This gives rise to an important question. No matter how tolerant and disinclined to repression the dominant ethnic group and its governing elite may be, there still exists a point in the escalation of ethnopolitical conflict which, once reached, is almost destined to entail reaction and repression from the agents of the central government. Such a point has been reached when the aggrieved group has become, or is on the verge of becoming, so highly mobilized as a political actor that the central government comes to realize that the anticipated next step of the disadvantaged ethnic group will not only pose another challenge to the legitimacy of the regime but may also bring about complete delegitimation of the current order. It is during such an ethno-political crisis of legitimacy that interethnic power contention becomes extreme. The outbreak of an ethno-political crisis of legitimacy means that a turning point in the power conflict has been reached and a new, intense, and different level of political interaction between the conflicting ethnic groups becomes possible.
Violence then appears as a likely resultant mode of further conflict behaviour.
The unresolved issue of power allocations between Moldova and Trans-Dniester and the salience of ethnic anxieties contributed to the reoccurrence and reproduction of legitimacy crises at each stage of sociopolitical transformation. This is turn raised the level of political ethnic mobilization. Horowitz, D. 1985. Ethnic Groups in Conflict. University of California Press.