It first, it sounded intriguing: The inside scoop on a “secret deal” for making Transdniestria part of Moldova. Apparently brokered by Russia, the deal was unknown to anyone but an obscure foreign policy hawk called Vladimir Socor. In the end, it turned out to be a hoax … but only after diplomats from the European Union frantically flew to Moscow, and top U.S. State Department officials converged on Chisinau.
Here’s the chronology of what diplomats now call the Socor Hoax:

1. On Friday the 13th of April 2007, it was placed (or, more accurately, “planted“) by Vladimir Socor.
He was with RFE/RL but is now with the Jamestown Foundation, a neocon lobby group which puts out his little-read propaganda vehicle “Eurasia Daily Monitor”.
They include Richard Perle, the notorious Pentagon adviser; Elliott Abrams of Iran-Contra fame; Kenneth Adelman, the former US ambassador to the UN who egged on the invasion of Iraq by predicting it would be “a cakewalk”; Midge Decter, biographer of Donald Rumsfeld and a director of the rightwing Heritage Foundation; Frank Gaffney of the militarist Centre for Security Policy; Bruce Jackson, former US military intelligence officer and one-time vice-president of Lockheed Martin, now president of the US Committee on Nato; Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute, a former admirer of Italian fascism and now a leading proponent of regime change in Iran; and R James Woolsey, the former CIA director who is one of the leading cheerleaders behind George Bush’s plans to re-model the Muslim world along pro-US lines. Neocon Harvard history professor Richard Pipes is appearently also part of the grouping.

2. It was immediately picked up by Edward Lucas, a former Cold Warrior and a good friend of Socor who has a history of popularizing Socor’s analysis and making it available to a larger, mainstream audience. Lucas is the current East European correspondent for The Economist. The Lucas rewrite made it to mainstream newsstands worldwide on April the 19th.

3. From there, it spread and appeared in various translations (Russian and Moldovan/Romanian, most notably) and was also commented on in several blogs as well as in an article at EUobserver.com.

4. Moldova was initially silent. Transdniestria immediately denied any knowledge of the plan, in separate statements from its president Igor Smirnov and head of parliament Yevgeny Shevchuk.

5. The EU went to Moscow to consult, and was apparently told that no such deal existed.

6. The U.S. sent David Kramer to Moldova, for consultations with U.S. Ambassador to Moldova Michael Kirby and Moldovan President Vladimir Voronin. Following the meetings, David Kramer said that no such plan existed. He had been assured of this by Voronin. However, Voronin himself was silent.

7. It appears that the hoax was cooked up by insiders close to Moldovan President Voronin. The initial Moldovan silence and the lack of direct rebuttal would suggest this. The next question is: Why?

8. As to why, a lengthy analysis appeared in local Transdniestria press on April 30. The most plausible explanation appears to be that some in Moldova wants to scare the EU and the U.S. into taking a more active and confrontational role with regards to Russia in the long-stalled Transdniestria settlement talks.

The melodramatic tone of Edward Lucas’ Economist article supports this view. Even a representative of a US agency working locally felt that it was over the top.
Anyway, there is no real indication that the “deal” exists and the key people involved - the 550,000 strong population of Transdniestria - have not been consulted. Based on local sentiment, there would almost certainly be a near-complete rejection and opposition to such a deal, even if it was recommended by Russia.

This entry was posted on Monday, April 30th, 2007 at 4:18 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.