Talk:Transnistria War/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Political background

The end of the Communist rule in neighboring Romania in December 1989, and the partial opening of the border between Romania and Moldova on 6 May, 1990, led many in Transnistria to believe that a union between Moldova and Romania was soon possible, ending them inside Romania, where they could no longer demand the return to Russian as the official language.

Er, what? What about the massive nationalist demonstrations in Chisinau? Popular Front activists presenting the union as an imminent event? A wave firings of Russian(only)-speakers following the establishment of the language law? Besides, Transnistrians would be able to demand the return to Russian as the official language even if Transnistria became part of Romania... --Illythr 15:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is a gross simplification to blame only the end of Communist rule. It would be more historically correct that the Popular Front for a while became the largest and most potent political force. It campaigned on a unification platform. When you see the largest political group advocating a union, the "led many in Transnistria to believe" statement is actually an understatement. I would have believed the same at the time. - Mauco 16:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

In fact, before the end of Communist rule in Romania I don't believe anybody in Moldova would want to unite with Romania. As a Romanian, in 1989 I followed the Moldovan press and I was delighted with the degree of freedom it enjoys. Freedom in Moldovan SSR in 1989 was bigger than freedom in Romania under Ceauşescu. Don't understand why anybody in Moldovan SSR would want for reunification with Romania as long Ceauşescu was still in power. If I would live in Moldovan SSR at that time, I would be against unification with Ceauşescu's Romania.--MariusM 17:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Adition: At the end of 1989 Ceauşescu's regime imposed restrictions at subscribing at Moldovan press. I was not able to subscribe again at "Literatura şi Arta" for 1990, which I subscribed at end of 1988 for 1989 (when it was still written in cyrillic).--MariusM 17:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and BTW, Moldovan (CYR) was already official in MSSR, on par with Russian. The new law basically just abolished Russian and reinforced Moldovan/Romanian. This part is kinda vague thoughout the articles - it sometimes looks like Moldovan wasn't official in MSSR at all. --Illythr 16:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Was it? I'm not sure, I will check. I was always under impression that Moldovan SSR didn't have an official language (de facto official was Russian), contrary with Caucasians SSR.--MariusM 17:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, you know, I was sure that every SSR had its own language in addition to Russian, which was the "main" language. I better double check as well. --Illythr 18:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

nah...not only did the MSSR not have an official language (until 1 September 1989), but the USSR didn't even have one. jamason 18:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I am not Russian/Romanian/Moldovan or anything Eastern European, but just a researcher. But from what I recall, each SSR had what was referrred to as the "titular language" (which in this case would have been called "Moldavian") as well as the "language of inter-ethnic communication" (always, without any exceptions, Russian). - Mauco 18:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Each republic definitely had a titular nationality (with its own language), but I'm not sure that the Soviet governmental organs codified the place of these languages in any sense. (That is not to say that the Communist Party didn't often have policy initiatives addressing various aspects of national live in various spheres--e.g. korennizatsia.) I do know, however, that the role of Russian was not codified in 1989: the VS MSSR established Russian as the "language of inter-ethnic communication" after it passed the language laws as a compromise in the hopes of stopping the strikes at that time. jamason 18:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it would be nice to find the text of the Constitution of the MSSR, then. Meanwhile, looks like Jamason is correct:This edit suggests it, if indirectly. I will withdraw my statement, then.--Illythr 18:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Illythr was convinced, but my friend Mauco is still not convinced. For his enlightment, a comment about Moldavian SSR Constitution is here. Quote: "In accordance with the provisions of Article 34, the citizens of the Moldavian SSR are given "the possibility of using their mother tongue and the languages of the other peoples of the Soviet Union". Therefore, there is no mention of a right, but merely of a possibility, just as there is no mention of directly identifying the "Moldavian" language (Romanian written in the Cyrillic alphabet) as the first language in use in the Moldavian Republic, but merely as the mother tongue of some of its citizens. This language is thus placed on an equal footing with the approximately 130 other languages spoken in the Soviet Union. [4] The Constitutions of only three union republics -- Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia -- mention the language of the titular nationality as the state language. Moscow made a concession to national sentiment in these three cases only in the face of public pressure. [5] The fact that this right has been granted to the three Transcaucasian republics may have made some "Moldavians" more concerned over the lack of official primacy of their language in their republic. Nonetheless, at present the "Moldavian" language thus has merely a limited official role, used in education, the legal system, and in some cultural publications. Article 43 provides "the possibility of school education in the mother tongue." Once again, however, it is the possibility, not any specific right that is mentioned, and the use of the term "Moldavian" language is again avoided, preference obviously given to the more general wording of "mother tongue." A Reuter correspondent noted that "the Russian language dominates across the republic, and Moldavian fathers cheerfully admit to sending their children to schools operating in the Russian language to give them a better chance of getting top-level jobs when they become adults," [6] thus reflecting a trend among many other nationalities of the Soviet Union". This was CIA propaganda of 1978, article was speciffically writen for Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty. My guess: First time ever Russian language aquired a official status in Moldovan SSR was by the language laws of 1989 (status of language of inter-ethnic communication). I mean official/legal status, not de-facto status.--MariusM 19:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Your friend Mauco will never be convinced ...only if US will speak russian... that is it ...I know that I should be neutral ...by I am...I am neutral .. but that Mauco is not...he is a russian propaganda puppet ( don't forget that). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Catarcostica (talk • contribs) 07:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

