Last year, Maria Pilchin published a volume of poetry with a provocative title: “You are the good Russian”. “Some even asked me: Don’t you think you are suggesting that there are also bad, or less good, Russians? After February 24, I don’t think I need to explain this title anymore”, said the author during an IPN debate on Monday.
Invited to discuss about the Russians seeking refuge in Moldova after the Putin regime announced mobilization, the writer said she would have a hard time answering how welcome they would be.
“I personally would find it difficult to give a final verdict as to whether we should let them in or not. Of course, any choice comes with certain risks. I mean, who are they exactly? Because apart from those who are really afraid to die – okay, maybe they voted for Putin in the past, but now they understand they were wrong, because for some this realization may come gradually, and now they no longer identify with this regime… But besides them, agents of influence can also come, and what do we do with them in two or three years? This is a very complicated story and I think that we as a society need to figure out what to do with this situation”, said Maria Pilchin, adding:
“Brussels and Washington indicated that they would welcome such refugees. But I would rather call them fugitives from mobilization, in the sense that I don’t think it’s right to call them refugees. I mean, they are not fleeing because of the war, but because they do not want to participate in this war. Which, don’t get me wrong, is awesome. But what I’m trying to say is that they are now fleeing to Georgia, which is a nation their country attacked (in 2008), and they are fleeing to Kyrgyzstan. They are coming to Moldova as well. Basically, I as a citizen of Moldova, would love to see them learn to tell me «bună ziua» or «mulțumesc» in two weeks (Romanian for «hello» and «thank you»). To say «Moldova» instead of «Maal∙daa∙vee∙ah». To say «Kyrgyzstan» instead of «Kirgizia». People in Kyrgyzstan can get quite angry when they hear «Kirgizia», you know? Because this automatically imposes an imperialistic, Soviet label. The same is true for «Maal∙daaa∙vee∙ah». Will you call my country by its true name, for goodness’ sake? It’s a matter of protocol, even if we are two ordinary people. The Russians must become good and reconsider their attitude, which they often don’t even realize”, said the writer.
ALSO READ
About Moldovan state’s and society’s attitude to persons who flee from mobilization in Russia
At the same time, Maria Pilchin recalled a number of great authors who came from families that once, too, had to flee from Russia: “Nichita Stănescu’s mother, who came from a family of Russian aristocrats, arrived in Ploiești, married a Romanian and gave birth to Nichita Stănescu, without whom modern Romanian poetry wouldn’t be the same. Similarly, without (Vladimir) Nabokov – whose father, by the way, was one of the lawyers who defended the Jews in the Chisinau pogrom –English literature, too, wouldn’t be the same”.
According to Maria Pilchin, the attitude of Moldovans towards the Ukraine war became clear from the very first days, when our country started receiving a massive flow of refugees. “I personally felt very proud for us. I am not talking about the government or some agencies, but the people who volunteered at the border to take those refugees. We have strengthened ourselves as a civil society, which I think is very important, in the sense that we received some kind of vaccine against authoritarianism and other such trends. We may be poor and have a crippled democracy, but Moldova has learned in these years to strengthen itself and have a position”, declared the writer.
She believes that those who support the war are a minority in Moldova. “I have not heard any politician come out on TV and say openly that he supports the war, even though we suspect him to be. It means they understand it’s not comme il faut to support this war. Which is in itself important. Because I’m afraid that, in a different political context in Chisinau, we could have seen some very different statements on television”, concluded Maria Pilchin.
The debate was the 263rd installment of the “Political Culture” Series, run by IPN with the support of the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
