Moldovans vote in election re-run

[Derbedeu]

Moldovans are voting in a parliamentary election, three months after a disputed ballot led to violence and two deaths.
The opposition has been demanding a re-run of April's election, claiming it was rigged.
The new vote is being held because the Communists, who won a majority in the initial poll, failed to win enough seats to elect a president.
Opposition parties boycotted the votes to elect a replacement for outgoing President Vladimir Voronin.
Polling stations opened at 0400 GMT and are due to close at 1800 GMT.
After the April result, thousands of people took to the streets, clashing with police, and storming parliament and the presidential offices.



The opposition and some international observers said the vote had been rigged, although others said it was generally fair.
The Communist Party gained 60 of the 101 seats - one short of the 61 seats needed to meet the three-fifths majority required to elect its presidential candidate, current Prime Minister Zinaida Greceanii.
Coalition pledge
Opinion polls this month suggested a drop in support for the Communists.
In Wednesday's vote, three opposition parties hope to join the Communist Party in parliament - the Liberal Party, the Liberal Democratic Party and the Our Moldova Alliance.
They have pledged to create a ruling coalition if they collectively gain enough votes.
They have also said that they will co-operate with the Communist Party in the new parliament if the "early election is fair, democratic and transparent".
Mr Voronin's successor will lead the poorest country in Europe - where the average wage is just under $250 (£151) a month - and will inherit an unresolved conflict over the breakaway region of Trans-Dniester.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/8173649.stm

Published: 2009/07/29 04:29:52 GMT

© BBC MMIX

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8173649.stm

Here's hoping the Communists lose.

[Sashko]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8173649.stm

Here's hoping the Communists lose.


You do of course realize that those "communists" are a far cry from pals in China and are more comparable to Western social democrats, right?

[Derbedeu]

You do of course realize that those "communists" are a far cry from pals in China and are more comparable to Western social democrats, right?

You do realize that they're still a bunch of thieves, right? They've had eight years in power, and since then they've done nothing.

[Russianlynxy]

I think I know why you would want the Communists to lose Derbedeu, there is a strong will among the oppositionary forces to join with Romania territorially. p-)

[Derbedeu]

I think I know why you would want the Communists to lose Derbedeu, there is a strong will among the oppositionary forces to join with Romania territorially. p-)

Yes there is. And if you know anything about history, you'd know there is nothing wrong with that. Moldovans are Romanians since Moldova is just a region, not an ethnicity. The Principality of Moldova (comprising of the Moldovan Republic as well as the Moldovan region in Romania), was first united with Transylvania and Wallachia in 1600 under Michael the Brave. They also voted to join Romania in 1921.

My stance is that unification should come about, but certain conditions should be met first:

-Referendum in Romania accepting unification
-Referendum in Moldova accepting unification
-Transdnistria issue should be resolved

For the third, I'm perfectly willing to see it independent, or as part of Ukraine, or whatever they want. If they don't want to be an autonomous region of Romania + Moldova, I'm perfectly fine with that, as are many of my fellow Romanians.

[HorrigEn]

You do of course realize that those "communists" are a far cry from pals in China and are more comparable to Western social democrats, right?

I very much doubt it.
here we ve got both communists and so called social democrats who are by all means either former communist sympatisants or just populists. ok maybe there are few naive dumbass idealists but thats really all.
anybody who pact with the communists is eiter idiot, populist or spineless powerlusty bastard. simple as that.

[Russianlynxy]

Yes there is. And if you know anything about history, you'd know there is nothing wrong with that. Moldovans are Romanians since Moldova is just a region, not an ethnicity. The Principality of Moldova (comprising of the Moldovan Republic as well as the Moldovan region in Romania), was first united with Transylvania and Wallachia in 1600 under Michael the Brave. They also voted to join Romania in 1921.

My stance is that unification should come about, but certain conditions should be met first:

-Referendum in Romania accepting unification
-Referendum in Moldova accepting unification
-Transdnistria issue should be resolved

For the third, I'm perfectly willing to see it independent, or as part of Ukraine, or whatever they want. If they don't want to be an autonomous region of Romania + Moldova, I'm perfectly fine with that, as are many of my fellow Romanians.

then why are you so against Ukraine becoming part of Russia again?

[HorrigEn]

then why are you so against Ukraine becoming part of Russia again?

lol, typical russan.

maybe because Ukraians dont want to became the part of your goddamned republic?


double standards it seems, but only natural I suppose.

get your head from your ass

[Derbedeu]

then why are you so against Ukraine becoming part of Russia again?

Find a post where I said that. This is my stance on the Ukraine-Russian relationship:

http://militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4276510&postcount=39

[Russianlynxy]

Find a post where I said that. This is my stance on the Ukraine-Russian relationship:

http://militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4276510&postcount=39

double standards it seems, but only natural I suppose.

[Derbedeu]

double standards it seems, but only natural I suppose.

Where the **** do you see double standards in that post? Let me quote:


Either case, so long as the issue between you two is resolved peacefully and the people's decisions are respected I could care less what the outcome would be.

That includes unification. Are you clear now?

[Russianlynxy]

get your head from your ass

I suppose you know so much about Russo-Ukrainian relations and Eastern Europe in general to try and elevate yourself to that level without an argument.

@Derbedeu: I really couldn't care much for what happens to Moldova. I very well know they are almost-Romanians living under a different national name, just as most of the people on this forum know that Ukrainians are exactly the same, but am forced to play devil's advocate for the exact same reason.

Whatever the outcome of this election is, it is another step of putting an end to GUAM as an organization.

[Flamming_Python]

The communists are the only party which is actually supported by ethnic minorities in Moldova, who account for perhaps 25% of the population of Moldova (excluding Pridnestrovie). A communist defeat would mean that the nationalist parties step into power; among whom support for unification with Romania is high.

However, such a scenario would mean high amounts of ethnic tension inevitably followed by an exodus of many skilled and educated people to other countries from the capital Kishinev, which is where a large proportion of the Russians, Ukrainians and other minorities live.

Secoundly, there would then be no hope of Moldova and Pridnestrovie ever re-uniting, which would be a shame because the earlier has manpower and the later has industry; neither can be prosperous without the other. There is also a high likelyhood that the autonomous republic of Gaugazia would seperate from Moldova, which is a right that was written in their constitution I believe in case the status of Moldova ever changes. This could actually be the cause for a war, especially if Romania doesn't accept such an outcome and is silly enough to stick its nose into an area where the nearest Russian military base is only a couple of hundred kilometres away.


For the third, I'm perfectly willing to see it independent, or as part of Ukraine, or whatever they want. If they don't want to be an autonomous region of Romania + Moldova, I'm perfectly fine with that, as are many of my fellow Romanians.

I don't think Russia really cares what is fine and what isn't with you and your fellow Romanians, and I think you know as well as I do that it will be Russia which ultimately decides what happens here.

[Russianlynxy]

I don't think Russia really cares what is fine and what isn't with you and your fellow Romanians, and I think you know as well as I do that it will be Russia which ultimately decides what happens here.

qft x2....

[Derbedeu]

The communists are the only party which is actually supported by ethnic minorities in Moldova, who account for perhaps 25% of the population of Moldova (excluding Pridnestrovie). A communist defeat would mean that the nationalist parties step into power; among whom support for unification with Romania is high.

However, such a scenario would mean high amounts of ethnic tension inevitably followed by an exodus of many skilled and educated people to other countries from the capital Kishinev, which is where a large proportion of the Russians, Ukrainians and other minorities live.


Minorities in Romania (Serbs, Hungarians, Germans, etc) actually have more rights then most countries and for the most part are seen as valued members of society.



Secoundly, there would then be no hope of Moldova and Pridnestrovie ever re-uniting, which would be a shame because the earlier has manpower and the later has industry; neither can be prosperous without the other. There is also a high likelyhood that the autonomous republic of Gaugazia would seperate from Moldova, which is a right that was written in their constitution I believe in case the status of Moldova ever changes. This could actually be the cause for a war, especially if Romania doesn't accept such an outcome and is silly enough to stick its nose into an area where the nearest Russian military base is only a couple of hundred kilometres away.
[quote]

So Russian chauvinism rears its ugly head again. :roll: Like I said, we don't care if Trandniestria remains independent. All the more power to them. As for Gaugazia they'd be free to hold a referendum.


I don't think Russia really cares what is fine and what isn't with you and your fellow Romanians, and I think you know as well as I do that it will be Russia which ultimately decides what happens here.

[Flamming_Python]

Yes there is. And if you know anything about history, you'd know there is nothing wrong with that. Moldovans are Romanians since Moldova is just a region, not an ethnicity. The Principality of Moldova (comprising of the Moldovan Republic as well as the Moldovan region in Romania), was first united with Transylvania and Wallachia in 1600 under Michael the Brave. They also voted to join Romania in 1921.

My stance is that unification should come about, but certain conditions should be met first:

-Referendum in Romania accepting unification
-Referendum in Moldova accepting unification
-Transdnistria issue should be resolved


So perhaps Finland should annex Estonia, Turkey should incorporate Azerbaijan, Iran should unite with Tajikistan? No, these are all seperate countries. Besides which, I believe all ex-USSR countries should be like brothers and unite with each other regardless of ethnic ties. Outside actors such as Romania, Finland, Turkey and Iran sticking their noses too far into the former USSR can only spell trouble, and perhaps military conflict with Russia.

Russian chauvinism is only a response to Romanian chauvinism. One more thing i'm concerned about; if Moldova is incorporated into Romania, the Russian language will be stamped out.

[Difool]

Very bizarre indeed. I thought the elections have been checked and everything had been correct. Because of a bunch of hooligans they're repeating the whole elections? Is that what people call democracy nowadays?

[Derbedeu]

I don't think Russia really cares what is fine and what isn't with you and your fellow Romanians, and I think you know as well as I do that it will be Russia which ultimately decides what happens here.

I think you'd be wrong. If Moldova holds a referendum to join Romania, excluding Transdniestria, Russia has no legal say in the matter. If Russia doesn't respect it, then Russia should stop complaining when it finds itself continuously isolated by NATO, since it's imperialistic tendencies will become apparent.

[Cornelius]

So perhaps Finland should annex Estonia, Turkey should incorporate Azerbaijan, Iran should unite with Tajikistan? No, these are all seperate countries. Besides which, I believe all ex-USSR countries should be like brothers and unite with each other regardless of ethnic ties. Outside actors such as Romania, Estonia, Turkey and Iran sticking their noses too far into the former USSR can only spell trouble, and perhaps military conflict with Russia.

Russian chauvinism is only a response to Romanian chauvinism. One more thing i'm concerned about; if Moldova is incorporated into Romania, the Russian language will be stamped out.

Wrong, wrong, wrong..
No one would anex Moldova, if Moldova and Romania would want to be reunited this would need a referendum for people to vote...So don't worry about anexing...
Russian language will not be stamped out, or do you see that hungarian language it's stamped out from Romania?
Romania it's not sticking it's nose to Russian affairs, Moldova before was anexed by URSS, was Romanian and there are living ethnic romanians..
Moldova it's not Russia bussines, not Russia affairs...

[Flamming_Python]

I think you'd be wrong. If Moldova holds a referendum to join Romania, excluding Transdniestria, Russia has no legal say in the matter. If Russia doesn't respect it, then Russia should stop complaining when it finds itself continuously isolated by NATO, since it's imperialistic tendencies will become apparent.

I don't think that either Romania nor its NATO or Western allies (which it will drag in with it into Moldova) has any business in the former-USSR. I think Romania would be making a very big mistake if it ignores Russian concerns and brings a military alliance another few hundred KM closer to Russian territory, and regardless of how right or just you think the cause of ethnic unification is, you would be naive to think that Russia would sit by and do nothing to prevent or reverse such an occurance.


Wrong, wrong, wrong..
No one would anex Moldova, if Moldova and Romania would want to be reunited this would need a referendum for people to vote...So don't worry about anexing...
Russian language will not be stamped out, or do you see that hungarian language it's stamped out from Romania?
Romania it's not sticking it's nose to Russian affairs, Moldova before was anexed by URSS, was Romanian and there are living ethnic romanians..
Moldova it's not Russia bussines, not Russia affairs...

I believe it was you who was calling for Chechnya's independence. Hardly legal is it? Well then you can't use the legal card if fighting and ethnic cleansing starts breaking out in Moldova and Russia moves in.

[Cornelius]

Very bizarre indeed. I thought the elections have been checked and everything had been correct. Because of a bunch of hooligans they're repeating the whole elections? Is that what people call democracy nowadays?

If you don't know what are you talking about, please don't talk cause you are making foul of yourself mate..
The oposition presented proves, that the election process was stolen by communists..
Is democray to you that dead people has voted for the communists?
Are you able to think that the people are voting again the communists beacause the communists made from Moldova the porest country from Europe?Have you ever been to Moldova to see how the things are going there?Have you ever heard the a lot of people from Moldova are selling their kidney to have a decent life?
Do you know that since Voronin rules Moldova, his son treasure value is half from the Moldova PIB?
Don't talk..

[Derbedeu]

So perhaps Finland should annex Estonia, Turkey should incorporate Azerbaijan, Iran should unite with Tajikistan? No, these are all seperate countries. Besides which, I believe all ex-USSR countries should be like brothers and unite with each other regardless of ethnic ties. Outside actors such as Romania, Estonia, Turkey and Iran sticking their noses too far into the former USSR can only spell trouble, and perhaps military conflict with Russia.

Russian chauvinism is only a response to Romanian chauvinism. One more thing i'm concerned about; if Moldova is incorporated into Romania, the Russian language will be stamped out.

