The speculative subjects should be definitely eliminated. The current government should recognize the Romanian character of this territory, that there are two Romanian states, and based on this we should build out relations in the civilized Europe, a member of the First Parliament of the Republic of Moldova Alecu Reniță, a member of the National Union Council, stated in a public debate hosted by IPN.
“We had discussions on the issue in 1991 so as to officially recognize the existence of two Romanian states. Either we discuss the population’s reintegration wish or another variant, the speculative subjects should be definitively eliminated so that we have a perspective. Now we do not have any perspective even if we go towards the European Union. The subjects related to the name of the language and the Republic of Moldova’s affiliation to the Romanian state have been used as manipulative instruments by politicians,” stated Alecu Reniță.
He also said that the security is the key problem of a state. The Republic of Moldova is now as vulnerable in terms of security as it was in 1917 and in 1990. In 1917, Ukraine claimed Bessarabia. When the Moldovan soldiers learned about this, they explained that they were neither Russians, not Ukrainians, but were Moldovans. The authorities then started to address the security issue as the key issue.
Alecu Reniță noted that after Ukraine was invaded, the security problem was emphasized again. The status of neutrality introduced in the Constitution in 1994 was bait aimed at weakening the independent post-Soviet states so that they could not defend themselves and ensure their security. If the Republic of Moldova will not form part of NATO or the EU, the coming generations in time will have the same clear conscience as those from 1917-1918. Who are we? Are we part of historical Moldova or historical Moldova is part of the Romanian nation. Moldova can guarantee its security only as part of Romania, as the People’s Council decided, within the EU or NATO.
Alecu Reniță also said that the People’s Council always respected the rights of ethnic minorities and took decisions in a democratic way. “It is interesting to examine how the ethnic groups felt as part of Romania. I cannot say if the Ukrainians had a journal in Ukrainians, but the Russians started to create a whole network of magazines that promoted not Bolshevism, but Russian culture. It is interesting to see how many freedoms the ethnic groups, including the Russian, obtained. Initially, after being separated from the empire, they were scared, but they later saw a huge difference between freedom and the model imposed under tsarism, which they also promoted as they were used as an instrument,” added Reniță.
The public debate entitled “Union of 1918: what was it, why was it and for what?” was the sixth installment of IPN’s project “Impact of the Past on Confidence and Peace Building Processes” that is supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation of Germany.
