success. However, this time there seems to be a difference. The BDS movement is growing stronger and is gaining mainstream success in Europe, one of Israel’s biggest economic partners. Additionally, in the prime time of the Internet and social media, movements just need a small spark to go viral and turn into a world youth fever against Israel, which at the same time can bring the dangers of the anti-Semitism sentiments. Whatever the destiny of the BDS movement, whether it is just another cry out against Israel or a tide turner like the AMM in South Africa, it is already serving its purpose, shining light onto the unsolved Israeli-Palestine conflict.

By Rodrigo de Souza

Image Credit:

Picture 1 & 2: BDS Movement

The post BDS: The Weapon of the Day in the Israeli-Palestine Conflict appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Visiting Transnistria: A Dormant Civil War Inside Europe

Rodrigo de Souza — Fri, 28 Feb 2014 14:48:53 +0000

Transnistria. Although it is independent, has its own currency, army, public institutions and even passports, much of the world has no idea it exists. It is a self-declared country, a breakaway state from Moldova that is not recognized by any other country in the world. According to the UN, Transnistria is an integral part of Moldova and is recognized by other countries as such. To understand how Transnistria came to be, we should go back in time to the period of the Soviet Union

From the end of the Second World War to the beginning of the 90’s, Moldova was part of the Soviet Empire. With the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 90s, Moldova then became an independent country. Despite this, a great conflict remained in the new country as those at the east of the Dniestr river, the majority of whom were of Russian and Ukrainian descent, declared themselves independent from Moldova since they felt more allied to Russian interests. Because of this disagreement, there was a brief civil war in 1992. Thanks to the support of the 14th Russian Army, which was based inside Transnistria, the outcome of this war was that Transnistria would be allowed to maintain its independence from Moldova. Russia intervened because it considers the region in its backyard and believes it has the right to intervene at any time once its interests are in jeopardy. In this case it was the “protection” of civilians from Russian descent. However this is probably an excuse to keep its troops in countries that broke away from the Soviet Empire since the same situation happened in other post-Soviet “frozen conflicts” like South Ossetia and Abkhazia in Georgia and Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan. In the case of Moldova and Georgia, this is a clear attempt by Russia to prevent ex-Republics aligning with the West, especially the European Union in Moldova’s case and NATO for Georgia.

Since the end of the war and the creation of this peculiar “country”, there have been rumors about all kinds of shady business within this territory like human trafficking and commerce of organs, drugs and steroids. One of the most widely known stories (and possibly the only reason why some people have heard of Transnistria) is that of the famous arms dealer portrayed in the movie “Lord of War”, Viktor Bout, who got most of his heavy weaponry from the 14th Russian Army in Transnistria. It has been stated that with the sudden collapse of the Soviet Union, a lot of the control over its less sophisticated arsenal was lost or became very lax. Taking advantage of this situation, Bout allegedly used his influence as ex-Soviet Army officer to gain access to part of the Russian arsenal left in Transnistria.

It may seem weird that someone would like to visit a place like this, but since I am a student of International Relations and an avid traveler, a trip like that would be the perfect field experience to understand a micro example of a geopolitical dispute. To accomplish this task I had to go to Moldavia which is probably the easiest way to enter Transnistria, but it is also possible to go in through Ukraine. It was surprisingly simple as I merely took a van from Moldova’s capital, Chisinau which run every 30 minutes to Tiraspol, to the capital of Transnistria.

After 40 minutes on the van I started getting close to the “border”. Since Moldova doesn’t recognize this breakaway province, they also don’t recognize that there is a border between them, so the last authorities on the Moldovan side are not border guards but “normal policeman” who ensures border control.

After passing through Moldovan border control, I saw the Russian “peacekeepers” with their Kalashnikovs and tanks. They wear blue berets and helmets like UN peacekeepers, but without the UN emblem and their status is disputed since they are not part of any UN mission. They are not under UN mandate and according to most Western countries they are there in a violation of Moldavian sovereignty. On the other hand, Russia claims that its presence there is part of a 1992 cease-fire agreement between Moldova and Transnistria, stating that they are there to prevent a conflict between both sides. This is an illusion since in the event of conflict the barrels of the blue helmet’s guns would most likely only point to one direction.