Events that prepared the war

• August 1990: Modovan SSR refused to participate at the referendum for the keeping of Soviet Union, but in Gagauz and Transnistrian regions, with the help of Soviet 14th Army (according agreement between A. Lukianov and Igor Smirnov), referendum was organised.

14th Army in Gagauzia?

14th Army was even in Chişinău, if I remember well.. The teritorry of 14th Army included all Moldova and even some parts in Ukraine (Odesa region).--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Depends on what time you are talking about. Originally, its HQ was in Chisinau, but it was moved to Tiraspol in the 1980s. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't talk about the HQ of 14th Army, but about 14th Army in general. Military units from entire Bessarabia were also part of 14th Army, including those which acted in Gagauz region. You chalanged the accuracy of my source based on the fact that is impossible for 14th Army to be present in Gagauzia. Your argument is wrong.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Can I find more info on the activities of the 14th army in Bessarabia (and more specifically, Gagauzia) somewhere? I remember Transnistria sending volunteers to Gagauzia against volunteers from Moldova. Surely, there was no need for that if the 14th army was there. --Illythr 21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I already told the source, and I repeat it: Anatolie Muntean & Nicolae Ciubotaru - "Războiul de pe Nistru", AGER-Economistul publishing house, Bucharest 2004. To answer criticism that I didn't provide page numbers, the timetable of events (more detailed than we discuss here) is in Anex 1, pages 311-354. Problem solved.--MariusM 05:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 16 September 1990: A meeting against separatism is held in the village Lunga, near Dubăsari

Any profound influence on the war?

After the proclamation of PMR not everybody in Transnistria was ready to accept it.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

That is probably true. But this particular meeting is not a key event that led to the war. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Each event separately is not enough to led to the war, but all those together had this outcome. We can change the title of the section if you propose a better one.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

No, the name of the section is well-chosen, if ill-formed. "Timeline of key events that led to war" or somethig would probably be better. The problem remains, however, that many of these events, were not "key" and that many others are excluded. The inherent POV of such a section lies in that it really should read "Timeline of key events that someone thinks had led to war". Hmm... --Illythr 21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I changed the name of the section, I took out the word "key" in order to avoid POV disputes which event is key and which is not. With this, I think this particular problem is solved.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 2 November 1990: The bridges over Dniester are blocked by separatists. At the bridge near Dubăsari, clashes are held between the police which wanted to open the bridge and separatists. Deaths and woundeds are registered at both sides.

Both sides? Exact numbers, names? (I vaguelly remember that one policeman was wounded, will look for more info)

The main source I used - Muntean & Ciubotaru - "Războiul de pe Nistru", where is a timetable of the conflict, is not giving details.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

This is the problem. The "mirror source" Mauco provided says "Moldovan police used weapons on demonstrants in Dubossary. 3 killed 16 wounded". This is a fact, too. The way it is presented is more inportant than the fact itself. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Come with clear proposals to improve the article. Mauco's source is not specifying from which side were the victims, mine is specifying in general that victims are from both sides, without numbers.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Remove most of those events and place those you think appropriate as footnotes to support parts of the main text. Many more from the other side need to be added before the timeline is inserted back into the mainspace as well. Inserting it as it is now warrants a {{NPOV-sect}} or {{Missing information|Moldovan chain of events}}. Oh, and {{spelling}}, too.. --Illythr 21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

