CEU eTD Collection

Budapest, Hungary In partial fulfilment ofthe requirements forthedegree ofMaster ofArts Submitted to C C OMMUNIST ONFLICTUAL P OLICIES TOWARD E Department ofNationalism Studies UROPE Supervisor: ConstantinIordachi N Central EuropeanUniversity ATION BUILDING :

Ágnes Kiss A 2007 N By

A NALYSIS OF M OLDOVA P OLICIES IN R

OMANIA P OST ’ S - CEU eTD Collection Chapter 3.Conflicting nationbui Chapter 2.Historicalreferencepointsin Chapter 1.The conceptual framework oftheanalysis Introduction Primary sources Bibliography Conclusions Chapter 6.Political debatesinRomania about Chapter 5.The functioningofthesupportivesystem 37 ...... Chapter 4.The policiestowardMoldova evolutionofRomania’s ...... 65 ...... 3.2. Minorityreactionsto 3.1. Thenationalistmovement inMoldova(1989–1991) 1.4. Thenationbuildingpolicie 1.3. Approachestotheanalysis 1.2. Nationbuildinginpost-Communist Europe 3 1.1. Theconceptof“nationbuilding”...... 6.2. ThemaintopicsoftheParliamentary discussions 6.1. PoliticalforcesandtheMoldova-policy 5.7. Thecitizenshiplaw 5.6. Passportfreebordercrossing 5.5. BenefitsintheRomanianeducationsystem 5.4. Preferentialtreatment in 5.3. Governmental donationsandprojectsfinancedbytheDRRLA 5.2. Fundsandprojects 5.1. Theinterministerial committees andtheinterparliamentary committee 4.2. The“small steps”politicstowardintegration 4.1. TherelationshipbetweenRomania andMoldova(1990–2007) 3.5. Generaltrendsofna 3.4. Promoters ofMoldovannes 3.3. Promoters ofRomaniannes 4.2.2. PromotingtheRomanianpoliticalca 4.2.1. Theinstitutional system ofintegration 6.2.4. ’skin-statepolicies 6.2.3. ThenationpoliciesandtheforeignaffairsofMoldova 6.2.2. TheTransnistrianconflict 6.2.1. Thequestionoftheunion

...... 1 ...... 74 ...... 78 ...... 82 ...... 49 ...... 56 ...... tion-building inMoldova the nationalistdiscourse thedomain ofeconomy lding projectsinMoldova s ofRomania andMoldova of transnationalethnicissues ...... 31 ...... 28 ...... ewe oainadMloa...... 56 ...... between Romanian andMoldova ...... 67 ...... 68 ...... Table ofcontents ...... 70 ...... the relationshipbetween the relationshipwithRepublic ofMoldova ii ...... 65 ......

reer ofpersonalitiesfromMoldova ...... 43 ...... 5 ...... 55 ...... 43 ...... 47 ...... 35 ...... 25 ...... 3 ...... 53 ...... 66 ...... 23 ...... 23 ...... 11 ...... 7 ...... Romania andMoldova ...... 70 ...... 52 ...... 37 ...... 47 ...... 45 ...... 18 .... CEU eTD Collection buildingpoliciespursued. will befollowed, inanattempt toidentify th influencing factors.Basedonth anditsfurtherdevelopments rega policies drawsonthemodelof these policies? this interaction whatother(domestic and exte building policiesofthetwocountriesevolvean to fill some of thisgap byanswering the regarding thedevelopments inRomania’spolicie relationship, theissuehasbeen diminished. as aconsequencealteredduringthelastsevent neighbor ina“special”way.Theconflicting nati to thefactthatinspiteofMoldova’sst building policiesofMoldovaas emerged theexternalnation-buildin between prominence andhavecausedconsiderablestrain Introduction constant counterpointfor theRomanian nati reason forbrieflyanalyzing theMoldovannation building policiesisthatthey servedasa Despite thestrongimpact andtheambi After thecollapse of the nationbuilding projects came emphatically into It has tobehighlighted thattheresearch The conceptual framework foranalyzing is approach,theinternaldeba well, andtheirrelationshipsbe Rogers Brubakeraboutthedyna subject torather limited scholarly research, especially rong opposition Romania never ceasedto treatits on-building policies.Neve following main questions:Howdidthenation e main motives andpoliticalforces behind the 1 g policiesofRomania rnal) factorsinfluencedthedevelopment of d how did they influence each other? Beside d howdidtheyinfluenceeachother? iscenteredonthepolic rding theimpactofexternaland domestic onal policies mutually shaped each otherand een years; nevertheless, the tension did not een years;nevertheless,thetensiondidnot s betweenthestates. A conflictual situation s directedtowardMoldova.Thispapertries guous natureoftheRomanian–Moldovan the development of tes from MoldovaandRomania came more andmore tensedue mic ofdifferenttypes rtheless, theMoldovan ies ofRomania. The and internal nation the nation-building CEU eTD Collection but thosearenotavailabletothepublic. Romania. Ofcourse,itwouldbe comprehensive accessible sourceforreconstructing thecontextofpolicies pursued by României, Partea aII-a parliamentary debatesbetween -policy ofRomaniaarepr submitted to in depth analysis.Thedifferent measures takenintheframework of the well asonsome materializedpolicies.Contrastingly, thepoliciespursuedbyRomania are actors andtheirconflictingperceptions,thein nation buildingprocessispresen the Moldova-policy, andthemain politicalforces committed toit. debates regardingtherelationshipwithMol measures takenbyRomania,whilethesixthchap between thetwostatesandpeople.Thefift bilateral relationsandthepolicieslaunched by Romania forgettingtightertherelationship development ofRomania’s policiestowardMo development oftheRomanian nationbuildingpolicies.The fourthchapterpresentsthe Moldova after1989andtheirdevelo relationships. Thethirdchaptercontainsthedesc some additionalnotesconcerningthehistor review andpresentstheconceptualframework of The paperisstructured intosixchapters.The firstchapter contains theliterature The primary source forthisresearch isrepresentedbytherecordsofRomanian (Official Bulletin ofRomania, Section II). Thisseems tobemost ted onlyinmore generalterms, focusingonthemain political better to use also therecords 1990 and2007publishedinthe esented inadetailedmanner. pment. Thefourth,fifth,andsi dova focusingonthegeneralperceptionsabout 2 ical backgroundof ternal dynamic ofMoldovannationalisms, as h chapterpresentsth ription oftherivalnationbuildingprojectsin theanalysis.Thesecondchapterserveswith ldova focusingonthe ter reveals theinternal Romanian political of theGovernmental debates, the Romanian–Moldovan xth chaptersdealwiththe e functioningofthese al evolutions intheir CEU eTD Collection describe theprocessofnational integrationand defines themain objectivesoftheresearch. section reviewstheliteratureonnation European context. The third presents the lite context ofnationbuildinginanattempttounde the stateanditstrans-borderdimension. The The firstsketches theusage of analysis adoptedintheliteratur phenomena, thecontextofem analysis, thustoprovideexpl adopting differentapproaches. This chapteraimstosketchtheconceptual framework ofthe Furthermore, the newawarenessabout thisissu reality ofnationstates,nation-building,minor aspect ofnationhood/ethnicity also provokedacademic controversiesoverthenorms and state boundariesagaintothefore. Chapter 1.Theconceptualframework oftheanalysis 1 Reinhard Bendix. 1960’s among historyoriented politicalscientis 1.1. Theconceptof“nationbuilding” Boulder, 2000, p. 16. Political Construction Sites. Nation-Building in Russia and the Post-Soviet States Post-Soviet the inRussia and Nation-Building Sites. Construction Political PålKolstø: According toKolstø,thete Following thelogicoftitle thesis The fallofCommunismbroughtthephenomenon 1 Thetheorieslabeledbythisarchitect

anations fortheconceptsused the concept of “nation building” asreferring topractices within e, aswelltheapproachad ergence oftheconflic Besides generatingfiercepolitic rm “nationbuilding”came in second introducesthepos 3 rature review ontranse building policiesofRomania andMoldova, rline itsspecificityasopposedtotheWestern consolidation thatledto theestablishment of ts, suchasKarlDeutsch,CharlesTilly,and ity protection,andotherrelatedconcepts. e gavebirthtomany sc this presentation proceedsin foursections. tual situation,themain approachesfor ural metaphorwereprimarily usedto of ethnic-kinrelatio opted fortheproposedanalysis. fordenominating theanalyzed to usageinthe1950’sand al debates, the transnational al debates,thetransnational t-Communist European thnic issues.Thefinal ientific researches ns cuttingacross . WestviewPress, CEU eTD Collection [pp. 144–146]. latter writing Brubaker offered the concepts of concepts the offered Brubaker latter writing political projectsandcontingentevents”. idioms, cognitive schemas, discursiveframes, organizational routines, institutional forms, analytical stanceoneshouldhandleethnicitya members ofthenationinethnoculturalterms. may alsopurportthepoliciestargetingminority denote policies actingwithin the state,thus targ important aspectconcerningthepos ofcommonethnicityorculture. community (citizenship),oronthebasis definitions tothis ofnation.According dichotom drawn distinctionsisthatbe political frontiersasprimary in occurred withintheborders ofastate. conscious strategiesinitiatedby the modern nationstates.AsKolstøsummarized 5 4 3 2 concept ofnationbuildingmayas beinterpreted point ofviewandcontainssome how thetermnationhasbeendefinedinrelationtostate. Rogers Brubaker: the Nation: Ernest Gellner and the Theory of Nationalism of Theory the and Gellner Ernest Nation: the 3–27. pp. 1999, York, New Oxford, Brubaker cited by Kántor, see below. A. John Hall (ed.): In: Study ofNationalism. in the Misconceptions and Rogers:Myths Brubaker see D. overwiew Anthony Foradetailed Smith: Ibidem. Although, asBrubakerasserted,th At thispoint ithastobe mentioned that Ethnicity Without Groups

tween the politicaland cultural, orbetween civicandethnic defining theboundariesofnation. state leaders,aswellthe embedded normative ambiguitiesaswell, sibility oftheusage . Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2004, pp. 132–146. In this this In pp. 132–146. 2004, Cambridge, Press, University . Harvard 2 state-framed Itmay benoticed that this approach implicitly setthe Myths andMemories of the Nation is distinctionhighlyprob 5 Now,according toKántor,inthisapproach the 4 , Cambridge, 1998, pp. 272–305. 272–305. pp. 1998, , Cambridge, eting thenationaspoli Brubakersuggestedthatwhileadoptingan y, nationsaredefinedonthebasisofpolitical aprocessorpoliticsthatmay invokeoneor theliteratureonnati groups livingoutsideth it,theprocessunderscrutinycontained nd nationas „practical categories, cultural and counter-state unplanned societalchangesthat term “nationbuilding”. Itmay 3 understandings of nationhood and One of the most Oneofthe frequently lematic fromananalytic . Oxford University Press, . OxfordUniversity onalisms is dividedon tical community, butit e bordersdefinedas 4 ithighlightsan The State of CEU eTD Collection Kymlicka’s argument concerningthes feature istheemergence ofthre of thepost-Communistsituati use theconceptsinconformity totheCommission’s usage. “host-state” forhome “diasporapolicy”forkin-statepolicy,etc. state, “nation abroad”, “ethnonational kinabroad”for many terms intheliteraturedenotingthese groups beyonditsborders;and one statebutlivinginanotherstate; introduced thefollowing terms: 2001 theEuropeanCommission forDemo set bydifferentactors. another definitionofthenationdependingonc 8 7 6 nation buildingprocesses.Inth 1.2. Nationbuildinginpost-CommunistEurope of thenation living beyond theborders. This kin-state policy No. 4, Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 2004, 8. p. 2004, Sapporo, University, Hokkaido ResearchNo. Center, Slavic 4, et al.(eds.): 44. 2006, p. Sapporo, University, Hokkaido Center, Research Slavic (eds.): Ibidem. Osamu Ieda: “Post-communist Nation Building and the Status Law Syndrome in Hungary”. In: Kántor Zoltán Kántor Zoltán: “TheConcept of in Central and East European ‘Status Laws’”. In: Osamu Ieda et al. Beyond Sovereignty. From Status Law to Transnational Citizenship Transnational Lawto Status From Beyond Sovereignty. This section aims toanswerthequestion In order to differentiate betweenthe twoas The Hungarian Status Law: Nation Building and/or Minority Protection hastobeintroduced,whichdenotesth 6

home-state e differentandcompetingtypes e followingIwillpresenttwo on. ThefirstisBrubaker’sopi kin-minority ecuritization ofet forthecountryhavingethnickinminority kin-state , fortheminority’s c forpeoplesharingtheethn term wasgradually accepte 5 cracy Through Law (Venice Commission) cracy ThroughLaw(Venice categories: “diaspora”,“nationalminority”, kin-minority; “homeland” forkin-state;or pects ofnationbuildingpolicytheterm ontext, moreexactlytheparticular targets of whatisparticularinpost-Communist e policiesdirectedtowardthemembers hnic relationships. . Slavic Eurasian Studies, No. 9, arguments aboutthepeculiarity ountry ofresidence. of nationalisms. Thesecondis nion thatthedistinguishing . Slavic Eurasian Studies, icity of themajority in 8 d byscholars afterin Nevertheless,Iwill 7 Thereare CEU eTD Collection Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996. 2003, pp. 38–58. 38–58. pp. 2003, the interestininstitutionalizingkin-staterela example thereport provided by theVeniceComm post-Communist countrieswasconceivedasvigorousnationbuilding. through theanalysis ofthenewconstitutions and re emerged thepost-communist after reorganization. argues that the nationalism. states, thehomeland nationalism (inthispa mutually antagonisticnationalis events following theFirstWorld War,because bothledtotheemergence ofthreedistinctand 12 11 10 9 Concerning thenationalizingna I willreturnlaterto theli minorities pursuing their ownnationalism. nationalizing states.Caughtbetwee nationalisms (kin-state nationalism) claim toprotect theinterest of their national kin inthese before itsattainedindependence. Directlychal power topromote thespecific in nation” definedinethnoculturalterms andta Brubaker, Rogers: Rogers: Brubaker, Irina Culic: “State Building and Constitution Writing Constitution and Irina Culic: “StateBuilding Brubaker,pp. 6–7. op.cit., Brubaker,pp. 1–6. op.cit., Although thetriadicnationalin According toBrubaker, therecent reconfigur 9 The“nationalizing”nationalism involvescl locus classicus Nationalism Reframed. Nationhood and the national question in the New inEurope the question national and the Nationhood Reframed. Nationalism

terature handling thedynamics between thesenationalisms. was interwar East Central Europe,and asimilar situation ms: the“nationalizing”nati tionalism newlyformed ofthe terest inorder torectify di n thesemutually antagonistic terplay hasnotbeenconfin 10 tionship isalsowidespreadthroughCentraland 6 in CentralEastern and after Europe In: 1989”. lenging thistypeofna rgets “compensatory” projectsbyusingstate per kin-statenationalis 11 ission orFowler’sanal lated legislations thatthestate building of Manystudiessupportthisargument, and ation ofpolitical spaceissimilar tothe aims made inthename ofthe“core onalism ofnewlyindependent scrimination againstthenation nationalisms arethenational ed onlytoEurope,Brubaker states, Culicdemonstrated tionalism, thehomeland m) and the minoritym) and the 12 ysis pinpointed that Otherstudies,for . REGIO , CEU eTD Collection 2007-05-25. al. (eds.), op. cit, pp. 177–238. cit,pp. al. (eds.), op. 177–238. “Hungarian Status Law” as a New Form of Kin-state Polic Manuscript [forthcoming Oxford University Press, 2007] Press,2007] University Oxford [forthcoming Manuscript their Kin-states by Minorities Bridig Fowler: “FuzziingCitizen overlap. there arenosecurityarra which havehistoricallysubor neighboring kin-state(or of ethnicrelations: minorities are potentially concerned. Kymlicka enumerated thefollowing with neighboringenemies, particularlywhen minorities are commonly perceived asa potentialfifth column whoarelikelytocollaborate integrated in theframework of“normal” democr and kin-statepoliciesareCroatia,Poland,Romania, Slovakia,andUkraine. Eastern Europe. 14 13 live, andthegovernments thatmight claim tore and analyzesdealingwiththeevolutionofna distinguished: security 1.3. Approachestotheanalysisof securitization of of thepost-CommunistCentrala Will Kymlicka: Kymlicka: Will National of Treatement the Preferential of Report Law: Through Democracy for Comission European Due tothefactthat the relationshipbetween Three approaches totheissue ofthetr Supplementing theabovedescribedtheory,Kym Multicutural Odysseys: Navigating the New International Politics of of Diversity Politics the NewInternational Navigating Odysseys: Multicutural 13 ethnic relations. Some examples forstates thatprovi studies andtheories fortheemergence ofethnicviolence, legal studies (CDL-INF, [http://www.venice.co 2001). ngements intheregion. perceived assuch);thesekin-st ship, Nationalizing Political Space:

dinated thenationalgroupswhic nd EastEuropeansituation(ascompared totheWest) is the 14 transnationalethnicissues WhileinWesterncountries the minority issuesbecame 7 tion policies. Of course the neighboriskin- atic politics, inpost-Communist countries the y in Central and Eastern Europe.” In: Kántor Zoltán et irredentist minorities withloyalty toa three factorsexacerba ansborder dimension of present them isoften theethnicgroups,stateinwhichthey ded bothstronginternalnationbuilding licka arguedthatth A Frameworkthe A forInterpreting e.int/docs/2001/CDL(2001)095-e.asp], e.int/docs/2001/CDL(2001)095-e.asp], ates areformer imperial powers h nowform amajority; and , theseapproachesmay ting the securitization state oftheminority conflictual, thelast ethnicitycan be e distinctfeature . Chapter 6. CEU eTD Collection 1999–2000/Winter, pp. 108–138. 108–138. pp. 1999–2000/Winter, Organization In: Eurasia.” Securityin and Policy Foreign Linkages, Ethnic Politics. . Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Lanham/Bo Publishers, Moldova Littlefield and . Rowman (ed.): Kolstø, Pål For a review of theories concerning ethnic violence in Post-Cold War era see Pål Kolstø: “Introduction”. In benefit laws. integration ofthekin-minority ab attention hasbeenpaidrecently totheunilatera the stanceofkin-minorities influencesthe emergence of ethnic violence. decade witnessed theemergence ofavastliteraturesecuritystudies andtheoriesforthe 19 18 17 16 15 argued thatthesethreefieldsareboundtogether nationalism, themost important nationalism of minorities, the“nationalizing” na it embraces alltheformerly mentioned topi and inthisframework bilateral treaties playa veryimportant role. of thekin-statepolicies. selective attention,interpretation In thistriangularinteraction and Current Politics Current and Kiss Ilona and McGovern Catherine (eds.): 255–279. cit, pp. op. Halász Iván: “Models of Kin Minority Protection in Central and Eastern Europe”. In: Osamu Iedaet al. (eds.), Central and EasternEurope Brubaker, op. cit., pp. 1–22, 55–69. 55–69. 1–22, pp. cit., op. Brubaker, Kántor Zoltán et al.(eds.), op. cit. Arie Bloed and Pieter van Dijk (eds.): “Diasporas Aharon: Barth, and Yossi Shain, this review topic on King literature by Seethe an The thirdbody of literature dealswiththe The secondmain bodyofliterature focusesonle , Vol. 57, No. 3, 2003, Summer, pp. 449–479. 449–479. pp. Summer, 3,2003, No. 57, , Vol. 18 National Integration and Violent Conflict in Post-Soviet Societies. The Cases of Estonia and and Estonia The Cases of Societies. Post-Soviet in Conflict Violent and Integration National . Open Society Institute, Constitutional and Legal Policy Institute, 2000. 2000. Institute, Policy Legal and Constitutional Institute, Society . Open . Kluwer Law International, Hague/ London/ Boston, 1999. 1999. Boston, London/ Hague/ International, Law Kluwer . Onebranch of thisliterature focuses on international legal norms,

15 the centralaspectisrecipr Within thisframework considerableattentionisgiventohow analyticalmodel wasdevelopedbyRogersBrubaker,who road throughlaw,forexamplecitizenship laws,statusand/or and representation.Ofte Protection of Minority Rights Through Bilateral Treaties. The Case of New Diasporas in Hungary, Russia and : Legal Regulations Regulations Legal Ukraine: and Russia Hungary, in Diasporas New and International Relations Theory”. Theory”. In: Relations and International d Melvin. Charles King Charles and Melvin. d domestic and foreignaffairsofthekin-state. 8 l actionspromoted bykin-states,targetingthe inasingle,interdependentrelationalnexus. ulder/New York/Oxford, 2002, pp.5 –25. –25. pp.5 2002, York/Oxford, ulder/New tionalism ofthehome states,andthekin-state cs. Concerningtheinteractionamong the evolution of nation-policies. Consequently, gal issues andthein n, theinterpretationof International Security International ocal monitoring, whichinvolves Neil J Melvin.: “Diaspora “Diaspora Neil JMelvin.: 17 However,even more International International stitutional design , Vol. 24.,, Vol. No.3, otherfieldsis 16 19

CEU eTD Collection toward thekin minority. assume thisroleornotalsodependsontheque the statehastoactuallytakeactionalongthese condition shouldbemonitored andtheirinterest the ethnickinas“belonging”to which must befulfilled for astate tobecome akin- may divergefor “its”minority groups livingindifferent countries.Therearethreeconditions will differ from statetostate, moreover thekin- ethnic demography. Themajor consequenceofthis other twofields–areconstr field. contested and it becomes theobjectofrepresen 22 21 20 roles inthecaseofeach kin-state:forexample, attention is giventothe influences of thein stemming from theappearanceof“new ethnic relationshipsinthecaseofHungarians, integrative forces. further. Severalnewfactorshadbeenintroduced analyzing thedevelopment ofnationalisms,me so ofthemdevelopingtheanalyticaltool Europe MichaelMandelbaum (ed.): Brubaker, op. cit., p. 58. Brubaker, op. cit., p. 68. 20 . Council of Foreign Relations Press, New York, 2000. 2000. Press, NewYork, Relations Foreign of . Council

For instance, thevolume editedby Mandelbau Following Brubaker’sconceptualization,se A veryimportant point of this analytical a 21 The New European Diasporas. National Minorities and Conflict in Eastern Eastern Conflict in Minorities and National Diasporas. NewEuropean The ucted throughpoliticalaction,not

thenation;elit diasporas” (kin-minorities) and1999. ternational environment, whichplaysdifferent 9 ,SerbsandAlbaniansintheperiod state policiespromoted bytheverysame state theWest isamodel forHungary,actsasa tational strugglesamong actorsinthegiven lines. However,thedebateaboutwhetherto stions aboutthecontentofpoliciesdirected protectedandpromoted , themost beingtheinternational important pproach isthatkin-st claim isthatassuming e hastoassertthat state: first, political eliteshave todefine veral authorsappliedthemethod in m containstheanalysisoftrans-border predetermined bythefactsof theminority group’s ates –aswellthe bythestate;third, the roleofkin-state 22 Special CEU eTD Collection Melvin, Melvin, UnionFormer Soviet empirical evidenceforsustainingtheargumenta for acountry’sself-image asakin-state.Although thestudy doesnot geographic proximity, andcontemporary economic a previously enumerated factorstheypointedoutthatshared historyinacommon state, ethnics, policies that can considerably worsen interstate relations. Besidesome of the politics (strategic orgeopolitical interests) ra states. interethnic relations withinthehome-state; and 5) theeconomic resourcesavailabletothekin- integration, membership ininternationalorgani minority; 3)theforeign policypriorities andconstr threat tothe positionof politi within thestate, dissensus withinthe political politics withinthekin-state (hindering factors arefor examplepowerful ethnicminorities both the sources andeffectiveness of“diaspor point tocommon patternsandacomm despite thedifferenttypesof politics and international relations of the Sovietsuccessor states.Astheeditorsconcluded, volume explores thepolitical home-state’s policies. deterrent forRussia,actuallyintervenes intheSerbandAlbaniancases, andalsoaffectsthe 25 24 23 out genuinelycausalconnectionswithinthe Melvin and King: “Conclusion: Diasporas, International Relations, and Post-Soviet Eurasia”. In: King and King and In: Eurasia”. Post-Soviet and Relations, International Diasporas, “Conclusion: King: and Melvin King Charles NeilMelvin and (eds.): Mandelbaum:“Introduction”. In: Mandelbaum (ed.), 25 op. cit. op. Similarly, HuberandMickeyarguethatkin- The researchescollectedinthevolume ed , pp. 218–224. 218–224. , pp. . Westview Press, Boulder, 1998. 23

policies pursued,th salience oftrans-borderethnicpopulationsforthedomestic cal actors, etc.); 2) theorganization andresources of the Nations Abroad. Diaspora Politics and International Relations in the in the Relations DiasporaInternational Politics and Abroad. Nations on setofcausalfactors.The triadic “relationalfieldsofnationalisms”. 10 op. cit. op. ther thantheconcernforfateofco- elite, incasethe“diaspora” presents adirect tion, thenoteconcerningactorsinvolved zations, relationswiththehome state);4) a” politics are the foll ited byKingandMelvinattempted tomark ains ofthekin-state(for example European e evidence presented inthis volume does , pp. 8–15. 8–15. , pp. state policyisoften drivenbydomestic nd socialtiesmay also serve asabasis factors that help toexplain contain comprehensive owing: 1)domestic

