rritory of the country. Thus, the aspiration to sovereignty in the Pridnestrovskaia Moldavskaia Respublika is supported by essence of the Russian policy directed to protection of the Russian-speaking population.and cultural environment of secessional conflicts is also formed by the number of the reasons: the historical past of ethnoses, presence of historical, cultural, cult and other monuments of ethnos on the certain territory (cult values ??of the nationality tutsi on the territories occupied hutsi in Ruanda); illegibility or absence of demarcation of existing borders, making new demarcation between ethnoses (for example, the problem of North and South Korea); return to the historic native land of earlier deported ethnos (repatriation of the Kazakhs from Mongolia, Iran, Afghanistan, countries of CIS); independent change of borders (the problem in relations between Western Sahara and Morocco); violent inclusion of the territory of ethnos into the neighbour state (for example, attempt of joining Kuwait to Iraq); partition of the ethnos among different states (the problem of Taiwan) [4]., It is clear enough, that the secessional conflict is the typical social and legal conflict which sanction is possible by means of using classical ways - reconciliation, intermediaries, negotiations. However, the peculiarity of such conflicts is complexity of their sanction. Thus, the power resolution of the conflict is extremely dangerous and can create a number of precedents, and non force decision is interfered with various political and legal factors. At the same time it is indisputable, that the sanction of secessional conflicts without taking into account their theoretical, legal and conflictological component is unreasonable, as such sanction does not assume account of all possible factors describing the condition of the conflict, including the recognition as a side of the conflict of the political authority on the territory aspiring to self-determination. And we believe it should become a basis for the peaceful sanction of the the secessional conflictsurch and the state have different origin and nature, separate and special spheres of means and influence, and are independent from each other. However, this independence is not absolute. The state working within the limits of the competence, does not express judgment about subjects of Belief Study or about forms of divine worship - about divine service, the same as the church does not judge forms of the state system and activity of the government from the point of view of their political expediency. However, there are the spheres which can be indifferent neither for the church, nor for the state. First of all, it is public morality and the legal status of the church. The church preaches truth from Christ and teaches people moral precepts from the God, therefore it is not imperious, and can not change anything in the doctrine, stop, or not stop preaching of the truth, whatever doctrines would not be ordered or not spread by the state instances. In this respect the church is internally completely free from the state. As to the legal status which this or that local church possesses, it is the power of the government which possesses the legal sovereignty on territory of the state. And it means i that solely this power shall determine the legal status of local church, giving it the opportunity of execution of its mission or limiting these opportunities. Thus, the state realizes its right, and the church has no right to refuse the state even discriminating it, in obedience as the church should in any conditions and under any circumstances commit such activity as salvation of people.relations of the church and the state have developed in the context of history during which the state has developed and changed. In the 20th century the Russian orthodox church has passed a thorny road of ordeals, which started in 1 917, and the state has passed the difficult way of formation of the attitude to religion and feelings of believers. During the monarchy the state made the indication of a religious belonging of the citizens as the legal compulsion, leaving a person freedom of choice of the religion, but not supposing the opportunity to refuse from confession of religion in general to choose and more over to preach atheistic belief. There have been entered the category of the state religion and organs of the government, supervising religious affairs and in documents of the citizens it was necessary to specify the religious creed. The declaration of the socialist state was followed by adoption of acts about separation the church from the state and of separation of school from church. It was forbidden to pass any local laws and resolutions which would constrain or limited the freedom of worship or would establish any advantages or privileges by the religious belonging of the citizens. The church was separated from the state, that is lost the status of the...