As far as the numbers go:
TASS, 2 November 1990: “according to Mircea Druc, he ordered the police to clear the bridge, the roads and offices in the city...[the arrival of Moldovan forces] prompted a sharp negative reaction of residents—who began throwing stones. A police officer was wounded.” According to city authorities (i.e. separatist Dubossary city soviet), 6 were killed and 30 wounded.
TASS, 3 November 1990:“’Militias who blocked the bridge used barbaric methods—lances, crow-bars and stones.’ Costas said. ‘A huge crowd of people attacked militiamen, using even petrol bombs.’”
Dubossary City authories (again, a partisan source) later adjusted the figure to 3 killed (Geletiuk, Mitsul, Gotka), 13 wounded by gun fire. The numbers repeated in the TASS reports were always attributed to the Dubossary city soviet (the Moldovan authorities did not provide numbers of killed and wounded separatists), but Druc indicates that only one police officer was wounded. jamason 21:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

In the book of Vlad Grecu - "O istorie a conflictului de la Dubăsari", Prut International, Chişinău 2005, page 33, which is quoting a written eye-witness account which was received by Ştefan Urîtu, who latter give it to Mircea Druc, one of the deaths - Oleg Gheletiuc from Lunga, was a supporter of Moldovan government which was killed by fire opened from a military unit of 14th Army, in the Fontan neighborhood of Dubăsari. Commetn at Grecu's book, including the mentioning of this incident, is here. I will rephrase this sentence in: 2 November 1990: The bridges over Dniester are blocked by separatists. At the bridge near Dubăsari, clashes are held between the police which wanted to open the bridge and separatists. 3 deaths and several woundeds are registered.--MariusM 10:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• As result of their support for the coup in Moscow, several separatists leaders, including Igor Smirnov and G. Pologov, are arrested. They will be freed later.

Was that really a result of their support for the coup? Must've been pure coincidence that they were arrested by Moldovan units in Kiev.

Do you deny they supported the coup? You can add the place where they were arrested. Was Pologov arrested in Kiev?--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I deny this. "As a result of their support..." is a wild and irresponsible statement. Please state if this support was material (as in men, arms, money, logistical planning, etc) or if is was a statement of sympathy (as in "great, finally some Law & Order in Moscow"). If so, millions of people throughout the USSR supported the coup. They turned on their TV and saw it. Lots of folks did not support it. Lots of folks did. There were millions of people on both sides of the issue. Smirnov and other OSTK leaders happened to fall into one of these two groups. But their "support" did not extend to anything material whatsoever. If you claim support, please prove it. - Mauco 03:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

My source (Muntean & Ciubotaru) is specifically telling that PMR leaders supported the coup. Is not inherently bad to suport the coup. As you know, millions of true Russian patriots did support the coup, we are not blaming them, we are just reporting the facts, they should be proud of what they did. Quote from my source: "19 august 1991: La Tiraspol şi Tighina s-a introdus starea excepţională, toate drumurile au fost închise, s-a organizat patrularea miliţiei şi gărzilor OSTK. Liderii separatişti s-au adresat populaţiei rusofone să susţină puciul de la Moscova" (page 315). The love between coup leaders and PMR leaders was reciprocal - Anatoly Lukianov, who supported PMR, was also a coup leader. In the article wasn't included a claim that support was material (arms, money, logistical planning), don't use straw man arguments.--MariusM 12:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

That is rich. It is of course NOT a straw man argument. Please learn to be civil. This is a very real concern which is related to the edit. If this alleged "support" if important enough to be included in an encyclopedia (and you seem to think so), then you must find a source to explain what form this support took. Surely you are not claiming that they were arrested merely for holding an opinion, like millions of others who privately agreed with the failed coup and cheered it on from the sidelines for political reasons? If so, then the new "democratic" Moldovan state was a lot less democratic than its supporters at the time had led us to believe. If your source does not have any information on the kind of support, then please find one that does. If you can not do this, then the edit will not be suitable for inclusion. It is an unsupported blanket statement with no proof of any significant, material support of any kind, and certainly not the kind of support that would merit an arrest, as you sentence implies. - Mauco 13:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

