Authors
Marina Gorbatiuc1; 1 Moldova State University, Moldavia Discussion
Most states and organizations are in turbulence. Now it’s an ideal time to reshape, refresh and renew. This renewed vision will not only elevate our future goals, it will also reaffirm our commitment to making a positive, lasting impact for years to come. These dynamics make Moldova a fascinating laboratory to unfold complexities of post-communist processes to democracy developments. A stated aim in the EU Global Strategy is for the European Union (EU) to work with partner interaction the OSCE in addressing crises across the world. The EU cannot make dinner and do the dishes (cf. Kagan, 2003). It needs to work with reliable partners in conflict prevention and civilian crisis management. In this article we provide empirical evidence from fieldwork in Moldova as well as try to examine practices of the EU and OSCE in dealing with secessionist entity in post-Soviet space. The study specifically looks at the engagement of the two organizations with Moldova and contested territory that seeks secession from ‘parent state’ Transdniestria. Moldova, which doesn’t yet meet EU membership criteria, has targeted joining the EU by 2030. EU membership appears a strategic necessity for both Moldova and the EU. Whatever happens, Moldova’s democracy and future in Europe are at stake in the ongoing battle over whether a European spring follows Moldova’s harsh Russian winter. Our people have already proven their favour in the referendum ‘veni, vidi, vote’ (50.35% of votes, compared to 49.65%) for EU membership. In this fight, Moldova stands as a symbol of resilience and determination. Despite being outgunned and outfinanced, we have not given up. Our path to Europe is a conglomeration of values: peace, security, and democracy. Drawing on the organizations’ documents and a series of expert interviews with their representatives, the analysis uncovers the actual engagements of the EU and OSCE area and provides possible explanations. 
