5+2_format

5+2 format

5+2 format

Multilateral negotiation platform aimed at solving the Transnistria conflict

The 5+2 format,[1] also known as the 5+2 talks,[2] the 5+2 negotiations[3] and the 5+2 process,[4] is a diplomatic negotiation platform aimed at finding a solution to the Transnistria conflict between Moldova and the unrecognized state of Transnistria. It is composed of the latter two, which are designated as "parties to the conflict", and Russia, Ukraine and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), "mediators" of the negotiations. The European Union (EU) and the United States act as "observers".[5][6] The inclusion of Romania into the 5+2 format has been proposed.[7]

Locator map of Moldova (green) and Transnistria (orange), the main parties of the Transnistria conflict

The 5+2 format started in 2005, but due to the notice sent by Ukraine to the European Union Border Assistance Mission to Moldova and Ukraine (EUBAM) regarding the great amount of Transnistrian smuggling on Ukrainian territory, Transnistria and Russia suspended formal negotiations in 2006, with them only being formally resumed in 2012.[8]

In June 2016, through 5+2 format negotiations, eight points to work on during negotiations were agreed upon between Moldova and Transnistria, these points being collectively known as the Berlin Plus package. By April 2018, six of these points had been implemented, after which negotiations stalled due to domestic and global changes.[9]

In 2022, 5+2 format negotiations were rendered impossible as a result of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as both Russia and Ukraine are members of the format.[10]

See also

References

  1. [1]
    Râncioagă, Liviu Ștefan (2012). "Recent evolutions of the political environment in Transnistria" (PDF). Revista de Științe Politice (35): 381–392.
  2. [2]
    Pieńkowski, Jakub (2017). "Renewal of negotiations on resolving the Transnistria conflict". Polish Institute of International Affairs. pp. 1–3.
  3. [3]
    Wolff, Stefan (2011). "A resolvable frozen conflict? Designing a settlement for Transnistria". Nationalities Papers. 39 (6): 863–870. doi:10.1080/00905992.2011.617363. S2CID 110880296.
  4. [4]
    Sherr, Jame (17 April 2009). "Moldova's crisis: more than a local difficulty" (PDF). Chatham House. pp. 1–4.
  5. [5]
    Socor, Vladimir (26 September 2018). "De-sovereignization: testing a conflict-resolution model at Moldova's expense in Transnistria (part two)". Jamestown Foundation.
  6. [6]
    Ivan, Paul (13 March 2014). "Transnistria – where to?" (PDF). European Policy Centre. pp. 1–4.
  7. [7]
    Botnarenco, Iurii (20 May 2021). "Sergiu Mocanu: Nu putem vorbi despre unirea cu România până nu putem frontieră pe Nistru". Adevărul (in Romanian).
  8. [8]
    Popescu, Liliana (2013). "The futility of the negotiations on Transnistria". European Journal of Science and Theology. 9 (2): 115–126.
  9. [9]
    Tăbârță, Ion (2021). "The subject of neutral license plates – old issues and new perspectives of the Transnistrian dispute" (PDF). Bulletin. Power, Politics & Policy. 16. Institute for Development and Social Initiatives "Viitorul": 1–9.
  10. [10]
    "Krasnoselski se plânge iarăși pe Moldova: Criza energetică a răcit relațiile". Timpul (in Romanian). 18 November 2022.
Share this article:

This article uses material from the Wikipedia article 5+2_format, and is written by contributors. Text is available under a CC BY-SA 4.0 International License; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.