This is precisely my concern. The sentence says that he was arrested because he supported the coup. This implies that his support was so serious that it warranted an arrest. This is like saying that Ilashku was arrested for organizing a terrorist cell in Transnistria without mentioning the political background for that arrest. Even then, this was the official reason. I wonder, if there was an official reason for Smirnov and the other Transnisntrian leaders. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

My source is specifying the kind of support PMR leaders gave to the coup. Their suport for coup is clear, but I agree that they were arrested for their actions in Moldova, the failed coup was only a favourable moment. Before the coup Moldova didn't dare to arrest Russian nationalists from Transnistria. If you want to take away "as result of their support for the coup in Moscow", is O.K. with me. We should mention the arrest.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about your source, but the statement above certainly doesn't clarify what kind of support that was. You have also misplaced the label "nationalists", I'm afraid. The fact of arrest must be mentioned, of course. --21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I took out "As result of their support for coup". Problem solved.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 15 November 1991: In Tighina and Dubăsari people are forbidden to subscribe at Romanian-language newspapers from Chişinău.

It may be worth noting that subscription to the (few remaining) Russian language newspapers in Chisinau was allowed only together with the subscription to the Romanian language edition of "Nezavisimaya Moldova""Moldova Suverană" at the time.

First time I heard this. Is it original research? Russian-language press in Chişinău is doing well, AFAIK. I am not convinced that a Romanian language edition of Nezavisimaya Moldova existed. AFAIK, "Moldova Suverană" was an independent newspaper, with its own staff.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm talking about that particular period. Yes, my own experience does qualify as OR, I suppose. And yes, it was "Moldova Suverană", I thought that it was the same newspaper, because I had the name translated for me. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Find a source and we will include it. It is important however to see exactly which time period was this.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

1989-1992. But I think this one is a prime footnote candidate. --Illythr 21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• 27 November 1991: A delegation of International Helsinki Comitee for Human Rights visit Moldova, but Igor Smirnov refused to disscuss with it.

Was he invited to Chisinau for the... discussion? :-)

My source (Muntean & Ciubotaru) specifically tell that the meeting was supposed to be held in Tiraspol. I will add this clarificaton in the article.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Hm, this is interesting, I'll look into it. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Explanations were added, problem solved.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 1 December 1991: A group of 20-25 persons, 6 with automatic guns, enter in the village Mălăieşti, Grigoriopol district, asking the organisation of elections for Transnistrian authorities. However, the villagers refused to participate in ellections. Same actions hapened in Speia, Butor and Taşlîc.

This sounds weird. Did they ask or demand elections? Why didn't they use their weapons?

I don't make assumptions.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, your source does that for you. It also provokes certain assumptions from readers. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Is just reporting facts.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Sourced information, problem solved.--MariusM 05:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 9 December 1991: At police section from Tighina a group of separatists leaded by Kogut from Tiraspol arrived and informed the comandant V. Gusleacov that he was dissmissed, asking him to give the keys and all the documents to the new apointed boss. Gusleacov refused, and the police was surrounded by Transnistrian guards. Policemen who came to the section were arrested and disarmed, the building of road police attacked and the cars stollen. In the help of police came people from nearby village like Varniţa, Chircăieşti, Ursoaia and Transnistrian guard was forced to withdraw.

This sounds highly dubious.

But it can be true.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

How could unarmed villagers force the armed guards to withdraw? Unless the guards were reluctant to use arms on the local population... Also, in this particular context, the proper word is "confiscated", not "stolen" :-) --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Policemen inside police section were armed. Opening fire against population could cause reaction from policemen. I agree to change "stollen" with "confiscated" to make you happy.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Word "stollen" changed with "confiscated". Problem solved.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 10 December 1991: S. Trocin and V. Oprea were arrested in Tighina and kept several days in a basement only because they spoke Romanian in Sovetskaia street.

Hm, no official reasons? Should we also mention all the Russians-speakers who were threatened or beaten (one was even killed) on the streets of Chisinau at that time for exactly the same reason?

Do you have a source for official reasons?--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope. I don't think this belongs to the timeline. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Nobody stopped you to include in timeline whatever abuses against Russians in Chişinău if you can prove them. I am not the person to object at inclusion of factually correct facts. However I doubt that authorities in Chişinău took actions against anybody just because he spoke Russian. My source is clearly indicating the reasons for the arrest of Trocin and Oprea: they spoke Romanian on a street in Tighina.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Such info would only be worth including as a footnote elsewhere. Still, good point, I'll see if I can find anything. --Illythr 21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem with this onformation. When aditional info will apear, we will discuss it.--MariusM 05:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 27 December 1991: The building of democratically ellected raional Soviet of Dubăsari, which refused to accept separatism, is blocked by Transnistrian authorities.