24 The CEU eTD Collection 1999, pp. 23–28. 23–28. pp. 1999, Europe Eastern Case and Treaties. The of Central Bilateral Moderating its Impact”. In: Bloed, Arie and van Dijk, Pieter (eds.): involves just twostates,becau and theRomaniansnoethnicaffiliationexis the otherpartofMoldovanelitearguesth majority populationfromRomania andMoldov Romanian sustainsthatinethnoculturalterms sideandsomepartoftheMoldovanelite the territories annexedbytheSovietUnionshouldreun formed asingleRomanian nation;and(or relationship werecenteredonthequestionsof most challenginginterstateproblems inpost-communistEurope.Th 1.4. ThenationbuildingpoliciesofRomaniaandMoldova churches, charitable organizati example politicalparties,media outlets,and representatives, otheractorsmight in kin-state policiesis worth 26 several specificities: nationalizing nationalism directed towardMoldova,andtheinternal between theexternalnationbuildingpolicyofRo Konrad Huber and Robert W. Mickey: “Defining the Kin-

The relationshipbetweenRomania andtheRe 1) However, ascompared totherelational nexusdescribedbyBrubaker thiscasepresents Using theterminology introducedintheprev

Instead ofthetriadiccons of thenewlyformed RepublicofMoldova.

ons, orcommercialenterprises. attention. Thestudystresses that se Moldova,theformer provinceof Romania, withthe n-state behaviour as well, for beinvolvedinpropagatingkin-statebehaviouraswell,for truction oftwostatesa ts, thus donotformthesame nation. nation buildingofMoldova 11 consequently) whetherornottheMoldovan at betweenthe“core” national unity:whetherornotthetwopeople different non-governmental a belongtotheRomaniannation,conversely, . Kluwer Law International, Hague/ London/ Boston, London/ Hague/ LawInternational, . Kluwer state. An Analysis ofits mania, thatis,Romania’s kin-statepolicies ite withRomania. Tosketchitsimply,the ious subchapters, the conflictemerged public ofMoldovahasbeenonethe Protection of Minority Rights Through Through Rights Minority of Protection

26 nd aminority group,thiscase in addition togovernment e shifts andturns of this Role and Prescription for for Prescription and Role population of Moldova population ofMoldova , inotherwordsthe entities, such as entities,suchas CEU eTD Collection Russia the Culture and of Politics [http://www.ecmimoldova.org/Gagauzia.115.0.html], 2006 (ed.): Moldova, oneofthem inconf being internal politicallife,caused considerable strain citizenship lawfavoringMoldovancitizenshad to afull-scale armed conflict. emergence oftwosecessionist movements, theet and theGagauzminority livinginMoldova,a King noticed,theunificationi general, severalexamples might beselectivel external statusofRomania andMoldova,on tightening therelations.Asaconsequence,two reunite, andcontrastingly,ifthecorenationis between thetwopeople,stateswere related to defining the relationship withRoma Romanian Theimmediate or Moldovan?” conse charged withdebatesconcerningthequestion“W well, becausesincegainingindependencethe nation” ofastate. external nationbuilding dissolution oftheSovietfederationgained 27 Claus Neukirch: “The Case of the Gagauz Territorial Case Gagauz “The ofthe Claus Neukirch: Minority Governance inEurope Concerning theimpact ofnationalistdisc 2)

At itsturnthenationali policies aredirectedtoward anet . Stanford University, Stanford, 2001. 2001. Stanford, University, . Stanford

27 ssue dominated thenationality . Budapest, 2002. (Series on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues, Issues, Vol. I). Minority and (Serieson Ethnopolitics . Budapest, 2002. Second,theresearchofIordach lict withtheexternalnation zing nationalism ofMoldovashowsspecificitiesas y mentioned. First,as 12 Autonomy in the Republic of Moldova”. ofMoldova”. In: Kinga Gál Republic the in Autonomy identifiedasMoldovanthereisnoneedfor nd among othersservedasamotive forthe status ofasovereign rival nationbuildingproj supposed tobuildspecia -12-16. Charles King: nia: incase thereare ethnickin relations between thetwocountri hnic conflictfrom Transdniestriaescalating a strongdestabilizingeffectonMoldova’s Moldovan internalaffaireswereheavily quences of answering this question were quences ofansweringthisquestionwere the politicalstability hat isthe‘corenation’ ourse andpolicies on the internal and hnic kingroupthatforms the“core discourseoftheRussophones building projectsofRomania. i revealedthattheRomanian The . Romania, authors likeNeukirchand state. Thus,Romania’s of EasternEuropein ects werepresentin l relationsevento es, andalsostirred of Moldova? Itis ofMoldova? CEU eTD Collection 239–269. pp. Comparison between Hungary, Romania, and the Republic of Moldova.” In: Zoltán Kántor et. al. (eds.), op. cit., Moldovanness. rival versions ofthetitulargr between the Romanian andMoldovan rivaldefinitions of national identity. who arguedthatMoldovaexhibitedthecaseof“failed” nationalism, whichstilloscillates acceding Romania. the concerns oftheEuropeanUnion,because 31 30 29 28 contains analyzesofhistorical,linguistic,a link is similarly missing in interaction betweentheRomanian andMoldov culture. However comprehensive this study woul construction ofadistinctMol focuses primarily ontheSovietnationbuildingprojectspropagated Romania’s kin-state policies andthat of theinterstate relations and Moldova’spolicies.Finally,thestudiesaimi state. Lessliteraturedealsexactlywiththedyna Soviet projectof“Moldovanism” andthenatio with theMoldovannationbuildingbeforeand been subjecttoratherlimited scholarlyresearc People of Moldova 2000. Stanford, Donald L. Dyer (ed.): MichaelBruchis: Charles King: A Europe: East-Central toward in and Kin-Minorities Policies “Dual Citizenship Iordachi: Constantin The most prominent monograph about Mol Despite thestrongimpact andtheambiguousna . Columbia University Press, New York, 1996. The Moldovans. Romania, Russia, and the Politics of Culture of the Politics and Russia, Romania, The Moldovans. 31 . Boulder, East European Monographs, 1996. The Republic of . From the Collapse of the Soviet Empire to the Restoration of the 28 Studies in Moldovan. The History, Culture, Language and Contemporary Politics of the of Politics Contemporary and History, Language The Culture, Moldovan. in Studies thewritingsofBruchis

dovan nation,andtheab oup’s identityinMoldova, stressing theartificialnatureof nd culturaldebatesoverth 13 after 1989,stressingtheco nalizing nationalism ofthenewlyindependent h. Moreprevalent arethosestudies thatdeal of themassive influxof newcitizenstothe ng todescribetheinst an nationbuildingpoliciesafter1990.This mics ofthisrelationshipbetweenRomania’s d be,itdedicates just anarrowspace to the dovan nationbuildingwaswrittenbyKing, 30 , orinthevolume editedbyDyer,which ture ofthisrelationship,theissuehas ility ofpoliticalelitestomanipulate have tobementioned aswell. . Hoover Institution Press, . Hoover Institution itutional backgroundof e meanings ofthetwo in Moldova,thusthe ntinuity betweenthe 29 Theanalysis CEU eTD Collection 2001. 2001. and the Dilemmas of the Romanian – background andthefieldsofcooperation. cooperation betweenMoldovaandRomania fr here, whichcontainsachronologicalassessment presented inthethirdsubchapter.Forexam that may be included into the legal andinstitu institutional backgroundforitskin-statepolicy issue oraratherlimited periodoftime. Europe. However,theshortcoming ofthesestudies the agencyofpoliticalel Romanian–Moldovan relations unionist policies to increasing ofthetw centered onthequestionofunification documentation ofthebasicdilemmas ofth 34 33 32 because oftheHungarianStatusLaw). symbolic national membership grantedto citizenship (betweenRomania andMoldovabecau in Romania, HungaryandMoldovaafter1989, perspective, focusingonthere relationship. Iordachi explores theimpact of Romanian citizenship policies inacomparative Basarabia. Dilemele identit Dilemele Basarabia. Cooperation between the Republic of Moldova and Romania]. In: Flavius Solomon and Alexandru Zub (eds.): Constantin Solomon: “Un deceniu de colaborare dintre Republica Moldova Gheorghe Cojocaru: cit. op. Iordachi, Notwithstanding this,there areafew studiesfocusing exactly onthenatureof this The thirdapproachto thistopic appear Colapsul URSS URSS Colapsul ăţ [Basarabia. Dilemmas of Identity]. Funda Identity]. ii [Basarabia. Dilemmas of

ites inbothcountries,andthegeopoliticalcontextEastern hip areexposedasacomplex outco vival ofcontrastingandoverla Romanian Relations]. Omega, Bucure i dilema rela şi dilema divergence on this topic. 32 AnotherstudyisauthoredbyCojocaru,whooffersa 34 e bilateralrelation ţ iilor Româno-Române [The Collapse Româno-Române iilor of the kin-minorities (betweenRomania andHungary ple thestudyofSolomon shouldbementioned 14 om 1990to2000,focusingontheinstitutional tional category inthe literature classification directed towardMoldova.Thesearestudies of interparliamentary o countries,andpresentstheshiftfrom the the resultingdiplomatic tensionsoverdual s in studiesthat dealwithRomania’s se oftheRomanian citizenshiplaw)and is that theyconcentrate eitheron asingle ţ s inthe1989–1992period. ia Academic The changingpatternsofthe pping definitionsofcitizenship ti, 2001. şti, 2001. şi România” [ADecade of me ofthehistoricallegacy, and intergovernmental “A. ă “A. D. Xenopol”,Ia 33 Itis şi, CEU eTD Collection Kisebbség [Romania’s Kin-state Nationalism between 1990–2004: underlying theactualpoliticaldecisionthatgainedlegalforce. to thefactthatbyan These puzzlingissuescouldhavenotbeensolv rights guaranteedtoMoldovanci amounts specificfundsetupforfinancin ofthe were some institutions set up? Why some of th the contentofsupportivepolicies,thereare analyzed Romania’s kin-statenationalism be 35 fields, aswelltheinfluencing dynamic relationbetweenthediffere seems themostproperapproach.Thus,inhandli directed toward Moldova. previous researchaiming to“contextualize” answering thesequestions.Theanalysispropose abrogated until 2003. incoherence duringthestudiedperiodandth among Romania's kin-statepolicies. materialized inawholerange One ofthemost important resultswasthat Kiss Ágnes: “Románia határon túli románságpolitikája az 1990–2004 között hatályos jogszabályok tükrében” tükrében” jogszabályok hatályos között az 1990–2004 románságpolitikája túli határon Kiss“Románia Ágnes: Despite theexistenceofdetailedinform My previousresearchmay beincludedinthisframework aswell,astudyinwhichI For thispurposetheanalytical model set Yet, theliteraturepresentedinthiss [Hungarian Minority], Vol. 10., No. 35–36, 2005/1–2, pp. 298–353. 298–353. pp. 2005/1–2, 35–36, No. 10., Vol. Minority], [Hungarian alyzing legalactswecannotundersta

ofsupportivemeasures, moreover, enjoyedaspecialposition domestic andexternalfactors. tizens areabrogated?–,and Yetthepolicyitselfwaschar nt fieldsof nationalisms,th tween 1990and2004from legalperspective. a 15 the legalbackground oftheRomanian policies many questions thatremain unanswered:Why An Analysis of the legal framework]. In: legal the of Analysis An ubchapter doesnotbringuscloseenoughto em became dissolved outof theblue? Why the g Moldovanprojectsdo thekin-statepolicytowardMoldovahas ed intheframework setbythisresearch,due ation abouttheinstitutionalbackgroundand ng theissueitwillbetakenintoaccount e most important legalnorms have been by Brubakeranditsfurtherdevelopments d forthispaperis nd thereasoningandmotivation the questionscouldcontinue. e debatesoccurredwithinthe acterized byagreatdealof a continuationofmy fluctuate? Whysome fluctuate? Magyar 35

CEU eTD Collection 2007 for the Senate. [www.cdep.ro], 2007-05-30. 2007-05-30. [www.cdep.ro], Senate. the for 2007 sittings joint the ofthe and of Chamber sittings Deputies – 1996 2007 periods: following for the records contains database The aswell. used was of Deputies Chamber of thetwostatesandpolitical mentioned issues,namely thedynamicofre citizens. Of course,the functioning of thissystem isintimately linked tothepreviously the opinionsandattitudesa of thekin-statewillbeexamined too.With this specific legal measures), theinternal political Romanian externalnationbuilding will cover thedebatesoccurred withinthefiel could haveprovokethechangesoccurred inthekin-statepolicies. be directed toidentify the international influences andgeopolitical interests of Romania that Romanian kin-state policies,be the most important influencingfactorinmo in themean time –basedontheinterlinkedrela perceptions andpoliciesisto nation buildingpolicy.Thereasonforofferi the Moldovannationbuildingprojectsandpol 36 Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei, Fordatacollection theprimary sources used Romanian parliamentary debatesfortheperiodbetween1990and 2007,publishedin supportive system, inotherwordsthemeasures To facilitate and curtail the searching for topics related related topics for searching curtailthe Tofacilitateand Given theconstructednatureofthesefields Concerning thedynamic relationofnationalisms A furtheraimofthisanalysisistogive bout theMoldova-policyamong

present thetargetofRomania’ sides thefeedbackscoming from Moldovaaspecialfocuswill

willoftheRomanianofficials. Partea aII-a policy (being thispresent inthe form of declarationsor 16 debates from Romania aboutassuming therole of the Chambers of Deputies and Senate; and 2002 – and 2002 Senate; and ofDeputies Chambers of the (OfficialBulletin ofRomania, SectionII). ng adetailedoverviewabouttheMoldovan lationship betweenthenationbuildingpolicies lding theRomanian policies. Regarding the to Romanian kin-state issues, the online database of the the to ofthe issues, kin-state database Romanian online ds aswell.Thus,besides theoutputs of the dimension of theanalysisitcanberevealed icies, andontheotherhand,Romanian taken infavorofMo tionship ofnationalisms –canbeconsidered deeper insight in ofnationalisms (Br in this research are the records of the therewillbeexamined, ononehand, the Romanian officials. s externalnationbuilding,which ldova ortheMoldovan the functioning of the the functioningof ubaker) theanalysis 36

CEU eTD Collection space restrictionthe analysiswi Moldova thatistherivalinst Romanian OrthodoxChurchhastightrelations continuous contactwith organizations strongly committed to pursuethe ideaof common nationalbelonging arein important roleinpropagatingthekin-stat churches willbeomitted, although asHuberandMickey suggestedtheymight playan the activityofgovernmental distribution duringthestudied dealing withMoldova, thenumber ofspeeches Despite thefactthatitcannotbesustaine debates regardingthisissue,information aboutthefunctioningofsystem, other. and external nationbuildingpolicy:themain po the parliamentaryrecordscontainusefulinfo bilateral relations andRomania’s commitment to Moldova, ratherthemedia declarationsarefa This source is very rarely used in analyzes

Concerning thedelimitation ofthefiledre civil organizationswithsimilar pr itution oftheMoldovanOrthodox period assuresacomprehens ll notincludetheiractivity. actors willbeanalyzed,thus, d thatIhavefoundallparliamentary speeches regarding thekin-statepo 17 litical forcesbehindtheMoldova-policy, vored formonitoring thedevelopments inthe rmation concerningthe“construction”of e policies.Indeedsome Romanian civil with the Bessarabian Orthodox Church from with theBessarabianOrthodoxChurchfrom selected(about600interventions) andthe assuming the roleofthekin-state.However, assuming the search ithastobementioned thatonly ive material for analysis. ofile from Moldova;likewise,the the civil organizations orthe Church. Nevertheless,dueto licies directed toward CEU eTD Collection the pan–Romanian national consciousness: the rebellion against the Ottomans in 1821, tha standardization and and standardization tha in 1821, the Ottomans against the rebellion consciousness: national pan–Romanian the 1994, pp. 33–104; York, Press, New University Columbia History-Writing and Communist Politics and Nationalist Historiography. neighboring ,aunionthat projects thatemerged afterth “”. between the Prutand DniesterRivers, tothe 1812, whenwiththeTreatyofBu the Principality became avassalstate of theOt belonged tothePrincipalityofMoldova, whichemerged inthe14 the PrutRiver tothewest andthe DniesterRive current Moldovanness–Romanianness debates. strong impact ontheconstructionofMoldova people. Furthermore, therewillbedepicted frequently appearinthediscourseaboutrelationshipbetweentwostatesandtheir following presentation serves withcomplementary information tothosereference points that crucial historicaleventshavetobediscusse Moldova after1989,aswellthecompeting nati Moldova Chapter 2.Historical referencepointsin 38 37 zenith underthereignofStefanGreat( the BlackSea from Ottoman expansion.Neve defend theterritoriesborderedbyEastern According to King, the Moldovans had been absent from the following defining moments in the emergence of For the /Bessarabia see: Wim P. van Meurs: The RepublicofMoldovaislocatedbetween In ordertounderstandthecontextof 37 Asaconsequence,theseterritories

e unificationin1859ofthewest charest theSublime Po later tookthename ofRomania. therelationshipbetween Romaniaand Russian Empire whereitwas giventhename of Ş 18 those periodsandnationa rtheless, fromthebeginningof16 tefan celMare,1457–1504)whomanaged to Carpathian Mountains,th d. Insteadofanexhaustiveelaboration,the

r tothe East.IntheMiddle Agesits territory King op. cit.; Dyer (ed.) op. cit. op. cit.; Dyer(ed.) op. King toman Empire andthissituation lasted until on-building projectsw n national identity and serve as a basis for n nationalidentityandserveasabasisfor bilateral relationsbetweenRomania and Romania andUkrainebeingborderedby were leftoutfrom nationbuilding the The Bassarabian Question in Communist in Question Bassarabian The rta cededitseasternhalf, . East European Monographs, Monographs, European . East ern partofMoldovawiththe th 38 centuryandachievedits

e DniesterRiverand l policies that hada ithin Moldova, some ithin Moldova,some the territory th century CEU eTD Collection Summer, 1994, p. 348. 348. p. Summer, 1994, In: Pan-Romanianism”. of the Politics and Identity “Moldovan King: Charles 127–153. Bucuresti, 2007,pp. CurteaVeche, ofMoldova]. Republic the about Studies citizenship. ambiguous new shopopeninghoursweremet withgreathostility. being thelandreform provi and conditions wasattachedtotheproclamation of unification,themost importanttwodemands 40 39 was made”. In: independence from the Porte in 1878. See Charles King: “The Ambivalence of Authenticity, or How the Romanian statein 1859, the Latinization of the and alphabet in the 1850’s and 1860’s, the creation of the unified Germany to andtheSovietUnion.According accompanied byasecretprotocol inwhichthe propitious opportunitywaspr Eastern PartoftheDniesterRiver,andwaited Soviets establishedin1924theMoldovanAu issue betweentheSovietUnionandRomani introduced byBucharest, forexample theLatin politicians wereeffectively Bessarabia remained themost underdevelope Bessarabian expectations lifeinGreaterRoma a unionwiththeKingdom ofRomaniaonthe27 intellectuals sincethebeginning , andundertheinfluenceofpan- 1918 fullindependencewasproclaimed. Having was declaredwhichtobepartoftheenvi Bessarabia].Monica In:Heintz (ed.): Cristina Petrescu: “Construc Petrescu: Cristina op. cit., pp. 66–61. Meur, van After itsincorporation intoRomania theque Yet theintegrationintoRomania wasfarfr After theRussianRevolution, inDecember 1917theMoldavianPeople’s Republic founding of the Romanian dynastic house in 1866 and 1881, and the achievement of ţ ia identit oppressed bythecentralizedadmi Slavic Review Stat slab,cet ovided bytheMolotov–Ribbentro ncial autonomy forBessarabia. of thecentury,Bessarabian National Assembly votedfor ăţii na ţ ionale în Basarabia” [The construction of national identity in in identity national of [The construction înBasarabia” ionale ăţ , Vol. 58, No. 1., Spring, 1999, p.120. p.120. 1999, Spring, 1., No. 58, Vol. , enie incert 19 saged RussianFederation,andtheninFebruary a. Followingabreakdown innegotiations,the the appendixofpact,Bessarabiabelonged thatwasspreadby d regionofRomania andtheBessarabian to annexitthe“occupied territories”. The tonomous SovietSocialistRepubliconthe script, theGregorian ca spheres ofinfluenceweredividedbetween nia turnedtobeagreatdisappointment. th om beingunproblematic. Contrarilytothe ofMarch1918.However,alonglist ă stion ofBessarabiaremained acontested to choosebetweentheBolsheviksand . Studii despre Republica Moldova 40

39 nistrative system. Thereforms

Slavic Review p Pactin1939thatwas lendar, andeventhe , Vol. 53,No., 2., [Week State,