There is no Romania chauvinism. Not as official government policy, nor for the majority of Romanians (there certainly are some fringe groups, but those exist in every country). Do you see the Romanian Government calling for a Greater Romania that incorporates southern Dobruja from Bulgaria, or Cetatea Albă from Ukraine? No you don't. And please don't make me laugh about Russian chauvinism simply being a response.

As for your, first part, reread what I said. If Romania and Moldova hold referendums calling for unification then there is legally nothing wrong with that just as there would be nothing wrong with Ukraine and Russia holding a referendum on unification. And your opinion on former USSR states is nothing more than chauvinistic imperialism.

[Derbedeu]

I don't think that either Romania nor its NATO or Western allies (which it will drag in with it into Moldova) has any business in the former-USSR. I think Romania would be making a very big mistake if it ignores Russian concerns and brings a military alliance another few hundred KM closer to Russian territory, and regardless of how right or just you think the cause of ethnic unification is, you would be naive to think that Russia would sit by and do nothing to prevent or reverse such an occurance.


Moldova was originally part of Romania. They voted to join Romania after 110 years of Russian rule. Why? because Moldovans are Romanians, and Moldova is Romanian territory, not Russian. They were then annexed in 1939 by the Soviet Union illegally under the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. They never joined the USSR willingly.

[Herman the II]

As for your, first part, reread what I said. If Romania and Moldova hold referendums calling for unification then there is legally nothing wrong with that just as there would be nothing wrong with Ukraine and Russia holding a referendum on unification. And your opinion on former USSR states is nothing more than chauvinistic imperialism.

Completely agree, if both countries want a reunification I cant see anything wrong with that.

[Flamming_Python]

If you don't know what are you talking about, please don't talk cause you are making foul of yourself mate..
The oposition presented proves, that the election process was stolen by communists..
Is democray to you that dead people has voted for the communists?
Are you able to think that the people are voting again the communists beacause the communists made from Moldova the porest country from Europe?Have you ever been to Moldova to see how the things are going there?Have you ever heard the a lot of people from Moldova are selling their
kidney to have a decent life?
Don't talk..

Cut the crap. That line was pushed by agents of the Romanian government and you bought that line hook, line and sinker. Of course the commies are corrupt. News flash: so is everyone else in Moldova, do you really think the nationalist parties are any different? Read up more on Natalia Morar.


There is no Romania chauvinism. Not as official government policy, nor for the majority of Romanians (there certainly are some fringe groups, but those exist in every country). Do you see the Romanian Government calling for a Greater Romania that incorporates southern Dobruja from Bulgaria, or Cetatea Albă from Ukraine? No you don't. And please don't make me laugh about Russian chauvinism simply being a response.

Yes but we do see calls for a greater Romania upto the Dniestr, don't we? I can also pretty much assume that the people in favour of it are nationalistically minded. I can't critisise them without critisising the many in my country who advocate a union between Russia and Ukraine (which I myself support along with unions with other republics), but they are being naive.


As for your, first part, reread what I said. If Romania and Moldova hold referendums calling for unification then there is legally nothing wrong with that just as there would be nothing wrong with Ukraine and Russia holding a referendum on unification. And your opinion on former USSR states is nothing more than chauvinistic imperialism.

On the contrary my opinion on former USSR states is not based on ethnic chauvinism/nationalism but on secular ideology and the legacy of socialist economic and social projects that ensured that each former USSR republic has a lot more in common with fellow republics than with outside states no matter the ethnic ties. Whole generations grew up under the Soviet system after all. I also do not advocate Russian domination of the former-USSR, cultural, linguistical, political or otherwise, simply a mutual union to develop the economy and thwart outside military threats; sort of like what the West has with NATO and the EU. Romania can join if it wants to, hop aboard :)

[Bolshoy]

So perhaps Finland should annex Estonia, Turkey should incorporate Azerbaijan, Iran should unite with Tajikistan? No, these are all seperate countries. Besides which, I believe all ex-USSR countries should be like brothers and unite with each other regardless of ethnic ties. Outside actors such as Romania, Estonia, Turkey and Iran sticking their noses too far into the former USSR can only spell trouble, and perhaps military conflict with Russia.

Russian chauvinism is only a response to Romanian chauvinism. One more thing i'm concerned about; if Moldova is incorporated into Romania, the Russian language will be stamped out.

Good post.

[Flamming_Python]

Completely agree, if both countries want a reunification I cant see anything wrong with that.

And bring NATO further upto Russian borders? Don't think so... p-)

[Herman the II]

And bring NATO further upto Russian borders? Don't think so... p-)

I don't think that NATO or Russia should have anything to say in that matter.
If the people living there want to be united in one country nobody should have the right to intervene.

[Difool]

If you don't know what are you talking about, please don't talk cause you are making foul of yourself mate..
The oposition presented proves, that the election process was stolen by communists..
Is democray to you that dead people has voted for the communists?
Are you able to think that the people are voting again the communists beacause the communists made from Moldova the porest country from Europe?Have you ever been to Moldova to see how the things are going there?Have you ever heard the a lot of people from Moldova are selling their kidney to have a decent life?
Do you know that since Voronin rules Moldova, his son treasure value is half from the Moldova PIB?
Don't talk..
Not one of the international organizations observing the elections had proofs of cheating. AND the votes have been counted twice with the same result. Pravda ili net?
It's not my country and I don't care what party rules. Just don't think if a different party wins the living standard is gonna rise automatically during the next years. One polititian is as corrupt as the other. Maybe you think Moldova could join the EU then? I tell you what: We're pumping billions of Eurodollars into the new EU members without seeing any light at the end of the tunnel. The EU is closed to new members for at least 10 years.

[Mr.K]

Geopolitical East-West (read fanboy) rants aside, i hope they lose, young people are fleeing this country because there is no opportunity whatsoever and end up doing low paid jobs abroad. Voronin's government are just a bunch of crooks. Now this doesn't mean that a nationalist government will do much better.

[Flamming_Python]

Geopolitical (read fanboy) rants aside, i hope they lose, young people are fleering this country because there is no opportunity whatsoever and end up doing low paid jobs abroad. Voronin's government are just a bunch of crooks. Now this doesn't mean that a nationalist government will do much better.

Well perhaps you're right, and we should think more about the people of the region, what is better for them and trust them to decide for themselves instead of all the ranting about re-building the Romanian empire or the USSR :)

[Cornelius]

The people know that the situation will not change quick, but the people know that they get down the communists to be able to start and build up the country...
The proves where not accepted by the BEC from the communists order...
Why at this elections Moldovan government arrested international observers from Russia, Georgia, Ukraine?Why they expeled from Moldova International observers?

If someday the people from Moldova would like to be with Romania or Russia it will be their will and not Voronin's will

[Derbedeu]

Yes but we do see calls for a greater Romania upto the Dniestr, don't we? I can also pretty much assume that the people in favour of it are nationalistically minded. I can't critisise them without critisising the many in my country who advocate a union between Russia and Ukraine (which I myself support along with unions with other republics), but they are being naive.


Reread the history of Romania, and in particular that of Moldova. Romanians have always lived between the Pruth river and the Dniester. Romania was first unified under Michael the Brave in 1600, and the Eastern border was the Dniester. The capitals of the Moldovian Principality, (which has always encapsulated what today is the Republic of Moldova as well as the Moldova region from Romania) were Suceava and Iasi, both cities in Romania. Moldova was annexed by Russia in 1812. It never joined of its own accord. Moldova declared independence from Russia in 1917 and willingly voted to rejoin with Romania in 1918. The closest analogy I can come up with for the unification of Romania and the Republic of Moldova would be East and West Germany reuniting. Yes Romania will border the Dniester, but don't worry, we don't want to have anything to do with what's beyond it. Trandnistria is free to do whatever it wants, even join with Russia if that's what it desires.




On the contrary my opinion on former USSR states is not based on ethnic chauvinism/nationalism but on secular ideology and the legacy of socialist economic and social projects that ensured that each former USSR republic has a lot more in common with fellow republics than with outside states no matter the ethnic ties. Whole generations grew up under the Soviet system after all. I also do not advocate Russian domination of the former-USSR, cultural, linguistical, political or otherwise, simply a mutual union to develop the economy and thwart outside military threats; sort of like what the West has with NATO and the EU. Romania can join if it wants to, hop aboard :)In theory that sounds nice. Too bad it never works out that way in practice, especially when it comes to Russia. My mother visited Moscow back in '84 (she thought Moscow was beautiful) as part of a scientific meeting of Eastern Bloc countries. They were given an official tour of the city, and to my mother's surprise the tour guide kept referring to the USSR as "this great Russian Empire of ours". My mom was the only one on the bus with the courage to point out the hypocrisy in that, as the USSR was supposed to be a union of fraternal states, yet the guide chose to pointedly ignore her.

Your assertion that ethnic ties don't count is also convenient though ultimately it is incorrect.

Empires have always existed in the past. Look at Britain, Russia, Spain, or France. It can be forgiven though, since people didn't really know any better (and I doubt the common folk had much of a say in it), and besides it's pointless to hold grudges. I can easily even forgive the actions of the USSR towards my country, because at the end of the day the ones who suffered the most at the hands of the Kremlin were the Russian people.

But all the same it is alarming and sad to see that Russia and Russians today still hold the same unyielding position of hoping for a resurrection of an empire that had no moral or legal foundation. Germany has more than made amends for it's past actions and has become a country that is a model for human rights, and furthermore is one of the most unselfish member of the EU. France, Britain, and Spain have all seen their empires fall apart, yet you don't see them pining for those days, and for the most part they all maintain friendly relations with their past colonies that is reciprocated. However, Russia's involvement in what is ultimately a Romanian issue is nothing more than a continuation of the same imperialistic mentality.

[-Julik- 4.GdKp]

In fact only few people in Moldova want see their country become part of romania,and thats only bcs romania is in EU-so they can go work in the EU legal.

[Afro-European]

Moldovians are between rock and hard place.

[Cornelius]

In fact only few people in Moldova want see their country become part of romania,and thats only bcs romania is in EU-so they can go work in the EU legal.

Did you heard what the mass where doing in 7 april?Did you heard them when they sing the anthem of Romania?Did you heard them when they the mass, keept yelling WE ARE ROMANIANS!:)

[asch]

Did you heard what the mass where doing in 7 april?Did you heard them when they sing the anthem of Romania?Did you heard them when they the mass, keept yelling WE ARE ROMANIANS!:)
you mean, guys who lost the election? not majority, right?

[Fat Lazy American]

you mean, guys who lost the election? not majority, right?

Wait, who do you think won?

[DS73]

Reelections happened due to failure to elect president. (Moldovan president is elected by parliament. Communists missed 1(one) voice. Hence reelections of the parliament).

The desire of some mp.net members to make statements about things they have no idea about is impressive. But not new.


Not one of the international organizations observing the elections had proofs of cheating. AND the votes have been counted twice with the same result. Pravda ili net?

Nyet.
http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc09/EDOC11870.pdf
"...29. On 17 March the CEC announced that 2,549,804 voters were registered on the electoral roll, an
increase of some 10% compared with the 2005 parliamentary elections. A comparison of data supplied by
the Information Development Ministry on the number of voters with the number of voters on the electoral
registers produced by local authorities shows a discrepancy of about 160,000. This has caused considerable
concern about the accuracy of the electoral registers.

30. In this context, the OSCE/ODIHR observers reported that the methods used to draw up electoral lists
differ from one local authority to another, particularly with regard to the inclusion of citizens living abroad. ..."

And conclusion made after elections:
"...61. The ad hoc committee regrets that according to evidence collected by OSCE/ODIHR and others a
number of problems identified during previous elections remain. We were told that they include:

• cases of pressure during the election campaign against opposition party representatives, by the police;
• threats to dismiss civil servants supporting the opposition;
• lack of electoral list accuracy and the uneven updating of these lists by the various local government
bodies;
• unbalanced media coverage of the election campaign by the public audiovisual media, and the uneven
access to the media for the political parties standing for election.
..."

FYI:
Both Ukraine and R. of Moldova have long and already "traditional" history of election frauds. In both countries all parties use rather elaborate schemes to pump votes.

Most common is multiple voting when active party members register in multiple voting sections, or if voting section control is friendly, "shuttles" vote in place of absent or not voted people. This activity is not limited to one party or group.
Having observers doesn't help as they participate nor in passport control neither in voters' registration.
Existing and statistically visible wave of "late voters" comes exactly from these actions.

Obviously recounting won't help here and the moldovan opposition was quick to point that. Obviously EU commissions noticed that as well.

Small reminder since you asked for proofs.
International organizations don't find proofs, it's not their job. Their job is to monitor, make observations and mediate conflicts. They don't have legal power.


It's not my country and I don't care what party rules. Just don't think if a different party wins the living standard is gonna rise automatically during the next years. One polititian is as corrupt as the other.
Really? Don't You participate in german elections? After all, why to bother here, in mp.net, if "one politician is as corrupt as the other"?



Maybe you think Moldova could join the EU then? I tell you what: We're pumping billions of Eurodollars into the new EU members without seeing any light at the end of the tunnel. The EU is closed to new members for at least 10 years. Pumping what in what? Do you have any idea what is happening? What is pumping, do other countries outside of EU get similar help? What is the purpose of these investments? The main reason for all of these investments is trivial security. Because the only alternative to healthy neighbors is ****ty and hard guarded borders.

EU is kind of closed (kind of because Croatia will be accepted very soon), but not because "there is no light at the end of the tunnel". EU is lacking perspective. Until ol' Europe will find common future, again, and make normal agreements, again, there will be no father expansion.
Since cultural "proximity" limits are reached most probably there will be no father expansion for many years. In either case, it's not and never was about money.


Are you really a german? Man, what women can do... Kudos to Russian lady.

[-Julik- 4.GdKp]

Did you heard what the mass where doing in 7 april?Did you heard them when they sing the anthem of Romania?Did you heard them when they the mass, keept yelling WE ARE ROMANIANS!:)

How many were they?:roll: And im sure it was organized.