Heh, I understand that only those raional Soviet that opposed separatism were democratically elected, then? :-)

You should understand exactly what is written: Dubăsari raional soviet was democratically ellected.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Does that mean that the others (Tiraspol, Rybnitsa, Bender) weren't? --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't make such an affirmation, don't use straw man arguments. It should be mentioned that authorities of Chişinău didn't try to stop the activities of pro-OSTK local Soviets. They issued statements that some of the decisions of those Soviets are not legal, but they didn't take violent action against those Soviets.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Ahem, doesn't arresting them (Smirnov et al) count as "violent actions"? And jamason has a point there. --Illythr 21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

For avoiding disputes, I took out "democratically ellected". Problem solved.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 13 January 1992: E. Martin and V. Plămădeală were shoot by transnistrian guards.

Shot or shot at? And who are they? And where did this happen?

My mistake I didn't explained. They were wounded at feet at the exit of Dubăsari, at "Poltava" road.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Explications added, problem solved.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 2 February 1992: At Lunga is wounded the policeman V. Rusu.

?

What is difficult to understand? His car was stopped by 18 separatists.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not a telepath to understand "His car was stopped by 18 separatists." from "At Lunga is wounded the policeman V. Rusu." --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

My mistake I didn't explained. I added a large amount of text (not everything is written in my source) and I was tired. Now, I hope is clear.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Explication added, problem solved.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 14 February 1992: People from Transnistria were going to Moscow to inform public opinion about Human right abuses in Transnistria.

?

I will check Grecu's book, I think he has more details about this.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• 20 February 1992: Peacefull demonstrators in Lunga, near Dubăsari, who protested against referendum organised in the village by Transnistrian authorities, are scaterred by force. Fire was opened against them and tear gas was used, at the order of Alexandru Porojan, separatist leader from Dubăsari.

One man's separatist is another man's demonstrator, I see.

We are reporting facts here.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Again, The way they are is presented is often more inportant than the facts themselves. Besides, this list contains strictly the facts from the perspective of one side. This is bad. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Find an other perspective and we will discuss.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

That'd be jamason's points and Mauco's link (too bad it's in Russian). --Illythr 21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem here regarding the sentence, just a need to find other views about the incident, if such view exists.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 22 February 1992: Military unit 01002 is atacked by separatists. 95 officers and soldiers were embused and drove until the bridge over Dniester, where they were told to go to Chişinău by foot.

Attacked? Losses?

No mention about losses in my source.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Statement correct, no problem here.--MariusM 05:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

• 29 February 1992: Near Dubova, unknown persons armed with automatic guns stopped a car, killed the driver N. Boiniceanu, wounded an other person and robbed the passengers

Errrrr?! An event that prepared the war?

Lawlessness in the region is relevant.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Such lawlessness was common everywhere in the former USSR at the time. This particular event did not lead to the war. Although the general background is indeed worth noting. --Illythr 15:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Not really everywhere, I guess. I guess in Transnistria lawlessness was more common. One of the accusation raised against Transnistria in pro-Moldovan books is that they armed persons taken from prisons, which received pardons if they accept enrollment in Transnistrian guards. An specific example of Russian citizen Şişanov, which received a 6 year sentence from Odessa Court, was pardoned by Mărăcuţă and enroll himself in Dniestrian Gurd is showed by Muntean & Ciubotaru, with documents. An other example is with ukrainian citizen Kuţan, which was released from prison and was found also in Dniestrian guards. The claim is that it was a widespread situation.--MariusM 19:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't belong to the timeline. Instead, insert it into "political background" with a footnote reference. --Illythr 21:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

In short, not even our local (Chisinau) pro-Moldovan sources are that one-sided when descibing the events that led to the war. --Illythr 16:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

