This thesis aims to explain why the de facto authorities of the non-recognised state of Transnistria use multiple strategies in their desire to achieve internal and external legitimacy by engaging...Show moreThis thesis aims to explain why the de facto authorities of the non-recognised state of Transnistria use multiple strategies in their desire to achieve internal and external legitimacy by engaging in nation-building and state-building. These strategies consist of one or more policies with a specific aim, and an argumentation of why the state, and by extension its regime, ought to be recognised. These arguments are remedial secession, historical statehood and earned sovereignty. Using Qualitative Content Analysis to analyse scholarly articles, government statements and local news outlets published between 1989 and 2019, I inductively build up a typology that distinguishes between four distinct strategies: strategies that aim to strengthen external legitimacy by appealing to the wishes of the international community, those that aim to strengthen internal legitimacy by appealing to the needs of the population, and those that aim to do both or neither. The typology also accounts for the prevalence of certain policies in one of the four distinguished periods of the de facto state’s existence. I provide three interconnecting explanations of why certain strategies prevail over others in different time periods. Firstly, strengthening internal and external legitimacy are different goals and therefore require a different strategy. Constrained by limited resources, the nation-builders have to prioritise these strategies. Secondly, ever-changing domestic and international geopolitical and socio-economic developments determine which policies and arguments will be effective. Lastly, strategies do not exist in isolation to each other, but are built upon by more refined arguments and renewed policies.Show less