[Cornelius]

How many were they?:roll: And im sure it was organized.

Yes it was organizated by twitter:P and don't be so sure as you don't know too much things about the moldovans.
It where more then 40.000 students, don't be surprised the history of Romania it's still known by the ethnic romanians from Moldova wich are more then 65%, the people dosen't forgot who they are even if the communist party it's trying to brainwash them, and trying to erase the past and the history of the people..

[Cornelius]

you mean, guys who lost the election? not majority, right?

And who won?The dead people from the election lists, wich voted for the communists?

[-Julik- 4.GdKp]

Yes it was organizated by twitter:P and don't be so sure as you don't know too much things about the moldovans.
It where more then 40.000 students, don't be surprised the history of Romania it's still known by the ethnic romanians from Moldova wich are more then 65%, the people dosen't forgot who they are even if the communist party it's trying to brainwash them, and trying to erase the past and the history of the people..


How do you know what i do know about moldova?:)
Fact is only a few people in moldova want an 'reunification'.If ask me,they should,bcs moldova is a failed state and cant do alone.

[Cornelius]

How do you know what i do know about moldova?:)
Fact is only a few people in moldova want an 'reunification'.If ask me,they should,bcs moldova is a failed state and cant do alone.

I'v had the conclusion that you don't know too much about Moldova, because what you said, the fact is that the communists manipulated the oficial statistics and it's trying to impose a new identity to the moldovans, the communists are trying to impose a different opinion..
Don't trust the ,,oficial" statistics ruled by the communists..:)

[Herman the II]

Here's hoping the Communists lose.





Moldova: Poorest European Nation Topples Communist Rule

In Wednesday’s parliamentary elections, Moldavian have voted to unseat the ruling communist party, but the political future of the country remains uncertain due to the complexity of Moldavian laws.


http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/20327/

[Mr.K]

Well perhaps you're right, and we should think more about the people of the region, what is better for them and trust them to decide for themselves instead of all the ranting about re-building the Romanian empire or the USSR :)

They'll get screwed in the end, either they will have the crook who claims to be a "communist" in order to get old people votes, or they'll get a Yushenko.:)

[Flamming_Python]

They'll get screwed in the end, either they will have the crook who claims to be a "communist" in order to get old people votes, or they'll get a Yushenko.:)

I'd rather there be another ex-commie crook there than another UShenko :)

[Flamming_Python]

Reread the history of Romania, and in particular that of Moldova. Romanians have always lived between the Pruth river and the Dniester. Romania was first unified under Michael the Brave in 1600, and the Eastern border was the Dniester. The capitals of the Moldovian Principality, (which has always encapsulated what today is the Republic of Moldova as well as the Moldova region from Romania) were Suceava and Iasi, both cities in Romania. Moldova was annexed by Russia in 1812. It never joined of its own accord. Moldova declared independence from Russia in 1917 and willingly voted to rejoin with Romania in 1918. The closest analogy I can come up with for the unification of Romania and the Republic of Moldova would be East and West Germany reuniting. Yes Romania will border the Dniester, but don't worry, we don't want to have anything to do with what's beyond it. Trandnistria is free to do whatever it wants, even join with Russia if that's what it desires.

As far as Moldova/Bessarabia is concerned, it was formally Ottoman territory that was transferred directly to the Russian Empire, and this happened at the beggining of the 19th century after a war between Russia and the Ottomans, and at the cost of numerous Russian lives, not Romanian lives. It had nothing to do with any Romanian principalities at the time or the later Kingdom of Romania. This territory briefly came under the control of Romania as a result of the Crimean war, against Russian wishes. However, after Russia sent thousands of soldiers to help Romania attain its independence, Russia took Moldova back under its control again. The idea of Moldova being part of some sort of greater Romania might have looked and still looks nice from a pan-Romanian perspective, but AFAIK it had no historic precedent,and it certainly had little to do with the political realities or legal rights at the time.

Romania made a foolish move when it took advantage of the Russian civil war to fulfill its own ambitions, as after Lenin failed to ignite world socialist revolution; Stalin began the process of expanding Soviet territory back to the former borders of the Russian empire. This involved waging war with Finland (the jury is still out whether his aim was really to annex it though), annexing the Baltic states and regaining Western and Central Belarus after invading Poland (he chose to leave the rest of Poland independent however after WW2 ended). And of course it also involved telling the Romanians to get the hell out of Moldova, which they promptly did.

After the collapse of the USSR, Russia emerged without many of its core territories, such as the Crimea, Northern Kazakhstan and some other places. These areas have been settled by Russians for at least as long as Moldova has been settled by Romanians. Do you see Russia asking for these territories back, sponsoring revolutions in neighbouring states, spreading pan-Slavic or Russian chauvinist propaganda? No, Russia is happy with the status-quo because the status-quo assures stability, the core Russian territories located in these independent states mean that Russia has a greater amount of influence there, and that more of the population in these countries are pro-Russian. Similarly, the independent states that emerged after the collapse of the USSR (there are 14 in addition to Russia), form a neat ring around Russia, and serve well as buffer states, assuring peace of mind for Russia from the West, and in fact for Eastern Europe against Russia. Now imagine when someone starts sponsoring revolutions in these countries; obviously a pro-Russian or neutral government is not acceptable to some people and instead these countries start accepting NATO troops and delibaretly ruin their relations with Russia. This sort of thing has led to the crisis in Ukraine, the war in Georgia and numerous chaos in general. Now imagine what would happen if countries such as Romania went a step further and actually incorporated or annexed these countries, what sort of instability would result?


In theory that sounds nice. Too bad it never works out that way in practice, especially when it comes to Russia. My mother visited Moscow back in '84 (she thought Moscow was beautiful) as part of a scientific meeting of Eastern Bloc countries. They were given an official tour of the city, and to my mother's surprise the tour guide kept referring to the USSR as "this great Russian Empire of ours". My mom was the only one on the bus with the courage to point out the hypocrisy in that, as the USSR was supposed to be a union of fraternal states, yet the guide chose to pointedly ignore her.The guides can call it whatever they want. So can you. It still doesn't change the fact that it was a state based on socialist ideology and as such the Soviet Union generally speaking treated all of its citizens the same regardless of their ethnic background; Slavic citizens weren't given any special privelages above others. I would also bet that the support and approval of the USSR was higher in many parts of the Caucasus, Central Asia and probably Moldova as well, than for example in Western Ukraine.


Your assertion that ethnic ties don't count is also convenient though ultimately it is incorrect.They only count for as long as the asshole in power says they do. Otherwise, they really don't.


Empires have always existed in the past. Look at Britain, Russia, Spain, or France. It can be forgiven though, since people didn't really know any better (and I doubt the common folk had much of a say in it), and besides it's pointless to hold grudges. I can easily even forgive the actions of the USSR towards my country, because at the end of the day the ones who suffered the most at the hands of the Kremlin were the Russian people.

But all the same it is alarming and sad to see that Russia and Russians today still hold the same unyielding position of hoping for a resurrection of an empire that had no moral or legal foundation. Germany has more than made amends for it's past actions and has become a country that is a model for human rights, and furthermore is one of the most unselfish member of the EU. France, Britain, and Spain have all seen their empires fall apart, yet you don't see them pining for those days, and for the most part they all maintain friendly relations with their past colonies that is reciprocated. However, Russia's involvement in what is ultimately a Romanian issue is nothing more than a continuation of the same imperialistic mentality.I consider this Romanian involvement in what is ultimately a Russian issue, and nothing more than a dangerous rebirth of Romanian nationalism.

In total, Romania had this territory for a brief period in the 2nd half of the 19th century and for a brief period in the 1st half of the 20th century. Russia and later the USSR has kept it for all other times since 1812. How can you say that it has more in common with Romania, than with Russia, when there are scarcely any people alive who can remember the brief time that it was a part of Romania? You got to be kidding.

Whole generations of Moldovans have grown up under the Soviet system since then, living together with Russians, Ukrainians, Gagauz, Jews, etc... without any problems. I know plenty of Moldovans, some of which consider themselves Romanian and some of which don't, but none of them ever had any problems with Russian culture or language, actually they are very well disposed towards it which is contrast to modern Romanian youth and their dislike of Russian culture. There was a Moldovan on this forum I believe who judging by his political views could never appear as anything other than a Russian based on your standards. Well Moldova independent now; it became a full-fledged republic back in the USSR days and thats where it's statehood comes from. We're happy with that, but for some reason Romania isn't.

[cmc]

As far as Moldova/Bessarabia is concerned, it was formally Ottoman territory that was transferred directly to the Russian Empire

You are kidding me, right?! How many turks do live there now? Yes at one point it was under Ottoman rule, but that does not make it their property... Imagine the British Empire trading India to France in 1800's... should that mean India now should belong to France? That is just STUPID.


Stalin began the process of expanding Soviet territory back to the former borders of the Russian empire. This involved waging war with Finland (the jury is still out whether his aim was really to annex it though), annexing the Baltic states and regaining Western and Central Belarus after invading Poland (he chose to leave the rest of Poland independent however after WW2 ended). And of course it also involved telling the Romanians to get the hell out of Moldova, which they promptly did.

Hmm... are you talking by any chance about the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact? The great alliance between the the nazis and soviets? Lets not go into that man...


Similarly, the independent states that emerged after the collapse of the USSR (there are 14 in addition to Russia), form a neat ring around Russia, and serve well as buffer states, assuring peace of mind for Russia from the West, and in fact for Eastern Europe against Russia.

So tell me why is Russia the only country in the world that needs buffer countries? But is good to know Russia has no neighbours, only buffers p-)


Now imagine what would happen if countries such as Romania went a step further and actually incorporated or annexed these countries, what sort of instability would result?

You must be confusing Romania with other country... when was the last time you read in the paper about the romanian annexations? rofl

They only count for as long as the asshole in power says they do. Otherwise, they really don't.

With this I agree


I consider this Romanian involvement in what is ultimately a Russian issue, and nothing more than a dangerous rebirth of Romanian nationalism.

Now... you see... this is the problem... Moldova is NOT a russian issue... is a moldovian issue... might be a ukrainian and also a romanian issue because Ukraine and Romania are Moldova's only neighbours.


In total, Romania had this territory for a brief period in the 2nd half of the 19th century and for a brief period in the 1st half of the 20th century. Russia and later the USSR has kept it for all other times since 1812. How can you say that it has more in common with Romania, than with Russia, when there are scarcely any people alive who can remember the brief time that it was a part of Romania? You got to be kidding.


No, YOU got to be kidding... the Republic of Moldova was part of Moldovian Principality for over 500 years... how could you belive it has nothing in common with Romania?! For God's sake they have the same language, they have the same flag, they have the same culture and most important they are the same people...

BUT...

All I said does not mean Moldova should unify with Romania... From a certain point, this situation works for Romania too... might boost an ego or two, but except that... Romania has nothing to gain from unification...
You did not mentioned it, but Romania was the FIRST country in the world to recognize Moldova's INDEPENDANCE...

No, the only way the two countries will ever be united is going to be under a common european flag. What amuses me is the fact that you fan boys remember Moldova only when it has a choice to make... and the only way to support a (let's call communist although I doubt) regime is to say that if the oppsition wins then there is not going to be any Moldova coz' the big bad Romania is going to annex it... it's laughable and pathetic... Yeah there might be some romanians or even moldovians that might want a unification, but they have the same saying as the russians that want a rebuild of USSR.

So... in the end... this vote is not because of the few "hooligans" as one Einstein said here... but because the communist party did not have a majority in the parliament (missed a seat)... and this is not a West vs East issue... is about the moldovians choosing a new parliament... a parliament that hopefully (be it communist or not) will decentralize the moldovian institutions and will give the country a real chance in the future...

And to actually give some informations here http://www.alegeri.md/en/ you can find out the percentages for every party.

[Derbedeu]

Looks like I get to save myself some typing, since cmc pretty much covered all the bases. :)

Edit:


Actually there is something else worth mentioning. You state:


Well Moldova independent now; it became a full-fledged republic back in the USSR days and thats where it's statehood comes from. We're happy with that, but for some reason Romania isn't.

Yet Romania has always shown it's support for Moldova, even when the communists in power have painted us as the big bad bogeyman in order to consolidate themselves in power. Take the revolt back in April. Even RT states that Romania had nothing to do with the revolts like the communists accused us of. http://www.russiatoday.com/Politics/2009-07-23/Romania-was-not-behind-post-election-riots---Moldovan-prosecutors.html

Romania has always said that it stands by Moldova and is willing to do whatever it takes in order to help it's aspirations, such as joining the EU. The Romanian Government's policy never has been to bring about unification as you like to believe, though they're not opposed to it either. Ultimately, they realize that it is up to Moldova.

Yet Russia continues to keep troops there, against the wishes of the OSCE, Moldova, and even promises that it made itself.

http://www.ceeol.com/aspx/getdocument.aspx?logid=5&id=b6078547-2852-4d6b-b3bb-9b9ab0d0698e

Moldova's biggest problems have never been Romania. It continues to be a party (the communists) who are corrupt and worthless when it comes to governing, and a country (Russia) that continues to exploit the Transdniestria issue for it's own benefit, without giving any regard to the wishes of Moldova or International Law.

[Russianlynxy]

without giving any regard to the wishes of Moldova or International Law.

conflicts like Operation Allied Force, and Ossetia 2008 have once again proven that there is no such concept in existence, only Realpolitik.

Russia is doing what it's doing not because it "doesn't like" Romania or a good future for Moldova but primarily because it wants to shatter GUAM to bits and pieces. Medvedev's visit to Moldova and his show of support for the ruling party as well as the Gas deal in Azerbaijan show this desire.