You know only Russian-language sources from Chişinău. My main source for this timetable is Anatolie Muntean & Nicolae Ciubotaru - "Războiul de pe Nistru", AGER-Economistul publishing house, Bucharest 2004.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The article became worse, not better, with this latest addition. (And a new atrocity was added to the list already committed in the war of Transnistria: spelling). A timeline is an excellent idea. But I propose that we move it here, while we work on making it NPOV. For a bit of balance, we can look into a mirror: Same events, same timeline, different conclusions. And equally onesided. The look in the mirror is here: http://priznanie.tiras.ru/page.php?18 - Mauco 17:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

You can add events if you have source.--MariusM 02:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I certainly will. The timeline is a good idea, but not based on a blatant POV source. So I propose that we move it here, while we work on making it NPOV through collaborative editing. You do want to collaborate, don't you? - Mauco 03:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree to remove the section. You should propose improvements on this section, not apply censorship. You can remove info only if you can prove it is incorrect.--MariusM 04:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, buddy. That is not how it works. You can not just introduce a controversial, biased section and then refuse to work on it here, in Talk. As you can see above, Illythr has dissected it step by step and almost every single line is questionable. I have even more concerns than he does. We are both willing to work with you, but try to seek consensus for your edits. They are highly POV based, and you have been told so more than once from both of us within the last 24 hours. - Mauco 05:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I see you don't really care about things like "consensus" when pushing your side. I'll hang out the tags for now. I'll compile an acceptable version later today. --Illythr 13:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Moved section

Timeline of events before the war

Now, let us work on this. Starting with the headline: this is not good, proper English. - Mauco 05:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

