by David Cretu
As Moldova’s EU integration remains a distant prospect, its president, Maia Sandu was recently said to be in favour of a unification with its larger neighbour, Romania. Through her statement, Sandu reignited a profound debate in the two countries, which can be traced back to the 20th century.
Historically, the region of Bessarabia, encompassing most of modern-day Moldova, was part of the Kingdom of Romania until 1940, when the region was annexed by the USSR under the June 26 ultimatum. Nowadays, Moldova remains a Romanian-speaking nation, while the two states maintain a shared cultural heritage. Nonetheless, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, calls for reunification emerged, invoking this historical and cultural connection.
But how plausible does this scenario seem to be, 35 years after Moldova’s independence? Very unlikely, according to experts. An overwhelming majority of experts argue that if reunification was an easy process, it would have happened years ago. Indeed, significant barriers preventing it from occurring remain.
First, the Transnistrian situation; a separatist Moldovan region, remains unresolved. After declaring its secession in 1992, this Russian-speaking region started functioning as a de facto state, with its own currency and government, under Moscow’s support. One sign of Russian involvement is the 1,000 soldiers stationed in the region, who represent the main obstacle to reintegration within Moldova, according to Chișinău.
Moreover, the current legal framework in both countries does not allow for unification. Their constitutions present obstacles in this direction, as Romania’s constitution doesn’t allow for regional autonomy to the same extent as Moldova. Furthermore, implications such as the modification of national borders, require referenda to be held in both countries. Moldova recently modified its constitution to enhance its European vision. A weak majority of 50.38% voting ‘yes’ suggests that a majority in the case of a referendum on the Romanian matter is very unlikely. One key element is Russian interference, through both old generations, still deeply marked by Soviet mentality and opinions; as well as modern tactics, involving corruption or cyberattacks. Finally, in the European Union itself, many member states are reluctant to accept the rapid integration of a hazardous region in the organisation, invoking regional stability and security.
Nonetheless, if reunification seems so unlikely, it is because public opinion does not support it in the first place. According to recent polls in Moldova, the support rates are around 37%, while about 54% of Moldovans declared to be against it. Many pro-Russian politicians, such as Igor Dodon, in response to Sandu’s declaration, accused her of treason.
However, even if this political movement is minoritarian in Moldova, it seems to be majoritarian in Romania, where about 60% of Romanians would support unification with Moldova in a referendum. The political circle shares the same position, as Romanian Prime Minister Ilie Bolojan also declared to vote in favour if a referendum were to be held. Another key factor is the Romanian nationalist groups: George Simion’s party, the Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR), who reached the second round of the last presidential elections, is publicly in favour of this reunification.
In this context, reunification appears less as a realistic shortcut to the European Union, and more as a long-term political possibility that, despite current challenges, could emerge over time, deeply shaped by history, identity and geopolitics. Moldova’s future will not depend on merging borders, but on achieving the reformation of its institutions.
Le Dragon Déchaîné 