[Derbedeu]

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/20327/

Good news is that all 4 parties have said that they will join in opposition to the communists. There is even a decent chance that Marian Lupu, head of the Democratic Party can get some communists to defect as well.

[Flamming_Python]

You are kidding me, right?! How many turks do live there now? Yes at one point it was under Ottoman rule, but that does not make it their property... Imagine the British Empire trading India to France in 1800's... should that mean India now should belong to France? That is just STUPID.

Well you're right it was the age of empires so to speak. Moldova transferred from the imperial property of one empire to the imperial property of another empire. At first it had plenty of autonomy in Russia, but later it became a gubernia and became subject to russification (which created some differences between Moldovans and Romanians proper). Then it became a republic in the USSR, and finally it seccedded from the USSR and became an independent state like the rest of the republics.

So now that it's an independent state, free from any empires or unions, why then are there people that are so keen on dragging it into a greater Romanian empire, or the European Union?


Hmm... are you talking by any chance about the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact? The great alliance between the the nazis and soviets? Lets not go into that man... Hmm... you're right let's NOT go into that; or the Romanian participation in the Axis during WW2 for that matter, because actually neither topic has anything to do with what we're talking about. I was merely trying to describe some history and provide a context for the USSR's invasion of Bessarabia; I didn't want to go off into a WW2 discussion.


So tell me why is Russia the only country in the world that needs buffer countries? But is good to know Russia has no neighbours, only buffers p-)We're the only country in the world that needs buffer countries, precisely because of what is happening to our buffer countries right now with the amount of outside interference and meddling that they are subject to p-)

You'd think that if Russia were such an unimportant country, everyone would leave us and our neighbours alone...


You must be confusing Romania with other country... when was the last time you read in the paper about the romanian annexations? roflWell I heard and read enough hu-ha the last time 'round a few months back; what with all the 'spontaneous' student protests in Romania, the Romanian flags being planted on Kishinev's parliament buildings, all the talk of uniting with Romania, etc... But to answer your question I'm not responding to what I read in the papers, i'm responding to people that have posted on this very thread.

I'm not saying it will happen, or that it's the official plan of the Romanian government. I'm just worried about what would happen if it turns out that it is.


Now... you see... this is the problem... Moldova is NOT a russian issue... is a moldovian issue... might be a ukrainian and also a romanian issue because Ukraine and Romania are Moldova's only neighbours.Well you're right, it's a Moldovan issue indeed. And you know what I'm perfectly happy for Russia to stay out of it, as long as Romania also stays out of it. And don't play the card about the 'only neighbours', they're an ex-Soviet state and we're the largest ex-Soviet state; of course we're neighbours.


No, YOU got to be kidding... the Republic of Moldova was part of Moldovian Principality for over 500 years... how could you belive it has nothing in common with Romania?! For God's sake they have the same language, they have the same flag, they have the same culture and most important they are the same people... Well yes well done. However that still doesn't change the fact that the last time that Romania and Moldova were part of the same independent country was back in the Middle Ages. So they were together for over 500 years... over 500 years ago. Yeah great. A lot has changed since then. They were both under the control of the Turks, but didn't have a common independent state with common institutions and other things, when under Ottoman control they were even part of different administrative divisions if i'm not mistaken. That they're the same people well essentially you're correct, but the last few centuries have created some differences just the same. Russians and Belarussians, especially urban Belarussians, are also exactly the same people with the same language, same traditions, etc... there is less difference between us than between Romanians and Moldovans (who are russified and were part of a different country than Romanians for the better part of 2 centuries). Yet Belarussians and Russians, close as we are, are still seperate peoples with seperate countries. The only reason is because the Soviets decided that we should have seperate republics; had they not we could have just as easily ended up as part of the same country and considered ourselves the same people; the Belarussians certainly had and still have very little of the anti-Russian nationalism that affects Western Ukraine.

If we wish to make a union with the Belarussians in the future I would certainly support it, but based on wise, realistic politics and our common Soviet legacy (as it is still recent), not so much on our ethnic ties or the fact that we were both part of Kieven Rus' or the Russian empire.

Secoundly, doesn't the fact that the communists are the only party that receive votes from ethnic minorities in Moldova tell you anything? The minorities account for about 25% of the population (excluding Pridnestrovie) so it's not like what they think is insignificant. I'm an ethnic Russian (give or take a 1/2), and our lot account for perhaps 75-80% of the population of Russia, but I would never vote for a party in Russia whose member base consists exclusively of ethnic Russians; because I know what the election of such a political party may lead to, the sort of right-wing ideology it would preach and in general I just wouldn't consider it fair to the little guy. When I see representitives of these 'liberal', 'democratic', 'pro-EU' parties clambering onto buildings and raise maps of a Romania that streches upto the Dniestr (or EU flags, or whatever), without a single Russian face to be seen in the crowd and without any political banners in the Russian language, well frankly all I can think of is that these guys are just a fringe group of nationalists and that they don't represent the ethnically diverse youth of Kishinev or their political views. And they sure as hell aren't a 'spontaneous' gathering of Kishinev's dissaffected and disenfranchised population; a specific group of people belonging to a specific ethnic group with a specific agenda such as this... it just doesn't happen without prior organisation.

Remember one thing; Russians, Ukrainians, Moldovans, Gagauz, Jews and anyone else from Moldova... they are all Moldovans. I say this not because they are all ethnically Romanian, only about 75% are as we already established; but because their fates are tied. They were all born on that land and it is their responsibility and only their responsibility to create a proper country and a developed economy out of it. Joining Romania, even joining the EU is just a cop out as far as I'm concerned; that would only lead to better conditions for Moldovan gasterbiters to work in richer countries. They should first of all get rid of all this cheap nationalist sentiment, re-unite with Pridnestrovie so that they can get some industry and assume some stability in the eyes of international actors and investors. Then once they begin to get investment into their economy they can think about joining an economic union, they should balance their interests between those of Russia and the West; stay neutral and get concessions from both perhaps if they don't want to turn to Russia p-). Of course Moldova will end up having close cultural and economic ties with Romania regardless; that is only natural and healthy as we see for example with Turkey and Azerbaijan; so I don't think you should be so concerned.


All I said does not mean Moldova should unify with Romania... From a certain point, this situation works for Romania too... might boost an ego or two, but except that... Romania has nothing to gain from unification...So what the hell are we arguing about then?


You did not mentioned it, but Romania was the FIRST country in the world to recognize Moldova's INDEPENDANCE...Well done for getting there first. The rest of the world has since followed suit, including Russia; so don't worry.


No, the only way the two countries will ever be united is going to be under a common european flag. What amuses me is the fact that you fan boys remember Moldova only when it has a choice to make... and the only way to support a (let's call communist although I doubt) regime is to say that if the oppsition wins then there is not going to be any Moldova coz' the big bad Romania is going to annex it... it's laughable and pathetic... Yeah there might be some romanians or even moldovians that might want a unification, but they have the same saying as the russians that want a rebuild of USSR.**sigh** Well I don't see any difference between Romania sponsoring a political movement in Moldova and subsequently dragging into the EU which would de-facto make it a satellite of Romania, or adding it to Romania proper which Romania would only ever be able to do with EU assistance anyway (not every country can stand up to Russia by themselves after all). It's just a question of semantics really, and I don't support either option. Of course, if Moldova has to join the EU than I'd rather that it do so as a full-fledged sovereign state, with the EU guaranteeing such sovereignty.

Well as for ignoring Moldova, I do admit that Russia's political class has often acted with arrogance or at least indifference to some of the poorer ex-USSR republics such as Moldova or Tajikistan; to be precise we basically refused to help them and give them economic assistance as they had nothing to offer us in return. This I believe was a mistake that we are paying for now. I hope Russia's leaders learn from their mistakes although i'm not absolutely sure they will. In this thread though, i'm offering my own private opinion and no-one else's.


So... in the end... this vote is not because of the few "hooligans" as one Einstein said here... but because the communist party did not have a majority in the parliament (missed a seat)... and this is not a West vs East issue... is about the moldovians choosing a new parliament... a parliament that hopefully (be it communist or not) will decentralize the moldovian institutions and will give the country a real chance in the future...I hope so too and wish all Moldovans the best of luck.

[Derbedeu]

Well you're right it was the age of empires so to speak. Moldova transferred from the imperial property of one empire to the imperial property of another empire. At first it had plenty of autonomy in Russia, but later it became a gubernia and became subject to russification (which created some differences between Moldovans and Romanians proper). Then it became a republic in the USSR, and finally it seccedded from the USSR and became an independent state like the rest of the republics.

Poland as well. Yet today Poland is still Poland, just as Moldovans are still Romanians. The only difference is the 100,000's of Russians that were settled on Moldovan territory over the years. And yet, Moldova still voluntarily joined Romania in 1918, and today what you would call ethnic Moldovans still see themselves as Romanians.


So now that it's an independent state, free from any empires or unions, why then are there people that are so keen on dragging it into a greater Romanian empire, or the European Union?No one want's to drag it into anything. I'm pretty certain that Moldovans wish to enter the EU since it would mean no longer being the poorest country within Europe.


Hmm... you're right let's NOT go into that; or the Romanian participation in the Axis during WW2 for that matter, because actually neither topic has anything to do with what we're talking about. I was merely trying to describe some history and provide a context for the USSR's invasion of Bessarabia; I didn't want to go off into a WW2 discussion.Country A and country B split up country C. Two years later country A rules pretty much all of Europe, while country B is universally seen as a house of cards waiting to collapse. Country A invades country B. Country C sees an opportunity to at least recover some of its lost territory. Guess which countries are which? Romania was stuck between a rock and a hard place and was put into that situation by powers outside of its control, just like many other smaller European states.


We're the only country in the world that needs buffer countries, precisely because of what is happening to our buffer countries right now with the amount of outside interference and meddling that they are subject to p-) You'd think that if Russia were such an unimportant country, everyone would leave us and our neighbours alone...
Sorry, but the only interference seems to be coming from the east, not west. Even the communist government has come clean and admitted that Romania had nothing to do with the April revolts. Besides, if the opposition wishes to join the EU and integrate into the West, then it is Moldova's sovereign right to do so, without interference from Russia. And again, Moldova wants to join because it doesn't wish to remain the poorest nation in Europe.



Well I heard and read enough hu-ha the last time 'round a few months back; what with all the 'spontaneous' student protests in Romania, the Romanian flags being planted on Kishinev's parliament buildings, all the talk of uniting with Romania, etc... But to answer your question I'm not responding to what I read in the papers, i'm responding to people that have posted on this very thread.

I'm not saying it will happen, or that it's the official plan of the Romanian government. I'm just worried about what would happen if it turns out that it is.Nope, Romania had nothing to do with it. Even the Moldovan prosecutors have admitted it, as seen in the article I've posted above. The communists of course blamed Romania since they wished to take the heat off of themselves. Moldovans are Romanians (I'm not speaking of the Russian/Ukrainian Moldovans here), so it's not surprising you saw such demonstrations.


Well you're right, it's a Moldovan issue indeed. And you know what I'm perfectly happy for Russia to stay out of it, as long as Romania also stays out of it. And don't play the card about the 'only neighbours', they're an ex-Soviet state and we're the largest ex-Soviet state; of course we're neighbours.Currently only one of us has troops in the state of Moldova, and it's not Romania.


Well yes well done. However that still doesn't change the fact that the last time that Romania and Moldova were part of the same independent country was back in the Middle Ages. So they were together for over 500 years... over 500 years ago. Yeah great. A lot has changed since then. They were both under the control of the Turks, but didn't have a common independent state with common institutions and other things, when under Ottoman control they were even part of different administrative divisions if i'm not mistaken. That they're the same people well essentially you're correct, but the last few centuries have created some differences just the same. Russians and Belarussians, especially urban Belarussians, are also exactly the same people with the same language, same traditions, etc... there is less difference between us than between Romanians and Moldovans (who are russified and were part of a different country than Romanians for the better part of 2 centuries). Yet Belarussians and Russians, close as we are, are still seperate peoples with seperate countries. The only reason is because the Soviets decided that we should have seperate republics; had they not we could have just as easily ended up as part of the same country and considered ourselves the same people; the Belarussians certainly had and still have very little of the anti-Russian nationalism that affects Western Ukraine.Not 500 years ago, try 70 years ago. And conveniently you leave out the fact that Moldova voluntarily, of its own accord, decided to join Romania. Never so when it was part of Russia or the USSR. And even 100 years followed by another 60 years still hasn't changed the fact that Moldovans are Romanians. The only difference is the influx of Russians and Ukrainians into Moldova during those time periods.


If we wish to make a union with the Belarussians in the future I would certainly support it, but based on wise, realistic politics and our common Soviet legacy (as it is still recent), not so much on our ethnic ties or the fact that we were both part of Kieven Rus' or the Russian empire. Same with us and Moldova. It would probably only be done at the behest of Moldova and as a means of entering the EU. It wouldn't be done against their wishes.


Secoundly, doesn't the fact that the communists are the only party that receive votes from ethnic minorities in Moldova tell you anything? The minorities account for about 25% of the population (excluding Pridnestrovie) so it's not like what they think is insignificant. I'm an ethnic Russian (give or take a 1/2), and our lot account for perhaps 75-80% of the population of Russia, but I would never vote for a party in Russia whose member base consists exclusively of ethnic Russians; because I know what the election of such a political party may lead to, the sort of right-wing ideology it would preach and in general I just wouldn't consider it fair to the little guy. When I see representitives of these 'liberal', 'democratic', 'pro-EU' parties clambering onto buildings and raise maps of a Romania that streches upto the Dniestr (or EU flags, or whatever), without a single Russian face to be seen in the crowd and without any political banners in the Russian language, well frankly all I can think of is that these guys are just a fringe group of nationalists and that they don't represent the ethnically diverse youth of Kishinev or their political views. And they sure as hell aren't a 'spontaneous' gathering of Kishinev's dissaffected and disenfranchised population; a specific group of people belonging to a specific ethnic group with a specific agenda such as this... it just doesn't happen without prior organisation.Russia imposed itself and its people on Moldova. Stop trying to pretend that the opposition is rabidly nationalistic and the communists are angels somehow. And the fact of the matter is that mostly old people voted for the communists, irregardless of their ethnicity, because they're deluded enough to believe communist propaganda that they'll lost their pensions if they don't.


