Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Chisinau named them by name: six OGPV commanders became personas non grata in Moldova

Moldova has declared the commander of Russian troops in Transnistria and five of his subordinates as persona non grata. If they attempt to cross the Dniester River or depart through Chisinau, they will be detained and deported.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 17, 2026 · 2 min read

Chisinau named them by name: six OGPV commanders became personas non grata in Moldova
Російські війська у Тирасполі у Приднстров'ї (Фото: скриншот з відео)

Moldova has done something it has avoided for years: named the commanders of the Operational Group of Russian Forces (OGRF) in Transnistria by name and declared them persona non grata. According to Infotag citing official sources, six individuals made the list — and this is far more than just a diplomatic gesture.

Who is on the list

Parliament Speaker Igor Grosu confirmed the decision without revealing the complete list. Moldovan media identified the names: OGRF Commander Dmitry Zelenkov, his deputies Dmitry Opaleev, Sergey Mashenko and Sergey Shirshov, Chief of Staff Marat Yarulin — and separately Alexey Bogomolov, who, according to Interfax Ukraine, oversees OGRF financing schemes through a field bank in Tiraspol.

What this means in practice

Persona non grata status in this case works like a delayed-action trap: as long as those on the list remain on the left bank of the Dniester, they are untouched. But should any of them attempt to cross the checkpoint to the right bank or fly out through Chisinau International Airport, they will be detained and deported to Russia.

"The OGRF is a foreign military force deployed without the consent of the host state"

Igor Grosu, Speaker of the Moldovan Parliament

Grosu also reminded that under Moldovan law, foreigners have 90 days to legalize their presence. For Russian military personnel, this would mean arriving in Chisinau-controlled territory and regulating their legal status — a scenario none of them realistically considers.

Why now

The OGRF in Transnistria is a remnant of the Soviet 14th Army, which supported separatists during the 1992 conflict. According to Kyiv Post estimates, the formation comprises approximately 1,200 military personnel. For years, Moldova has legally avoided direct confrontation with the presence of these forces, limiting itself to rhetoric about troop withdrawal. Personal sanctions against commanders represent a different pressure format: it does not require the physical withdrawal of troops, but narrows the room for maneuver for officers and fixes their status in Moldovan law.

  • ~1,200 Russian military personnel deployed in Transnistria
  • 6 officers declared persona non grata
  • 90 days — deadline for legalizing presence under Moldovan law
  • Detention threatened if attempting to cross the Dniester or fly out from Chisinau

If Chisinau consistently expands the list — including enlisted and non-commissioned personnel — this would turn any OGRF movement outside Transnistria into a legal risk and effectively confine the formation to the left bank. The question is whether Moldova is prepared for a symmetric response from Moscow — for example, restrictions on Moldovan diplomats or citizens in Russia.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026