At what stage of its historical development does Moldova find itself on the eve of its 24th anniversary from economic, political and social points of view? Is the development process normal, fast, slow? What are the lessons we have learned and those we are yet to learn? What are the short-term and long-term prospects of Moldovan society? These are the questions IPN Press Agency is trying to answer through a series of articles titled “Moldova at 24 years of age: Who are we? Where are we going?”, by speaking to experts from different fields.
---
Political analyst Anatol Taranu, head of the Center of Political Analysis and Consultancy “Politicon”, says Moldova is still a country in the making. A state must have an identity, but Moldova hasn't finished building its own identity. It is a country that doesn't even control its borders and the separatist conflict on the Nistru proves Moldova is an incomplete country. So far, it remains a typical state in transition from an empire to another kind of entity and it's not clear how it will end up. It may develop as an independent country or the option to reunite with Romania will pick up steam and national reintegration will happen within the borders of Romania.
Taranu thinks each state has a specific trajectory and it depends on the history of the space where it is located. “From this point of view, the process of Moldova's formation and development as a state is very specific. There are also some common elements for the ex-Soviet space, which disintegrated into former Soviet countries that cannot be called national states in the fullest sense”, says the pundit.
Moldovan citizens haven't learned enough lessons and this explains the decadence of the state and society. Taranu believes that the unresolved identity issue makes us not citizens, but merely the population of an externally recognized country, which is still not complete on the inside. According to him, we must learn to become a nation. The population of Moldova is not a nation on which a state can be built, but a conglomerate of ethnic groups and the Moldovans, who are the ethnic majority, have failed to become the nation's elite. They still oscillate between being a separate ethnicity and the “Romanian ideal”. This has cause a lot of problems, including the Moldovans' incapacity to become leaders in their own country and lead the ethnic minorities.
Anatol Taranu says that, from a historical perspective, Moldova is a young country and the attempts to extend its roots to the medieval principality of Moldavia are ungrounded, because the medieval state formed on the other side of the Prut, while Basarabia and Transnistria were just peripheries. So 24 years aren't enough for Moldovans to become a nation, especially considering the lack of the internal bonds that sustain a nation. The pundit refers to the “cement” of national culture, the only one that can unite and keep together an ethnicity. According to him, when thinking about Moldovan culture, one realizes that it is purely Romanian and doesn't have the value to be considered a national culture in itself.
He is of the opinion that Moldova is at a crossroads in its development and it isn't clear which path it will choose. There is a small chance that a civic Moldovan nation may arise from local ethnic Romanians and the other minorities, but only on the condition that this nation will be based on Romanian culture. Then, we will have two Romanian states: a single ethnic nation on the both banks of the Prut, but two civic nations – Romania and Moldova. If this happens, Moldova will have good prospects. Another path is reuniting with Romania, given that Romania is the historical successor of the medieval Moldovan state. It's not about the disappearance of the Moldovan state, but about advancing to higher historical stage, says the Politicon director.
As regards Moldova's European integration prospects, Taranu thinks that we are certainly closer to this goal, despite all the current problems, than 6 years ago.
Mariana Galben, IPN