You should come with proposals for improvements, but don't delete the entire paragraph. You are wellcome to add other events if those are factually correct and you can provide sources.--MariusM 12:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• 30 december 1988: In Chişinău, with the help of A. Bolşakov, the manager of "Tocilmaş" factory from Tiraspol, is formed the movement "Interdvijenie", later renamed "Edinstvo", a movement with the aim of defending the interests of Russians from Moldova. This movement was against acceptance of Moldovan (Romanian) as official language, latin script for Moldovan and later supported Transnistrian separatism.
• 15 July 1990: A. Lukianov, chairman of Supreme Soviet from Moscow, sent to the widespread Russian newspaper Izvestia a letter of Transnistrian and Gagauzian separatists.
• August 1990: Modovan SSR refused to participate at the referendum for the keeping of Soviet Union, but in Gagauz and Transnistrian regions, with the help of Soviet 14th Army (according agreement between A. Lukianov and Igor Smirnov), referendum was organised.
• 2 September 1990: Transnistrian Republic is proclaimed at Tiraspol.
• 16 September 1990: A meeting against separatism is held in the village Lunga, near Dubăsari.
• 2 November 1990: The bridges over Dniester are blocked by separatists. At the bridge near Dubăsari, clashes are held between the police which wanted to open the bridge and separatists. 3 deaths and several woundeds are registered.
• 12 March 1991: Based on the order of V. C. Bogdanov, place tenant of Tiraspol city Executive Comitee, a 200 people strong military unit is formed, with weapons and ammunition received from Soviet Army. Same developments hapened in Tighina, Dubăsari and Rîbniţa.
• May 1991: The Supreme Soviet of Transnistria order to all policemen from Transnistrian teritorry to obey separatist authorities. A separatist Ministry of Interior and Prosecutor office is formed.
• 19 august 1991: Separatist authorities proclaimed exceptional situation at Tiraspol and Tighina. Dniester guards are patrooling the cities, roads are blocked. Transnistrian leaders asked the population to supoort the coup which was done in Moscow.
• Several separatists leaders, including Igor Smirnov and G. Pologov, are arrested. They will be freed later.
• 6 and 18 September 1991: Separatist authorities order that all military units of Soviet Union in the region need to obey the jurisdiction of Transnistria.
• 10-20 September 1991: At the indications of Odessa military district leadership a general assembly of officers and non-coms from Soviet Army in Transnistria is held. With this occasion, is expressed the will to support transnistrian separatism, independent of Moscow's orders.
• 11 September 1991: The Russian military unit 03517 from Rîbniţa decided to defend the Transnistrian Republic.
• 19 September 1991: Police section in Rîbniţa is taken by separatists.
• 22 September 1991: Police section in Camenca is taken by separatists.
• 2 October 1991: Tiraspol city Executive Comitee issue a decision asking local police to refuse subordination to the authorities from Chişinău.
• 16 October 1991: At Dubăsari, an explosion was done at the police, which was still loyal to Chişinău.
• 8 November 1991: The newspaper Nezavismaya Moldova is publishing facts about Human rights abuses in Transnistria: explosions and burning of houses of people which refused to accept separatist authorities, threats against the family of policeman Vladimir Colesnic, second in command of Dubăsari police section which refused to accept separatist authorities; the situation of refugees.
• 15 November 1991: In Tighina and Dubăsari people are forbidden to subscribe at Romanian-language newspapers from Chişinău.
• 19 November 1991: Weaponry and ammunition is transferred from 14th Soviet Army to separatist authorities.
• 21 November 1991: Authorities from Tiraspol forbid local entreprises to colaborate with Moldovan National Bank.
• 26-30 November 1991: Transnistrian guard from Rîbniţa received weapons and ammunition from 14th Army military unit of Colbasna.
• 27 November 1991: In the building of local authorities from the village Teia, Grigoriopol district, 6 persons from Tiraspol. 2 with automatic guns, forced local authorities to organise a voting section for the elections of Transnistrian president. Same situation appeared in other localities of Transnistria.
• 27 November 1991: A delegation of International Helsinki Comitee for Human Rights visit Moldova. Igor Smirnov refused to participate in Tiraspol at the meeting with this delegation.
• 27 November 1991: Trudovoi Tiraspol, a newspaper run by OSTK, is publishing the list with names and adresses of Moldovan policemen from Transnistria who refuse to obey separatist authorities, asking repressions against them.
• 1 December 1991: A group of 20-25 persons, 6 with automatic guns, enter in the village Mălăieşti, Grigoriopol district,a asking the organisation of elections for Transnistrian authorities. However, the villagers refused to participate in ellections. Same actions hapened in Speia, Butor and Taşlîc.
• 1-5 December 1991: All the bridges over Dniester are blocked by separatists.
• 5 December 1991: Viktor Malic, assistant of Soviet Union Ministry of Interior, in an interview in Nezavisimaia Moldova, is telling that the result of research done by Soviet Union prosecutor office regarding the events in 2 November 1990 in Dubăsari, shows that transnistrian authorities made the disorders and Moldovan police acted within legal limits.
• 6 December 1991: A group od armed separatists is imposing Slobozia police section to accept the jurisdiction of Transnistria. The commander of police section was beaten and his acces to the police section was forbidden.
• 6 December 1991: Transnistrian guards are opening fire against a car belonging to Moldovan police, at the brigde over Dniester at Gura Bîcului. The policeman N. Dociu is wounded.
• 8 December 1991: L. Toderaş, prosecutor of Tighina city, is arrested by separatists and interogated at OSTK.