Remember one thing; Russians, Ukrainians, Moldovans, Gagauz, Jews and anyone else from Moldova... they are all Moldovans. I say this not because they are all ethnically Romanian, only about 75% are as we already established; but because their fates are tied. They were all born on that land and it is their responsibility and only their responsibility to create a proper country and a developed economy out of it. Joining Romania, even joining the EU is just a cop out as far as I'm concerned; that would only lead to better conditions for Moldovan gasterbiters to work in richer countries. They should first of all get rid of all this cheap nationalist sentiment, re-unite with Pridnestrovie so that they can get some industry and assume some stability in the eyes of international actors and investors. Then once they begin to get investment into their economy they can think about joining an economic union, they should balance their interests between those of Russia and the West; stay neutral and get concessions from both perhaps if they don't want to turn to Russia p-). Of course Moldova will end up having close cultural and economic ties with Romania regardless; that is only natural and healthy as we see for example with Turkey and Azerbaijan; so I don't think you should be so concerned.Too bad it's not what the majority of Moldovans think right? :roll:


So what the hell are we arguing about then?
**sigh** Well I don't see any difference between Romania sponsoring a political movement in Moldova and subsequently dragging into the EU which would de-facto make it a satellite of Romania, or adding it to Romania proper which Romania would only ever be able to do with EU assistance anyway (not every country can stand up to Russia by themselves after all). It's just a question of semantics really, and I don't support either option. Of course, if Moldova has to join the EU than I'd rather that it do so as a full-fledged sovereign state, with the EU guaranteeing such sovereignty.The point is that whatever Moldova chooses, Russia has no legal say in the matter. If both Moldova and Romania hold referendums for unification then Russia has no choice but to respect such an outcome. If Moldova joins the EU not as part of Romania, but a separate country, then Russia must respect this also. That's what I'm arguing here. And again, Romania has stated that it respects whatever Moldova wishes. But we won't stand idly by while the communists unfairly target us in order to deflect from the piss-poor job that they have done over these past 8 years.


Well as for ignoring Moldova, I do admit that Russia's political class has often acted with arrogance or at least indifference to some of the poorer ex-USSR republics such as Moldova or Tajikistan; to be precise we basically refused to help them and give them economic assistance as they had nothing to offer us in return. This I believe was a mistake that we are paying for now. I hope Russia's leaders learn from their mistakes although i'm not absolutely sure they will. In this thread though, i'm offering my own private opinion and no-one else's.

I hope so too and wish all Moldovans the best of luck.Well, at least something we can agree on.

[Mr.K]

I'd rather there be another ex-commie crook there than another UShenko :)

The assraping will feel the same. Maybe they hope with a pro EU crook it will feel a bit different.
As for Romania, if you stop daydreaming for a second, how is that country supposed to integrate one of the poorest states in Europe. It's not Western Germany reuniting with the Eastern Germany.

[Derbedeu]

The assraping will feel the same. Maybe they hope with a pro EU crook it will feel a bit different.
As for Romania, if you stop daydreaming for a second, how is that country supposed to integrate one of the poorest states in Europe. It's not Western Germany reuniting with the Eastern Germany.

Thing is the communists haven't done anything in 8 years. Time to give the opposition a chance.

As for your second point, some things can't be measured in a monetary sense alone.

[nubface]

With the centennial anniversary of the conclusion of WWI coming up in the next couple years, why not celebrate by stealing or annexing your neighbors land again!

[Xaito]

Time to give the opposition a chance.
yeah, it worked so well in the Ukraine!
we need more color revolutions - because a coup is always democratic if the pro west side lost, right?

[Derbedeu]

yeah, it worked so well in the Ukraine!
we need more color revolutions - because a coup is always democratic if the pro west side lost, right?

Moldova is not Ukraine. But nice try though. Oh, and BTW, the communists are officially pro-European integration as well.

[AlexMartin2]

I find conversation here strange. If majority of population in Moldova for unification, why should we care? It is concern of Moldovan and Romanian people only.
If they not, then all who wants unification should shut up and live (or leave) peacefully.

PS By majority I mean not 50% + 1, but more, two thirds for example.

[Mr.K]

Moldova is not Ukraine. But nice try though. Oh, and BTW, the communists are officially pro-European integration as well.
Officially everyone is for job creation, peace on earth and sunshine. Be it the blue flag or the red flag.


Thing is the communists haven't done anything in 8 years. Time to give the opposition a chance.

As for your second point, some things can't be measured in a monetary sense alone.

Oh its not only the money, 20 years after the reunification, differences between the two Germanies exist.

[Derbedeu]

Officially everyone is for job creation, peace on earth and sunshine. Be it the blue flag or the red flag.


So you're saying that the communists are lying about their platform? What a surprise.



Oh its not only the money, 20 years after the reunification, differences between the two Germanies exist.

Yes, you're right. Now go ask how many Germans are looking for the dissolution of Germany back to the way it was before.

[Mr.K]

So you're saying that the communists are lying about their platform? What a surprise.




Yes, you're right. Now go ask how many Germans are looking for the dissolution of Germany back to the way it was before.

Why is it a surpise? Ever heard of Ostalgie?

[Derbedeu]

Why is it a surpise? Ever heard of Ostalgie?

I was being sarcastic. Fact remains that the communists are nothing but a bunch of crooks who haven't done anything to improve the condition of their people in 8 years. That they're stringing along the electorate with false promises of further European integration only gives another reason for them to get thrown out of power.

As for Ostalgie, yes I have heard of it, but what's your point? It's nothing more than a common human trait that goes across political lines. Ask any old person about the old days and they would wax on end about how much better things were back then, regardless of how much empirical evidence you present them with. There are those who still yearn for the Soviet Union. Some old people in Romania maintain that life was better under Ceausescu. Nostalgia is usually nothing more than a symptom of mankind's aversion to change.

[Mr.K]

My point was to provide you with an answer, and that Moldovans will basically become 2nd class Romanians.

[Derbedeu]

My point was to provide you with an answer, and that Moldovans will basically become 2nd class Romanians.

So East Germans are 2nd class citizens? rofl


Please, if anything Moldovans would benefit enormously from investment both from Romania as well as EU structural funds.

Besides you forget that Moldova hasn't experienced true communist rule for 19 years. Therefore there won't be such a culture shock/inability to adopt to a free market system like you had in the German reunification.

[Satorius]

Yes there is. And if you know anything about history, you'd know there is nothing wrong with that. Moldovans are Romanians since Moldova is just a region, not an ethnicity. The Principality of Moldova (comprising of the Moldovan Republic as well as the Moldovan region in Romania), was first united with Transylvania and Wallachia in 1600 under Michael the Brave. They also voted to join Romania in 1921.

My stance is that unification should come about, but certain conditions should be met first:

-Referendum in Romania accepting unification
-Referendum in Moldova accepting unification
-Transdnistria issue should be resolved

For the third, I'm perfectly willing to see it independent, or as part of Ukraine, or whatever they want. If they don't want to be an autonomous region of Romania + Moldova, I'm perfectly fine with that, as are many of my fellow Romanians.

Why do you think Romania will be given permission to incorporate Moldova by the EU? Romania is a EU member-state and it means that Moldovian joining Romania equals its joining the EU. In the meantime Moldova is an agricultural country, one of the most poorest among ex-Soviet republics.
I don't see any grounds why Brussels will tolerate the unification of Moldova and Romania in the EU.

[Bolshoy]

Why do you think Romania will be given permission to incorporate Moldova by the EU? Romania is a EU member-state and it means that Moldovian joining Romania equals its joining the EU. In the meantime Moldova is an agricultural country, one of the most poorest among ex-Soviet republics.
I don't see any grounds why Brussels will tolerate the unification of Moldova and Romania in the EU.

Poorest, even behind Tadjikistan....

[Derbedeu]

Why do you think Romania will be given permission to incorporate Moldova by the EU? Romania is a EU member-state and it means that Moldovian joining Romania equals its joining the EU. In the meantime Moldova is an agricultural country, one of the most poorest among ex-Soviet republics.
I don't see any grounds why Brussels will tolerate the unification of Moldova and Romania in the EU.

If it ever does come to reunification, the EU won't have a say due to the German precedent.

[Satorius]

If it ever does come to reunification, the EU won't have a say due to the German precedent.


The European Union was established under Maastricht Treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Treaty) that came into force on 1 November 1993. The reunification of Germany took place in 1990.
Besides the Eastern Germany was in much better shape than Moldova while the Western Germany was the economic leader of Europe and could afford to finance the reunification and reforms in the east on its own.

[Difool]

What is this talking about Romania-Moldova unification all about? I know a girl from Moldova and she is native Russian speaking. As far as I know the country is ethnically pretty much mixed up. So a unification between those two countries might cause heavy tensions and (god forbid) civil war again.

[Russianlynxy]

the communists are leading anyways.

http://news.rambler.ru/Russia/head/3380371/

[Derbedeu]

The European Union was established under Maastricht Treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maastricht_Treaty) that came into force on 1 November 1993. The reunification of Germany took place in 1990.
Besides the Eastern Germany was in much better shape than Moldova while the Western Germany was the economic leader of Europe and could afford to finance the reunification and reforms in the east on its own.

The EC was still around, and there was plenty of debate on what to do with East Germany. Also with regards to NATO. In the end it became clear that there was no practical choice other than automatically including East Germany into those structures.

Conversely, you can say that the inclusion of Moldova won't be too much of a big deal since it's only 3.5 million people. Granted there will be things like visa issues, a push back when it comes to joining the euro, a reallocating of EU structural funds, and generally lots of debate. But in the end the EU would have no choice since it already set a precedent with the reunification of Germany.


What is this talking about Romania-Moldova unification all about? I know a girl from Moldova and she is native Russian speaking. As far as I know the country is ethnically pretty much mixed up. So a unification between those two countries might cause heavy tensions and (god forbid) civil war again.

Moldova, excluding Transistria, is historically Romanian land, and it comprises of 78% Romanians. The rest is a mix of Ukrainians, Russians, Bulgarians, Gagauzians, Roma, etc. Many in Moldova are for reunification, and even those that don't necessarily support it realize that the quickest path into the EU would be through unification. Romania itself has a large proportion of ethnic minorities, of Hungarians, Germans, Serbs, Roma, and Ukrainians. Minorities rights are well respected. If reunification were to happen (through referendums in both states), there will of course be several provisions to protect Russian-speaking schools and other minorities. Unlike the Russians in Transnistria we won't close them down:

http://www.osce.org/publications/sg/2005/07/15621_425_en.pdf

[Flamming_Python]

Poland as well. Yet today Poland is still Poland, just as Moldovans are still Romanians. The only difference is the 100,000's of Russians that were settled on Moldovan territory over the years. And yet, Moldova still voluntarily joined Romania in 1918, and today what you would call ethnic Moldovans still see themselves as Romanians.

Well perhaps I should have made myself more clear. The 'russification' in those times pertained mainly to the local and regional apparatus/institutions, as well as the urban intelligencia and other parts of society like the army. It didn't extend to the peasentry or the villages; and of course as the rural population in those times accounted for perhaps 80-90% of Poland's and Moldova's total; in actuality not many Poles and Moldovans were 'russified' during those times; and the vast majority remained with no grasp of the Russian language or any connection to Russian society. It was only during the Soviet period that the Moldovans industrialised, learnt Russian and started to mix with the populations of other republics, so really this is the time period that I should have referred to.

As for voluntarily joining; well i'd be wary about the legitimacy and validatity of democratic processess during a time like 1918. During this time there was an outburst of revolutions and seizures of power all across Europe and Russia, often with mass support because of atrocious conditions and the disasterous decisions made by the old regimes.

Even if we were to assume that the majority of Moldova's population at the time genuinely supported unification with Romania, you should keep in mind that what the people want at any particular moment is all well and good; but it is subject to change. 20 years ago the Chechens wanted to remain part of Russia. A horrific war later and many didn't want anything to do with Russia. For this reason such decisions must be based on pragmatic politics, not on populism.

Finally, like I said, I know quite a few Moldovans, and some see themselves as Romanians, and some don't. In fact I would say that although over the past few years it has steadily become more popular for ethnic Moldovans to identify themselves as Romanians, such people still make up a smallish minority of ethnic Moldovans, and this trend is pretty much concentrated in the young generation. The Soviet system did its work pretty well and the idea of a seperate Moldovan identity is stronger than you assume. Actually I know one Moldovan, who at the same time considers himself a Romanian, and is somewhat nostalgic about the USSR :)


No one want's to drag it into anything. I'm pretty certain that Moldovans wish to enter the EU since it would mean no longer being the poorest country within Europe.So which country is going to be the poorest in Europe then? Russia? It's fair enough that the Moldovans want to join the EU; can't blame them. However Romanian direct or indirect intereference in this process, trying to support pro-Western parties in Moldova, etc... is not healthy and will only lead to trouble later.


Country A and country B split up country C. Two years later country A rules pretty much all of Europe, while country B is universally seen as a house of cards waiting to collapse. Country A invades country B. Country C sees an opportunity to at least recover some of its lost territory. Guess which countries are which? Romania was stuck between a rock and a hard place and was put into that situation by powers outside of its control, just like many other smaller European states.Well I'm not arguing this, although this same lost territory is territory that Romania itself took from Russia in 1918. In either case, didn't we agree not to talk about WW2?


