Russian journalist Semyon Pegov was among the journalists with whom Vadim Krasnoselsky spoke after the vote. He is a war correspondent, writer, columnist for RT, and Head of the WarGonzo media project, known for his activity and determination. The Head of the Pridnestrovian state invited Semyon Pegov to continue the discussion at the presidential executive office. The guest said that his interest in Pridnestrovie was based on the republic's involvement in the Russian world and pressure on it from unfriendly forces. Semyon Pegov shared the difficulties he faced while getting to Pridnestrovie. Realizing that the simple and civilized option of arriving at the Chisinau airport in the existing circumstances is unrealizable (which was confirmed in practice by examples of deported Russian social activists and political scientists), the journalist found “roundabout”, as he put it, ways.
Semyon Pegov, noting that he specializes to a greater extent in covering the events taking place in restive regions, asked how the Pridnestrovians and in particular Vadim Krasnoselsky relate to the Nagorno-Karabakh events of a year ago. “This is a tragedy. People died. Territories were lost. Of course, I followed the development of events, evaluated them, wondered why this was happening. What happened. It is important that thanks to the peacekeepers of Russia who entered this territory, it was possible to stop the war, in which thousands of people died. Tragedy, in one word”, Vadim Krasnoselsky replied.
They talked about various self-determined territories and states unrecognized by the international community as well as about outside influence on their fate. Vadim Krasnoselsky noted: “Every unrecognized territory, every unrecognized state — Karabakh, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Kosovo, and other territories — has its own history. We also have our own. What is the difference between Pridnestrovie and other unrecognized territories? The thing is that Moldova legally rejected Pridnestrovie. Let me remind you that Moldova, in striving for its independence, adopted two important declarations. The first declaration of June 23, 1990 on the sovereignty of Moldova. Then there was a movement of all Soviet republics, parliaments and Supreme Soviets declared sovereignty. Moldova did the same, but Moldova has gone further. Moldova left not only from the Soviet Union, Moldova left the MSSR, stating that the creation of the Moldavian SSR was illegal, the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is null and void, and that the legal consequences of this document need to be eliminated. Let me remind you that the MSSR was created precisely thanks to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. If the Moldovan parliament recognized it as null and void, they abandoned us de jure and de facto. This was also confirmed in the Declaration of Independence - the final document of August 27, 1991, where they also confirmed the illegality of the creation of the MSSR, recognized the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact as null and void, assumed obligations to eliminate the legal consequences of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and even remembered us. They stated that the people of the region over the Dniester (as they called us) did not ask when they created the MSSR, and this is wrong. That is, what actually happened? If, for example, other union republics simply seceded from the Soviet Union, then Moldova, the territory of the former Bessarabia, seceded not only from the Soviet Union, but also from the Moldavian SSR. We remained part of the MSSR. That's the nuance. Realizing their mistake, they tried to correct it with blood in 1992, our blood. It didn't work out. They lost this war. Many Western politicians evaluate the documents adopted by the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova and understand that everything here is not as simple as it seems that in this context we are different here from all territories of conflicts. I do not feel here the collective influence of the West, which would like to escalate the conflict on the Dniester. There is no such. Maybe individuals, individual politicians, individual revanchists who live in Moldova – yes, but there is no collective aggravation of the situation from the point of view of unleashing a war. This is also important, it's true. The escalation may be different – economic, but I do not feel exactly the military one. Although, as they say, if you want peace, get ready for war. You mentioned the exercises being conducted by Moldova. I don't mind. And we will conduct".
One more question from a Russian journalist was about the statements regarding the withdrawal of Russian peacekeepers from the territory of Pridnestrovie and the reformatting of the mission into a kind of "civilian" one. Vadim Krasnoselsky: “Do you know how I assess such statements? Like ignorance of the situation. If these or those politicians who propose this, read the documents, then they would change their position probably. It is clearly spelled out that the Russian peacekeepers can be withdrawn after a complete comprehensive political solution to the conflict between Pridnestrovie and Moldova. Do you understand? When the final peace comes and it is fixed. Therefore, legally, the peacekeepers of Russia will be here until this moment. If these gentlemen knew the content of these documents, they would not have made such rash statements. Otherwise, it's just a provocation. We clearly know and understand the essence of peacekeeping here on the Dniester. Peacekeepers keep the peace. There would be no peacekeepers, everything would be different".
The talk turned to relations not only with Moldova, Russia, but also with Ukraine in the course of the conversation. Vadim Krasnoselsky recalled that people of various nationalities live in Pridnestrovie. The most numerous ethnic groups are Russians, Ukrainians and Moldovans. 100 thousand Pridnestrovians have Ukrainian citizenship, more than 200 thousand are holders of Russian passports, no less than those who have received Moldovan citizenship in addition to the Pridnestrovian. We are all a single Pridnestrovian people, emphasized the PMR President.