• 8 December 1991: 700 Transnistrian guards and cossacks, armed with bren guns, armored chariers, grenade throwers received from Russian 14th Army, are concentrated in the outskirts of Dubăsari. The police receive an ultimatum to swear allegiance to the Transnistrian Republic.
• 9 December 1991: At police section from Tighina a group of separatists leaded by Kogut from Tiraspol arrived and informed the comandant V. Gusleacov that he was dissmissed, asking him to give the keys and all the documents to the new apointed boss. Gusleacov refused, and the police was surrounded by Transnistrian guards. Policemen who came to the section were arrested and disarmed, the building of road police attacked and the cars confiscated. In the help of police came people from nearby village like Varniţa, Chircăieşti, Ursoaia and Transnistrian guard was forced to withdraw.
• 10 December 1991: Near the village Lunga, 5 transnistrian guards stopped the car with the policeman A. Ismailov, take him out of the care, beat him and confiscate his gun.
• 10 December 1991: S. Trocin and V. Oprea were arrested in Tighina and kept several days in a basement only because they spoke Romanian in Sovetskaia street.
• 11 December 1991: Ellections are held for the president of Transnistrian Republic.
• Night of 12 to 13 December 1991: Police section in Dubăsari is besieged by separatist. 35 policemen are in the building threatened by death.
• 13 December 1991: A group of policemen was send to help the besieged Dubăsari police station. They are attacked with bren guns. 4 policemen will die: Ghenadie Iablocikin, Mihail Arnăut, Valentin Mereniuc and Gheorghe Caşu.
• 13 December 1991: At Tighina, a reporter of Moldovan television is arrested, his camera confiscated. He will be freed at the intervention of Moldovan police.
• 14 December 1991: In Dubăsari, is opened fire against A. Terentiev, electrician, and against a truck belonging to the raional Soviet (which refused to accept separatism). The truck driver, V. Chiriac, and his passenger, are wounded.
• 14 December 1991: Policemen S. Lopatiuc and V. Dorofenco are taken hostage by separatists. The later will be hospitalized after beatings.
• 14 December 1991: The newspaper Drujba from Grigoriopol, which was against separatism, is closed by Transnistrian authorities. Local radio station is attacked.
• 15 December 1991: Moldovan president Mircea Snegur is meeting with Igor Smirnov.
• 21 December 1991: Igor Smirnov is ellected honorary cossack.
• 27 December 1991: The building of raional Soviet of Dubăsari, which refused to accept separatism, is blocked by Transnistrian authorities.
• 3 January 1992: The KGB section from Tighina is occupied by separatists.
• 3 January 1992: The mayor of Varniţa, A. Cuconescu, and other several people are arested in Varniţa town hall and taken to Tiraspol, where are interogated and threatened with prison. They will be freed at request of Chişinău authorities.
• 6 January: On the road Dubăsari-Rîbniţa 6 armed transnistrian guards arrested Moldovan policemen P. Frecăuţan and H. Adam. They were forced to leave the rayon with their families, if they want to live.
• 9 January 1992: 70 armed separatists attacked a column of trucks from military unit 07481, which transported weapons from Hlinaia (Grigoriopol district) to Chişinău. Trucks, weapons and ammunition are captured by separatists.
• 12 January 1992: Transnistrian guards open fire against a car belonging to Moldovan police in Dubăsari. 2 persons (policemen S. Ţîstoi and a passenger) are wounded. In an other incident at Dubăsari, other 2 persons are wounded (policeman S. Manole and G. Damaschin).
• 13 January 1992: E. Martin and V. Plămădeală were shoot by transnistrian guards and wounded at legs, at the exit from Dubăsari.
• 15 January 1992: 2 policemen and a woman are wounded when fire is opened against a Moldovan police car.
• 22 January 1992: The prosecutor of Tighina, L. Toderaş, is arrested again. As result of the disscussion of Moldovan police he will be freed.
• 25 January 1992: New arrest for L. Toderaş, prosecutor of Tighina. His family and coleagues are intimidated.
• 29 January 1992: Separatist militsya arrest some drunken cossacks in Tiraspol. The headquarters of militsya is blocked by women comitee, and the cossacks are freed.
• 30 January 1992: Attacks against several sections of Moldovan police in Tighina. 39 policemen were agressed. Road police section is stormed and put on fire. 18 guns and 6 cars are stollen.
• 31 January 1992: 4 policemen were arrested in Tighina and beaten.
• 1 february 1992: F. Ţurcan is killed near Dubăsari, in the village Lunga, at a checking pont organised by Transnistrian guards, when fire was opened against his car, despite the fact he stopped at Transnistrian gurads request.
• 2 February 1992: At Lunga is wounded the policeman V. Rusu, after his car was stopped by 18 separatists.
• 4 February 1992: the deputy of Tighina police, A. Corolicov, and the police officer O. Pavliuc were arrested when they returned from their job. They were beaten and their weapons confiscated.
• 12 February 1992: The school for medical nursery in Tighina is closed by Transnistrian authorities.
• 14 February 1992: People from Transnistria were going to Moscow to inform public opinion about Human right abuses in Transnistria.
• 19 February 1992: The custom building in Dubăsari is attacked by separatists, custom-house officers are beaten, their weapons confiscated.
• 20 February 1992: Peacefull demonstrators in Lunga, near Dubăsari, who protested against referendum organised in the village by Transnistrian authorities, are scaterred by force. Fire was opened against them and tear gas was used, at the order of Alexandru Porojan, separatist leader from Dubăsari.
• 21 February 1992: In Slobozia, the bank accounts of 2 schools which refused to accept Transnistrian authorities, are closed.
• 22 February 1992: Military unit 01002 is atacked by separatists. 95 officers and soldiers were embused and drove until the bridge over Dniester, where they were told to go to Chişinău by foot.
• 29 February 1992: Near Dubova, unknown persons armed with automatic guns stopped a car, killed the driver N. Boiniceanu, wounded an other person and robbed the passengers.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3