CEU eTD Collection Vol. 58, No. 1., Spring, 1999, pp. 117–142. pp. 117–142. 1999, 1.,Spring, No. 58, Vol. territories in ordertoprevent irredentist claims. Romanian one.Thepurposeofthesepolicieswa and whatis evenmore important, this distin the tsaristandSovietnationalpol searched intheperiodof tsarist andSovietru that themain shapingfactors intheconstruction last 200yearsincorporatedintheRussianEmpi incorporated intotheUkrainianUnion (northern andsouthernparts,aswelltheeasternpartsofAutonomousRepublic)were former Autonomous Republicandthecentralpor decided thatthenewMoldavianUnionRepublicshouldcompriseonlywesternhalfof treaty (Paris,1947)sealedits June 1940forcefullyannexedBessarabiaandfina to theSovietsphereofinfluence.Withoutf 42 41 “imperialist”, etc.);2)thefriendshi enemies, inthiscasetheMoldovansfrom the brother” conception(theSovietUnionresc was thebetter option as compared toOttoman rule) thatwaslater changed to the“elder to the Bessarabian issue: 1)“the lesser evil fo that except for barely 30 yearsinthe first half of the20 See King: “The Ambivalence of Authenticity, or How the Moldovan Language was made”. In: cit., op. Meurs, van pp. 79–84. The most salientinformation from thisshor According tovanMeurs,theSovietnational

sovereignty inBessarabia.Alr icies weretargetedtoconstruc Republic. Thisstatusquolasteduntil1991. ear ofGerman interferen rmula” (theincorporation 20 ued theweakerandyoungersiblingfrom its le. Asdifferentauthor “fascist”, “bourgeoisnati “fascist”, 42 guished identitywas constructed against the p ofpeoples(theMoldovanpeoplehadbeen re andtheSoviet Union.Itbecomes obvious

of theMoldovannational tion ofBessarabia.The lly thearmistice aswellthefinalpeace t presentationofthehi policies propagatedfourmyths inrelation s toassuretheloyaltyofannexed th century,theMoldovanslivedin eady in1940theSovietSupreme t adistinctMoldovanidentity, s exhaustivelydescribed, ce theSovietUnionin onalist”, “co in theRussianEmpire remaining territories story ofMoldovais identity have tobe Slavic Review 41

lonialist”, , CEU eTD Collection Moldovan Scientific Committee(1926), andlater theMoldovan AcademyofSciences(1961). among thingswiththedevelopingof other words andreplacedwith“Moldovan”neologisms. the languagemany Slavicworldswereintroduced,thelanguage wascleansedfrom Romanian even some Moldovan–Romanian differences, many linguisticstud was introduced,astheoutwardsymbolofadi level. particular myth varied dependingonamultitude rule, and4)theMoldaviannationlanguage. striving forunificationwiththeRu 46 45 44 43 period. than theactivityinMoldovanAutonomous Soviet re incorporation intothe SovietUniontheeffo principles aboutadistinctMol 1980’s. Theexplanation, accordingtoKing,liesin Moldovan nationremained aviableproposition. of aseparateMoldovanlanguagecouldbe criteria asfundamental fordefiningthenationa claiming theexistenceof aseparate King, op. cit., p. 140–142. cit., 140–142. op. p. King, cit., op. pp. 123–134. King, van Meurs, op. cit., p. 196. vanMeurs, cit., op. pp. 149, 194–196, 199, 229. 44 46 However,eachofthem contributed to From thesemythsthefarmost important fr The interpretation of these myths wasnotfixed, rather the actual interpretation of a In spiteoftheseeffortsarevivalpro-Romanian movements appearedinthelate Bythe1980’stherewaslittletosepara

dovan languageandnation,aswell ies (aboutgrammar,phonetics, dictionaries appeared.To empha ssian people forages);3) theestablishment Soviet ofthe , because they had regarded linguistic Moldovan language,becausetheyhadregardedlinguistic the Moldovanlanguageandgrammar,like 21 defining adistinctMoldovanidentity. fferent language.Furthermore,tounderlinethe rts topropagatetheseideas weremuch weaker maintained, theideaofanon-Romanian, l identity.Consequently,aslongthenotion 43 45

Tothisend,firstofall,theCyrillicscript of actors on thepolitical and historical Severalinstitutionsweresetup,charged te Moldovanfrom Romanian exceptthe om theSovietnationpolicyviewpointis theartificialnature ofthepropagated Socialist Repub etc.)werepropagatedand size thedistinctivenessof inthefactthatafter lic inthe1924–1940 CEU eTD Collection unfair eventinhistoryisrepresen “natural borders” (grani united. Their aim isto reconstitute Greater Ro Romania” returnedtothe“Mother-country”,or Unification from 1918bearsspec emphasize differenthistoricaleventsand live indifferentstates,advocated Romanian and Moldovanaretwodistinctpeople in differentstates,anapproachadoptedbythe the Prutriverinearly1990’s;2)twopeoplebelongtoth reunite, apointofviewthatwaspropagatedby the nextChapter1.):1)twopeoplearesim people, after1989threestandpointscan counter-pointing theRomaniannes discourse. Cyrillic script.Nevertheless, “crummy (Moldova dodolea Moldova” Romania andMoldovaseveraltimes indeedappear bizarre of RomaniaandUkraine.However overtones oftheCommunistera,itmay carrymessages ofterrito Principality ofMoldovafrom the15 of anindependentstateinthe1917declaratio period, or contrastingly, stresses thebadexperiences ofthose times, and findsthelegitimacy Corresponding totheirapproachesthetwora Concerning therelationshipbetweenRomania andMoldovabetweenthetwo The thirdgroupthatechoesth ţ ele fire thepropagatorsofMol ş ti) oftheRomanian people.In bytheadeptsofMoldovannes. ted bytheMolotov–RibbentropPact. ific relevance,whenBessarabi th century. While thissecondoptionisfreefrom nostalgic ţă bedistinguished(theseare e oldSovietprinciplesobvi ), thelatesteventbegi 22 experiences. ForthefirstgroupGreat ilar, belongtotheRomanian nationandshould it wouldsound,duringthedebatesbetween n ofindependenceorintheexistence radical pro-Romanian forcesonbothsidesof majority of pro-Romanian forces;and3)the mania, whichisconsidered to represent the , theyspeakdifferent “the brothersfrom th ed thisvisionof“ dical groups(thefirstandthethird) dovannes survivedtooandkeep e Romanian nationbutshouldlive n in2007(seeChapter4.). this trainofthoughtthemost rial claims onthedetriment a, the“dolefuldaughterof presented inmore detailin ously skipstheinterwar languages andhaveto Ş e twosidesofPrut” tefan’s Moldova”or CEU eTD Collection Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1993, pp. 127–160. 1993, pp. 127–160. Stanford, Press, University Stanford movement, many otherlocalorgani was theorganizationofMo oriented intelligentsia, the Chapter 3.ConflictingnationbuildingprojectsinMoldova 47 the Moldovan Popular Front states. changes thatledtothebreakdownofCo movements emerged intherepublicsof 3.1. ThenationalistmovementinMoldova(1989–1991) summary ofthegeneraltrends. and thepoliciespursued from theiremergence up information about themain political partiesrepr development ofthepro-Romanian andpro- presenting separately the minority reactions 1989 and1991,theyearofgainingindependence.Thisisfollowedbythreesubchapters contains thepresentationofnationalist building policies. Thechapter isconstituted by five subchaptersfrom wichthefirst one Moldova sincethelate1980aiming toidentify th The Revenge of the Past. Nationalism, Revolution and the Collapse of the Soviet Union. Union. the Soviet of Collapse Ronald the and Revolution Grigor Nationalism, the Suny: Past. of Revenge The Moldavian DemocraticMovementinSupportof Perestrojka 47 In thelate1980's –theheydayofglas This chapterpresentsthedevelopment rivalnationbuildingprojectsfrom ofthe Amovement came intobeinginthesp . Thisumbrella organization embraced differentoppositionforces, as Alexe MateeviciLiteraryandMusicalClub

ldovan intellectualsrepres zations andinterestgroups,aswelltheorganizations of movement andpoliciesfromMoldovabetween 23 to theemerging nationalist discourse, andthe Soviet Union accompanied bymajor political esenting therivalideas,their politicalsuccess, Moldovan forces.Thesubchapterscontain mmunist empireandtheformation ofnew nost andperestroika–,many nationalist to recent years. Thechapterisclosedbya ring of1989inMold e generaltrendsintheMoldovannation enting theMoldovannational (1989)createdbythereform- (1987–1988) which ova too,calledthe CEU eTD Collection Slavic Review April reform communistMirceaSnegurwas Supreme Soviet inMarch1990producedaspect moderates withintheCommunistParty.Asa mass thattheDemocratic support Movement lacked,inreturn,thisofferedabridgetothe mutually complemented andreinforcedeachother: the nationalistmovement providedthe Popular Front. pointing towardtheunionwithRomania atleas changed fromRussian“Moldavia”toRoma similar tothatofRomania’swasadopted newflagresemblinglanguage (August1989).Soon,a theRomanian anthem andanew pressure the was reintroduced and soviet-style Russificationpolicyandwerepe different nationalities,especiallyGagauz 52 51 50 49 48 fever provedtobeanimpediment inkeepingth response totheSovietnationalpolicies– political, andsocio-economic demands. Among thes and legalconsequences” of theclausesdeclarationindepende of August1991theMoldovanParliament declared Review of Ethnopolitics Review of Cited by Andrei Panici. Andrei van Meurs, op. cit, pp. 96–97. In: Pan-Romanianism”. of the Politics and Identity “Moldovan King: Charles King. Charles by Remarked van Meurs, op. cit, pp. 95–96. cit., p. op. 2. Neukirch, 94–96; cit,pp. op. Meurs, van The twobasicorganizations,theDemocr Having served asanimportant mobilizati The politicalprogram ofthePopularFront , Vol. 53, No. 2., Summer, 1994, p. 349. 349. 1994, p. 2.,Summer, No. 53, , Vol. 52

. Vol. 2, Nr. 2, January 2003, p. 39. 39. p. 2003, January 2, Nr. 2, Vol. .

of theMolotov-RibbentropPact,clau Panici: “Romanian Nationalism in the Republic ofMoldova.” Nationalism Republic In: the “Romanian in Panici:

50 wasrelatedtolanguageissues. and Ukrainianwhohadalsosufferedunderthe nian “Moldova”(May1990).Finally,onthe27 (April 1990),andthename ofthecountrywas rceived aspotentialal elected Chairman oftheSupreme Soviet. 24 nce called for the„liquidation of the political consequence, theelectionforMoldavian t bearing in mind theideas propagated bythe e unityofMoldova’svariousinterestgroups. acular victoryofthePopularFront,andin thefullindependenceofRepublic.One on resourceforashorttime, thecultural atic Movement andtheMateeviciClub e theprimarily national claim –asaclear encompassed all ofth Moldovan wasmade theonlyofficial se that might be interpreted as lies by theMoldovans. 51 e currentnational, Dueto the public The Global 49

48

th

CEU eTD Collection [http://www.ecmimoldova.org/Gagauzia.115 (ed.): Romanian forcesintheMol continued bytwoothersections,thefirstcont subsection tothedescriptionofminority reacti theoretical modelsetupbyBrubaker.Becauseoftheirimportant role,Idedicatethefollowing the nationbuildingpoliciesfrom Moldova.Actu directly inthecontentions of identity,theirm Romania. Moldovannes debatecame totheforefrontcloselyconnectedissueofunificationwith were centered onthequestion oftheidentity case theconflicts wereframed inaninterethnic fault linesappearedamong theMoldovan/Romanian different nationalminority gr andtransparency,theleadersrepresenting more generaldemands fordemocratization Already bymid-1989, whenthena 53 Romania stirredfearseven further. perceived by the minorities as threatening th other, much smaller minority groups. Thedevelopments ofMoldova’spoliticallifewere Russian (13%)people,aswell population of 4.2million, theremainder beingc 3.2. Minorityreactionstothenationalist discourse Claus Neukirch: “The Case of the Gagauz Territorial Case Gagauz “The ofthe Claus Neukirch: Minority Governance inEurope Accordingtothe1989censusMol Although theleadersrepresentingnati

dovan politicallife,whilethe

oups from Moldovadefectedfr . Budapest, 2002, Series on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues, I. MinorityIssues, Vol. and Ethnopolitics . Budapest, Serieson 2002, astinyproportionsofGaga 53 tionalistic agendaclearlyga Thegravestdiscontent arose becauseof languageissues. .0.html], 2006-1 25 Autonomy in the Republic ofMoldova.” Republic In: Kinga Gál the in Autonomy ovements influencedtheevolutionof definitely aining thepresentationof eir position,andthedemandsforunionwith of thetitularnation,thus theRomaniannes– discourse, inthislattercase thecontroversies onstituted mostly by Ukrainian (13.8%) and ally, thisdynamic canbederivedfrom the ons tothenationalistdi 2-16, pp.2–3. onal minority groupsdidnottakepart political eliteaswell.While inthefirst dovans made up64.5%ofthetotal second thepro-Moldovanforces. uzi (3.5%),Bulgarian(2%)and om themovement. Moreover, ined theupperhandagainst theevolutionofpro- scourse. This willbe CEU eTD Collection democracy.md/en/electionresults/1994parliamentary/], 2007-05-21. 2006-12-18. [http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/chronology.asp?groupId=35902], 120–129. pp. 2000, considerable force inthe Parliament. electoral block withtheSocialist PartyofMoldovawithsimila ideological reasons,namelya stressed thatbesidetheethnicovertonesofth andthesecessionist movements oftheGagauzi, Russophonesfrom Ithastobe . minorities wereconstituted,but tworadical independence. adoption ofthenationalsymbols resembling 57 56 55 54 main proponentofMoldovanism intheearly1990’s. Furthermore, theorganizationwa the relations betweenRomania andMoldova as differentRussophileinterestgroups.At representstheRussian constituted in1992,which marginalization anddiscrimination. communicate inthenewstatelanguage, thisa could speakRussiantosome extent,but compulsory languagetestswereforeseen w position requiringcommunication withcitizens mission in the Republic of Moldova, 1993-1997.] Polirom, Ia Marian Enache and Dorin Cimpoe Association forParticipatory Democracy “ADEPT”: atRisk: Minorities Charles King: One ofthemostpowerfulminority organizatio The As aresponsetotheMoldovanlegislationdi Moldovan LanguageLaw The Moldovans. Romania, Russia and the Politics of Culture the Politicsof Russia and Romania, The Moldovans. 55 Chronology for in Moldova.

strong pro-Communist şu: Misiune diplomatic s theundeclaredallyofDe 56 54 passedinAugust1989stip Thisformation categoricallyopposestogettingtighter Thesituationgotevenmore tensionedafterthe the 1994electionsor 26 1994 Parliamentary Elections ithin fiveyears.AstheMoldovanpopulation onlyafractionofnon-Moldovanscould ffected mostly Russian-speakers, whofeared reactions could bewitnessedaswell:the must speakbothMoldovanandRussian e conflictsanimportant roleisplayedby ă those ofRomania and militates forintegration withRussiainstead. s andUkrainiansfrom thecountry,aswell în Republica Moldova, 1993-1997. [Diplomatic [Diplomatic 1993-1997. Moldova, Republica în i, 2000, p. 262. 262. p. şi, 2000, 57 attitude opposingtheregime change. fferent politicalpartiesrepresentingthe ns isthe"Unitate-Edinstvo"Movement r electoral profileandbecame a . Stanford University, Stanford, Stanford, University, Stanford . mocratic AgrarianParty, the ulated that everyone in a ulated thateveryoneina . [http://www.parties.e- ganization formed an the declarationof CEU eTD Collection internally displaced persons and refugees who fled to Uk 2006-12-18. [http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/chronology.asp?groupId=35902], minority did notescalatetoafully-fledgedmilitary confrontation. Orthodox Turkpeoplelivinginth self-determination, theircasesarehighlydiffe declarations werenotmet recognizedbyMoldovaortheSovi of them was later, inSeptember 1990,the Soviet SocialistRepublic Autonomous SovietSocialistRepublic 62 61 60 59 58 case ofachangethestatus Article 1(4) from the competencies. Asaclearresponsetothefear Gagauz Yerigainedthestatusofanautonom reintegrated intoMoldova, whileTransdniestr December 1991–June1992, Transdniestria became thesiteofaviolent alth position intheSovietindustrialpoliciesit absolute majority (53.8%)constitutedbyRussian Conversely, Transdniestriahasinhabitants next day the 14th Army ofRussia intervened alongside Transdniestrian troops. See: King, op. cit., pp. 189–196. assault on Transdniestrian forces in Bender on the 19 Fight between Moldovan and Transdniestrian forces left over 1.000 dead or wounded and produced 130.000 cit., op. pp. 185–186. King, Neukirch, op. cit., p. 4. atRisk: Minorities Neukirch, op. cit., p. 3. Apart from thefactthatbothgroupsclaimed independence basedontheprincipleof Yet, themost important differenceisthat The secessionistmovements mu emerged Chronology for Slavs in Moldova. Law ontheSpecialJuridi asasovereignrepublic by thesecessionistparties.

of theRepublicMoldovaasanindependentstate, thepeople Dniestrian SocialistSovietRepublicwas declared too. Neither 62 theconflict erupted inthe e SouthernpartofMoldova, wasproclaimed, st whose is oneoftherichestregionsinMoldova. th of June 1992 resulted in the bloodiest reprisal, then on the on then reprisal, the in bloodiest resulted 1992 June of 27 belonging todifferent ia didnot.Aftersevera raine, Russia, andthe rest ous territorialunitbest s oftheperspective ough shortlivedwarthatlastedinthe period at the end of 1994 the Gagauz region became at theendof1994Gagauzregionbecame rent. TheGagauzareasmall ofChristian- cal StatusofGagauzia ch earlier.InNovember 1989,the s andUkrainians,duetotheprivileged within the SovietUnion. et Unionbuttheiror 59

region inhabitedbytheGagauz inanextremely poorregion. atus changedlaterto of Moldova. l yearsofnegotiations ethnic groupsbutan unionwithRomania, owed withlarge-scale enunciatesthat“[i]n ders toretractthe 58 Severalmonths The Moldovan 61 Gagauz Gagauz Gagauz While 60

CEU eTD Collection Summer, 1994, p. 351. 351. p. Summer, 1994, Steven D.Roper: “Territorial stria.pdf], 2006-12-21. 2006-12-21. stria.pdf], [http://www.crisisgroup favor of“Bessarabia”. the existence ofaseparatestate,theFrontev objective isthereintegration inthe Unitary Romani Democratic PopularFrontmaintains itsstatus political partyandincludedinitsstatutean the “freechoiceofpeople”.In1992,Front political fact thatMoldova waspart of Romania betweenthe twoWorld Warsastheresultof spoken bythem isactuallyRomanian. Anotherargument ofhighaccount wasthehistorical- people, arguingthatthemajor with Romania. Theclaims werebasedonthelin 3.3. PromotersofRomaniannes turned tobeahardliner negotiations failed in the case of Transnistria, whichsince then functions asa of Gagauziashallhavetherigh 65 64 63 finally inApril1993the Several members andparliamentary deputiesde split, onthe otherhandthepopularsupportofth one hand,asaconsequenceoftheobstinateattach Group: Charles King: “Moldovan Identity and the Politics of Pan-Romanianism.” In: In: thePan-Romanianism.” of Politics and Identity King: “Moldovan Charles Fora detailed account about endeavors forsettlement of Fora detailed accounts about thesettlementof the Ga Since 1990some factionsofthe The radicalizationofthePopularFront (CDPF) Moldova. RegionalTensions OverTransnistria

.org/library/documents/europe/moldova/157_mo 65 communists andMoscow-backedRussiannationalistentity. Autonomy Gagauzia.” in In: Congress ofIn

ity fromMoldovashouldbecalledRomanians andthelanguage t ofexternalself-determination.” Moldovan PopularFront telligentsia . Europe Report No. 157, Chi 157, No. Report . Europe 28 en rejectedthe name “RepublicofMoldova”in gauz conflict see:Neukirch op.cit.;JeffChinnand as anational,unionistmovement, whosemajor overt commitment tounion:“TheChristian transformed itselffrom amass movement toa guistic andethnicaffili Nationalities Papers Nationalities the Transnistrian conflicts ment tothepro-unific fected toothernewl e Front’sprogram considerably decreased. an State.”Inordernot ledtoitspolitical seceded fromtheCDPF,agroup ldova_regional_tensions_over_transdnie , Vol. 26, No. 1, 1998, p. 95–100. 95–100. p. 1998, 1, No. 26, , Vol. explicitlycalledforunion Slavic Review şin ee: InternationalCrisis ation between thetwo y formed parties and and parties y formed ation agendatheparty 63 ău/ Brussels, 2004 marginalization. On Contrastingly,all to addlegitimacy to , Vol. 53,No.2.,, de facto 64

state. It CEU eTD Collection pp. 40, 46. democracy.md/en/electionresults/1994parliamentary/], 2007-05-21. Organization. Youth Democratic Christian the Moldova and Combatants of Voluntary the of Council the Front, independence, while18%suggestedadhere public opinionpollfromearly1993indicated when thenewGovernmentstar when MoldovajoiningtheComm Assembly, onlyafewhundredsuppo Popular Front wasabletoattracthundreds of CDPF, duetothefactthatmostly respec ratherthanimme Romania” Romania, its statutesmention only“gradua representing the less radical face of unionism. While stillcommitted to closerelations with 71 70 69 68 67 66 Romania. Accordingtoa1992survey,only19, declaration ofindependencethatthepopulatio of unification the PopularChristianDemocraticFront disgracefully failed, whilethe parties committed toindependence succeeded. The with the1994parliame for details). Mircea Druc and LeonidaLariIorga. Bothmade political carrier inRomania. (seeChapter4. furthermore, some moved ofthem toRomania, William Crowter: “Nationalism and Political Transfor Political “Nationalism Crowter: and William Association for Participatory Democracy “ADEPT”: Fr Democratic Christian Popular the of Alliance The Charles King, op. cit., p. 351. Ibidem. cit. op. 351–352. King, The popularsupportoftheunificationvani However, inwhatitconcernspopulars 69 , gotonly7.5percentofth ntary electionswhenallpartie diate politicalunion.

ted itsanti-. onwealth ofIndependentStateswasdiscussedorin1995 rters turnedoutforsimilar ra , whichwasanelectoral e totalvotesandjust9 ted former leaderssubs 1994ParliamentaryElections. [http://www.parties.e- ont was composed by the Christian Christian Democratic bythe Popular ont was composed 29 mation in Moldova.” In: Donald L. Dyer cit. Donald (ed.), op. In: inMoldova.” mation nce totheCommonwea thousandsofcitizenstotheGrandNational forexample the president oftheorganization 7% oftheMoldovanssupportedidea. l economic andspiritua n ofMoldovadidn’tfavorunificationwith upport, it became obvious soonafterthe upport, itbecame obvious 66 that 67%ofthetotalpopulationfavored Thissplitrepresented agreat loss for the shed spectacularly.While in1989the s advocating union with Romania s advocatingunionwithRomania seats intheParliament. 68 coalition upholdingtheidea llies inthesummer of1993 Thebiggestdefeatarrived cribed totheCongress, lth ofIndependent l integrationwith Alliance of 70

71 A , 67

CEU eTD Collection (ed.), op. cit., op. p. 70. (ed.), th for discourse political “nationalist” of kind [What University Press, New York, 1996, pp. 94–95. 94–95. pp. 1996, York, New Press, University Moldova. From the Collapse of the Soviet Empire to the Restoration of the Russian Empire Bruchis: reliable. See Michael arenot data the provided and suspect Poporul) was scientifically Moldova. electorate alsoincluded onitsagendatheprot course, allofthesehaving focused onpoliticsofanti-Russification,thepr 90% ofparticipantsoptingforit. 1994 parliamentary elections,seemed toyield referred toasthereferendum abouttheissueof States. 79 78 77 76 75 74 73 72 was knownforhisnotoriousanti-Romanian feelings. Front evennegotiated its votesforthereelection of ,theStatePresident that Sciences, theWriter’s UnionandtheHistoria Bloc „MoldovaDemocrat that acceptedtheideaof ethnicaffiliationwithRomanians (forexample in2005theElectoral Moldova beinglinkedwiththelatter“inspec have goodneighborlyrelationshipswith[…]tw pro-unionist appeals.The1999partyprogram onl community and[...]linguistic, ethnic andculturalidentity”. Ibidem. Zgureanu-Guraga Enache and Cimpoe C CDPP: Program (1999). [http://www.parties.e-democracy.md/en/parties/ppcd/program/], 2007-05-20. cit., 357. op. p. King, According to Michael Bruchis andCharles King, this van Meurs, op. cit., p. 101. ăt ălina Zgureanu-Guraga Facing thissituationthePopul 72 Likewise,agovernment sponsored“sociologicalsurvey” 77 Itspartnersinfighting ţă , op. cit., pp.71–72. , op. u, op. cit., p. 265. cit., 265. p. op. şu, ţă : “Ce fel de discurs politic „na politic : “Cefelde discurs ă ”) 78 the adjective “Romanian”,

andsome importantcultural institutions, liketheAcademy of 74 the promoters ofextreme werethe parties ar Frontchangeditsrhetor e Republic of Moldova (1991-2005)?] In: Monica Monica Heintz In: (1991-2005)?] of Moldova e Republic 30 survey called“Counseling with thepeople”(La Sfat cu n’s Union.Surprisingly, ection of theinterests o adjacent countries”,UkraineandRomania, unification–carriedou a clearpro-independenceresult,withabout otection oflanguagecultureandhistory, ial relationsdetermin ţ y mentioned that“aparticularimportance ionalist” pentru Republica Moldova (1991-2005)?” 79 76 butinanattempt tobroadenits 75 Insteadoftheunion,Party ic andgradua 73 –whichisfrequently in2005thePopular of thepeasantsfrom ed bythehistorical t oneweekafterthe . Columbia The Republic of lly abandoned CEU eTD Collection pan-Romanianism asabetray become neither “aprovincenoragubernijaof Romanians, theyspeakadiffere – faithfultotheSoviettheoriesthatth 1991 mostly bymembers oftheformer agrarian 3.4. PromotersofMoldovannes 82 81 80 points underlinedbySnegurinthefightfo serves asthedecisivelegiti contains referencestothefollowing“histori Moldovanist forces. who sincehiselectionhadbeencarefultodistancehimself from boththeradicalunionistand centerpiece. Themost attentionwasreceived byth February) fundedbytheGovernment, ensuredthat event ofthe1994campaign, thecongress“Our issue andfocustheattentionofelectorat Romania. The most drasticdefender wasthe among thegroupssupportingindependenceandopposingideaof “viability ofthemanytradition[Moldovan] statehood”. centuries’ “nuances” thatdifferentiate them andconfers have commonRoman rootsandthelanguagespokenbythem isthesame, thereare however, “OurHome” speeach byMirceaSneg cit., 354. op. p. King, CharlesKing,cit., pp.352,354. op. This midway-handling isclearly reflected in In spiteofthefactthatseveralelectoral As aresult of the Front’smilitancy acorr 81 mizing factorforMoldova’sinde al againsttheMoldovans.

