 |
|
| Anatol Țăranu | |
The relations between Romania and the Republic of Moldova are complex and influenced by historical, cultural, political and economic factors. Discussions about union and sovereignty are frequent and have deep roots in the common history of both states. According to opinion polls, in Romania over 70% of the population accepts the union. In the Republic of Moldova between 30 and 40% of the citizens want the union with Romania. The union is talked about in the press, in civil society, on social media and – in an isolated way – in political circles. In Romania, the idea of union is agreed by an overwhelming majority of citizens, while the positioning of different segments of Moldovan society and political life on the union is still very diverse.
Historical context
From a historical and linguistic point of view, Bessarabia is an integral part of the Romanian ethno-cultural space and if the annexation to the empire of the Russian tsars had not occurred in 1812, the Bessarabian space and its population in an organic way would have been followed the paradigm of the constitution and evolution of the national state and of the modern Romanian nation. For the Romanian space eastward the Prut, over which the Russians deliberately extended the name of Bessarabia, a region that today constitutes a part of the Republic of Moldova, the process of natural ethno-national modernization extended after the union with Romania in 1918, which happened after the collapse of the Russian Empire and in the context of the First World War.
But in 1940, the process of affirming the Romanian identity framework was again interrupted when, following the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, Bessarabia was annexed by the Soviet Union, and after World War II it remained part of the USSR as the Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic until the collapse of the Union in 1991. Under the Soviet occupation, the Romanians eastward the Prut were subjected to the process of forced deconstruction of identity by imbedding anti-Romanian Moldovenism. In August 1991, the Republic of Moldova declared its independence from the Soviet Union, but it did not go any further, remaining frozen in the position of a state with rather formally declared sovereignty, with an imperfect territorial integrity and a diffuse national identity.
Union vs. Sovereignty
The majority of the citizens of both states located on the banks of the Prut River speak Romanian and share a common culture. The Union is seen by the majority of Romanians as a restoration of a legal state interrupted by tumultuous historical events. The integration of the Republic of Moldova into Romania, with all the inherent costs, will certainly bring economic, political and security advantages through the immediate accession of the Republic of Moldova to the European Union. Unlike the reunification of Germany, which was done at the preponderant expense of the German citizens, in the case of Romanian reunification, the costs of the process will definitely be assisted by European funds.
Obviously, in the event of reunification, at the initial phase Romania, taking over a bankrupt state from all points of view, such as the Republic of Moldova, will bear costs that will be felt over time, as they are still felt today in the case of Germany. But the most important thing is that by reunifying the two Romanian states, the identity of the Romanian nation, which from a historical perspective is worth more than any financial reasons with the economic pluses or minuses of the moment, will be fully protected. It is equally clear that, regardless of how much the reunification will cost, a viable nation will find enough resources to finance its reunification, as it happened recently in the case of Germany or as it happened in the case of Romania itself after the Union of 1918.
The supporters of the sovereignty of the Republic of Moldova say that the union project cannot be implemented because, a national identity distinct from the Romanian one developed eastward the Prut during the Soviet period. Geopolitical arguments are also invoked, referring to the relationship with Russia, which is categorically opposed to the prospect of unification, openly pleading for the preservation of the so-called sovereignty of the Moldovan state and for the Moldovan identity. The influence of the former colonial metropolis causes and maintains in Moldovan society the identity cleavages between those who support the coming closer to Romania and those who prefer to maintain sovereignty, which in reality fuels dependence on Russia.
Pro-Europeanism and Union
A part of the population and the political class of the Republic of Moldova supports the union with Romania and, implicitly, the European integration as the surest way to achieve this goal. But this part of Moldovan citizens is not represented in government by politicians with an assumed unionist program. The unionists are often considered “naïve”, a kind of “idealists”, even politically “unrealistic”. When they speak – naturally and justifiably – about a national-identity problem, perhaps the last one left unresolved in Eastern Europe, they are opposed to such as concepts “civic nation” or European values, as if the latter were incompatible with the idea of the Union.
In reality, the unionists in the Republic of Moldova have a unique political solution to overcome the great problems related to the chronic underdevelopment characteristic of the Moldovan state, which will surely be solved by the merger with Romania. But for all the other parties considered pro-European and Euro-sovereigntist, which are not necessarily anti-unionist, the idea of the Union is practically absent from their discourse. This absence, combined with the lack of practical achievements for the development of the Republic of Moldova under the current Euro-sovereigntist government, fuels a kind of electoral absenteeism among the citizens with unionist visions and leaves room for the chance of anti-European parties’ political revenge.
Surely, the relatively slow progress of Romanian identity and unionism in Moldovan society is due not only to internal causes. Romania should also adopt a firmer approach to Romanianism in the Republic of Moldova – both the authorities and the political parties. Romania must be permanently present in the Republic of Moldova, to develop and finance significant projects not only economic and social assistance ones, but also national-identity projects. The Moldovan citizens must be sure that the standard of living – theirs and their children’s – will be significantly better in a united Romania than in a precarious state held captive by its own oligarchs and caught in the trap of vicious circles maintained by the imperialist and revanchist Russia.
In conclusion
The Union of Romania and the Republic of Moldova is a complex subject, which requires an open and respectful dialogue between all parties involved. It is essential to respect the sovereignty and will of the citizens of both countries, while analyzing and taking into account the political, economic, social and geopolitical implications of such a step. The time has already come for the subject of the Union to be present in the electoral debates in both of the Romanian states, bringing to the attention of domestic and international factors the desire to restore the national unity of the Romanian people on both banks of the Prut.
The adding of this topic to the electoral debates can mobilize unionist voters and provide a platform for in-depth discussions about alternatives to the Europeanization process of the Republic of Moldova.
IPN publishes in the Op-Ed rubric opinion pieces submitted by authors not affiliated with our editorial board. The opinions expressed in these articles do not necessarily coincide with the opinions of our editorial board.
