Transdniestria was never part of Moldova or Romania, neither ethnically (Moldovans were always a minority), nor historically (the Dniester river has traditionally been the border), nor legally (no independent Moldovan state ever included Transdniestria).

It was old Slav land, always sparsely inhabited, but mainly home to Ukrainian farmers. The Moldovans on the land were settlers from the other side of the river-border. Other immigrants, the Russians, came after 1792 when the land became the border of the Russian Empire.

With almost no native population to call its own, it is a place made up of immigrants and descendants of immigrants. A total of thirty-five different ethnic groups and nationalities live there. No single group (unless you count all Slavs as one) make up a majority. And, like most other nation of immigrants, it is a melting pot: Today, almost no one in Transdniestria is “ethnically pure”. Estimates of mixed ethnicities range from 78% (the number of interracial marriages) to 95% (the number of people who claim more than one different ethnic background), leading Transdniestria to be one of the most racially intertwined societies in the world.
Everyone speaks Russian and 96% of the population also speaks at least one second language. A whopping three languages are official languages, according to Transdniestria’s constitution.

All of this matters since Transdniestria is seeking to make its statehood stick and put itself on the map as a viable, sovereign country (17 years of de facto independence has as of yet failed to gain it international recognition. A fact no doubt related to their unfortunate choice in Coat of Arms).

What will the future bring? If “Coming Anarchy” (a blog which doesn’t advocate anarchy, but looks at new trends in nationbuilding issues) is anything to go by, then Transdniestria could be a prototype for future successful states: Small, self-governing, and based on a shared idea, rather than mere ethnicity. Says Chirol from Coming Anarchy:

Nowadays, the most successful states are arguably those who born from settler colonies, specifically British ones. To be American, Australian or Canadian isn’t to be a certain race or religion. While white Anglo-Saxons are clearly the majority at the moment, everyone else has been and is just as welcome and not seen as less Canadian, American or Australian. Indeed, for countries based on an idea and where no group “owns” the land, the freedom to change, adapt and grow is far greater than in those based on ethnicity and religion with far older cultures and traditions. While some people advance the idea of so-called Market-States, one if the biggest and most overlooked questions of our century is that of identity. (cont.)

Yep: Identity, not ethnicity… Someone else saw this almost a hundred years ago and his insight is serving Transdniestria rather well these days.

This entry was posted on Monday, October 22nd, 2007 at 12:42 pm and is filed under Transdniestria musings. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.