nt language,andrepeatedlystre ur published inEnache and Cimpoe r independenceareMoldovaunderStephenthe cal truths”:theMoldova Democratic Agrarian Party 31 e Moldovansareadist e toeconomic problems, theseminal political anothercountry”.Moreover,theydenounced nomenclature. Themost radicalsemphasized Home –theRepublicofMoldova”(the5 alliances attempted toplaydowntheidentity esponding radicalization could bewitnessed them their“originality”; furthermore,the e address of StatePresident MirceaSnegur, thenational identity wouldremain inthe his speechentitled“OurHome”, which 80 pendence. Thehistoricalpeak- u, op. cit., pp. 304–311. cit., op. 304–311. şu, pp. ssed thatMoldovashouldnot n andRomanian people 82 inct peoplefrom the Thislatter argument formed inNovember unificationwith th of CEU eTD Collection RepublicMoldova. of the CDPF. independence andpro-MoldovanAgrarianDemocra 1996 presidential electionsbeingwonbyPetru Lu [ integrity. himself andtheGovernment as the descendentsofourancestors.” asanaffluentland,it her countryiswantedasaterritory, does notwantanymore tobeaswapnorsomebody’s victim.Shedoesnotwanttohearhow “blood-brothers beyondthePrut forget tomention thiskindof Great, thedeclarationsof 88 87 86 85 84 83 separatist minorities, Moldovan statewas,ononehandtoalleviatethe authors, theaim anindigenous ofembracing himself clearlyexhibitedinhi Bloc (thecoremember beingthe the AllianceofPopularChristianDemocra Russophile SocialistPartyand"Unitate-Edinstvo" votes meaning 56seats,absolutemajority intheParliament. Itwasfollowedbythe http://www.parties.e-democracy.md/en/electionresults/1994parliamentary/ cit., 356. op. p. King, SeeEnache and Cimpoe the 1994. with separatists in Gagauzi negotiations status of Seethe cit., 355. op. p. King, Translated byKissÁgnes. Association forParticipatory Democracy "ADEPT" The reasonoftheGovernment’s tackinth Although Snegurdidnotmanageprotecthi to 84 87 Inthe1994parliamentary elections,th 85 u, op. cit., pp. 70–72, King op. cit., pp. 356–357. cit., 356–357. op. 70–72, pp. King cit.,pp. op. şu, andontheotherhandtocounterbalanceRussophilemovements. independence from 1917,1918and

aspirations duringth s speech, aswellaccording to ” headdressedthefollowing Congress of Intellectuals) together. theguarantorofMoldova’s 83 Insum, asKingnoticed,Snegurattempted toportray : 32 Parties and other social-political organizations from the fromthe organizations other social-political and Parties Moldovannationalism asthebasisof tic FrontandthePeasan fear ofpan-Romanianism intheeyesof Movement Blocthatwonmore seatsthan cinschi, hisspeechsurelyaidedthepro- e times. Finally,tothe e identityquestionisclear.AsSnegur tic Partyandsealedthepoliticalfateof e DAPgained43.18percentofhetotal s Presidentialseatonthelongterm, the message: “Our Moldovanpeople ], 2006-12-14. ], 2006-12-14. would nothaveasrealmasters 1991. Nevertheless,hedidnot independence and territorial theanalysisofdifferent 88

ts andIntellectuals 86

CEU eTD Collection Tritonic, Bucure RepublicMoldova. of state national policyof theRepublicofMoldova principles of nationpolicies are perfectly mirrored inthedocument entitled PC waselected,nevertheless,bothtimes withthehelpofpro-Romanian forces.Their policy. under theruleofPartyCommunists and thepro-Romanian intelligentsia. course, none ofthesepassedunnoticed,butgene Moldovan languageand changing two subjectsinthecurriculum: Roma and Romanian languages.Furthermore,theedu the Moldovanlanguage,containingnoreferenc constitution made inJuly1994stat Popular Frontintheearly1990s.Thenational 92 91 90 89 becomes thelanguageof “inter thenoveltyisthatRussian Moldovan, andthestatelanguageisMoldova n. However, multinational becoming alawattheend oftheyear. At thefollowingpresidentialel number ofseats(40out101) 21. For a detailed analysis of the of the analysis Foradetailed Draft Law: Concept Through Democracy for Comission European Enache and Cimpoe Dan Dungaciu: At the1998parliamentary electionsthePart The newparliament startedreversingmany ofthereforms introducedunderthe peopleof theRepublic of Moldova”.Thetitular nationisconsidered to bethe ti, 2005, pp. 91–113. 91–113. şti, 2005, pp. Moldova anteportas [CDL (2003) 49]. 49]. [http://www.venice.coe. [CDL (2003) u, op. cit.,şu, op. pp.89–90. Concept

ethnic communication”too. andevenstrongeratthe2001 ections (2001,2005)Vladimir Vo . Tritonic, Bucuresti, 2005, pp. 93-95. 93-95. pp. 2005, Bucuresti, . Tritonic, and its political implications see Dan Dungaciu: see Dan Dungaciu: implications itspolitical and ed that‘thestatelanguageof history, withtheappropria 90 92 Thesituationgotevenmo Theaim ofthenationpolicyis“integration 33 Moldovanism became adeclaredstatenation cation system wassubmittedtoa“reform”by nian languageandRomanianhistorybecame e totherelationshipbetweenMoldovan anthem waschanged; anamendment to the rated vehement protests from theopposition 91 y ofCommunistsemerged withthelargest issuedbytheGovernment in2003and int/docs/2003/CDL(2003)049-e.asp], 2007-05- int/docs/2003/CDL(2003)049-e.asp],

on the State National Policy of the te adjustmentsincontent. elections (56seatsoutof101). theRepublicofMoldovais ronin, thecandidateof re tenseafter2001,when Moldova ante portas Concept ofthe 89 Of . CEU eTD Collection 3. [ cit, op. 176–190. (ed.), Heintz In: Moldova (2001–2005)]. Acasestudy about politics. and history between identity [National (2001–2005)” [http://www.statistica.md/recensamint.php reinstalling thepreviouspatternofte April 1994.Activitiestargetingto affairs sincetheaccession tothe economic struct 95 94 93 Chapter 5.).Attheendof2006,PresidentVor Moldova’s internallife,andpro-Romanian fo points, especiallyafter2001.Ro problem ofTransnistria,onethema interests andtheideologicaltieswith Mosc a holidaycommemorating theOc 2003–2005 period. were provoked bynewregulationsrelatedtothe Moldovan –RomanianDictionary 75.8%, whileRomanians composed ju “proved” bythedataof2004census,which Moldovan. ConsideringtheRomaniansasformi Governmental level bysimply admitting that th the nationalidentityof the Russians, Gagauzians,etc.as“t Moldova]: Argentina Gribincea and Mihai Grecu: SergiuMusta BiroulNa www.moldova.org/download/eng/515/ What isevenmore interesting,thattheRo Beside thesefightsoversymbols therewasacl As aclearmixtureoftheseideas,se The relationship withRomania became more Totalurile recens Totalurile ţ ional de Statistic ional de ţă : “Identitatea na : “Identitatea 94 ă al Republicii Moldova [National Bureau of Statistics of the Republic the of Bureau Republic of Statistics [National Moldova ă alRepublicii mântului populaţ ţ whole peopleforming themajority ofMoldovawasresolvedon ional

ă he representativesofotherna între între istorie mania wasattackedwithexpansionism andinterferencein renewthetieswithRussiaweremirrored indecisionslike Moldova: SituationAnalysis andAssessment Trend appeared,authoredbyVasileSt ], 2007-05-25. ?lang=ro], 2006-12-13.Transistri?lang=ro], tober Revolution,andothers. rritorial administration, restoringthe7 st 2.2%ofthe in negotiatingpartnersbeingRussia. iei din anul 2004 2004 anul iei din veral daysafterthe publicationofthe şi politic ow, Moldova’sorientationwasdefinedbythe 34 ng aminority groupinMoldovaseemed tobe ere isaseparateRomanian groupbesidesthe resulted asfollowing:Moldovansmade up ures oftheCIShasbeenratifiedon the8 teaching ofhistory,fights thatdominated all rces weresuspectedwithcomplicity(see onin characterizedtheBucharest–Khisinew manians are referredtoamong , ă. Un studiu de cazprivitorla Republica Moldova total population. . [Totals of the 2004 census] census] 2004 the . of [Totals rhapsodicwithmore andmore crisis ear shiftinMoldova’s a wasnotincluded in the census. tions”. Thus,thedebateabout ati. Beside these, protests 95 93 Exceptthe economic

th externalpolitical . October 2004. p. 2004. . October of November as ofNovember Concept th the of CEU eTD Collection Policy Studies, 19 Studies, Policy which wouldhavedefined reproduced theSovietnationbuildingprinciples the Moldovannationbuildingpolicies important place. 1991 to2005nineyearswerecampaign yearsin presidential, parliamentary andlocalelections identity have beenconstantly present inMoldov 3.5. Generaltrendsofnation-building inMoldova domestic affairs ofasovereignstate”. one weretoobjectivelyassessthissituation,th on Moldova,whichitistryi relations as following: 96 unification forces became politicallymarginal Romaniannes andMoldovannesashiftcanbe effectively radicalizedthe pro-Moldovan forces. Romanian forces,themajority optingagains concerning therelationshipwithRomania. Th “EUmembership its Romaniagives newin opportunities 1) Thedebatesaboutthenationalidentity As asummaryofthegeneraltrendsth The previoussectionsrevealedthatsinc 3) Concerningthebalancebetweenpolitical forces ofthepromoters of 2) TheRomaniannes–Moldovannes conflict was tightlycorrelate th of January 2006. [http://www.ceps.be/Ar 2006. January of “Romania istrying to imposecertai the nationalbelonging. ng toforce-feedonusduringa

96 several assessments canbemade.

35 arescheduledinanon-concomitant way,from observed afterthe1994electionswhenpro- is issueprovokedasplitevenamong thepro- t thepoliticalunion,andinmean time ized, andthe more moderate pro-Romanian is shouldbequalifiedas‘interferenceinthe , thecoreelement beingthelanguage-issue, an politicaldebates.Duetothefactthat relations with Moldova.” In: Center for European European for Center In: Moldova.” with relations e the late 1980’s the questions of national e thelate1980’squestionsofnational e nationalistdiscourse ticle.php?article_id=556], 2007-04-09. 2007-04-09. ticle.php?article_id=556], which thenationalistrhetoricoccupiedan of thetitularnation ll our15yearsofindependence.If n rulesofthegame andprinciples of Moldovafaithfully and theevolutionof d tothedebates CEU eTD Collection Romania? The following chapterstry toanswerthesequestions. Andconversely,howth Moldova? nationalisms. HowRomania’ski Moldova basedontheexistenceofaseparateMoldovanethnicity. serve withthemost soothingpe about theidentityof the “corenation”aswinningforces emergence ofminority nationalisms nationalism burstoutinthehe confirmed by thedevelopments ofnationbu interests related toRussia. movements, theintegrationofpowerfulminor targeted to securetheterritorial integr pro-unionist appealsdisappearedfromthepoliticalagenda. becoming astatepolicyin2003undertheruleof forces remained inminority aswell.Since

However, anunanswered questionremains concerningthedynamic ofthe The dynamicmodel differenttypesof among Finally, theprinciplesofMoldovanism thatimpliedthedelimitation from Romania yday ofthenationalistmovement n-state nationalism didinflue rspective abutthefutureof inawaythatcouldnotbeen ese developments affected ity of Moldova underth then Moldovanism gainedmoreand ground, ilding policiesfrom Mo 36 ity organizations, aswellgeopolitical thePartyofCommunists.Inmeantime nationalism asdevelopedbyBrubakeris emerged thosegroupsthatcould thecountry,anindependent nce thedevelopments from , butitwastempered bythe lookedover.From thefight the kin-statepoliciesof e menaceseparatist of ldova. Thenationalizing CEU eTD Collection 47–50. 47–50. 2002, pp. October Moldova], Republicof the Romaniaand between relationship itsimpact the and on border frontier Noua Publice: Politici pentru Institutul concrete wall]. In: to the of from “bridge Moldova: flowers” the [Romania – the Moldovan SSR. See: Nicolae Chirtoac 2007-04-07. [http://www.mae.ro/index.php?unde=doc&id=5664&idlnk=1&cat=3], built withthe intention for gradualintegration. issues. ThesecondsubchapterpresentstheRoma independence, thanturnstodisc 2007. Itstartswiththepresentationof of thegeneraltrendscharacte Romania? Romania Furthermore, and Moldovaevolve? wh this chapter aims toanswer thefollowing questions: Howdidtherelationship between language spokenbythem.Consideringtheevolu among theRomanian politicians: theethnicityof the peopleofMoldovaisRomanian asisthe Chapter 4.TheevolutionofRomania’spoliciestoward Moldova 98 97 early month of1990,rightafterthelatterproc between thenewregime ofRomania andtheMoldovan SSRwere alread only afewhoursafterthenewstat 4.1. TherelationshipbetweenRomaniaandMoldova(1990–2007) Owing tothe insistence of For example already in January 1990 the protocol the first 1990 inJanuary already example For Ministry of Foreign Affairs: The chapterisdividedintwosubchapters. Concerning theMoldovannes–Romanianness Romania wasthefirststateto ă Schengen şi impactul asupra rela Republic of Moldova. Political and Diplomatic Relations and Diplomatic Political Moldova. of Republic the PopularFront, onthe6

rizing therelationshipbetween uss theconflictual situation th e proclaimed itsindependence. ă: “România – Moldova: de la ‘podul de flori’ la zidul de beton.” acknowledgetheexistence ţ iilor dintre România iilor 37 s were signed between the ministries of Romania and laimed itsindependenceasaunionrepublic. Romanian expectationsregardingMoldova’s nia’s policies,thesupportivesystem thatwas tion ofrivalnational The firstsubchapterprovidesanoverview at kindsofpolicieswerelaunchedby debate, thereisaperfectconsonance th ofMay1990theMoldovanSSR i Republica Moldova şi Republica the twostatesduring1990and at werecenteredonidentity 97 of theRepublicMoldova, However,officialcontacts policies from Moldova, . y establishedinthe [TheSchengen new 98

CEU eTD Collection Supreme SovietofUkraine. to beerasednotjust the differentmembers oftheParliament:forexam adopted. relationships thatmay evolveto the “spiritualization of thefrontiers”. Yet, thedeclaration was argued that thetreaty withtheSovietUnionpermits direct relations withtherepublics, account” andstressedthatan“em cautiously statedthat “the geopolitical situati Romanian Parliament decidedtohonorthis the factthatPopularFrontwasplanningto Ribbentrop Pact(1992). unification withtheCountry”a revisionist aspirationsculminated ontheco Eastern Germany. taking asareferencepointof symbols anddifferentvoicesc ”. opened thefrontierwithRomania, 103 102 101 100 99 the discussionswerenotfocusedonlytos confederation” keyeduptheintere Chamber of Deputies of June 28, 1990. p. [OfficialBulletin 33 57, 1990.08.06, of February 12, 1991. February of Chirtoac Sittings of the Chamber of Deputies of July 7, 1990. 1990. 7, July the of Chamber of of Deputies Sittings Sittings the of Chamber 30, Sittings of July 1991. of Deputies the of Chamber 24, of 1991. June Sittings of Deputies Speech of MirceaSnegur inthe Romanian Parliament. Joint sittingsofthe Chamber of Deputies and Senate 99 The issueof theMolotov–Ribbe The Romanianofficialscloselymonitored 102 ă , op. cit., p. 47. p. , op.cit., Initsfinalform theDeclarationwasfar M.O.R. 100 de jure,butfacto Snegur’svisit inRomania andhisspeech envisioning a“cultural

II , Vol. II,p. 1–2. , Vol. Nr. 52,1991.02.13, 103

Actually,theUkrainianreaction wasnotunrealistic because ould behearddemanding the(re)unificationofcountries nd withthetalksaboutnullifyi the negotiationscon of Romania, Section II, Vol. 1, Nr. M.O.R. II otional handlingmay imply territo an event calledtheday of th st towardtheissueeven more, aswell.Yet,itwasenoughto ntrop Pactgotontotheparliamentary agendadueto , Vol. I, Nr.I,, Vol. 21,1990.06.02, p.1–2. 38 mmemoration of“73yearssinceBessarabia’s on andinternationalnorms ituation ofBessarabia,buttheGreaterRomania Monitorul Oficial al României, al Oficial Monitorul M.O.R. eventbyadeclaration.TheGovernment M.O.R. II organizeaconference ple itwasnotincluded thattheeffectshave the introduction of the Romanian national the introductionofRomanian national from reflecting theradicalviewpoints of cerning theunifica

II , Vol. II, Nr. 197, 1991.07.31, p. 4. 1991.07.31, 197, Nr. II, Vol. , , Vol. II, Nr. 153, 1991.06.25, p. 1–17. p. 1–17. 1991.06.25, 153, Nr. II, , Vol. 57, 1990.08.06, p. 3]; Sittings of the ofthe Sittings 3]; p. 1990.08.06, 57, ng the effects of the Molotov– ng theeffectsof e “bridgeoffl 101 rial revisionism.” Italso

stirtheconc butdiscussionswith onthistopicandthe

Partea aII-a tion ofWestern and has tobetakeninto owers overthe erns ofthe , Anul I, Nr.

CEU eTD Collection citations from the citations witnessed. Inthenextsixteenyearsrela way orother,theunificationwasconsideredhighlyprobable. Government tosupportMoldova’seffortsincaseitwantsmerge Romania. with idea ofunification,whiletheCongressUS Mitterand andtheGerman MinisterofForei surprised theGovernments ofth among theRomanian politicians.Moreover,the approach, thepossibilityof reestablishing theinterwarsitu variances concerningthetiming oftheunion,na of itsdamnable results that convened in theMolotov–Ribbentrop Pactrepresen Romanian state onterritoriesannexedbyfor boldest statement oftheDeclaration isthe fo in aplenarymeeting afterallpoliticalgroups this time bytheGovernment.Severa formulated since 1940. ,NorthernBukovinaandtheHertzaregion) vision appeared,whichalsoinvolvedsome part 105 104 of theunion.Oncontrary,afirm decision Dungaciu, op. cit., pp. 10–15. 10–15. pp. cit., op. Dungaciu, the of Chamber 30, Sittings of July 1991. of Deputies Although –exactlyasinthecaseofMoldovanpro-Roma The proclamation ofMoldova’sfullindepe In spiteofexpectationsthe M.O.R . translated by Kiss Ágnes) were directed againsttheinte

e world’sbiggest states: the “decisive step”ofMoldovawa

gn AffairsHans-DietrichGenscheropposedthe tionship betweenRomania andtheRepublicof 39 for keepingthedistance llowing: “Theproclamatio joyfullywelcomed Moldova’sdecision.The M.O.R. II A adoptedaresolutionthatrecommended the ce asaconsequence ofthesecretaccord l dayslateritwasadoptedbytheParliament mely immediate integrationoraftergradual s ofthehistorical evolution in this direction would not have evolution inthisdirectionwouldnothave ts adecisivestepforthepeacefulremoval ndence wasmet byanotherdeclaration, , Vol. II, Nr. 197, 1991.07.31, p. 4. (All (All p. 4. 1991.07.31, 197, Nr. II, Vol. , rests oftheRomanian people.” ation wasagenerallysharedview President ofFranceFrançois that areUkrainianterritories s nottakeninthedirection Moldova (Northernand nian forces – there were nian forces–therewere from Romania couldbe n ofanindependent 105 104 One

CEU eTD Collection Nr. 10, 1993.02.05, p. 5–7. p. 1993.02.05, 10, Nr. language”, “twoRomanian denominator, “theRomanian forexample people references totheethnic affiliation betweenthetwopeoplebyusing the“Romanian” relations” betweenthetwostates,condemned still nobasic treaty between thetwostates. ground, consequently,thenegotiati the following roundsofnegotiationbecauseboth the committee ofexpertsinSeptember1993. Snegur in1991,thetopicwasretakenseveraltimes in1992anddebatedforthefirsttime by negotiations ofthebasicbilateraltreaty.The considered bybothsidesdecisivefordefini Moldova was encumbered withdisputescentere 111 110 109 108 107 106 treaty (typeTreatyonFriendship,GoodNe ideals ofthecitizenslivingon to therealities (twosovereign states), butin Affairs TeodorMele treaty of“integrati citizenship law, education, etc. For negotiations inthe period 1991 –1997Enache see Cimpoe and Enache and Cimpoe treaty, (bilateral the to that have thatfields withidentity-issues do excepting It tobe emphasized has Speech of Teodor Mele Teodor of Speech Enache and Cimpoe the Decemberof Senate of Sittings 10, 1992. Contrastingly, theMoldovanpartyconsistently Taking forgrantedthe“special”natureof The main conflicting conceptionsaboutthe on andbrotherhood”. ş ş u, op. cit., pp. 223–227. cit., 223–227. pp. op. u, u, op. cit. p. 223. ş canu arguedin1993,thistreatyisa“specialinstrument” thatisadapted canu. Sittings of the Chamber of Deputies of Ferbruary 4, 1993. Chamber 4, of ofthe Ferbruary of Sittings 1993. Deputies şcanu.

