Recognition of Romanian nationality as an instrument for repairing historical-legal injustices

[Analysis by Tudor Cojocariu, of the Romanian Center for European Policies, for Info-Prim Neo] The subject concerning the regaining (or, more correctly, the recognition) of the Romanian nationality by people living on the left side of the Prut is the most debated and disputed within the Romanian-Moldovan relations. The reasons are clear and are related mainly to the fact that almost all the inhabitants of the republic had or will have to deal with the given policy of the Romanian state. Notable progress has been lately made as regards the mechanism for providing Romanian nationality to Romanians who are outside the borders, increasing thus the number of granted nationalities. It is true that the mechanism can be further improved, but things now are better compared with the previous periods. In this connection, the Moldovans’ sensibility to all kinds of rumors about the stopping or slowing down of the process is understood, even if the nationality granting speed is in fact constant. This speed aroused European administrations’ concerns, which were fueled by exaggerations and speculations in the media rather than from the exhaustive and empirical knowledge of the phenomenon. Namely for this reason, the ‘millions of new Romanian citizens’, who thus are European as well, could not migrate and ‘endanger the stability of the EU’, for the simple reason that those millions did not exist. The Moldovans who got Romanian nationality in 2011 totaled about 100,000. The number is higher than in 2009 (21,999) and 2010 (41,800), but the Romanian state’s capacity to process the applications for nationality will stabilize around 100,000 a year. Unfortunately, there is a wrong assumption that the Romanians from the non-EU member states situated around Romania get Romanian nationality en mass. Two elements of this equation are emitted - Romania does not provide nationality en mass and on a non-discriminatory basis. Moreover, it does not grant nationality according to ethnic criteria, as many of those insufficiently informed believe. The correct term is the ‘regaining’ of nationality, which means that the Romanian state returns to a previous situation when the given persons or their ancestors were abusively dispossessed from nationality as a result of the Soviet occupation. Thus, the applicants for nationality must prove that they are the descendents of a Romanian citizen who lived before 1947. This applies to the Russians and other minorities who had the nationality of the Romanian state. Nationality granting is not an automated process. It is based on every application separately. Regretfully, the procedure is difficult and bureaucratic, despite the progress made in 2011. An analysis by the Romanian Center for European Policies that was included in the report “From the reestablishment of the relations to the accumulation of debts” also shows this. The nationality recognition policy as an instrument for repairing the historical injustices is not a Romanian invention, does not run counter to the EU rules and has precedents in other member states. The Center’s comparative analysis incorporated in the study “Banal in the EU – the Romanian nationality regaining policy in comparison with other EU states” shows that Germany for instance granted nationality to the German minorities from Eastern Europe (who never had the nationality of the German state, as for example, the Sash people in Transylvania lived separately from the German nation for centuries) en mass and according to strict ethnic criteria. The UK has special policies for the former vassals of the British Empire, as did France have for its territories situated overseas. Spain has special procedures for those from Latin America or for the successors of the political refugees who fled from the dictatorship of Francisco Franco. Poland has special policies for reintegrating the Polish people who remained in the territories confiscated by the USSR after World War II, while Hungary has a policy similar to Germany’s for the Hungarian minorities living outside the borders. These are acceptable and useful arguments first of all for the Romanian foreign ministry that should use them to calm downthe artificial hysteria maintained by certain speculative sources in the EU. In fact, we can say that this happened because these waves of unfounded criticism disappeared and we hope for good. It is evident that the Romanian state managed to break the impasse in which it was for a short period, while the creation of the National Nationality Authority generated significant improvements in the process of receiving applications as the applicants do not have to go to Bucharest. A number of the previous restrictions were lifted and the relatives of the third degree were allowed to apply for nationality as well. However, the so-called ‘nationality’ mafia flourished and caused significant damage to the image of the Romanian state. Fortunately, an important part of this network - over 40 persons – was recently annihilated by a joint action of the relevant institutions. [Tudor Cojocariu, the Romanian Center for European Policies, for Info-Prim Ne]