Sorry, but the only interference seems to be coming from the east, not west. Even the communist government has come clean and admitted that Romania had nothing to do with the April revolts. Besides, if the opposition wishes to join the EU and integrate into the West, then it is Moldova's sovereign right to do so, without interference from Russia. And again, Man I have a really hard time believing that Romania has nothing to do with Moldova's opposition parties or the masses of young students that were gathering in Romania during the upsets in Moldova a few months back. As for Russia; since when are we interfering in Moldova's affairs? We have an army in Pridnestrovie, but that place has been independent since the early 90's, and no Russian tank is crossing the Dniestr river as of yet. Voronin came to us not us to him, and since he is about the only major politician in Moldova that's not completely against us, we were only too happy to work with him. We were actually making good progress on settling the Pridnestrovie issue, until this nationalist BS restarted.


Moldova wants to join because it doesn't wish to remain the poorest nation in Europe.I still say, that there are no perspectives for Moldova becoming a poor province of Romania, or the backwater of the EU, and that it would still remain the poorest country in Europe because there is simply no country in Europe that can possibly replace it in this position; unless of course Moldova wishes to play catch-up with Albania, but even they are way ahead by now. What Moldova needs is internal reform and re-unification with Pridnestrovie, not outside intereference and handouts from Romania and the EU. And to accomplish this I completely agree that the communists must go; they are incompetent. But there is simply no-one to replace them as of yet; the only thing the communists got right is foreign policy, but unfortunetly that's exactly what everyone else is about to get wrong.

BTW, the average wage in Moldova raised by about 10% over the last 6 months, and this is during the economic crisis and without outside assistance.


Nope, Romania had nothing to do with it. Even the Moldovan prosecutors have admitted it, as seen in the article I've posted above. The communists of course blamed Romania since they wished to take the heat off of themselves. Moldovans are Romanians (I'm not speaking of the Russian/Ukrainian Moldovans here), so it's not surprising you saw such demonstrations.Well the riots are just something that happened due to mass discontent; I don't think Romania had anything to do with them either; but the fact that a mass of people gathered on that square to shout nationalist slogans is not a good sign; it was just a matter of time before things got ugly. Like I said before, if the youth of Kishinev feel the need to protest, they should do so together - Russians, Ukrainians, Moldovans, etc...


Currently only one of us has troops in the state of Moldova, and it's not Romania.Pridnestrovie may be a part of Moldova on paper, but in reality it's a seperate country by now, and is de-facto a Russian protectorate.


Not 500 years ago, try 70 years ago. And conveniently you leave out the fact that Moldova voluntarily, of its own accord, decided to join Romania. Never so when it was part of Russia or the USSR. And even 100 years followed by another 60 years still hasn't changed the fact that Moldovans are Romanians. The only difference is the influx of Russians and Ukrainians into Moldova during those time periods.Yes and the Russians and Ukrainians form quite a significant part of Moldova's population, and although they are a minority; their interests should also be respected atlhough of course ultimately the majority decides. What's more there has been mixing between the ethnic Moldovans and the newcomers, especially in the cities which were industrialised, developed and populated during Soviet times, by ethnic Moldovans from the villages in addition to Russians and Ukrainians from their respective republics. Therefore Moldovan society has changed quite a bit over the last 100 years, followed by 60 years. Moldova was only part of Romania for 21 years last century though, by my count.

Also, stop making it sound like the Russians and Ukrainians came to 'colonise' or 'settle' Moldova. They came to develop the economy, most of the one's that came to Moldova were specialists of one kind of the other, and the majority settled in urban areas alongside ethnic Moldovans and other peoples; they didn't create new villiages or settlements or displace any Moldovans from the land in which they lived. By the end of the USSR, the only places in Moldova that had very significant Russian and Ukrainian populations were Pridnestrovie (which had long had many Slavic settlements even prior to becoming part of the Russian empire) and the capital Kishinev.


Russia imposed itself and its people on Moldova. Stop trying to pretend that the opposition is rabidly nationalistic and the communists are angels somehow. And the fact of the matter is that mostly old people voted for the communists, irregardless of their ethnicity, because they're deluded enough to believe communist propaganda that they'll lost their pensions if they don't. Imposed itself? You're making it sound like we came and raped them. The USSR was responsible for the industrialisation, education & literacy and urbanisation of Moldova; the old people are the only one's who remember it. I never said that the communists are angels, but the opposition is rabidly nationalistic from what I've seen of it.


The point is that whatever Moldova chooses, Russia has no legal say in the matter. If both Moldova and Romania hold referendums for unification then Russia has no choice but to respect such an outcome. If Moldova joins the EU not as part of Romania, but a separate country, then Russia must respect this also. That's what I'm arguing here. And again, Romania has stated that it respects whatever Moldova wishes. But we won't stand idly by while the communists unfairly target us in order to deflect from the piss-poor job that they have done over these past 8 years.Well you're probably right that we have no legal say. But I doubt that Russia would accept an outcome where Moldovan statehood simply dissappears; that would make Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia combined look like a geopolitical picnic. I would also hazard a guess, that the rest of the ex-Soviet republics would also get pretty alarmed; even ones adverse to Russia such as the Ukraine.

[Derbedeu]

Well perhaps I should have made myself more clear. The 'russification' in those times pertained mainly to the local and regional apparatus/institutions, as well as the urban intelligencia and other parts of society like the army. It didn't extend to the peasentry or the villages; and of course as the rural population in those times accounted for perhaps 80-90% of Poland's and Moldova's total; in actuality not many Poles and Moldovans were 'russified' during those times; and the vast majority remained with no grasp of the Russian language or any connection to Russian society. It was only during the Soviet period that the Moldovans industrialised, learnt Russian and started to mix with the populations of other republics, so really this is the time period that I should have referred to.

Nope. Russification also included the banning of the Latin alphabet, the banning of Catholic schools in Poland for Orthodox ones, and other measure that were meant to annihilate Polish and Romanian culture. If anyone tried to do the same to Russia you'd be up in arms about it and rightfully so.


As for voluntarily joining; well i'd be wary about the legitimacy and validatity of democratic processess during a time like 1918. During this time there was an outburst of revolutions and seizures of power all across Europe and Russia, often with mass support because of atrocious conditions and the disasterous decisions made by the old regimes.

Even if we were to assume that the majority of Moldova's population at the time genuinely supported unification with Romania, you should keep in mind that what the people want at any particular moment is all well and good; but it is subject to change. 20 years ago the Chechens wanted to remain part of Russia. A horrific war later and many didn't want anything to do with Russia. For this reason such decisions must be based on pragmatic politics, not on populism.Fact of the matter is that they joined Romania willingly because they opposed from the very first their annexation by the Russian Empire.


Finally, like I said, I know quite a few Moldovans, and some see themselves as Romanians, and some don't. In fact I would say that although over the past few years it has steadily become more popular for ethnic Moldovans to identify themselves as Romanians, such people still make up a smallish minority of ethnic Moldovans, and this trend is pretty much concentrated in the young generation. The Soviet system did its work pretty well and the idea of a seperate Moldovan identity is stronger than you assume. Actually I know one Moldovan, who at the same time considers himself a Romanian, and is somewhat nostalgic about the USSR :) Again, a large influx of Russians and Ukrainians occurred under the USSR. Of course they're not going to see themselves as Romanian. However, Russia's actions were no better than that of China's with Tibet, where you have millions of Han Chinese displacing the indigenous Tibetan population.


So which country is going to be the poorest in Europe then? Russia? It's fair enough that the Moldovans want to join the EU; can't blame them. However Romanian direct or indirect intereference in this process, trying to support pro-Western parties in Moldova, etc... is not healthy and will only lead to trouble later.Ok, perhaps it will remain the poorest region, I'll grant you that. However I have no doubt that the standard of living will still increase, albeit it has a ton of work to do to catch up. I don't see how it's unhealthy. Fact of the matter is that the communists haven't improved anything in 8 years. It is only normal to give the Western-parties, as you term them, a chance.


Well I'm not arguing this, although this same lost territory is territory that Romania itself took from Russia in 1918. In either case, didn't we agree not to talk about WW2?Romania only retook the territory that it had originally lost in 1812. And again, they joined of their own accord.


Man I have a really hard time believing that Romania has nothing to do with Moldova's opposition parties or the masses of young students that were gathering in Romania during the upsets in Moldova a few months back. As for Russia; since when are we interfering in Moldova's affairs? We have an army in Pridnestrovie, but that place has been independent since the early 90's, and no Russian tank is crossing the Dniestr river as of yet. Voronin came to us not us to him, and since he is about the only major politician in Moldova that's not completely against us, we were only too happy to work with him. We were actually making good progress on settling the Pridnestrovie issue, until this nationalist BS restarted.Transnistria is not an independent country. No other country recognizes it, not even Russia. Russia is simply utilizing Transnistria for their own ends. It has been repeatedly called on by the Moldovan communist government as well as the OSCE to withdraw it's troops, yet it has failed to do so. Even when it originally promised to do so. I call that interference. It seems to be Russia's MO. Easy to invite them in, good luck trying to get them to leave.


I still say, that there are no perspectives for Moldova becoming a poor province of Romania, or the backwater of the EU, and that it would still remain the poorest country in Europe because there is simply no country in Europe that can possibly replace it in this position; unless of course Moldova wishes to play catch-up with Albania, but even they are way ahead by now. What Moldova needs is internal reform and re-unification with Pridnestrovie, not outside intereference and handouts from Romania and the EU. And to accomplish this I completely agree that the communists must go; they are incompetent. But there is simply no-one to replace them as of yet; the only thing the communists got right is foreign policy, but unfortunetly that's exactly what everyone else is about to get wrong.The communists have gotten everything wrong. Reunification with Transnistria isn't ever going to happen because Smirnov and most importantly the Russians won't allow it since it will mean giving up their foothold there.


Well the riots are just something that happened due to mass discontent; I don't think Romania had anything to do with them either; but the fact that a mass of people gathered on that square to shout nationalist slogans is not a good sign; it was just a matter of time before things got ugly. Like I said before, if the youth of Kishinev feel the need to protest, they should do so together - Russians, Ukrainians, Moldovans, etc...They did. In fact Natalia Morar, their leader, is a Russian, is she not?


Pridnestrovie may be a part of Moldova on paper, but in reality it's a seperate country by now, and is de-facto a Russian protectorate.Backtracking again are we? Didn't you just state that Moldova and Transnistria need to be reunited? Very convenient how the Russians always seem to switch on the issue so it suits them.


Yes and the Russians and Moldovans form quite a significant part of Moldova's population, and although they are a minority; their interests should also be respected atlhough of course ultimately the majority decides. What's more there has been mixing between the ethnic Moldovans and the newcomers, especially in the cities which were industrialised, developed and populated during Soviet times, by ethnic Moldovans from the villages in addition to Russians and Ukrainians from their respective republics. Therefore Moldovan society has changed quite a bit over the last 100 years, followed by 60 years. Moldova was only part of Romania for 21 years last century though, by my count.Their rights would be respected I have no doubt of that. And even if they were only 21 years part of Romania, and the rest illegally part of Russia/USSR, it's telling that the majority still see themselves as Romanians, not Russians.


Imposed itself? You're making it sound like we came and raped them. The USSR was responsible for the industrialisation, education & literacy and urbanisation of Moldova; the old people are the only one's who remember it. I never said that the communists are angels, but the opposition is rabidly nationalistic from what I've seen of it.Yes, imposed yourselves. The annexation of Moldova was illegal. And the opposition is not nationalistic as you would like to portray it. Why don't you take a look at some of their speeches from today, and you'd see that quit the contrary, they want to unify the country. It is the communists who are trying to frame the political discourse in terms of us vs. them. You should see some of their propaganda before the election. It was as divisive as you can get.


Well you're probably right that we have no legal say. But I doubt that Russia would accept an outcome where Moldovan statehood simply dissappears; that would make Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia combined look like a geopolitical picnic. I would also hazard a guess, that the rest of the ex-Soviet republics would also get pretty alarmed; even ones adverse to Russia such as the Ukraine.Why? It would simply be a reunification of what once was. Moldova is ultimately an artificial state. Even the communists have admitted as such. Voronin himself stated that there is no such thing as the Moldovan language.

[Satorius]

The EC was still around, and there was plenty of debate on what to do with East Germany. Also with regards to NATO. In the end it became clear that there was no practical choice other than automatically including East Germany into those structures.
Conversely, you can say that the inclusion of Moldova won't be too much of a big deal since it's only 3.5 million people. Granted there will be things like visa issues, a push back when it comes to joining the euro, a reallocating of EU structural funds, and generally lots of debate. But in the end the EU would have no choice since it already set a precedent with the reunification of Germany.



EU and EC are organizations with seriously different level of integration.
The idea of German unification was promoted by the Western Germany that agreed and was able to pay for all the necessary reforms. Romania receives the EU economic and financial support and it is not its donor like Western Germany.
If the Romania turns into the biggest donor of the EU like Germany or Moldova works its economic wonder, then perhaps the Romanian-Moldavian unification will be acceptable for the EU.

[Derbedeu]

EU and EC are organizations with seriously different level of integration.
The idea of German unification was promoted by the Western Germany that agreed and was able to pay for all the necessary reforms. Romania receives the EU economic and financial support and it is not its donor like Western Germany.
If the Romania turns into the biggest donor of the EU like Germany or Moldova works its economic wonder, then perhaps the Romanian-Moldavian unification will be acceptable for the EU.


The biggest fear that many EC states had, was not cost, but that Germany might follow a foreign policy that would be considered expansionist, and lead to Germany controlling the European region. Obviously this seems absurd to us now, but 19 years ago it was a real fear.