) the cooperation was not tensed. tensed. not was the cooperation ) states”,andothers.

both sidesofthePrutRiver”. ons wererepeatedlyblocked. M.O.R. II 109 Thedraftemphasized the“specialandprivileged ng therelationshipbetweentwocountries. the meantime “givesaperspective tothe shared 107 40 the Molotov–RibbentropPact,andcontained the idea ofabasictreatywas raised byMircea , Vol. III, Nr. 39, 1992.12.11, p. 2–3. 2–3. p. 1992.12.11, 39, Nr. , III, Vol. However,noseriousstepscouldbemade in ighborhood andCooperat d onquestionsofidentity,whichhavebeen 110 the relation,Romanian sidearguedfora on both sides of the Prut river”,“Romanianon bothsidesofthePrut thepartiesweredetermined toholdtheir Asthe Romanian Mi relationship areperfectlymirrored inthe arguedinfavorofamoreconventional ş u, op. cit., pp. 223–227. 223–227. cit.,pp. op. u, 111 108 Asaconsequence,thereis ion) rejectingall nister ofForeign M.O.R. II , Vol.IV, 106 CEU eTD Collection Cimpoe the RepublicofMoldovaandspendinghuge am European Enlargement hecomplained thatRomaniawasinterfering intheinternal affairs of ratified. concessions fromtheRomanian side.Neverthe “unionist” overtonesthatcouldbeinterprete 115 114 113 112 that theAmbassadorofMoldovaaccusedRomania tensioned duetodifferenthostiledeclarationscoming from and theRepublicofMoldova and Transilvania”(2004). Voronin statedthat“Romania isthelastempire inEuropemade upofMoldova,Dobrodgea under theRomanian occupationaJewwaskill it didnotreviseitshistorypercep to theMolotov–Ribbentrop The treaty“writtenintheco territorial claims” envisioningthecreation supplement istheMoldovansugges Romania were not to infringe very important tohighlightthatMoldova’sdecl and advocatedfor hidingormore preferably om [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=4971&idm=9&idl=2], 2007-05-25. 2007-05-25. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=4971&idm=9&idl=2], Chamber of Deputies of October 2, 2000. Relations Romania: Cold versus The In: War Identities.” National of Speech MihaiR of Speech Enache and Cimpoe The Moldovan side rejected even toinclude referen For the hostile declarations see Dungaciu, op. cit., pp. 50–52; and Monica Heintz: “Republic of Moldova Moldova of “Republic Heintz: Monica and 50–52; cit.,pp. op. seeDungaciu, declarations Forthe hostile ş The reason isthat the rela In 2000,the u, op. cit., p. 224. , No. 1, Vol. II, 2005, pp. 71–81. 71–81. pp. 2005, II, Vol. 1, , No. zvan Ungureanu (state secretary in the (statesecretaryinthe Mini Ungureanu ăzvan ş u, ibidem. Treaty onPrivilegedPartnershipandCo-operationbetweenRomania 115 Pact nortothename mmon language”ofthetwocountrie had beenfinallydraftedbythetw

Furthermore, inaletteraddressed tothe Commissar for the relationshipwithRussia and Ukraine. Aninteresting tion abouttheHolocaustinspit tionship betweenthetwostat tion toincludereferences of GreaterRomania orGreaterMoldova. d onthedetrimentofMoldova’ssovereignty, ces tothe Declaration of I 41 itting allusions of commoncultural roots. Itis ared intentionsinkeepingthedistancefrom ed in every two minutes” (2003); President ed ineverytwominutes” (2003);President JournalPolitical of Science and International less, the treaty has never been signed or less, thetreatyhasneverbeensignedor of thelanguageitself, ounts ofmoney onitsterritorywithout in thefrontofC stry of Foreign Affairs). Sittings of the of Affairs). Sittings Foreign of stry Kishinew o MinistersofForeignAffairs. e ofthefactthat“inMoldova the“inexistenceof mutual es became more and more more and more became es s containreferencesneither ndependence. See Enache and . Itmight bementioned 114 ouncil ofEuropethat thuscontainedbig 113 112

CEU eTD Collection romania_7073], 2007-05-23. of Mai,2007. [h irredentist voicesonbothsidesofthePrut Governments confirmed thatRo “special” relations.Althoughnoofficialdecl Russian interests.Inco a possiblepoliticalunion.Furthermore,itwasclear were determinedtorejectallreferencesco influenced bycontradictingperceptionsregarding nationalidentity.TheMoldovanofficials citizenship underpreferen not undertheprotectionofRomanian minority no according to whichin Romania livetenmillion c shocked theRomanian publicopinionandoffi of thousandsRoma” (2004).In “Roş coordinating itwithMoldovanofficials.Sometim 117 116 conceptions oftheMoldovanoffi of adistinctMoldovanpe Romania wouldrecognizethe“illegalincorpora expected, theproposalfrom Kishinewwasradically new initiativeforsigningth Moldovans from Romania]. In: Adev 05-23. [http://www.adevarulonline.ro/articole/voronin-se-vr “Voronin se vrea protectorul moldovenilor din România” [Voronin pretends to be the protector of the “Moldova vrea tratatul de baz ca’s [CDPFleader]aimistocreateaRomani The most recentdevelopment regardingthe As thedebatesonbasictreatyprove,th ttp://www.atac-online. ntrast, itisobviousthattheRoma tial treatment andofferot ople andMoldovanlanguage, ă cuRomânia” [Moldova wants the basic treaty with Romania]. In:

e “Basic Political Treaty” ă rul ro/europolitic_17/moldova-vrea-tratatul-politic-de-baza-cu- mania wouldliketo cial nationpolicylaunchedin2003. , 26 early2007theattackconti th of February, 2007. of ea-protectorul-moldovenilor-din-romania/304135], 2007- ea-protectorul-moldovenilor-din-romania/304135], were loudenoughtostirtheMoldovanconcerns. mmon belonginginordertoremove allbasesfor 42 tion ofBessarabiafrom 1918”,theexistence itizens ofMoldovan ethnicity, agroup thatis cials wasPresident Voronin’sdeclarations es evenmoreoffensivemessages appeared: aration addressedtoMoldovaorother rms. ThatiswhyMoldovawillgrantthem an provinceandtoinvadeitwithhundreds her kindsofsupporttoo. bilateral treatyisda e relationshipbetweenthetwostateswas new.Withtheratifi reintegrate Moldova ly stated that priority is given to the ly statedthatpriorityisgiventothe 117 thusperfectconsonancewiththe came fromMoldova.Asitwas nian sideadvocatedtheideaof nued. Oneofthetopicsthat ted May2007,whena cation ofthistreaty in thecountry, 116 ATAC , 12 th

CEU eTD Collection the twostates. measures, butdifferentinitiativescoming withth “institutional system” doesnotmean thatitwa getting tighter the relations. about “integration”ofthetwostatesandpeopl two states,severalofthem ar from Moldova.InthefollowingIwills unexpected one,promoting theRomanian politic institutional system thatwouldfacilitate the twostates.Tothisend, Romanian forces from Moldova adoptedtheappro Moldova, inthespiritof“specialrelations” 4.2. The“smallsteps”politicstowardintegration serious doubtsregard Moreover, the“politicsofsmall steps”targ measures canbedistinguished: bilateral initiatives, whichimplyanagreement betweenthe 4.2.1. Theinstitutional system ofintegration Although therearemany legalmeasures thatfacilitatethecooperationbetween Since itbecame clearthatthepolitical In thisinstitutional system builtupwith ing itsintentions. e specificallymentioned byRo two strategieswere adopte A further specification regarding thisissueis thatthe hortly presentbothofthesestrategies. eting “integration”launc integration; andontheotherhand,amore 43 the Romanian officialsandthemoderate pro- unionmight facecons e, thus are considered the basic support for e, thusareconsideredthebasicsupportfor al careerofsevera s projectedasacomprehensive, interlinked e same purpose:tofost ach ofgradualprocess the intention ofinte d: ononehand,buildingupan manian officialswhentalking l well-knownpersonalities hed byRomania raised iderable oppositionin gration, twotypesof for theintegrationof er the integration of CEU eTD Collection Moldovan authorities”. established thespecificFunds development ofthecommoncu support foractivitiesthat“speeduptheec Governmental donations.Animportant component ofthiskindmeas preferential treatment intheRomanian e countries (1991,1994). across theborderbetween consultation networks(1992);passport-free category containsthe followingmeasures: in Romanian and Moldovanofficials, 119 118 between Romania andMoldovaconsiderablyworsened. forces came into poweranditwas narrowe cannot bedrawn,itisne the Moldova-issuesaswell as the specificFund law wassuspended andamended, thanin2003th 2001, whenthepassportfreebordercrossingwasabr Some ofthesemeasures turned outtobepr detail inthefifthschapter.Nevertheless,there Kiss,op.cit. Kiss,op.cit. At thispoint, althoughfar-reaching conclusi The main Romanian unilateralinitiativeswe vertheless thatthesy

two states(1991),tax-freeim tipulated thatthes ltural andspiritual sphere”. the unilateralinitia ducation system 1990),aswellcasual (since 44 were noessentialchanges stem wasworkedupbe travel forRomanian andMoldovan citizens d downintheperiodwhen therelationship were dissolved. onomic integration,theconsolidationand e activitiesshouldbe e inter-ministerial committee charged with oblematic, issues that willbe discussed in re: theRomanian citizenshiplaw(1991); ons aboutRomania’s supportive policies ter-parliamentary andinter-ministerial ogated, theapplicationofcitizenship port andexportbe tives ofRomania. However,Law36/1993that 119

fore thepro-Moldovan “convenedwiththe in thisstructure upto ure isthefinancial tween thetwo 118 The first Thefirst CEU eTD Collection IV, Nr. 60, 1993.03.26, p.. 15 1993.03.26, 60, Nr. IV, in 2004turnedovertotheotherextr merged in1999withtheultra-nationa Romanian NationalPartyforReunion(later political partiesgainedonly emigrated toRomania and achievedhighpublicprofile. May 1991,andLeonidaLari-Iorga.Bothwere most spectacularcasesareMirceaDruc,Mo considered asasecondstrate 4.2.2. PromotingtheRomanianpoliticalca 125 124 123 122 121 120 reason: theunion. Constantinescu (member GRP)thereweresome run in the1992Romanian presidential electi Bessarabia.” nominated bytheParty“withspecificpurpos (CDNPP). Deputies since 1992.Shewasembraced bytheChristian DemocraticNationalPeasant’sParty Lari-Iorga achievedhighpublicprofilein [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5014&sir=&sep=and&idv=77&idl=1], 2007-05-24. 2007-05-24. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5014&sir=&sep=and&idv=77&idl=1], Partidul Partidul Na Partidul România Mare (PRM). Unit Partidului Reîntregirii Partidul Op Speech of Toader Constantinescu. Joint sittings ofthe sittings Joint Constantinescu. of Toader Speech th of Sittings Diaconescu. Ion of Speech Druc raninthe1992presiden Promoting thepoliticalcareerofpersonali 123 ţ ional ional 124 member oftheCDNPP,Lari-Iorgawas AccordingtoIonDiaconescu,aleadingmember ăţii Na Since1996shehasbeenaca Ţă 125 r ă ţ nesc Cre ionale Române(PUNR). ţ iunea Dacolatin tin ştin

gy targetingintegration.Fortheadoptionofthisstrategy 2.75 percentsofthevote.In şi Democrat(PN (POD). ă (POD). e Chamber of ofMarch 25, Deputies 1993. emists, theGreaterRomania Party tial elections;however,lack list PartyofRomanian NationalUnity reer ofpersonalitiesfromMoldova ndidate oftheGRP.For PartyofReunion–Daco-LatinOption) Romania beingmember oftheChamber Ţ 45 ldovan Prime Minister betweenMay1990and CD). CD). Chamber of Deputies and the Senate of June Chamber the June 19, Senateof and 1996. Deputies of ons, although, according todeputy Toader leading members ofthePopularFrontwho negotiations onthistopicwiththesame ties fromMoldovainRomania might be e ofadvancingtheissueunionwith the nextyearhefounded ing the support of powerful ing thesupportofpowerful some reasonsshedidnot M.O.R. 122 (GRP).Likewise, 121 Parte a II-a, Vol. (PRNU), then (PRNU), 120 that CEU eTD Collection chapter. serve furtherinformation aboutRomania’s commi based onbilateralagreement. Detailsaboutthefunctioning oftheintegrationsystem thatwill anti-Romanian forcessnatchedthe politicalpo because ofthis.Itisworthtorepeatthatth Moldovan officialsrejectedand “integration” ofthetwostates. separated from revisionistovertones,duetothefactthatstatedonewayoranotherserved Bothofthestrategiesadopted,butespe prove Romania’s commitment tothe envisioned

As itwashighlighted the relationshipbetweentw ese measures were introducedbeforethestrong 46 wer inMoldovaandseveralofthemwere cially buildinguptheinstitutionalsystem “special relations.” These couldneverbe tment willbe served outlined in the next in this chapter,this wasexactly what o stateswasalwaystensed CEU eTD Collection 1992.12.11, p. 2–3. p. 2–3. 1992.12.11, Senator EugenDijm Chapter 5.Thefunctioning 128 127 126 institutions wastoanalyzetheevolutionof the 20 Moscow”. “important moment, whenMoldovaisunderth 5.1. Theinterministerialcommittees more lengthilypresented. most of thetensionbetween thetwostates, its the Romanian citizenship law.Since theentitlem benefits grantedintheRomanian educationsy financed projects,theGovernmentaldonations, order: the interministerial committees andthe influencing factors that leadtochanges willbe shortly described. different measures, thespecificproblems rega system setforward to integrate the twostates. Romania’s relationswiththeRepublicofMoldova of January1992bytheGovernmentalDecreeNr. 28/1992the Comitetului Interministerial pentru Rela pentru Interministerial Comitetului Dijm Eugen of Speech References to both types of committees. th In December 1992,returningfromthenegot The measures enumerated intheprevious This chapteraims toprovide of Juneitsparallel institution in Moldova wasset uptoo. The main task of these 127 Thus,asacompensatory gestureto rescu. Sittings the of Senate December Sittings of ărescu. 10, 1992. ă rescu

of thesupportivesystem

stated thatthis “program of integration” ţ iile României cu Republica Moldova. Republica iile României cu and theinterparliamentary committee adeeperinsightinthef 47 the relationship betweenthetwostates andto interparliamentary committee, the fundsandthe For this purpose, inthefollowing the content of rding theirfunctioning,aswelltheprimary effect, aswelltheimplementation willbe stem, crossingbenefitsandfinally theborder ents included into the citizenship lawcaused the preferencesinth the growingRussianinfluence,on23 chapter willbe discussed in thefollowing 128 e pressuretodirecthersighttoward wasformed. Severalmonths later,on iations thattookplaceinKishinew, Interministeral Committee for unctioning ofthesupportive M.O.R. II e domain ofeconomy, , Vol. III, Nr. 39, 39, Nr. III, , Vol. 126 appears inan rd

CEU eTD Collection parliamentary debatesthatwouldindicat Nevertheless, thefirstmeeting domains” (Art.2).Forthisendexchangesof integration, thedevelopment of thecommon up thecomplexprocessoflegislativeharm Parliaments inequalnumber.Accordingtoth Interparliamentary Committee Bucureş different policies;consequen make proposals foritsdevelopment. Indeed, 132 131 130 129 relations considerablywo were bettercapitalized(seene Interparliamentary Committee never worked.Theotherpillar, theinterministerial committees counterbalancing theRussianinfluence.Neverthele problematic. Onthe27 committee too asaresponse. cooperation instead.This was“unacceptable” fortheRomanianparty, whichdissolvedits projects, andproposedforming astandard by Romania. However, in2003Kishinewdissolved itscommittee, refusingtonegotiatethe important tohighlightth [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5565&idm=2,09&idl=2], 2007-05-26. 2007-05-26. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5565&idm=2,09&idl=2], Solomon, op. cit., pp. 224–230. 224–230. pp. cit., Solomon, op. Solomon, op. cit., p. 223. Comisia Interparlamentară Bucure Speech of GheorghiPris Shortly, theinstitutionswere The functioningoftheinterparliamentar caru. Sittings of the Senate of the ăcaru. Sittings at in this framework werediscu th rsened theyweredenouncedbytheMoldovanside. ofNovember1992aProtocolwa 130 tly, theinteractiongainedanintergovernmentalaspect.

only tookplaceinJuly şti–Chi xt section);butintheperi set up for tightening therelations betweenthestates and şin ti –Chi ău. e anyfurther activity of theCommittee. 48 of November 3, 2003. 2003. 3, ofNovember e Protocol,theCommitt the twocommittees met yearlyanddiscussed ş draft lawsandconsulta onization inordertosustaintheeconomic in mixed intergovernmentalcommittee for spiritual andculturalsphereinother ău ss, oneofthetwopillarssystem, the y committee provedtobeevenmore 131 2000,andthereareno constitutedbymembersofboththe ssed theMoldovan od whentheRomanian–Moldovan s signedthatestablishedthe ee’s aim was“tospeed tions wereenvisioned. projects financed references inthe 132 129 Itis CEU eTD Collection 18–22. Governments. more stable,furthermore compared totheHumanitarian Fundfrom financ with theMoldovan Government inthemeeti and culturalintegration”havebeenfinanced Fund) thatwasmaintained from thestatebudget money wasusedagainsttheintegration. that facedmuch criticism, duetothe factthat Transnistrian separatist movement. reason wastohelptheMoldovanGovernment nourished bydonationsoftheGovernment, 5.2. Fundsandprojects 137 136 135 134 133 be identifiedforthe1993–2003period concrete projectstobefinancedappear.Neve accurate in thisrespect, sometimes onlytheprograms arementioned whilesometimes projects. TheGovernmentalDecreesfrom Government ofRomaniafortherelati account couldbedirectly accessedby theMoldov 99, 1992.05.29, p. 1-4. 1992.05.29, 99, Sittings of the Chamber of Deputies of May 28, 1992. Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei Monitorul ParteaII-a,Vol. the III, Nr. of Chamber of Sittings May28, of 1992. Deputies Fondul Umanitar “Moldova”. Kiss, op. cit. 330–333. cit.330–333. op. Kiss, Fondul la dispozi of Ion Speech AurelStoica. Sittings

Unfortunately thereisno accessto enoughinfo This FundwasreplacedbyLawNr.36from1993theatdisposalof In mid-1992 the ţ ia Guvernului României pentru rela

Humanitarian Fund“Moldova” the utilizationpresupposesc

of the Senate of March 3, 1994. 1994. ofMarch3, of theSenate 134 Theinterestingaspectof th 137 135 onship withtheRepublicofMoldova : , accordingtodifferentRomanian politicians, the rtheless, thefollowingdomains orprograms can 49 Romania approvingfinancingarenotatall from thismoney, projectsthatwereconvened ţ economic entitiesandphysicalpersons.The iile cu Republica Moldova. Moldova. Republica iile cu ngs oftheinterministerial committees. As ial pointofviewtheMoldovaFundismuch . Differentprojectsta an Government.Itwas during“hardtimes”, the namely facing rmation abouttherealizationsofthese M.O.R. II M.O.R. 133 ooperation betweenthetwo wasestablished, thatwas is supportwasthatthebank , Vol. V, Nr. 46, 1994.03.04, p. p. 1994.03.04, 46, , Vol. V, Nr. rgeting the“economic a short-lived project 136 (Moldova CEU eTD Collection 138 Marian Enache,whoestimated for the1993–1997pe domains. The onlysourceis not exist.Consequently,itis theories ofMoldovanism–forexample enough spaceforspreadingthe“Romanian” culture, whichcouldhave underminedthe money dividedamong thedifferentdomains? Were Moldovannes conflictbetweenth that servedtheinterestof Wording usedRomanianthe in Governmentalordinances. As itwasalreadystated,comp What isreadily noticed whentaking alook • • • etc. ); • • • subscription forperiodicalsfrom Romania, etc.); • Romania; school libraries;professional • monitoring, etc.); meteorology, scientificpe

providing differentproducts(pet meetings; environmental protection(sylvicultu development ofinfrastructure(construc technical expertise,supportandinform Media (retransmission ofthebroadcast “Romanian culture” education, trainingandrese not possibletoestimate howmuch money spentfordifferent was Moldovanstateinstitutions.KnowingtheRomaniannes –

the synthesisofRomanian ambassador from Moldova, riodicals, etc.); e twostatesthefollowingque 138 (libraries,editorials,bookedition,theatres,festivals, rehensive accountsaboutthe by sponsoringpro-Romanian media outlets? arch (scholarshipfor 50 education,scholarships,etc.); rol products,machines, etc.). at thislistis that theMoldovanofficialswillingtoleave riod thatmost ofthemoney werespent ation exchange(predicting earthquakes, tions, reparations,factoryequipments, re, water culture, environmental theRomanian Television(TVR1)); stions emerge: Howwasthe professional practicein therearemany projects materialized projectsdo CEU eTD Collection [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5570&idm=10&idl=2], 2007-05-26. 2007-05-26. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5570&idm=10&idl=2], 2003. 13, November of the Senate of Sittings Romanian periodicals “with financialsupportfortheedition of turned toaculturalprofile,themajorityrepresenting Moldovan officials,butfinallythewholeFundwasdissolved. namely todeletethe word„convened”, refe Interministerial Committee dissolved theirCommittee,in2003 theMo and 0,06percents,exceptingthepe dollars). Inthetota granted in1994(about600thousandUSAdo means adecrease fromabout8 million to3.5 million ROL were greatfluctuationsduringitsexistence. sphere”. as economic support,thusnotforthe“consol 143 142 141 140 139 Department forRomanians LivingAbroad. the generalframework offina Moldova didnotdisappearbutwiththeEmer [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5500&idm=10&idl=2], 2007-05-26. 2007-05-26. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5500&idm=10&idl=2], frequently“pro-unionist”, for exam Sittings the of Senate May12, Sittings of 2003. cit.319–320. op. Kiss, ROL: old Romanian lei. Enache and Cimpoe Several periodicals arefrequentlymentioned in the parliamentary debates as “pro-Romanian” or more It isimportant tohighlightthatfrom Due tothefact thattheMol Concerning theamount ofmoney oftheMo 139 140 in1993to120,000million ROLin2003,howeverturned intorealvaluethis u, p. 232–234. 232–234. p. şu, l statebudgettheamount oftheMo from Romania. Firsta“mi ple “Florile Dalbe”, “Literatura “Florile“Literatura ple Dalbe”,

ncing Romanians livingabroad,thusundertheheadingof pro-Romanian orientation”, dovan officialshaverefusedto ak of0,4percentfrom 1993. In nominal valueitconstantlygrew,from 6,000 51 gency Ordinance112/2003wasintegratedinto rring to the jointde now on the financedprojectspreponderantly now onthe million USAdollars.The leastamountwas idation ofthecommon ldova Fund was dissolved as well as the ldova Fundwasdissolvedaswellthe llars) and1997(about700thousandUSA ldova Funditcanbeassessedthatthere i Arta”, “Glasul Na “Glasul şi Arta”, ldova Fundfluctuatedbetween0,009 nor” amendment wassuggested, 143 butradioandTVeditorials, 142 141 Nevertheless,thesupportfor cooperatefortwoyearsand cision byRomanianand spiritual andcultural ţ iunii”, etc. iunii”, CEU eTD Collection [http://www.mae.ro/poze_editare/DRRP_proiecte_2006.pdf], 2007-05-25. 2007-05-25. [http://www.mae.ro/poze_editare/DRRP_proiecte_2006.pdf], DRRP: DRRP: a pro-Romanian counterbalance. Moldovanism becoming astatenatio Romania wantedtocooperate, while finally, from2003thefinancingisdetermin system thatpresumed whichwasabolishedduetoMoldovanopposition,and cooperation, was whollyconferredtothediscretionofMoldovanofficials,thencame tenyearsofa guaranteed severalobservationscanbemade. USA dollars(about5.554.000RON considered moresubstantialcompared toth schools andchurcheswe 145 144 were aswellunilateral initiatives that werenotsubject tonegotiations. Thesearethe casual tried toreachalwaysanagreement withth 5.3. Governmentaldonations andprojectsfinancedbytheDRRLA implying alsoashiftfromsponsoringstat Romanians Living Abroad [Departamentul pentru Rela DRRLA in 2005] by the DRRLA in 2005]. [http://www.mae.ro/poze_editare/2006.08.09_DRRP_Proiecte2005.pdf], 2007-05-25. See in this respect the financed projects for 2005 and 2006 financed by the Department for the Relationswith the for theDepartment by financed 2006 and for 2005 the financed projects Seeinthis respect RON: the new Romanian lei. Centralizarea proiectelorfinan Centralizarea proiectelorfinan Although from theprevioussectionim 4) Takingintoconsiderationtheevoluti 3) Alltheseshiftsreflectthechangesin 2) Therewasaclearshiftbetweenthefina 1) Inwhatitconcernscooperationtherewe Summing uptheevolutionofsupportfor re supportedaswell.

