The separatist conflict in the eastern districts of the Republic of Moldova - the premises and sources that fueled it, the events it has provoked over the years, the 1992 war and other various related topics generate diverse and contradictory narratives among interested political actors. The rhetoric of Chisinau, Tiraspol and the Kremlin denotes opposed visions and positions. While in Chisinau officials talk about the independence and territorial integrity of the Republic of Moldova, internationally recognized in 1991, in Moscow and on the left bank of the Nistru they make arguments to justify the actions undertaken by Tiraspol separatists over the past three decades to create and consolidate the so-called Transnistrian "statehood" - existing de facto, but not recognized by anyone internationally. This study focuses on the investigation of the political discourse on the protracted conflict over Transnistria. It examines, in particular, those aspects of the mentioned subject that are addressed more often in the narratives of the representatives of power and that dominate political debates, including the contexts and premises of the conflict, the 1992 war on the Nistru river, the role of the 14th army and the Russian military in the armed conflict, direct participants and stakeholders, and the presence of Russian troops and military equipment in the eastern districts of the Republic of Moldova. At the same time, the article mainly analyses statements and narratives of the heads of states (in the case of the Transnistrian region - of the pseudo-head of the separatist regime), but also some representatives of other state institutions and political parties, their position toward Transnistria's secessionism over the years.