After driving past the “peacekeepers” and their tanks, I arrived at the border control of Transnistria where everyone had to get out the van to have their documents checked. Outside everything is controlled by the serious eyes of the police but inside the immigration office is chaotic with people pushing in line to get their entry papers ready. Since no “real” country has diplomatic relations with Transnistria, the officials stamped a sheet of paper instead of my passport[1].

Shortly after, I reached the main bridge crossing the Dniestr River. In 1992, this was the bridge where Russian tanks crossing into the Moldovan side could be seen during the war. Today, however, this is yet another check point manned by Russian troops.

Once in the center of Tiraspol, I started to walk through the main avenue. On one side I could see the imposing statue of Lenin with his clenched fist and on the other side I could still see an old Soviet tank with the classic letters CCCP on the side, which is the Russian Cyrillic abbreviation for the USSR. Continuing down the avenue I saw a memorial to victims of the 1992 conflict as well as other nationalist symbols such as flags and communist red stars. Everything seemed almost deserted, without many people, stores, and less cars than you would expect for such a large avenue. I had to be careful when taking pictures, especially of Lenin’s statue. While I was trying to take a picture a soldier came out from the building behind it and made a clear gesture for me to stop. This attitude from the soldier is quite understandable since there are no other tourists around and they are not used to people photographing monuments. Anyone taking pictures may be thought of as Moldavian spy.

I tried to strike up some conversation with the locals on the street but most of them did not speak English. It was a little bit easier to have some interaction with the youngsters who were very curious to know more about me. The ones I could talk to always asked me what I was doing there since they are not used to seeing outsiders. I was also told that everyone in Transnitria held dual citizenship, usually from Russia, Ukraine or Moldova since otherwise they would be a stateless person, with a passport that is not recognized around the world. Furthermore, I learned that such an unrecognized county can only survive because it has full economic and military support from Russia, which was obvious by all the Russian products and brands I saw on stores around Tiraspol.

Leaving this self-declared country at the end of the day, I wondered how long this bizarre situation would last. Last November Moldova signed an association agreement with the EU which usually represents the first steps for a future full membership with the European Union. However, Transnistria has said it has no interest in the EU and prefers an association with Russia. This situation gives Russia a partial victory. Since it cannot stop Moldova from joining the EU, it can at least stop it from joining NATO which is usually a natural step. But since NATO would probably not accept a country that has no full control of its own territory, keeping Transnistria on Russia’s side would definitely deny Moldova from joining NATO any time soon and thus avoiding Russia’s old enemy of getting even closer to its Southwest border.

This same attitude of Russia seeking to enforce its military and economic power over ex-Soviet republics is what led to the civil unrest we are seeing in Ukraine in the last few months. Instead of following Moldova and signing the association agreement with EU, Ukraine prime minister preferred to keep its alignment with Russia in exchange for a 15 billion dollars package from Russia. The only problem is that the majority of the Ukrainian population wants to progress towards the West and EU and the Ukrainian government together with the Eastern part of the country prefers the Russian side. This tug of war between both sides reflects nothing more than a geopolitical dispute between Brussels and the Kremlin for the power over ex-Soviets republics. The unrest in Ukraine’s capital Kiev has been unravelling for almost three months. Barricades were formed by the protesters at Kiev’s main square and there is no end in sight (I will leave it to change at the last minute). We can only hope the same situation doesn’t happen in the “border” between Moldova and Transnistria because unlike Ukraine, there are more weapons available and the consequences can be dire.

1 South Ossetia and Abkhazia recognize Transnistria as an independent country.

This article was based on a previous version originally published by http://outofyourcomfortzone.net/ where it explains how to visit Transnistria.

By Rodrigo de Souza

Image credit: Rodrigo de Souza

The post Visiting Transnistria: A Dormant Civil War Inside Europe appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.