ţ ţ ate deDRRPîn Anul2006 ate de DRRP în cursul Anului 2005 145 n policy,thisshifttocultural the MoldovaGovernment rejectedit. ) werespentforthispurposein2006. e institutionstoci ed exclusivelybyRomanian officials. e previousperiod. Forexampleabout1.9million e Moldovanofficialsmight beconveyed,there 52 ţ iile cu Româniiiile cu Pretutindeni]: de 144 therelationshipbetw on ofnationpoliciesfrom Moldovawith re two shifts:usingtheFundsetupin1992 Moreover,thisfinancialsupportcanbe nced domains, from economic tocultural pression thattheRomanian Government financing different projects and the funds financing differentprojectsandthefunds . [Synthesis of the projects financedthe the projects . [Synthesis by of vil organizations. . [Synthesis of the projectsfinanced. [Synthesis of profile canbe een thetwocountries: interpreted as CEU eTD Collection 14. treatment inthedomain ofeconomy: softloansandtaxexemptions. referred tothesedonations inparliamentary Abroad. Romanians livingabroadthroughtheDepartment governmental donationsandthe 147 146 5.4. Preferentialtreatmentinthedomainofeconomy even ifthereweresome donationsto stateinstitutions. states, itmight beassumed thatthishandlin besides theMoldovaFund too.Taking into account not allfinancedprojectswerenegotiatedbyMo were broughtbacktoRomania andsold report ofLiviuMaior,theRomanian Minist Romanian Army, thatisastrongpro- civil organizations(fortheVictims ofthe Moldovan Government,theMilitaryAcademy mentioned: books forlibrariesandschoolssince1993,donationsstateinstitutions (forthe Romanians LivingAbroad.Nevertheless,th comprehensive accountaboutthe Speech of Liviu Maior. Sittings of the Senate of June 20, 1994. 1994. Maior.the 20, of Liviu of Senate Speech ofJune Sittings cit., op. 223–224. Kiss,

In thischapterIwillfocusonlyontwoi Based oninformation presented inthissection thefollowing assessment canbe made: Regarding thedonationsthereweresome di As inthecaseofprojectsfinanced

projects financedfromtheFundaimed tosupportthe donations realized,orthefinancingfrom theFundfor on lowpricesintheRomanian markets. Romanian organizationsfromMoldova). g couldhavealarmed theMoldovanGovernment, accounts justthe booksareusuallymentioned. er ofEducation,in 53 e followinggovernmental donationsmight be Communist Regime andtheVeteransof ldovan officials,butothersourceswereused “Alexandru celBun”,orphanages,etc.)and fortheRelationswithRomanians Living from theMoldovaFundthereisno sappointing feedbacks.Accordingtothe the tensedrelationshipbetween thetwo ssues thatdemonstrate the preferential M.O.R. II ,Vol. V,Nr. 144, 1994.06.30, p.7- 1994 thedonatedtextbooks 147 146 When When CEU eTD Collection Romanian market inamounts thatclearly products originatingfrom theCIScountries of the“most favorednation”. Parliament, reasoningthatitservesthepurpose was known,theCovenantwithMoldovaregardingtaxexemptions wasvotedbythe were introducedinRomania, werenot which between Romania andMoldovaisfreefrom taxe retransmitting thebroadcast oftheRomanian publictelevision. mentioning thatbasedonbilateralagreement could notbeenmonitored. the gasboughtinRomania wassoldinUkraine, 151 150 149 148 dollars, extendedthedeadlineofreim officials turnedouttobevery patient,an Moldova didnotratifytheaccessiontoCIS. was tohelpMoldovafacingfinancialhardship; no interestattached anditwasforeightyears. scale beingextendedtoothermaterials inthene ROL (about26.3million USAdollars)wasgranted February 29, 1993. M.O.R. II 1993. 29, February [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5871&idm=6&idl=2], 2007-05-26. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5871&idm=6&idl=2], Speech of Dan Mogo Dan of Speech Sittings of the Senate of September 19, 1994. 1994. 19, September of Senate the of Sittings the of Senate May23, Sittings of 2005. the Decemberof Senate of Sittings 27, 1993. Regarding taxexemptions ithastobe For therequest oftheMoldovan Government in1993alongterm loanof20billion ş (representative of the Ministry of Finance). Sittings Chamber the Sittings the of Finance). of of (representative Ministry of Deputies of , Vol. IV, Nr. 151, 151, Nr. IV, , Vol. 149

Despite beingfamiliar with the misusages, the Romanian 151 Thetax evasion continued andagreat dealof foreign 1993.09.03, p. 12-13. 1993.09.03, M.O.R. II bursement foranotherfifteenyears. M.O.R. II d in 2004whenMoldovastill owed 9.4 million exceededtheMoldovan producing capacity. 54 producedinMoldova.Althoughthismisusage known thatsince1991theexportandimport however, anotherimportant argument wasthat According toRomanian officials, thereason , Vol. IV, Nr. 267, 1993.12.14, p. 8-13. p. 1993.12.14, 267, Nr. IV, , Vol. xt years.The loanwaspreferential,there , Vol. V, Nr. 184, 1994.09.29, p. 13-15. p. 13-15. 1994.09.29, 184, Nr. V, , Vol. being aloan,thefateoffinancialsupport of “integration”,andMoldovagotthestatus 148 some partsofthemoneywerespentfor and CentralEuropeanstatesenteredthe s. Duetothissituationdifferentproducts Althoughitwasnoticedthatforexample for petroleum andrelatedproducts, the

150

Itis worth CEU eTD Collection [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=2861&idm=15&idl=2], 2007-05-26. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=2861&idm=15&idl=2], 1999. 1, March of of Deputies the Chamber of Sittings most favoredgroupbecausetheyhavegotextraassistancefrom theMoldovaFund. and livinginstudenthostelsisfreefrom example theforeign studentsofRomanianethnic abroad, namelyseparateframework forschoo 5.5. BenefitsintheRomanianeducationsystem forward justonafewoccasions. Nevertheless, thistopicwasseemingly avoide 156 155 154 153 152 lower, forexample, in2006only1250scholarshipswereawarded. Moldovan studentswas ministries ofeducationfrom 2001 academic yearstherewasasharpdecrease, Romanian ethnicoriginsinthe1990–2002period.Although1999–2000and2000– 70–85 percentsfrom thetotalofpubliclyfinanced Kishinew refusedtosigntheprotocol, tinerilor din Republica Moldova la universit 2007-05-26. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5475&idm=23&idl=2], [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenogra Moldova to from to universities Romania]. [http://www Moldova Sittings of the Senate of November 18, 2002. 2002. 18, November of Senate the of Sittings cit., 335–336. op. p. Kiss, cit., op. 336. p. Kiss, Seethe following records: Sittings of the Chamber of Deputies of April 29, 1996. Ministerul Educa Since 1990thereisaquotaforschoolingfo In thefield ofeducation Romania grants differentbenefitsfo ţ iei, Cercet ării high, about4000and2100pl i Tineretului [Ministry of Education, Research and Youth]: “Admiterea Research “Admiterea and [Ministry Youth]: of Education, şi Tineretului

RomaniaandMoldovathenum 152 ăţ ma?ids=441&idm=10&idl=2], 2007-05-26. 2007-05-26. ma?ids=441&idm=10&idl=2], ile din România”. [Admissions for the youth from the Republic of 155 and later Romania kept expenses. However,theMoldovanyouthwas .edu.ro/index.php/pressrel/5608], 2007-05-26. 2007-05-26. .edu.ro/index.php/pressrel/5608], 55 d intheParliamentary discussions,beingput ling, differentscholarsh originareexempted fromadmission exames placesreservedforforeignstudentswith withtheprotocols signedbetweenthe r Moldovanstudents,representingabout aces, respectively. the framework ofschooling 156 ber ofplacesgrantedfor r the Romanians living ips andservices.For

154 From2002 153 CEU eTD Collection Union]. Institutul European România: din European Institutul Union]. European ofthe extension the of perspective the and policy neighborhood –Betweenthe European Moldova devecin europeana politica Între Romanian citizenship,whichcouldbegeneri section Iwillreview the andtherewe relationship ofthetwocountries, until the 1 regime was established.Nevertheless,byanordinanceissuedtheRomanian Government, to beclosed,consequen according to thecommitments regardingtheaccessiontoEuropeanUnionbordershad citizens ofMoldovaandRomania Forten yearsRomania appliedthe“open According totheCovenantfrom 29 5.6. Passportfreebordercrossing 159 158 157 5.7. Thecitizenshiplaw since 2004visaisrequiredfrom thec the Moldovancitizensbutonlyavalidpassport. request „eveniftheyhaveanothercitizenship their Romanian citizenship forvariousreasons” canreacquireRomanian citizenshipby Romani Article 37(1§)statesthat„[f]ormer detailes, the motivation for the ammendments introduced, and the administrative side of granting the citizenship. citizenship. the side of administrative granting the and introduced, fortheammendments motivation the detailes, cit.). (op. Ne Ioradachi Constantin made by research the Adrian Pop, Gabriela Pascariu, George Angli Formulated by Constantin Iordachi. rely I itsimpact on of heavily the presentation and citizenship on legislation Romanian ofthe analysis the In The As theissue ofcitizenship wasby farth st ofJanuary2007,thustheda Law onRomanianCitizenship legislation on thisissue. tly bytheCovenantfrom 29 ătate

i perspectiva extinderii Uniunii Europene” [Romania and the Republic of the Republic [Romania and Europene” Uniunii extinderii şi perspectiva

between RomanianandMoldova Studiiimpact de II could crosstheborderwithth itizens ofallformer Sovietstates. th ofAugust1991betweenthetwoGovernments the ţ ioiu, Alexandru Purc Alexandru ioiu, te ofaccessiontotheEU from 1991introduced anewformofaccessto an citizenswho,before22December lost 1989, 56 vertheless, mymore analysisis focusedonthe changeing re severchangesintroducedsince2000,inthis 158 cally called „restoration ofcitizenship”. andtheydonotsettletheir domicile in Thistreatment wasapreferential, because . [Study ofimpact II], p. 37.

e mostimportant fact border” policy withregard toMoldova. th ofJune2001thepassportandvisa ăru : “România ş: “România , novisawasrequiredfrom eir identitycard.However, 157 şi RepublicaMoldova – or inshapingthe 159

CEU eTD Collection 1990.12.17, p. 13. 1990.12.17, least before2001. secondly, when referringtosupportivemeasures, consular taxes(Art.38,2§). the applicationwaseliminated (Art.37,1§).Fi special committee functioningbesidetheMinistry procedure wasbasedonlyona(legalized)personaldeclarati they werenotsupposedtoliveinRomania tobeentitledforcitizenship.Second,the been involuntarilystrippedofRomaniancitizenship” aswell“totheirdescendants”(2§). Romania”. 163 162 161 160 emerged, Iordachi’ssuggestion seems aswell unintended consequencesofthelaw. Nevertheless, calling back the context in whichthislaw mentioned thebeneficiariesandrelevant article passed without comments. the citizenship. Firstlybecauseduring thedebatesondraftlaw(December1990)nobody is questionablewhethertheRomani apply forrestoringit.However, their Romanian citizenshipfollowingtheSoviet occupation,basedonthesearticlestheymay abroad. reacquire Romanian citizenship to goes beyondthecommonlyacceptedstandardonrepatriation,enablingindividuals who citizenship legislation.First, itallowsRoma Law No. 21/1991 was reedited in 2000, and the content of Art. 37 appeares under Art. 35. Iordachi, Iordachi, Joint sessions of the Chamber of Deputies and Senate of December 13, 1990. cit., op. pp. 244–245. Iordachi, Constantin Since theinhabitantsofMoldovaandsome regionsfrom Ukrainewerestrippedfrom As Iordachi observed,the lawhasconsecrated 161 Besidethese novelties, thelawincluded se op. cit. op. 160 Thelawspecificallystipulated thatthis , p. 245. 163 ItmightbesuggestedthattheMoldovan applications arejustsome

according tothe analysis of th retain not only theirfirstciti an officialsaimed specifically nian citizenstoholddualcitizenship; second,it 57 nally, theapplicantswereexempted from this entitlement never acceptable, thattheauthorsmight have of Justice todetermine the conditions of twomajor innovations right isalsograntedtothosewho„have veral facilities for the applicants. First, on, thustheexamination bythe zenship, but alsotheirdomicile e parliamentary discussions,it at enabling them toretrieve M.O.R. II M.O.R. appeared assuch,at , Vol. I, Nr. 141, intheRomanian 162 And CEU eTD Collection which entitledthem toatax-freetr acceptance asRomanian citizens,Moldovanswere Romanian citizens weregrantedvisa-free travel for Romanian citizenshipfrom Moldova was invitedtoenternegotiationsjointhe that most oftherequestsforRomaniancitizen passport granted itsholder visa-free travel inCentral Europe. Inthisrespect itisvery telling citizenship wereactuatedbymaterial interest option”, whileontheotherhand,majority on onehand,dualcitizenshipofferedtheMoldova Moldova thatcouldleadinthe community, andasapreparatorysteptoward acloserintegrationbetweenRomaniaand envisioned dualcitizenshipas 167 166 165 164 strengthened, thedomestic desirefor a ‘politicalunion’withRomania. that Moldovan legislation allowsdual citizensh European Union. considerable strainbetweenthetwocountries, citizens hadastrongdestabilizing effectonMoldova’sin Romania wasusingdualcitizensh citizenship causedgenuineconcernamong Mo which wasabsentincaseofRomania. Moreov Iordachi, op. cit., pp. 249–250. cit.,pp. 249–250. op. Iordachi, Iordachi, op. cit., p. 253. Iordachi, Iordachi, It isalso importantto highlight thatdual citizenship undermined, rather than Iordachi’s research revealed that theRomanian citizenship lawfavoring Moldovan , pp. 239–269. cit,pp. 239–269. op. cit. op. , p. 247. 165 Theconflictbetween Romania andMoldovaemerged from thesituation

a strategyofunifyingethnicRo future toapossiblereunification. ip as astrategy for increasing itscontrol overMoldova. ansfer oftheirgoodsovertheborder. European Union.Andthe and UkrainepeakedinJanuary2001,when 58 s. UnliketheMoldovanpassport,aRomanian ship werefiledstarti intheSchengen space.Inaddition,upon their of MoldovancitizensapplyingforRomanian er, theamount ofapplicationsforRomanian ip onlyincasesof and lateralsostirredtheconcernsof ldovan policy-makers, whofearedthat also issuedacertific n intelligentsiaandpoliticiansan“exit manians into asinglepolitical 164 ternal politicallife, caused

ng in1998,afterRomania number ofapplications 167 ternational agreement, AsIordachi argues, ate of‘repatriation’ 166 CEU eTD Collection of propertybythenewcitizens. November 2002)motivated bytravelingin theSchengen spaceandthe claims forrestitution growth inthenumber ofrequests(13,000app first suspension,newelements appearedinth stipulation onrepatriationby exemption remained. examined bytheCitizenshipOfficeoperatingwith possessed Romanian citizenship.Thedecision abrogated; consequently,themethods appliedwe Nevertheless, theproceduredidnottake Government issuedOrdinanceNo.68/2002,which committed tosupporting theMoldovan citizens. Romanian citizenship, and attracted criticism 167/2001. This decisiontriggered months therestorationofc 171 170 169 168 Bucharest. Moldova forcollectingcitizenshipdossiersandtransportingthem inhugepackagesto Schengen space”, less andless”“takingintoconsideration restoration ofcitizenshiporig [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiecte/upl_pck.proiect?idp=2998&cam=2], 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiecte/upl_pck.proiect?idp=2998&cam=2], [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiecte/upl_pck.proiect?idp=3628&cam=2], 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiecte/upl_pck.proiect?idp=3628&cam=2],

Ibidem. 256. cit.p. op. Iordachi, Motiva Motiva According tomedia reports,thispr Bucharest wasquick toanswerback. Arguingthat„thecompensatory aspectofthe ţ ţ ie ie [Motivation], issued by the Government in January 2001. 2001. January in the Government by issued [Motivation], [Motivation], issued by the Government in November 2002. 170 Forthesecondtime, theGovernment suspendedforanothersixmonthsthe 168 inJanuary2001theGovernmentdecide itizenship falling under Article inally consideredbytheCiti

Ordinance No.160/2002.Besidethearguments sustainingthe 171

a streetdemonstrationof ocedure ledtothecreationofmafia 59 former simplified shape. Article35hasbeen e motivation, most impo in thepress from politiciansandjournalists the newvisa-freetravelopportunityin re similar tothoseforthepersonswho never was tobetakenonthebasisof adossier licants intheperiodbetweenAugustand 169 in the Ministry of Justice. Onlythetax- reinstituted therestor Aftersixmonths, asaresponsethe zenship LawNo.21/1991ispresent 35 ofthelawbyOrdinanceNo. Moldovan citizensapplyingfor d tosuspendforaperiodofsix rtantly theexplosive ation ofcitizenship.

networks in CEU eTD Collection (Art. 37 the Romanianpassportfortravelingabroad,onl Romanian citizenship,thehighnumber ofthea 2003. Third,theamendments aremotivatedby 21/1991 Lawwassuspendedtwotimes, totallyforoneyear betweenJanuary2001andMay involved agreatdealofinsecurity.Theenfo emphasize thatmoving toRomania isnoten of othercategories, and thecircle of entitled personswasreduced. Itisimportant to Law from 1991.Exceptforthecons severe reduction of entitlements if wecompar keep MoldovancitizensoutofRomania. not havehis/herresidenceinRo Romanian citizenship cantheoretically beacquire about Romanian cultureandcivilization spending fouryearsin those whoacquired visa for settlement inRo citi granted tothedescendantsofformer their citizenship requestsatRomania’s emba and since then this isin force. Themain alleviation included isthat former citizens canfile stipulating thenewconditions.Thiswasconf The evolutionof thecitizenship law canbesummeduplikethis:first, wewitnessa These restrictions definitely reduced thegroup of entitled persons.The fact that However, Ordinance43/2003introducedseveral At theendofsix-monthperiod,th 1 ); furthermore, 4)knowledgeoftheRoma thecountry(Art.10 mania, isa clear indication that the Government targeted to ular tax-exemption,theprocedur arerequired(Art.10 zens onlyuptothes 2 ); 3)thecategoryprevi ssies andconsulatesabroad(Art.12§2). 60 irmed bythe Parliament asLawNo.248/2003, e thestipulationsfrom e government issued rcement oftheentitlements enshrinedinthe y betweenRomania andthecountryoforigin mania may applyfor citizenship onlyafter couraged. Second, arrivingtothissettling pplicants, andthepressu d faster(lessthan 4years) ifsomeone does abuses with theentitlement ofacquiring nian languageandfundamental notions restrictions too:1)theentitlement is 1 ) . econd generation(Art.10 ously mentioned cannotuse e issimilar toapplication Ordinance No.43/2003, 2003 totheCitizenship re oftheEuropean 1 ); 2) CEU eTD Collection amendment,which hadretrospective no force. Government. Fourth,theleadingforcebehind Union. Thereisnoreference,notinasinglecase,totheconcernsofMoldovan 175 174 173 172 granted citizenship,andnotofthosewhoapp decade. between 2004and2007,butfallconsiderablybehindthenumbers from theprevious in 2003. 2000, because inthefollowingtwoyears citizensh would bemoreappropriatetosaythatthis Internal Affairs,betwee Romanian citizenship.Forexample, according to favorable toMoldovansasitis 300,000 Moldovansobtainedit. opposite direction.Yet,tomake The “small steps” strategy towardthe unioninthe lastyears turned outtobe small stepsinthe Law totheformer citizens of Romania, thisisbarelymore thanaformal “commemoration”. Romanian citizenship. to bechecked.Itcanput the Citizenship Law, becau cet România published in the M.O.R. Constantin Dolghier. Since all cases of granting c The drasticdecrease cannot be explained bythesuspensi Ministry of Internal Affairs: Cited by Iordachi, op. cit., p. 253. The data were collected from the ăţ enia român It hastobeemphasized thatthese figures There arevariousunofficialestimates rega As apreliminary conclusionitmight bestated [http://cetatenie.info.tm/index.php?page=8&action=viewall&mo=mo3], 2007-04-08. 175 174 Forthenextyearsfiguresareso ă în ultimii 14 ani. 14ani. în ultimii the data can be considered reliable. Constantin Dolghier: Dolghier: Constantin reliable. considered the data can be se the casesthat should have been processe n 1991and2002thenumberofre Informare privind num privind Informare Nr. SGG 1273, 2004. 04. 14, 2–3. JEAKGY, Cluj, record K 791. 791. K record Cluj, JEAKGY, 2–3. 14, 04. 2004. 1273, SGG Nr.

