Why is this? It doesn't seem that the EU benefits from keeping the status quo of heavy Russian influence but de jure Moldovan ownership: if anything, an independent Transnistria might one day prefer to court the European sphere. Conversely, Russia should be happy to have an official ally in the region. The international-law disputes over who signed what treaty, 3 states ago, seem moot and trivial compared with the principle of self-determination. So why not give them what they seem to want?
It’s a way to prevent parent country aligning with the Western world.
Also, it’s a known enormous money-laundering hole for Russia’s government schemas.
Here lies the flaw in your thinking. An obvious issue is that Transnistrian secession would impinge on Moldovan sovereignty. This is similar to how Catalonia is not allowed to secede from Spain. Some counterexamples are Kosovo seceding from Serbia (supported by USA and UN because of Serbia's terrible international standing at that moment, specifically because of the ethnic cleansing employed by the Serbian government and army in the war) and Algeria seceding from France (which the French agreed to to end the Algerian War). So I think the reason for Transnistria not being recognized is that Moldova is in relatively good international standing (at least compared to Serbia around the time of the Kosovo War), thus no internationally recognized country wants to attack Moldova's sovereignty, for kind of the same reasons that most people try not to break any laws. (And those that would be willing to "break the law" presumably have nothing to gain from it.)
Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination
> The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, nor what the outcome should be, whether it be independence, federation, protection, some form of autonomy or full assimilation. Neither does it state what the delimitation between peoples should be—nor what constitutes a people. There are conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination.
Transnistria was not Moldova's only ethnic separatism conflict; there was also Gagauzia, which similarly declared independence, but that conflict was resolved without shooting. Moldova promised significant autonomy, and, for the most part, did deliver on those promises.
And then you contrast that with how Serbia treated Albanians in Kosovo when it was a part of their country...
We can all probably agree that a single person can't decide to secede and form their own one person nation. What about a 200 person village? A 100,000 person city? What about a 35 million population province?
Even if Transnistrians want to be an independent state, having the rest of Moldova overrule them does not mean they aren't having self-determination automatically.
Except there weren't any bars in the Soviet Union, at least not for regular people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teZw4-trPuE If you really want to know about the Soviet Union, watch Ushanka Show.
(And in case you watch this and he says the meat markets are just like the Soviet Union, let's get it out of the way that there wasn't much fresh meat available in the Soviet Union for ordinary people either. But that's another Ushanka Show episode.)
Soviet Union had bars common people went to?
(Answer: no. My parents lived in the USSR until they were in their mid-30s and _never_ went to a bar. And they had means. Bars simply did not exist for non-Westerners. Beer was sold in the streets and in liquor stores you could get beer/wine/vodka). See the Ushanka show link for confirmation of this, unless Sergei is also a liar.
Soviet Union had grocery stores where you could go and buy fresh cuts of beef?
(Answer: no. Beef in the USSR was usually old milk cows that got slaughtered. People generally didn't eat steaks like they do in The West, because old milk cows aren't good for that. Steaks were unheard of. If you got beef, you made zharkoye. People ate lots of pork. Fun fact: pork is still more expensive than beef in Ukraine). If you wanted fresh, good meat, you had to buy from a vendor directly at a bazaar. Stores had chicken and canned fish.
Source: my life until I was 5, my parents until they were 35, my grandparents until they were in their 60s. Also see Ushanka Show.
> Bartender of Gambrinus bar, 1967
> Bars only began opening in the seventies. Even the word "bar" itself was a novelty, and sounded Western to people. These joints tended to be pretty simple inside, serving draft beer, bar snacks, and even American cigarettes if you were lucky. During the anti-alcohol campaign of 1985, bars were allowed to remain open as beer was considered a far less evil than vodka.
Similar situation with meat, often there were shortages of meat, but it's not like people ate meat only rarely in the USSR, as far as I understand.
Dear god what did I read?
>On April 11, 2014, the Third Circuit issued an opinion vacating Auernheimer's conviction, on the basis that the New Jersey venue was improper, since neither Auernheimer, his co-conspirators, nor AT&T's servers were in New Jersey at the time of the data breach. While the judges did not address the substantive question on the legality of the site access, they were skeptical of the original conviction, noting that no circumvention of passwords had occurred and that only publicly accessible information was obtained. He was released from prison on April 11, 2014.
How incompetent do you have to be to arrest someone over something that isn't a crime, and also screw up the case so badly that you'd have to release him even if it was?
I don't know, indicting, charging, and convicting someone in a federal court without proper venue when the charged act probably isn't a crime would seem like it would take an extraordinary combination of both competence and malfeasance from the prosecutor. Incompetence would lead you to fail even without the impediments of “not a crime” and “not a court in which venue is proper”.
I'd say that you have to be pretty incompetent to still lose with that system in place.
How much of your alt-right support is shock value and how much is genuine?
No true. There is a laundry list of things that have been censured for ages in organized societies. It's odd how you choose to make a point by pretending to be a neo-Nazi and not something like... oh I don't know, why don't you pretend to be a pedophile. Or since you are In Eastern Europe, gay? I'm sure the people of Serbia, Ukraine, and Transnistria would celebrate you taking a stand for same-sex liberty and free speech and won't discriminate you for "gay propaganda".
The myths you write about countries you've clearly never been to and like to write fanfic in your head about are quite amusing, but it doesn't change the fact that the US promises their citizens free speech by its Constitution and is functionally the source of all the world's liberties in that regard (it doesn't matter what country you are in, as long as you can host a statement in the US you can write about generally whatever). And in the US, right-wing ideas regarding racial characteristics and gender roles seem to be the only thing consistently deplatformed.
I was born and lived there for the first 30 years of my life ;-)
Your ability to change tune and deflect are next level so I'm gonna let you "win".
I'm not really sure how serious they were about the nuke part but they really didn't like America.
Now it's the response of normal people to someone also local criticising a local event, state of afairs, etc.
I reckon if Alaska became nominally independent and Canada became like a hostile Russian client state or something people living in Anchorage would feel similarly to transdniestrians.
Where are you from?
> But when he was out on the street with his camera, something struck him about the way people reacted.
Make it sound like they’ve never seen a camera before. And surely there is more to the story than pictures of tanks and people in military uniforms?
More of general Eastern European mood :)
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.
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.
I don’t know about Kosovo, but I know for sure about DNR. Transnistria is a crappy corruptionist hole for money laundering, there is nothing about people’s will there as well.
Also, Ukrainian propaganda does not exist. It’s more of a for-hire services that work for whomever pays more, not for the state itself. It’s one of the reasons why shit like that happens, since there is no state-backed push against Russian agenda.
"Covid-19 - global lie! turn off TV - turn on thinking! Learn facts! take off your mask!"
Organized by far rights, religious fringes, alternative medicine enthusiasts, conspiracy nuts, and a Russian 'psychic healer'.
Berlin had similar protest last month, organized with the help of their neo nazi party (AfD).