Jacques Delors, head of the EC, supported and allowed for reunification because he pointed out that reunification can be done within the EC treaties (treaties that are now enshrined within the EU) without altering them. Since the treaties would not be altered, parliamentary approval in every member state would not be needed.

The same thing is still relevant today. EU member states and the EU can only veto Moldova's entry into the EU as a separate entity. If Moldova and Romania unify, EU member states as well as the EU itself have no legal recourse to stop such a unification. They cannot veto unification like they can membership.

[Flamming_Python]

Nope. Russification also included the banning of the Latin alphabet, the banning of Catholic schools in Poland for Orthodox ones, and other measure that were meant to annihilate Polish and Romanian culture. If anyone tried to do the same to Russia you'd be up in arms about it and rightfully so.

Well OK, point granted - However I don't believe the russification of those times was very effective and certainly had little lasting legacy, no matter what measures were used. Certainly the Poles remained catholic, the Moldovans remained Moldovan/Romanian, and neither learnt Russian. Anyway, we're sorta drifting away from our original discussion.


Fact of the matter is that they joined Romania willingly because they opposed from the very first their annexation by the Russian Empire. You know; I would sorta doubt it. I don't think the Moldovan Romanians at that time had a very high level of national consciousness and self-indentification; they were almost entirelly composed of peasents; and had virtually no urban population, which meant no intelligencia or rulling class as such that could opposed Russian rule. It was the same with the Finns for example, who also didn't particularly oppose Russian rule; all they cared about was living their own life in the villages without intereference. The Turks had ruled the Moldovans for so long; I think that they most likely saw the Russians as an improvement, and indeed at first the Russians let the Moldovans run their own affairs. Later of course came the russification that might indeed have built opposition; but then of course you couldn't say that the Moldovans opposed their annexation into the Russian empire from the very beggining.


Again, a large influx of Russians and Ukrainians occurred under the USSR. Of course they're not going to see themselves as Romanian. However, Russia's actions were no better than that of China's with Tibet, where you have millions of Han Chinese displacing the indigenous Tibetan population. o_rly.jpg? You know I knew the Tibet card was coming up for some reason. And now that you have brought it up; I would like to see you detail just in which areas of Moldova the Russians and Ukrainians 'displaced' the native population? Which Moldovan villages were closed? I have already explained everything in my previous post, but for some reason you have chosen to ignore it :bash:

By the end of the USSR, the only place in Moldova where Russians and Ukrainians outnumbered Moldovans was in Pridnestrovie; a place where Russians and Ukrainians have always outnumbered Moldovans. There may have been some villages scattered around Moldova, with majority Russian/Ukrainian population, I know that for example there were Jewish villages that consisted mostly of Jews, but certainly there was no administrative region where the majority was anything other than Moldovan. The large influx of Russians and Ukrainians, as I said, was directed mainly towards the urban settlements, which is where their skills and education was needed most. But even for example in Kishinev, the Russians and Ukrainians didn't make up a majority. And of course if the USSR's intention was to displace Moldovans; then directing new immigrants to the cities was the worst decision it could have made; instead it should have set up new rural settlements in concentration with each other. But of course, that wasn't the case.

You know; I have no idea what's going on in Tibet, all I hear about it is what I hear from the Western media, but if the West's reporting on it is anything like its reporting on Russia, then I'm gonna have to take whatever is said about Tibet with a huge tub of salt; and so should you.


Ok, perhaps it will remain the poorest region, I'll grant you that. However I have no doubt that the standard of living will still increase, albeit it has a ton of work to do to catch up. I don't see how it's unhealthy. Fact of the matter is that the communists haven't improved anything in 8 years. It is only normal to give the Western-parties, as you term them, a chance.All I see is these stupid Western-parties bolloxing things up even worse than they were before; in Georgia, in Ukraine. And you know, in many cases the pro-Western leaders and administrations are more competent than the previous ones. Saakashvilli, over his years in power, did a great deal to curb corruption, institute important reforms, re-structure and re-equip the army, stabilise and centralise Georgia, and make it a secure place for international investors to do business in. And then he launched his attack on South Ossetia. The problem that all these pro-Western parties have, is not their competence, but their fanatical opposition towards Russia and their refusal to set up pragmatic relations with their natural largest trade partner, and this is what brings them down in the end and puts their country into a worse situation that it ever had under anyone else. I don't want Moldova to make the same mistake.


Romania only retook the territory that it had originally lost in 1812. And again, they joined of their own accord. FFS, show me even ONE document in which that territory was part of sovereign Romania a short time before it was annexed to Russia in 1812? It was a part of Romanian Moldavia, I'll grant you that, but this state itself was a vassal of the Ottoman Empire, not an independent country, and it certainly was not the Kingdom of Romania which later emerged and annexed Moldova.

As for the joining of their own accord; this joining happened in the prescence of the Romanian army. And the Romanian army went in under the pretences of preventing the Bolsheviks gaining power. You'd think that if there was such a huge public will to join Romania; there wouldn't be a need for a Romanian army to enter and guard against the Bolsheviks.


Transnistria is not an independent country. No other country recognizes it, not even Russia. Russia is simply utilizing Transnistria for their own ends. It has been repeatedly called on by the Moldovan communist government as well as the OSCE to withdraw it's troops, yet it has failed to do so. Even when it originally promised to do so. I call that interference. It seems to be Russia's MO. Easy to invite them in, good luck trying to get them to leave.Why don't you read up more about the recent history of that area (early 90's), before you open your big mouth again?

The situation in Pridnestrovie exists because of EXACTLY what we're discussing now. Except worse, back then there were even calls by some nationalist Moldovan factions for all Slavs and other minorities to be expelled from Moldova. Many others called for Moldova to be reunited with Romania, only at that time they weren't content for Pridnestrovie and Gagauzia to be left alone, and so the former split while the latter was ready to do the same. And now you come with your messages of peace, love and respect, but who's to say that more ethnic violence won't occur if nationalist factions gain power in Moldova again?

At that time there were many Romanian volunteers fighting on the side of the Moldovan forces. However, I would agree with you that there is no sence in keeping a Russian army there; Pridnestrovie can defend itself if need be, and an attack by the Romanian army is very unlikely which is the only scenario in which the Russian 14th army may still be needed.


The communists have gotten everything wrong. Reunification with Transnistria isn't ever going to happen because Smirnov and most importantly the Russians won't allow it since it will mean giving up their foothold there.Medvedev was actually pushing for a re-unification, and Putin before him. It would have set a good example for Georgia; setting up some kind of federation or confederation with the break-away republic(s). These things though, take a hell of a lot of time and patience though; which Saakashvilli didn't have and apparently the Moldovan opposition doesn't either.

And yes, a re-unification with Prindestrovie would mean more Russian influence. So what?


They did. In fact Natalia Morar, their leader, is a Russian, is she not?She's Moldovan (or Romanian if you prefer) with Moldovan citizenship. She applied for Russian citizenship, but until she gets it; she's no Russian.


Backtracking again are we? Didn't you just state that Moldova and Transnistria need to be reunited? Very convenient how the Russians always seem to switch on the issue so it suits them. I never said anything other than that Moldova and Pridnestrovie need to re-united. As it stands now though, Pridnestroive is de-facto a seperate country with its own leader, politicians, economy, army, institutions, courts, etc...


Their rights would be respected I have no doubt of that. And even if they were only 21 years part of Romania, and the rest illegally part of Russia/USSR, it's telling that the majority still see themselves as Romanians, not Russians.They don't. A sizeable minority of ethnic Moldovans may see themselves as Romanians, but the majority of them see themselves as Moldovans, not Romanians or Russians. You know, the population of Pridnestrovie is about 1/3 ethnic Moldovan. And out of those Moldovans, a lot actually support their Pridnestrovian government. How can this be? A state that has only existed for 18 years, with no historical background, no legal legitimacy, built on the foundation of Russian/Ukrainian fear of Moldovan nationalism is supported by some of the very same people it's meant to guard against. Could it possibly be because a generation of people by have now grown up there, made friends there, socialised, married, worked, create families? Moldova on the other hand has existed for several generations, and its statehood and identity is stronger than you assume.

Let's take the example of East Germany, that you are so fond of bringing up. They re-united with no problems, but the indentity of East Germany and East Germans is still around, and nostalgia towards that state is even manifesting among the younger generations. And this is for a country which was created by Stalin.


Yes, imposed yourselves. The annexation of Moldova was illegal. And the opposition is not nationalistic as you would like to portray it. Why don't you take a look at some of their speeches from today, and you'd see that quit the contrary, they want to unify the country. It is the communists who are trying to frame the political discourse in terms of us vs. them. You should see some of their propaganda before the election. It was as divisive as you can get.Illegal it may be, point granted. Really though, Romania should have known better before it went around annexing former Russian imperial territory. Of course the USSR took it back.


Why? It would simply be a reunification of what once was. Moldova is ultimately an artificial state. Even the communists have admitted as such. Voronin himself stated that there is no such thing as the Moldovan language.There are plenty of states in the world which are artificial, and they are doing fine. Actually the most powerfull states in the world were/are artificial (USA, USSR). As to the Moldovan language, well i'd agree, but that hardly means that there's no such thing as Moldova.

[Derbedeu]

Well OK, point granted - However I don't believe the russification of those times was very effective and certainly had little lasting legacy, no matter what measures were used. Certainly the Poles remained catholic, the Moldovans remained Moldovan/Romanian, and neither learnt Russian. Anyway, we're sorta drifting away from our original discussion.

Your right, it didn't. So that is why it is somewhat ridiculous to call ethnic Moldovans anything other than Romanians.


You know; I would sorta doubt it. I don't think the Moldovan Romanians at that time had a very high level of national consciousness and self-indentification; they were almost entirelly composed of peasents; and had virtually no urban population, which meant no intelligencia or rulling class as such that could opposed Russian rule. It was the same with the Finns for example, who also didn't particularly oppose Russian rule; all they cared about was living their own life in the villages without intereference. The Turks had ruled the Moldovans for so long; I think that they most likely saw the Russians as an improvement, and indeed at first the Russians let the Moldovans run their own affairs. Later of course came the russification that might indeed have built opposition; but then of course you couldn't say that the Moldovans opposed their annexation into the Russian empire from the very beggining.Actually the national consciousness started in the early 19th century, and both Moldova and Wallachia played integral roles in it. Romania had a boyar class throughout its history, much like Russia did, and this gave rise to an intelligentsia that from the very beginning looked towards the west, in particular France (as a Latin people we had a great affinity for them, and many of our students went to study in France). I think it would be safe to venture that the Romanians living in Moldova were perhaps even more oppossed to Russian rule than Turkish one. Unlike Bulgaria or Greece, the Principality of Moldova was only nominally under the rule of the Turks, and they payed a tribute to the Sultanate, but for the most part were left alone. Much of this has to do with both Stephan the Great's and Vlad the Impaler's victories against the Turks in the 15th century. Under Russian rule you had the ruling class displaced or forcefully Russified. You might be right that the peasants themselves did not think in national terms as we know it today (though I'm sure they felt a greater affinity for a Wallachian than a Ukrainian or Russian), but that was true for most peasants back then. If you asked some Russian peasant what he was, his answer would probably be "I'm an Orthodox" not "I'm a Russian".


O Rly? You know I knew the Tibet card was coming up for some reason. And now that you have brought it up; I would like to see you detail just in which areas of Moldova the Russians and Ukrainians 'displaced' the native population? Which Moldovan villages were closed? I have already explained everything in my previous post, but for some reason you have chosen to ignore it :bash:

By the end of the USSR, the only place in Moldova where Russians and Ukrainians outnumbered Moldovans was in Pridnestrovie; a place where Russians and Ukrainians have always outnumbered Moldovans. There may have been some villages scattered around Moldova, with majority Russian/Ukrainian population, I know that for example there were Jewish villages that consisted mostly of Jews, but certainly there was no administrative region where the majority was anything other than Moldovan. The large influx of Russians and Ukrainians, as I said, was directed mainly towards the urban settlements, which is where their skills and education was needed most. But even for example in Kishinev, the Russians and Ukrainians didn't make up a majority. And of course if the USSR's intention was to displace Moldovans; then directing new immigrants to the cities was the worst decision it could have made; instead it should have set up new rural settlements in concentration with each other. But of course, that wasn't the case.

You know; I have no idea what's going on in Tibet, all I hear about it is what I hear from the Western media, but if the West's reporting on it is anything like its reporting on Russia, then I'm gonna have to take whatever is said about Tibet with a huge tub of salt; and so should you.Very well, I redact my comparison to Tibet. In retrospect it might have been a bit harsh. I also agree with you when mentioning that Transnistria has always been predominantly Russian/Ukrainian, though a large (30%) minority of Romanians reside there.


All I see is these stupid Western-parties bolloxing things up even worse than they were before; in Georgia, in Ukraine. And you know, in many cases the pro-Western leaders and administrations are more competent than the previous ones. Saakashvilli, over his years in power, did a great deal to curb corruption, institute important reforms, re-structure and re-equip the army, stabilise and centralise Georgia, and make it a secure place for international investors to do business in. And then he launched his attack on South Ossetia. The problem that all these pro-Western parties have, is not their competence, but their fanatical opposition towards Russia and their refusal to set up pragmatic relations with their natural largest trade partner, and this is what brings them down in the end and puts their country into a worse situation that it ever had under anyone else. I don't want Moldova to make the same mistake.The parties in Moldova (as well as those of Romania) have, and will continue looking towards the West, simply because we are a Latin people and have a closer history/relationship with them. This does not, however, preclude having friendly relations with Russia. In fact, as far as I'm aware, Romania has a decent relationship with Russia and Ukraine at the moment. And what disputes we do have have been legally and mutually resolved (e.g. Snake island with Ukraine and joint Russian-Romanian commission to resolve Romanian Treasure issue). Just because Saakashvilli is an idiot, or Ukraine is looking to get free gas out of Russia, does not mean that the Moldovan "Western" parties are the same. They've already stated that they're looking to pursue multi-party talks with Russia, EU, Romania to resolve the Transnistria issue, as well as not ruling out having a dialogue with the communists.