Monitorul Oficial al României al Oficial Monitorul thequestionofhowmany Mo frequently heard.Despitethecl 172 sure aboutthecorrectnessofth Contrastingly, according toth itizenship are made public ă figure representstheperiodbetween1991and 61 the citizenship policyisthe Government. rul depersoane,cet lied forit.Unofficialestimates reportabout represent the number of persons who were representthenumberofpersonswhowere on of the enforcement of the relevant articlesfrom the relevant of enforcement the on of rding thenumber ofMoldovanswhogained mewhat larger,2,424citizenshipsawarded ip wasgrantedonly for3personsandto8 Infotag that the Romanian legislation isnot that

I. (Offical Bulletin ofRomania,(Offical Section I.) Bulletin by d in this period were submitted before the , between1991and2000about patriated personsis85,552. ear referenceintheCitizenship ăţ by a Governmental Decree eni moldoveni care au dobândit dobândit au care moldoveni eni is statement, otherfactshave ldovans actuallygainedthe e data oftheMinistry of Redobândire cet Redobândire ăţ enie 173 It CEU eTD Collection [http://www.ong.md/index.php?mod=home&hmod=postbyid&id=75], [http://www.ong.md/index.php?mod=home&hmod=postbyid&id=75], Romania’s accessiontothe UE on Moldova), Ila taken intoevidencein Bucharest, reality isthatbetweenJune examination. Moldovans seekingtoobtainRomanian 500,000 applications 180 179 178 177 176 the motivation issuedbytheGovernment, butas awarding the citizenship wasobstr Citizenship Lawfrom1991some dossier inthecountryoforiginturnedoutto examination werethose submitted in 2002. was sloweddownattheadministrative level. of theCitizenshipLawwerenotenough toimpe process wassuccessfully obstructed. Seemingly citizenship between1991and2002(85,552persons) the immediate conclusionisthatthe acquired thecitizenship. Moreover,compared to Kishinew, 28,028dossiersweretakenintoevid 2007 canbedrawnasfollows:several hundreds of directly in Bucharest. much higher,perhaps topping500,000, andthere isprobably alarge amount submitted [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6268853.stm], 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6268853.stm], [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6101&idm=8&idl=1], 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6101&idm=8&idl=1], Dolghier, op. op. cit. Dolghier, ONG.MD: BBCNews: Speech of Ilie Ila The names appearinthe Of cu cites the information received received citesthe information şcu To sum up,ononehand,ascomparedto The balanceofthepreviouslypresente Efectele sociale ale ader Romania tackles Moldova 2007. visaJanuary, of rush. 16th 179 Thenumber ofapplicationssubmitted cu. Sittings of the Senate of April April 26, Senate of 2006. ofthe Sittings şcu. 176 , or,asPresident TraianB ficial Bulletin Section III. Section ficial Bulletin 2001andMarch2007atotalof

from theMinistryofJustice. ă rii României la UE asupra Moldova laUERepublicii asupra rii României ucted onadministrative level. major restrictionswereintroduced;ontheotherhand, 178 meaning that their dossi citizenship could exceed800,000 in2007. 180 be aneffectivetooltoslowdowntheprocess. 62 Curiouslyenough,the“f At the beginning of 2006 the dossiers under Atthebeginningof2006dossiersunder d figuresfrom theperiodbetween2002and ence inBucharestand the restrictionsimposed bytheamendments thenumber ofthepersonsthatgained different authorsrevealed aswell,themain de Moldovan applications;yet,theprocess ă thousandapplications weresubmitted in sescu recently said, the total numberof the entitlementsen totheConsulatefrom Kishinewis 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. 28,028Moldovancitizenswere As itcan beinterpreted from er isunderprocessof 2,435 personsactually (Thesocialeffects of acility” tosubmit the shrined intothe 177 The CEU eTD Collection

cultural projectsfrom aninitiativethat Moldova, might asasupportforpro- beconsidered after 2003Romania spendsconsiderablymore m one ofthemoststableinitia various conclusionscanbedrawn: relationship betweenthetwostatesconsiderably worsened. committees wasobstructed,thelatterbeingdiss Nevertheless, thecooperationininterpar Consequently, itisobvious that theMoldovan Government waswilling tocooperate. for theimport–export products,butthefinanced and itscitizens ingeneral, likethevisa and Moldovan officialsitcanbeassessedthatseveral servedtheinterestsofMoldovanstate process. motive forhaltingtheprocessofgrantingcitizenship wasnottocomplicatetheaccession 181 points: occurred. The main findingsandcomments mi system wasfarfrom beingunproblematic,from and differentmotives some bigchanges the purpose of integrating thetw officials the pillars of the“small stepspolicy”, inotherwords thepoliciesputforward with [ Freedom ofMovement of Moldovan Citizens”. In: UNISCI Discussion Papers, January 2006, pp. 257–274. www.ucm.e George Dura: “A Tale Of Two Visa Regimes: Repe 181 1) This chapterreviewed themain measures 2) sci/UNIS s/info/uni

Concerning themeasures takenbycomm Following thefunctioning of theunilateral initiativesof the Romanian state CI10Dura.pdf tives, althoughthenumber ofsc

o states. Thepresentation revealedthatthefunctioningof first, the benefits in the Romanian education system seem ], 2007-04-08. ], 2007-04-08. passport freebordercrossi rcussionsRomania’s Of Acce 63 liamentary committeeand theinterministerial ght be shortly summarized in the following olved bytheMoldovan oney asinthepreviousyearsforfinancing projectsfrom theMoldovaFundaswell. thatwereconsidered bythe Romanian on agreement oftheRomanian and holarships decreased;second, ssion to the EU on the the to EU on ssion the ng, thetaxexemptions initiative, whenthe CEU eTD Collection domain ofeconomy. Government didnotceasedtosenddonationsandsustainthepreferen experiences, namely themisusages regardingthe EU. reason behind thesemeasures wastoaverthind citizenship lawandalsoadministrative obstruction inordertograntlesscitizenship.Themain citizenship thatimplies aRomanian passportto while Romania waswillingtonegotiate about opposition andtherestrictions imposed bythe EU Moldovannes; third,the entitlements from Romanian forces inMoldovawherethest

4) 3)

As alastpoint,itworthmentioning The influencingfactorsbehindthe the 1991Citizenship Lawwerecutback. 64 o thereweremade severeamendments to the ate nationpolicybaca the visarequirements, when coming tothe ering factorsinRomania’s accessiontothe granted support,nevert accession. Itisimportant to highlight that changes occurredaretheMoldovan that thereweresome disappointing heless theRomanian tial treatmentinthe me thetheory of CEU eTD Collection Unity (PRNU)andtheSocialist PartyofLabor nationalist partieslike theGreaterRomania Pa symbolism associated withthe nationalholiday, the 1 Moldova. Nevertheless,thisviewisal emphasize whenreferringtotheRepublicof thispointbyusingthename “Bessarabia” which isoftenmentioned asoneoftheRomani is alsoobviousthatconsideringMoldovaa“R is anunquestionedconvictionthat directed towardMoldovaortheneedofha there areno Romanian politicalforcesthat the discussionsregardingMoldova. supportive policies, the main politicalforcescomm Romania regarding this issue.Inthe following toward Moldovaadditional information hastobe Moldova Chapter 6.PoliticaldebatesinRomaniaabou with theCountry”.Consequently, inMarch–althoughnot an offi commemoration ofthe1918Great Union. Moreover,commemoration thereis 6.1. PoliticalforcesandtheMoldova-policy When coming tothequestionsofRo By followingtheparliamentary debatesthefi In ordertobroadenuptheperspectivea it isalmost impossible forapoliticiantoavoidthistopic. thepeopleofMoldovaarepart so supportedinthecommonknowledgeby ving goodrelationsbetween 65 I willpresent thegeneralperceptions aboutthe question the legitimacy (SLP)immediately appear intheforeground. t therelationship with theRepublicof rty (GRP),thePartyof Romanian National manian-Moldovan unification,wellknown bout Romania’s supportiv cial holyday –, for the “Union of Bessarabia cial holyday–,forthe“UnionofBessarabia omanian land”isagenerallysharedview, introduced abouttheinternaldebatesfrom an historical provinces. Radical politicians itted toitandthemain topicsemergingin rst thing that becomes evidentisthat st ofDecember thatis the oftheRomanian nation.It the twostates.There of kin-statepolicies e policiesdirected another separate CEU eTD Collection identified: unionwithMoldova; theTransnis becoming radicalized. to form amajority. Thismay serveasan force inRomania, andparticipatedindifferent Governmentalcoaliti own spokespersonsfortheMoldovan-issues,par Party ofSocialDemocracy ofRomania (PSDR, including inits1992pr (NLP) andtheChristian Democratic National Peasant’s Party(CDNPP),thelatereven Parliamentary debatesconcerningthisissue, However, centrist parties thatare not considered 182 6.2. ThemaintopicsoftheParliamentarydiscussions political spectrum inRomania, is parties. tackling theMoldova-policy,vanguardfighters cannot bedrawnalongideologicallines.Neve situation, concerningthepoliciesregarding Romanian policiestowardMoldova,aswell party rather,most ofthedetermining political the rhetoricdidnotalterandrevisionism isth It may safelystatedthatthesituationdidnot be King, op. cit, p. cit, 263. op. p. King, Regarding thecontentofparliamentary disc It isworthmentioning thatdespitetheradica Referring tothesituationfr ogram theunionbetweenRomania a

om the1990-1994period,Kingremarked that“acrossthe anecessaryplankineveryparty’splatform”. trian conflict;theMol 66 mostimportantly the National Liberal Party explanation forRomanian foreignpolicynot e utmost purposeofsome factionsfromevery changemuch overtime. This isnottosaythat relationship withMoldovacleardelimitations ticularly afterthefusionwithSLP. forces have their people thatmonitor the the nation policies of Moldova. Due to this the nationpoliciesofMoldova.Duetothis the former NationalSalvationFront)hasits rtheless, as measured rtheless, as radical also playedanimportantrole inthe ussions thefollowing l parties represent aconsiderable political aretherepresentativ nd Moldova.Finally,theleftist dovan nationpoliciesand ons, theynevermanaged bythefrequencyof es oftheextremist main topicscanbe 182

CEU eTD Collection is therecognitionofMoldovaasanindependentstate. the fieldofnationpolicies:th train ofthought thethird bigmi when thebasictreatywithUkrainewasdisc of notexploitingthefavorable the politicians committed tothemerger turned against thegovernmental policiesaccusing it that clear afterthe1994electionsfromMoldova 6.2.1. Thequestionoftheunion cannot bemade becauseallthesecoex Moldova’s foreign policy;andthekin-statepoli 184 183 Bejenariu statedthat“the ma deputies withdifferent ideological affiliation Several examplesmight bementioned evenfrom early2007,statements formulated by political groups aswell. Nevertheless, the visi leader): “GreaterRomania intheunified Europe!” was adopted.See,forexample thenewsloga declarations, resolutionsaddresse Moldova’s independencewasdi were theloudestbetween1990 of “small steps”andemphasized the priority of international legal norms. unification werequickly rejectedby theparl [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5372&idm=1&idl=2], 2007-05-26. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5372&idm=1&idl=2], Joint sittings of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate of November 28, 2002. 2002. 28, November Senate of the and Chamber Deputies of of the sittings Joint 1993. 2, February of of Deputies Chamber the of Sittings The unionistlaments graduallyfadedaround2000whenamore“EU-conform”policy The unionist callsmeant specificallytoin e firstisthe1991treatywithth

nifestations of Voronin and nifestations ofVoronin stake (or“capitaltreason”)ofth and 1993,especiallywhenthe Molotov-Ribbentrop Pactand historical moments. Oneofthepeakpointswasperiod d totheMoldovanGovernment scussed. Nevertheless,thepr isted, being logically interlinked. iamentary majority, whicharguedforthepolicy ussed (1995–1998),consideredintheunionist 67 from left toextreme right:SDPDeputyEugen on ofthe“ideal Romania” never disappeared. n lunchedbyCorneliuVadim Tudor(GRP thechancesofunionconsiderablydecreased, cies ofRomania.Cleardelimitation intime M.O.R. II fluence thedecisionsofGovernment 184 Similar rhetoricwasadoptedbyother , Vol. IV, Nr. 8, 1993.02.03, p. 9-22. p. 9-22. 1993.02.03, 8, Nr. IV, , Vol. his supporters […] harm thegood his supporters[…]harm e SovietUnion,whilethesecond e Romanian foreignaffairsin oposals fortheadoptionof tackling directlytheissueof

183 Asitbecame CEU eTD Collection [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6256&idm=1,67&idl=2], 2007-05-25. 2007-05-25. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6256&idm=1,67&idl=2], ChamberLari of Leonida of the March Speech of Iorga. Sittings 13, Deputies 2007. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma Speech of Emil Strung 2007-05-25. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6249&idm=1,06&idl=2], ofthe Sittings Bejenariu. Chamber Eugen of Speech of ofMarch 2007. 6, Deputies “Bessarabia belongstoRomania”. Prut River history, Romania andthe Emil Strung relations between thetwo Romanian statesthat are 185 support infavorofMoldova’sterritorialintegrity.However,whenJuly1992 Kishinew in thesame way.Themessagesrepeatedlyconde the worldanddifferentinternationalorganizatio recurrent topics. TheRomanian Parliament sent than, thefrozen conflict and the situation of 6.2.2. TheTransnistrianconflict to theEU-discourse;neverthele and thepreviousGovernment. Around2000eventh discourse turnedtoanever-endinglaments and toward themerger; neverthele influence thedecisionsofGovernment andth Allemphasis added by Kiss Ágnes. The topicoftheTransnistrianwardomina Summing up,therewasaperi (sic!)”; finally, GRP Deputy LeonidaLari (sic!)”;finally,GRPDeputy ă saidthat“Today,[...]althoughwespeakthesame languageandsharethesame . Sittings oftheă. Chamber Sittings Deputies ofMarch of 27, 2007. Republic ofMoldovaare

ss, theunionistthoughtssurvived. ss, theseattempts failed. 185 od intheearly1990’swhen ?ids=6273&idm=1,02&idl=2], 2007-05-25. 2007-05-25. ?ids=6273&idm=1,02&idl=2], 68 ethnicRomanians living therehave remained ns, furthermore askedtheGovernment toact e parliamentary majority totakeradicalsteps mned theRussian interferenceandaskedfor criticism of theactual governmental parties different declarationstotheparliaments of ted especiallythe1992discussions;since temporarily separated e radicalpartiesadaptedtheirviewpoints twostatesartificially separated bythe -Iorga heldaspeech simply entitled Starting from1994theunionist the unionistcallsaimed to […].”;NLPDeputy CEU eTD Collection , Vol. III, Nr. 13, 1992.07.11, 2. p. 13, 1992.07.11, Nr. II, Vol. III, Romanian Constitution forbidding dual citiz curious, hewaselected CDNPP), itwasproposedtobegrantedRomanian citizenship,and,whatisevenmore national dignity.” hostile actionsagainstth against thecitizensofRe following statement citedfrom a1993declarati declarations emerged speakingupforthem. Thea against the“RussianandSlavicexpansio national hero,the“Bessarabian patriot” fightingfortheterrito was releasedin2001.IntheRomanian publicopinionIla political trial. Atthe end Ila charged withterrorist activities against theauthorities of Transnistria and wassubjectof a Front’s pro-Romanian wing.The“Ila opinion, namely theimprisonment byTransnistria waiting forthereactions asked forjointmilitary troops 189 188 187 186 May 25, 1993. May 25, 1993. CDPP in 1994 and 1998. 1998. and in 1994 CDPP Sittings of the Chamber of Deputies of July 7, 1992. 1992. 7, July the of Chamber of of Deputies Sittings Joint minlitary troops of Byelorussia, During his imprizonment he was a deputy in the Moldovan Parliament as well being the candidate of the the of the candidate well Parliamentbeing as Moldovan the in he wasadeputy imprizonment his During Declaration–Appeal of the Senate regarding the judicial stageing from Tiraspol from stageing judicial the regarding Senate the of Declaration–Appeal There wasanincident oftheTransnistria M.O.R. II 188 InordertorescueIla , Vol.IV, Nr. 107,1993.05.26, p.16. Romanian Senatorin2000astheca e Romanian people,infringingthe ş the otherappointedstates. cu wassentencedtodeath,howev

186 public ofMoldova,chargedbeingRomanians, represent , theParliament repliedwithacautiousandevasiveanswer, Bulgaria, Russia, Ro Russia, Bulgaria, ş cu Group”–named after ş cu, hewasnominated forNobelPeacePrize(bythe ens beingelectedintopublicoffices. nism”. Duringtheirimprisonment a bunchof 69 M.O.R. II on oftheRomanian Senate:“Thecharges n warthatspecificallycaptured thepublic mania andUkraine.

pproach tothisissue isreflected inthe n forcesofsixleadersthePopular , Vol. III, Nr. 13, 1992.07.10, p. 11-16. 11-16. p. 1992.07.10, 13, Nr. III, Vol. , 187 ş cu veryquicklybecame hailedasa fundamental human rightsandour ndidate oftheGRP,despite er, hewasneverexecutedand rial integrityofMoldovaand their leader IlieIla . Sittings of the Senate Senate of . ofthe Sittings 189 ş cu –was M.O.R. CEU eTD Collection and influenceservedasanimportant argum issue thatshockedtheRomanian officials.As the relationswithRussiawererepresentedby and theheadwayofMoldovanism Thenationpoliciesandtheforeignaffairsof since 1993.Thegreatestconcernof 6.2.3. ThenationpoliciesandtheforeignaffairsofMoldova 190 arrangements meant tobring closerthetwostat firmly theMoldovanist-policies ofKishinew ConcerningRomania’s externalpoliciesth hand for“missing thetrainofunification”, 6.2.4. Romania’skin-statepolicies of nationalemancipation” from Moldova. politicians –adoptingthelanguage the caseof thestudentprotestsfrom 1995,whichwasconsideredbysome Romanian different politicalgroupsdeclaredtheirsympat changing historycurricula,etc. were thoroughlydepicted(likethe1994electio from thepoliciespursuedunderSangheliGove Romanian campaign presentedinadeta were Vol. VI, Nr. 63, 1995.04.21, p. 21-22. 21-22. p. 1995.04.21, 63, Nr. VI, Vol. the April 12, Senate of 1995. of Parliament). Sittings Moldovan the in Ion Dedu (deputy of Speech Sittings of the Senate of April 10, 1995. M.O.R.II April the 10, Senate of 1995. of Sittings The policiestargetingthesp

) butspecially the policies la . Thefirstsignsofdistanci ofthepro-Romanian forces theRomanian officialswas read oftheconceptionMoldovanismandanti- 190 ent forsettingupthesupportivesystem. , Vol. VI, Nr. 59, 1995.04.20, p. 10-11, 35. 35. 10-11, p. 1995.04.20, 59, Nr. VI, , Vol. 70 and ontheotherhandfornotopposingmore signing thefoundingdocuments oftheCIS,an iled manner andfirmly it waspresentedbefore,theRussianpresence es waswelcomed byallParliamentary parties. . Consequently, setting uptheinstitutional hy withtheprotestersfromMoldova,likein n campaign, changingthenationalsymbols, e Government wasmuch criticizedonone rnment in1993,themostimportant events Moldovahavebeenconstantlymonitored unched byVoronin.Furthermore, ng fromRomania andtightening from the“rebirth Moldova–, the orientationtowardRussia disapproved.Starting M.O.R. II , CEU eTD Collection 36/1993 wasamended onlyin2001. Moldovan institutions. Althoughthis kindofsuggestionsappearedalreadyin1993,theLaw renounce tonegotiationswiththeMoldovan Russia. There wasageneralconsentthatitservesto 193 192 191 passing thelaw,andhowmuch supportwasgive laws, however still remain the questions: What that there was amajority infavor of theam of theParliament totheGovernmental Ordinanc Furthermore, twopuzzlingquestionshave with theconstantlyfluctuatingamounts of support, norforbroadeningthepossibilities. radical innovations didnotemerge alloverthe period,neither inthesense ofcuttingdownthe negotiating aboutwithEUofficials. visa regime undertheEUcame inthefore awarding citizenshipforMoldovanapplicants. only around2006whenIlieIla „unionist” pressfrom Moldova. specifically, theutmost concernformulated by aids didnotarrivetothewant and Leonida Lari-Iorga (GRP). [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenogra 2007-05-25. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6267&idm=2,05&idl=2], Although this was a general concern the most prominent speakspersons are the poets Adrian P Speech Mortunof Speech Ioan Alexandru (PNL). S Speech of Ilie Ila Further proposalandcriticisms appeared Concerning thefunctioningofsystem th cu. Sittings of the Senate of March 19, 2007. March 19, Senate of 2007. ofthe Sittings şcu.

ed destination, namely tothe ş cu turned tomilitate against blocking onadministrative level 191 Inordertoresolvethissituationitwasrecommended to 193 ma?ids=6044&idm=1,11&idl=2], 2007-05-25. ma?ids=6044&idm=1,11&idl=2], However,itisimportant to ittings of the Senate of February 27, 2006. of 2006. oftheSenate February 27, ittings the Moldova Fund? Second,whatwasthereaction the MoldovaFund? endments, sincetheOrdinanceswereapprovedby 71 counterbalanceMoldova’s front in2006,whenitwasproposedtobe 192 n to the initiatives of the Government? n totheinitiativesofGovernment? were theparliamentary debatesaboutbefore es amending theCitizenship Law?It isclear concerningtheCitizen Anothertopic,thepe Romanian politicians wasthefate of the to bediscussed.HowdealttheParliament Government ratherfinancedirectlythe e mainproblem wasconsidered thatthe pro-Romanian institutions.More highlight thatproposalsof rspective of the new ship Law, however ship Law,however orientationtoward

ă unescu (SLP) unescu CEU eTD Collection are notenoughavailablejudgesin arrangements aredesignedinawaythatthere In the Senate thearguments againstaccepting 197 196 195 194 the Government wereunfavorable, setting deadlinesandbroadeningth granting thecitizenshiphasbecome waytoolo submitted totheParliamentinMay2006byGRPdeputies. vote, whichalwaysendedwithoverwhelmi minor wranglingrelated togrammar andstylistic Moldovan officialsthisrequestwasneveraccomplished. media outlets withpro-Romanian orientati For thisenditwasrepeatedlyrecommendedto proposals weredirectedjusttoen debates intheParliament onthistopic.Inte deputies of the GRP, among them LariIorgaandIlieIla deputies oftheGRP,among Leonida remained arathermarginal issue inparlia Furthermore, wemay concludethatthewhole meaning that just several minutes were reserved forthe„debates”. [http://www.cdep.ro/proiecte/2006/400/30/7/pvg437.pdf], 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. [http://www.cdep.ro/proiecte/2006/400/30/7/pvg437.pdf], 2007-04-08. [http://www.cdep.ro/proiecte/2006/400/30/7/em437.pdf], [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiecte/upl_pck.proiect?idp=7397&cam=2], 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiecte/upl_pck.proiect?idp=7397&cam=2], Propunere legislativ Propunere It has to be mentioned, that the debates in the Chamber of Deputies were issued in emergency procedure, Punct de vedere [Point of View], issued by the Government. Expunere de motive. [Assessments, issued by the Government] Moreover, the only draft for amending th Moreover, theonlydraftforamending Concerning theamendments oftheCitizenship Seeing thefluctuationofMoldovaFund ă demodificare

i completare a Legii nr. 21/1991, acet nr.21/1991, şi completareaLegii sure thatthefinancialsupport Bucharest, theproceduredoes 197 e personnelinvolvedintheissue. anditwasrejectedbybothchambers oftheParliament. on. Arguingthatthiswouldhavebotheredthe restingly enough,thiscannotbesustained.The 72 mentary debates,beingdevelopedmostlyby is nopossibilityforshorteningtheperiod,there ng majorities infavoroftheordinance. topic aboutgrantingciti ng, thedraftcontaine issues,noseriousdeba specifyinthelaw one mightsupposethattherewere serious the draft werethattheadministrative Law the recordsshowthatexceptsome e currentcitizenshipregulationwas 195 arrives tothe“unionist”press. ş Arguingthattheprocessof eniei române.ăţeniei cu. not takemore time thanin d some proposalsabout on budgetthename of 196 zenship toMoldovans tes precededthefinal Theassessments of 194

CEU eTD Collection system. the policiespursuedbyG politiciansbelongingto. commitment ofdifferent of Deputiestherewasnodebateatall. other countries,andanyway,itisa 199 198 nation buildingpolicy. be witnessedashiftinfavor ideological spectrum. Nevertheless, withthe ne directed toward Moldova wereembracedby sustained duringthedecadewithoutrecommenda the issueof“integration program” setupintheear redefined. Seemingly therewereno oppositional forcesintheRomanian politicalsphere to Seemingly thereisnopoliticalwilltochangethesituation. since 2003,isaclearsignofindifferenceor the factthattherewerenocons [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6153&idm=14&idl=1], 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6153&idm=14&idl=1], [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6101&idm=8&idl=1], 2007-04-08. 2007-04-08. [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6101&idm=8&idl=1], Sittings of the Chamber of Deputies September 14, 2006. 14, the of Chamber September of Deputies Sittings pril26, 2006. the Senate of of Sittings The Moldova-policywasconstantlyonthepol With thisnew information thepoliticalco of theaccessiontoEuropeanUnionondetriment ofthe

overnment, norecommendationsweremadeforchangingthe tructive proposals,notjustrega bad thingtobroadenthebureaucracy. 199 Althoughthedraftlawhadma 73 w regulationsofcitizenshippolicy,therecan members ofparties coveringthe whole tions forchangingit.Moreover,thepolicies ofconsideringthe

mmitment totheMoldova-policyhasbe Finally, inspiteofthefrequentcritiques itical agendaduetotheactivity of the ly 1990,anditwascontinuously rding thisdraftbutingeneral ny aspectstocriticize, situation convenient. 198 IntheChamber CEU eTD Collection interwar period. reunification ofthetwostates,whichwouldhave meantthestatusquoof reinstalling they form distinctMoldovannation.Theshar a Moldova belongtotheRomanian the ethnicityofpeoplefrom Moldova:the investigated. Brubaker’s approach,theinternaldebateswith national policies.Giventheconstructednature account too,namely theinfluenceofdifferent mutually influence eachother.Moreover,the that thekin-state, the home-state and themi Brubaker concerningthedynamics amongthediffe bilateral relations between thetwostates. situation hadabigimpact all nation buildingpoliciesofMoldova.Astheanalys between the external nationbuilding policies of minority groups,likewise inthecaseofRo Europe seriousconflictsemerged duetothe into thedevelopments ofRomania’s policiesdirectedtowardMoldova. building policiesofRomania andtheRepublicof Conclusions

The conceptual framework oftheanalysis Thepresentworkwasdedicatedtoin The basesof thenation building policies are over thepastseventeenyearsondefiningnatureof nation,contrastingly,theMol nority nationalisms arein 74 model’s furtherdevelopments weretakeninto national policiespursuedbysome statesand mania andMoldova. The conflictemerged ofnationalism, animportant component of externalanddomestic factorsforpursuing Romaniathatoverlapped withtheinternal Moldova,andtoservewithdeeperinsights p edgeof thedebateswasquestionof Romanian sidearguesthatthepeopleof in thefieldsofnationalisms werealso rent typesofnationalisms, whichassumes vestigate thedynamics betweenthenation wasgivenbytheth represented bytwo viewpointsindefining is ofthispaperreve dovan officialssustainthat terlinked, consequently, In CentralandEastern aled, this conflictual aled, thisconflictual eoretical model of CEU eTD Collection committees andtheMoldovaFund). However,thechangesoccurredarenotduesolely tothe reflect theshiftsin Romanian–Moldovan (e.g.dissolvingthe interministerial relations when therelationship betweenthe twostates Moldova became politicallymarginalized. Furthe following facts:the systemwasbuiltupuntil1994, unilateral measuresadoptedbyRomania. the Moldovanintereststoo,consequently Ofcourse,thebilate the twostates,passportfreebordercrossing,etc.). education system, etc.),butal measures includedRomania’s unilateralinitiatives (the citizenship law,thebenefits inthe was thegradualintegrationoftwostatesa measures onbehalfofMoldovaandtheMoldov “special” manner andthenation building project Romanian forcesfrom Moldovabeingpolitic the unionist intentions werenotanymore inth this “dynamic” isthatMoldovanismbecame a as atoolforthevalidationofgeopoliticalintere separatist movements, theintegr Romania were envisionedtosecuretheterrito promoters ofMoldovanism. Theprinciplesof each otherandgeneratedara follows: thepan-Romanianidealsbeingpresent

In spiteoftheMoldovan objectionsRomani The dynamics ofthenationalisms ofRomani Concerning thefunctioningofsupportiv so bilateralinitiatives(impor dicalization among theminorities from Moldovaandthe ation ofpowerfulminority organizations,butservedaswell ally marginalized si 75 nd tocounterbalancetheRussianinfluence.The rial integrityofMoldovaunderthemenace of Moldovanism thatimplied delimitation from declared statenationpolicyinaperiodwhen considerably worsened. Thus,the changes in MoldovaandRomania mutually reinforced sts relatedtoRussia.Aninteresting aspectof main controversiesemergedbecauseofthe e forefrontineitherof thestates, thepro- rmore, thereweresome cutbacks after2001, an citizens. The reason behind these efforts an citizens.Thereasonbehindtheseefforts thus beforethepro-Romanian forcesfrom a neverceased totrea materialized in diversified supportive a and Moldova can be sketched as it a andMoldovacanbesketchedasit e system theanalysisrevealed t-export taxexemptions between nce the1994elections. ral initiativesserved t itsneighbor ina CEU eTD Collection not withdrawthem. were severemisuses inthesemeasures (forex Moldova sinceMoldovanism became thestate preponderantly cultural,whatmet perfectlyth projects, just thesource waschanged.Moreover,the financeddomains became law. However,thedissolutionofMoldova integration intotheEuropeanUnion.Oneofth Moldovan opposition, but alsotothe Romanian geopoliticalinterests,mostimportantly tothe of nationbuildingpolicies, andthefunctioningof the limitations of thispaper,theempirical rese cannot begeneralizedforanalyzingotherconflic the development andfunctioningoftheRomanian supportivesystem Romanian andMoldovannationbuildingpoliciesinadynamic rela considered asanswered.Thean Union couldbewitnessed. with the new regulations of citizenship policya the extremist parties.Althoughthereisagene the frequencyoftacklingMo traced alongideologicallinesamong theRomani concerns thepoliciesregardi during the decadewithout anyre toward Moldovaandthe“integ no Romanian politicalforcesthatwould questio With theinformation presented,themain questionsproposedforthispapercanbe Concerning theinternaldeba ng therelationshipwithMol ration program” setupintheear alysis providedinformation aboutthedevelopments ofthe ldova-policy thevanguardfighters aretherepresentativesof commendation forchanging it. Furthermore, inwhatit tes from Romaniatheresearch uncoveredthatthere are 76 ample inthedomain of economy), Romania did arch yieldedinformation abut theconstruction Funddidnotaffect shift infavor of theaccessiontoEuropean e resultsistheamendm ral commitment towardtheMoldova-policy, n thelegitimacy ofkin-statepoliciesdirected e needs of the pro-Romanian forces from e needsofthepro-Romanian from forces tual nationbuildingcases nation policy. Furthermore,although there an politicalforces.Nevertheless,regarding thekin-statepolicies dova, clearboundariescannotbe ly 1990hasbeensustained tionship, aswellabout financing theMoldovan . Althoughtheresults ent ofthecitizenship which havenotbeen , thisbeingoneof CEU eTD Collection still intheforefrontandkeeptodefinerelationshipbetween thetwostates. relevance of thechosen caseis discussed in therelevant literature aboutRo

given byitspoliticalactuality, mania and Moldova untilnow. Furthermore,the 77 since the political debates are CEU eTD Collection

Brubaker, Rogers.1998.MythsandMisconcep Brubaker, Rogers.1996. Bloed, ArieandvanDi Alexandrescu, Ion.1994. Bibliography Dura, George.2006.ATale OfTwoVisaRegi Dungaciu, Dan.2005. Dolghier, Constantin. (s.a.): Culic, Irina.2003.StateBuildingand Constituti Crowter, William. 1996.NationalismandPo Cojocaru, Gheorghe.2001. Chirtoac Chinn, JeffandRoper,StevenD.1998. Bruchis, Michael.1996. Brubaker, Rogers.2004. International. New Europe Treaties. TheCaseofCentralandEasternEurope 305. Cambridge andNewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress. State oftheNation:ErnestGell Papers, January2006,257–274. To TheEuOnFreedom Of Bucure Collapse oftheSovietUnion andtheDilemm pentru PoliticiPublice: [Romania –Moldova:from the“bridgeofflow Retrieved on2007-04-08. Romania] [http://cetatenie.info.tm/i after 1989. relationship betweenRomania a România ş Papers, 26(1),95–100. the RestorationofRussianEmpire Moldova Moldovan. The History,Culture,Languageand ă , Nicolae.2002.Romania –Moldova:dela ş ti: Omega. , ed.DonaldL.Dyer,pp.NewYork:Columbia UniverityPress. i RepublicaMoldova REGIO . Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress. (2003),38–58. Moldova anteportas.Bucure jk, Pieter(eds.)1999.ProtectionofMinorityRi The RepublicofMoldavia.Fromthe Nationalism Reframed.Nationhoodand Ethnicity WithoutGroups.Cambridge: HarvardUniversityPress. A shorthistoryofBessarabiaandNorthernBucovina Noua frontier Colapsul URSSsidilemmarela Redobândire cet ner andtheTheoryofNationalism [ThenewSchengenborderanditsimpact onthe nd theRepublicofMoldova]. Movement OfMoldovanCitizens. ndex.php?page=8&action=viewall&mo=mo3], Territorial Autonomy inGagauzia.Nationalities ă Schengen . NewYork:Columbia UniversityPress. litical TransformationinMoldova.In: ăţ 78 enie România mes: RepercussionsOf tions intheStudy ofNationalism. In: on Writing inCentraland EasternEurope as oftheRomanian–Romanian Relations]., ers” totheconcretewall].In:Institutul ş Contemporary PoliticsofthePeople ‘poduldeflori’lazidulbeton. ti: Tritonic. ş . Hague/London/ Boston:KluwerLaw i impactulasuprarela ţ iilor Româno-Române [Regaining ofCitizenship. Collapse oftheSovietEmpireto the nationalquestionin , ed.JohnA.Hall,272– Romania’s Accession ghts ThroughBilateral UNISCI Discussion ţ iilor dintre . Iaş [The [The i. Studies in in Studies The CEU eTD Collection European Comission forDemocracy ThroughLaw: EU membership givesRomania newopportuni Enache MarianandCimpoie Dyer, DonaldL.(ed.)1996. Iordachi, Constantin.2004.DualCitizenship [http://www.crisisgroup.org/li International CrisisGroup.2004. Ieda, Osamu. 2004.Post-communistNationBu Huber, KonradandMickey,RobertW.1999.Defini Heintz, Monica.2005.Republic Romania:TheColdWarofNational ofMoldovaversus Halász, Iván.2006.ModelsofKinMinorityProt Fowler, Bridig.2004.FuzziingCitizenship,Natio , 19 Studies Policy European for National MinoritiesbytheirKin-states le_id=556], Retrievedon2007-04-09. [http://www.ceps.be/Article.php?artic 1993-1997. Iaş Contemporary PoliticsofthePeopleMoldova Beyond Sovereignty.FromStatus Hokkaido University,Sapporo. Kántor et.al.,pp.239–269. SlavicEurasian St In: Central Europe:AComparisonbetweenHungar ons_over_transdniestria.pdf], on2006-12-21. Report No.157,Chi Hungary. In: van Dijk,pp.17–51.Hague/London/Boston: KluwerLawInternational. Bilateral Treaties.TheCaseofCentralandEasternEurope and PrescriptionforModeratingitsImpact.In: Identities. University, Sapporo. pp. 255–279.SlavicEurasianStudies,No. Research Center,HokkaidoUniversity,Sapporo. Protection, ed.KántorZoltán etal.,pp.177–238.Slavic Eastern Europe.In: Interpreting the“HungarianStatusLaw” asa Hokkaido University,Sapporo. Kántor Zoltánetal.,pp.3–57.SlavicEurasian The HungarianStatusLaw:NationBu Journal ofPoliticalScien The HungarianStatusLaw:NationBu i: Polirom. The HungarianStatusLaw:Na ş inau/ Brussels.Retrieved from Studies inMoldovan.The ş u, Dorin.2000.Misiunediplomatic brary/documents/europe/mol Moldova. RegionalTensionsOverTransnistria th ofJanuary2006. Law toTransnationalCitizenship ce andInternationalRelations [CDL-INF,2001]. and PoliciestowardKi ilding and/orMinorityProtection 79 9, SlavicResearchCenter,Hokkaido ties initsrelations withMoldova.In: ilding andtheStatusLawSyndrome in ection inCentralandEasternEurope.In: New Form ofKin-statePolicyinCentraland nalizing PoliticalSpace:AFramework for udies, No.4,SlavicResearch Center, Studies,No.4,SlavicResearchCenter, Protection ofMinorityRightsThrough y, Romania, andtheRepublicofMoldova. Report ofthePreferentialTreatement . Boulder:EastEuropeanMonographs. ng theKin-state.AnAnalysisofitsRole History, Culture,Languageand tion Buildingand/orMinority ilding and/orMinorityProtection dova/157_moldova_regional_tensi EurasianStudies,No.4,Slavic . Eds.ArieBloedandPieter ă înRepublicaMoldova, n-Minorities inEast- , II(1),71-81. , ed.Osamu Iedaetal., , ed.Zoltán . Europe Center , ed. CEU eTD Collection King, CharlesandMelvin,NeilJ.2000.Diaspor King, CharlesandMelvin,Neil(eds.)1998. King, Charles.2000.TheMoldovans.Romania,RussiaandthePoliticsofCulture King, Charles.1999.TheAmbivalence ofAuthen King, Charles.1994.Moldovan Identityand Minorities atRisk: 2004. Ministry ofInternalAffairs. Meurs, Wim P.van.1994. Mandelbaum, Michael(ed.)2000. Kymlicka, Will. 2007. Kolstø, Pål(ed.).2002. Kolstø, Pål.2000. Kiss, IlonaandMcGover Kiss, Ágnes.2005.Romániahatárontúliro Made. SlavicReview and Security inEurasia. International RelationsintheFormerSoviet Union Hoover InstitutionPress. 53(2) (Summer, 1994). moldoveni careaudobânditcet Nationalist andCommunistPoli The CasesofEstoniaandMoldova 2006-12-18. [http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/ch SGG 1273,2004.04.14,2–3.JEAKGY,Cluj,record K791. the number ofMldovanpersonsawardedRomanian Press Conflict inEastern Europe Diversity Littlefield Publishers. States and LegalPolicy Institute. Ukraine: LegalRegulationsandCurrentPolitics Analysis ofthelegalframework]. jogszabályok tükrében[Romania’s Ki . Boulder:Westview Press. . Manuscript[forthcoming OxfordUniversityPress,] Political ConstructionSites.Nation-Bu Chronology forSlavsinMoldova Multicutural Odysseys:Navigating National IntegrationandViolentConflict inPost-SovietSocieties. , 58(1),117–142. n, Catherine(eds.)2000. The BessarabianQuestioninCommunist Historiography. International Security . NewYork:CouncilofFo The NewEuropeanDiasporas.NationalMinoritiesand Informare privindnum ăţ tics andHistory-Writing enia român Magyar Kisebbség Magyar . Lanham/Boulder/New York n-state Nationalism between1990–2004:An mánságpolitikája az1990–2004közötthatályos Nations Abroad.DiasporaPoliticsand the PoliticsofPan-Romanianism. ronology.asp?groupId 80 a Politics.EthnicLink ă înultimii14ani. [Informationregarding ticity, orHowtheMoldovanLanguageWas , 24(3)(1999–2000/Winter). pp.108–138. New DiasporasinHungary,Russiaand . OpenSocietyInstitute, Constitutional . . Boulder:Westview Press. citizenshipinthe , 10(35–36)(2005/1–2),298–353. reign RelationsPress. ărul depersoane,cet ilding inRussiaandthePost-Soviet the NewInternationalPoliticsof . New York:Columbia University =35902], retrievedon /Oxford: Rowman and ages, ForeignPolicy last 14years]Nr. ăţ Slavic Review enii . Stanford: , CEU eTD Collection ONG.MD: ONG.MD: Neukirch, Claus2002.The CaseoftheGagauzTerritorialAutonomy intheRepublicof Mustaţă Zgureanu-Guragaţă Solomon, Constantin.2001. Undeceniude Smith, AnthonyD. Shain, YossiandBarth,Aharon.2003.Diasporas Pop, Adrian,Pascariu,Gabriela, Angli Petrescu, Cristina.2007.Construc Panici, Andrei.2003.Romanian Nationa [http://www.ecmimoldova.org/ Ethnopolitics andMinorityIssues,Vol.I).Retrievedfrom Moldova. In: Moldova], ed.MonicaHeintz, pp.176–190.Bucure Republica Moldova study aboutMoldova(2001–2005)].In: Republica Moldova(2001–2005) [Nationalidentity of Ethnopolitics.2(2)(January2003). 04-08. and AlexandruZub.,Ia Basarabia. Dilemeleidentitatii [A DecadeofCooperation betweenthe Re University Press,1999. International Organization Institutul Europ neighborhood policyandtheperspectiveof Uniunii Europene”[Romania andtheRepub si RepublicaMoldova–Întrepoliticaeuropean ed. MonicaHeintz,pp.127–153.Bucure national identity inBessarabia]. In: [http://www.ong.md/index.php?mod=home&hm social effectsofRomania’sac Moldova (1991-2005)?] In: Moldova (1991-2005)?] [WhatMoldova (1991-2005)? kindof“nationalist” Moldova Heintz, pp.48–76.Bucure [Weak State,ambiguous citizenship.Studies , Sergiu2007.Identitateana Efectele socialealeader [WeakState,ambiguouscitizenship.St Minority GovernanceinEurope, ean dinRomânia: , C Myths andMemoriesoftheNation ă [WeakState,ambiguouscitizenshi t ă lina: Cefeldediscurspolitic„na ş i: FundatiaAcademic ş , 57(3) (2003/Summer), pp.449–479. , 57(3)(2003/Summer), ti: CurteaVeche. Stat slab,cetăţ cession totheUEonMoldova]. ţ [Basarabia. Dilemmas of Identity], eds.Flavius Solomon Gagauzia.115.0.html] on2006-12-16. ia identităţ ării RomânieilaUEasupraRepubliciiMoldova ţ ională StudiideimpactII ţ ioiu, GeorgeandPurcarus,Alexandru.(s.a.)România Stat slab,cet lism intheRepublicofMoldova. întreistorie colaborare dintre RepublicaMoldova Stat slab,cetăţ ş ti: Curtea Veche. ii na 81 public of MoldovaandRomania]. In: enie incertă.StudiidespreRepublicaMoldova the extensionofEuropeanUnion]. lic ofMoldova–BetweentheEuropean about theRepublicofMoldova],ed.Monica ă andInternationalRelationsTheory. ţ a devecinatatesiperspectivaextinderii “A.D.Xenopol”. ionale înBasarabia ed. ăţ od=postbyid&id=75], Retrievedon udies abouttheRepublicofMoldova], KingaGál.Budapest.(Serieson enie incert . OxfordandNewYork: politicaldiscoursefortheRepublicof between historyand politics.A case ş ş . [Impact StudiesII.] ti: CurteaVeche.pp.176–190. i politic ţ p. StudiesabouttheRepublicof enie incertă.Studiidespre ionalist” pentru Republica ă ă. StudiidespreRepublica . Unstudiudecazprivitorla [The constructinof The GlobalReview ş i România [The 2007-

CEU eTD Collection Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a, Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a (All electronicsourcesaccessedbe Primary sources Joint sittingsoftheChamber ofDeputiesandtheSenate Sittings oftheC Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaII-a Declaration–Appeal oftheSenateregarding judicial stageingfromTiraspol.Monitorul Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a Monitorul Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/ste [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/ Oficial alRomâniei ParteaaII-a hamber ofDeputiesApril29,1996, steno/steno.stenograma?ids=441&idm=10&idl=2] no/steno.stenograma?ids=5014&si tween November 2006andMay2007) , AnulIV,Nr.107,1993.05.26. , AnulIV,Nr.151,1993.09.03 , Anul II,Nr. 52,1991.02.13. , Anul I,Nr. 141,1990.12.17. , Anul I,Nr. 57,1990.08.06. –OfficialBulletinofRomaniaSectionII , Anul V,Nr.184,1994.09.29. , Anul V,Nr.144,1994.06.30. , Anul V,Nr.46,1994.03.04 , Anul IV,Nr.60,1993.03.26. , Anul IV,Nr.10,1993.02.05. , Anul IV,Nr.8,1993.02.03. , Anul III,Nr.39,1992.12.11. , Anul III,Nr.13,1992.07.11. , Anul III,Nr.13,1992.07.10. , Anul III,Nr.99,1992.05.29. , Anul II,Nr. 197,1991.07.31. , Anul II,Nr. 153,1991.06.25. Anul I,Nr. 21,1990.06.02 82 ofJune19,1996. r=&sep=and&idv=77&idl=1]

CEU eTD Collection Sittings oftheSenate Sittings oftheSenate Sittings oftheSenate Sittings oftheC Sittings oftheC PROTOCOL fromNovember 27,1992abouttheestablishmentofInter-Parliamentrary [http://www.mae.ro/poze_editare/DRRP_proiecte_2006.pdf], 2007-05-25. Centralizarea proiectelorfinan [http://www.mae.ro/poze_editare/ Centralizarea proiectelorfinan Sittings oftheC Sittings oftheSenate Sittings oftheC Sittings oftheC Sittings oftheC Sittings oftheSenate Sittings oftheSenate [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5570&idm=10&idl=2] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=5565&idm=2,09&idl=2] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/ [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=4971&idm=9&idl=2] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=2861&idm=15&idl=2] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6267&idm=2,05&idl=2] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6256&idm=1,67&idl=2] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6101&idm=8&idl=1] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6044&idm=1,11&idl=2] 12bae34_3_1_1_3.html], 2007-05-26. [http://lex.webis.ro/Protocol_1992_Parlamentul_Parlament_7e8f73aa0d6c840bea04c910d Commission Bucharest-Kishinev. by theDepartment fortheRelationswith financed bytheDepartmentforRelations [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6273&idm=1,02&idl=2] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6249&idm=1,06&idl=2] [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6153&idm=14&idl=1] hamber ofDeputiesOctober2,2000. hamber ofDeputiesMarch1,1999, hamber ofDeputiesMarch27,2007. hamber ofDeputiesMarch13,2007. hamber ofDeputiesMarch6,2007. hamber ofDeputiesSeptember 14,2006. ofNovember 13,2003. ofNovember3,2003. ofMay12,2003. ofMarch19,2007. ofApril26,2006. ofFebruary27,2006. steno/steno.stenograma?i ţ ţ ate deDRRPînanul2006 ate deDRRPîncursulanului2005 2006.08.09_DRRP_Proiecte2005.pdf], 2007-05-25.

theRomanians LivingAbroadin2006] 83 with theRomanians LivingAbroadin2005] ds=5500&idm=10&idl=2] . [Synthesisoftheprojectsfinanced [Synthesis oftheprojects CEU eTD Collection Punct devedere [http://www.cdep.ro/proi Motivation Motivation Motivation Ordonanţă Ordonanţă Ordonanţă Legea nr.21din1martie 1991cet Ordonanţă Lege nr.36din24iunie1993privindfinan Hot Propunere legislativ [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiec [Draft lawforthemodification andcomple [http://www.cdep.ro/proi [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiec [http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiec ărâre nr.28din23ianuarie1992 dispozi Nr. 424,18.106.2003. amendment oftheLawonciti prevederilor art.35dinLegeacetăţ financiare. [OrdinanceNo.112onthe24 the RepublicofMoldova.]MonitorulOficialalRomâniei I,Nr. 13,13.05.1992. regarding the foundingoftheInterministeri cetăţ citizenship 21/1991,republished]Monitoru on 13 Romanian Citizenship]MonitorulOficialalRomâniei I,Nr.98,06.03.2003. measures] MonitorulOficialalRomâniei I,Nr.748,26.10.2003. Republic ofMoldova].MonitorulOficialalRomâniei I,Nr.173,28.06.1993. financing some activitiesofeconomic andcu cultural Rela ţ eniei românenr.21/1991 deurgenţă deurgenţă deurgenţă deurgenţă , issuedbytheGovernment. , issuedbytheGovernment inNovember2002. , issuedbytheGovern iile RomânieicuRepublica Moldova th ofDecember 2001regarding thesuspention ofart.35from theLawon ţ ii dinLegeacetăţ ă întreRomânia [Pointofview],issuedbytheGovernment. ă de modificare nr.160din20noiembrie 2 nr.68din13iunie2002pentrumodificarea nr.167 din13 decembrie2001privind suspendareaaplic nr.112din24octombrie2003pentrureglementareaunorm ecte/2006/400/30/7/em437.pdf] ecte/2006/400/30/7/pvg437.pdf] ş eniei românenr.21/1991 i RepublicaMoldova ment inJanuary2001. ăţ te/upl_pck.proiect?idp=7397&cam=2] te/upl_pck.proiect?idp=3628&cam=2] te/upl_pck.proiect?idp=2998&cam=2] eniei române.[Law No.21on1 zenship No.21/1991] . [OrdinanceNo.68on13 ş privind creareaComitetuluiInterministerialpentru i completareaLegiinr.21/1991,cet eniei nr.21/1991,republicat ţ area unoracţ 84 tion ofLaw21/1991onRomanian citizenship] th . [DecreeNo.28onthe23 ofOctober2003regardingsome financial 002 privindsuspendarea aplicăriiunor l OficialalRomâniei I,Nr.802,14.12.2003. al CommitteeforRomania’s Relationwith ltural integrationbe . [LawNo.36onthe24 . [OrdinanceNo.160on 20 iuni deintegrareeconomic Monitorul OficialalRomâniei I, th ofJune2002forthe st ş i completarea Legii ofMarch1991onthe ă. [OrdinanceNo.167 tween Romania andthe th of January 1992 of January ăţ th ofJune1993on eniei române ă rii

ăsuri th ă of ş i . CEU eTD Collection Lege nr.248din10iunie2003pent Ordonanţă

citizenship No.21/1991]MonitorulOf republicat Nr. 399,09.06.2003. amendment oftheLawonciti cetăţ from theLawoncitizenship] MonitorulOficialalRomâniei I,Nr.850,25.11.2003. November 2002regardingthe

eniei românenr.21/1991 deurgenţă ă. [LawNo.248on10 nr.43din29mai2003pentrumodificareaş ru completareaLegiicet zenship No.21/1991] . [OrdinanceNo.43on29 suspending oftheimplementation ofsome measures th ofJune2003fortheamendment oftheLawon icial alRomâniei I,Nr. 414,13.06.2003. 85 Monitorul OficialalRomâniei I, ăţ eniei românenr.21/1991, th ofMay2003forthe i completarea Legii