FFS, show me even ONE document in which that territory was part of sovereign Romania a short time before it was annexed to Russia in 1812? It was a part of Romanian Moldavia, I'll grant you that, but this state itself was a vassal of the Ottoman Empire, not an independent country, and it certainly was not the Kingdom of Romania which later emerged and annexed Moldova.

As for the joining of their own accord; this joining happened in the prescence of the Romanian army. And the Romanian army went in under the pretences of preventing the Bolsheviks gaining power. You'd think that if there was such a huge public will to join Romania; there wouldn't be a need for a Romanian army to enter and guard against the Bolsheviks.Don't be ridiculous, Romania didn't exist back then, but then again neither did Germany, and many other nations. Poland was split between three empires, and many other countries that today exist found themselves back then yearning from freedom from one empire or another. Bessarabia had always been part of the Principality of Moldova. The annexation of Bessarabia by Russia effectively split the Moldovan Principality in two. And as I've stated above, Moldova as well as Wallachia were never ruled to the same extent by the Ottomans that the Greeks were, because luckily for us, we didn't happen to border them.

Moldova did join of their own accord, and Romanian troops were sent at the bequest of the Moldovan government (Sfatul Tarii), after an attempt by the Bolsheviks (i.e. Russians) to overthrow the the Moldovan government. The vote of the Moldovan National assembly was largely in favor of union with Romania (86 for, 3 against, 36 abstentions), and the preconditions that they set out for unification were respected.


Why don't you read up more about the recent history of that area (early 90's), before you open your big mouth again?

The situation in Pridnestrovie exists because of EXACTLY what we're discussing now. Except worse, back then there were even calls by some nationalist Moldovan factions for all Slavs and other minorities to be expelled from Moldova. Many others called for Moldova to be reunited with Romania, only at that time they weren't content for Pridnestrovie and Gagauzia to be left alone, and so the former split while the latter was ready to do the same. And now you come with your messages of peace, love and respect, but who's to say that more ethnic violence won't occur if nationalist factions gain power in Moldova again?First off, it was only the radicals in the Popular Front of Moldova who called for the expulsion of Slavs. The party as a whole would never have adopted it. Secondly, I believe it was a mistake for Moldova to go to war over Transnistria. They should just have let it go. However, today in Moldova, Russian as well as Ukrainian are secondary languages, and Gagauz is autonomous. More so, there are Russian and Ukrainian schools, and there is no discrimination towards them. The same cannot be said for Transnistria. While I believe that Transnistria ought to be independent, It should only be so if the large Romanian minority there have their rights respected. Given previous actions by the Transnistrian government (attempting to shut down Romanian schools) that are as recent as 2005(!), I do not have much confidence that they would do so.

During the Transnistrian war you had idiots on both sides do stupid things, but Moldova today respects the rights of its Russian/Gagauzian/Ukrainian minorities. None of the parties advocate ethnic violence/segregation/discrimination. Like I've stated before, they've taken a conciliatory approach, which is more than can be said for the communists. And if unification were to occur, I very much doubt that you'd have ethnic violence. For proof of this just look at the Hungarian or German minorities in Romania. I've been to Sibiu and Sigishoara, and both I believe have German mayors. Likewise the Hungarians in Harghita county get along well with Romanians. In fact Hungarians are represented very well by UDMR, the Hungarian political party, which usually plays a pivotal role in government coalitions.


At that time there were many Romanian volunteers fighting on the side of the Moldovan forces. However, I would agree with you that there is no sence in keeping a Russian army there; Pridnestrovie can defend itself if need be, and an attack by the Romanian army is very unlikely which is the only scenario in which the Russian 14th army may still be needed.I very much doubt you'd ever see Moldova, much less Romania, attack Transnistria. The only way that would happen is if the Transnistrian government literally started butchering Romanians in Transnistria, and the chances of that happening are zero.


Medvedev was actually pushing for a re-unification, and Putin before him. It would have set a good example for Georgia; setting up some kind of federation or confederation with the break-away republic(s). These things though, take a hell of a lot of time and patience though; which Saakashvilli didn't have and apparently the Moldovan opposition doesn't either.Transnistria doesn't want reunification, so I don't see it happening.


And yes, a re-unification with Prindestrovie would mean more Russian influence. So what?It would actually mean less. Russia would have no more excuse for keeping their 14th army there. Similarly, they would have no more independent government (Smirnov) to support.




She's Moldovan (or Romanian if you prefer) with Moldovan citizenship. She applied for Russian citizenship, but until she gets it; she's no Russian.Really? Cause her blog is in Russian. I've also seen her only speak in Russian or English, never in Romanian.


I never said anything other than that Moldova and Pridnestrovie need to re-united. As it stands now though, Pridnestroive is de-facto a seperate country with its own leader, politicians, economy, army, institutions, courts, etc...Well my mistake then. I thought that your support of Russian troops in Transnistria because it is de facto an independent nation, implied support for their independence.


They don't. A sizeable minority of ethnic Moldovans may see themselves as Romanians, but the majority of them see themselves as Moldovans, not Romanians or Russians. You know, the population of Pridnestrovie is about 1/3 ethnic Moldovan. And out of those Moldovans, a lot actually support their Pridnestrovian government. How can this be? A state that has only existed for 18 years, with no historical background, no legal legitimacy, built on the foundation of Russian/Ukrainian fear of Moldovan nationalism is supported by some of the very same people it's meant to guard against. Could it possibly be because a generation of people by have now grown up there, made friends there, socialised, married, worked, create families? Moldova on the other hand has existed for several generations, and its statehood and identity is stronger than you assume.This might come as a shock, but some Romanians in Romania call themselves Moldovans as well! Others call themselves Ardelean, Oltean, Bukovinean, or Dobrogean. This is due to the fact that Romanians were divided amongst different principalities and regions throughout our history, similar to Germany. It would be similar to a German calling himself a Bavarian. So a Moldovan might call himself or herself a Moldovan, but he/she is still ultimately a Romanian. The language is the same (albeit with an accent), the culture is the same, and the history is the same. Moldovan identity is very much alive as a reflection of the Moldovan Principality, not the Moldovan S.S.R. or the Republic. As for the Romanians supporting the Transnistrian government, I very much doubt they were supporting them when they forcibly closed down the Romanian schools a couple of years ago. :-(


Let's take the example of East Germany, that you are so fond of bringing up. They re-united with no problems, but the indentity of East Germany and East Germans is still around, and nostalgia towards that state is even manifesting among the younger generations. And this is for a country which was created by Stalin.I very much doubt it is manifest amongst the younger generation, and if it is it's because of a misunderstanding of what it really was, as well as the whole hippie/leftist leanings you usually see in young people. The older people tend to remember the good things (state pensions primarily) and forget everything else, which was mostly bad stuff.

What you fail to understand is that nostalgia is one thing, a deep rooted history/culture/ and language is another.


Illegal it may be, point granted. Really though, Romania should have known better before it went around annexing former Russian imperial territory. Of course the USSR took it back.:roll: You seem to always ignore that Moldova was never Russian. It was annexed illegally, and against the wishes of its people, not once, but twice. In 1939 AND in 1812.


There are plenty of states in the world which are artificial, and they are doing fine. Actually the most powerfull states in the world were/are artificial (USA, USSR). As to the Moldovan language, well i'd agree, but that hardly means that there's no such thing as Moldova.Yes there are, but that does not mean that Russia should have a say in what nation should be artificial or not, unless it comes to Russia itself (like a possible Ukraine-Russian unification). It should only be between the parties involved, which in this case is Moldova and Romania. Russia doesn't belong in that equation.

[cmc]

Guys, I think you diverged from the topic... the election...
Now that is over, what are the chances of a successful parliament? As you know, in order for a president to be elected, 61 out of 101 parliamentarians must vote for one... the communists got 48 seats the opposition parties got 53... though call... Per party, the communist won, but if you compare with the last elections (those in April) the communists lost 20% (from 60 to 48 seats)...
So? Give some scenarios :)

[Derbedeu]

Well currently the opposition has been adamant that they will form a coalition. It all falls on Marian Lupu, head of the Democratic Party of Moldova, who is considered to be a charismatic leader, and a recently defected communist. Many think he can bring some communists into the opposition. One thing is certain, while no president can be elected (missing 61 seat majority) the coalition can form a government, and this is very important since it will allow them to place their own members in important positions of power, and weaken communist control over state media. Realistically speaking we wont hear much for the next few days since there will be a lot of talk between the parties, ironing the coalition out and having a dialogue with the communists.

P.S. The best news is that Voronin's days looked to be numbered. :)

[Flamming_Python]

Your right, it didn't. So that is why it is somewhat ridiculous to call ethnic Moldovans anything other than Romanians.

They are Moldovans, ethnic or not, because they come from the nation of Moldova

Just the same, you wouldn't call English-descent Americans, South Africans, Canadians, Aussies, etc... English. In fact they would probably be offended if you did.

Now I specifically alluded in my last couple of posts, that the real identity building did not happen during the 'russification' efforts of the Russian empire; but in fact during the Soviet times as a result of the literacy & education campaigns and industrialisation/urbanisation which resulted in mixing between ethnic groups in the cosmopolitan city areas, and the emergence of Russian as the main language of inter-ethnic and urban communication in the republic (Romanian remained very widely used in the rural areas). Indeed it was during the Soviet times that Moldova gained republic status; it's first step to the sovereignty that it later achieved.


Actually the national consciousness started in the early 19th century, and both Moldova and Wallachia played integral roles in it. Romania had a boyar class throughout its history, much like Russia did, and this gave rise to an intelligentsia that from the very beginning looked towards the west, in particular France (as a Latin people we had a great affinity for them, and many of our students went to study in France).Oh brother, here we go again... Hey look, Poland is a Slavic country; their intelligencia must be orientated towards Russia right? What about Kazakhstan? Well they're a Turkic country, but their intelligencia is orientated towards Russia. Is it strange? No it's natural - we're both ex-Soviet countries and have a lot in common despite our lack of ethnic ties. And that isn't to mention the fact that we're their largest trade partner, won WW2 together, etc... Looking at the world; rarely does the orientation of a country's intelligencia have any correlation to ethnic or linguistic origin. And even if it does; the foreign policy of a country is not necessarily decided by its intelligencia. Welcome to the real world.

Anyway you guys shouldn't feel sad. Let's face it, you're Orthodox Christian, some 20-30% of Romania's vocabulary comes from Slavic languages (for the Moldovan dialect this percentage is even higher); you guys lived under a socialist regime and were part of the Warsaw Pact, and well... you're an Eastern European country - I don't really know how else to break it to you, but I think you'll find that you have more in common culturally and life-style wise with your immediate neighbors than with the French or Italians who you share some ancient linguistic ties with. In fact I'm pretty sure that you'll be met with some funny looks if you highlight your common ties in their company; to them you're an ex-commie Eastern European state like the rest of us.


I think it would be safe to venture that the Romanians living in Moldova were perhaps even more oppossed to Russian rule than Turkish one. Unlike Bulgaria or Greece, the Principality of Moldova was only nominally under the rule of the Turks, and they payed a tribute to the Sultanate, but for the most part were left alone. Much of this has to do with both Stephan the Great's and Vlad the Impaler's victories against the Turks in the 15th century. Under Russian rule you had the ruling class displaced or forcefully Russified.You're quite right that when the russification campaign started, the nobility must have got into a right state and mobilised the peasentry together with it. However this came later; when Moldova was annexed and for some time after, it was largely left alone and allowed to deal with its own affairs. Look it up on Wikipedia :P


The parties in Moldova (as well as those of Romania) have, and will continue looking towards the West, simply because we are a Latin people and have a closer history/relationship with them. This does not, however, preclude having friendly relations with Russia. In fact, as far as I'm aware, Romania has a decent relationship with Russia and Ukraine at the moment. And what disputes we do have have been legally and mutually resolved (e.g. Snake island with Ukraine and joint Russian-Romanian commission to resolve Romanian Treasure issue). Just because Saakashvilli is an idiot, or Ukraine is looking to get free gas out of Russia, does not mean that the Moldovan "Western" parties are the same. They've already stated that they're looking to pursue multi-party talks with Russia, EU, Romania to resolve the Transnistria issue, as well as not ruling out having a dialogue with the communists.Speak for Romania, don't speak for Moldova. I have more legitimacy to decide who gets elected there than any Romanian, seeing as half my family was actually born there. But of course I'm not a Moldovan either; so let the Moldovans decide. And i'm sure that like in any CIS country, the main political parties are torn between a pro-Russian platform and a pro-Western one. Not everyone there is Russophobic and Westward-leaning as you imply; very far from it. There are many pro-Russian Moldovans especially in the rural areas, and this isn't to mention the large numbers of Russians, Ukrainians and Gagauz in the country who are all traditionally pro-Russian. In Moldova this division is represented by the conflict between the Communists and pro-Western parties; although looking deeper its apparent that things aren't so simple; one of the pro-Western countries could just as easily become sponsored by Russia as the Communists are likely to move closer to the EU if it ensures them more support. For this reason, the most stable Moldova I can envision is one that remains neutral; neither pro-Western nor pro-Russian. And such a Moldova, it goes without saying, shouldn't be part of either power bloc, which means it should remain an independent state.


Don't be ridiculous, Romania didn't exist back then, but then again neither did Germany, and many other nations. Poland was split between three empires, and many other countries that today exist found themselves back then yearning from freedom from one empire or another. Bessarabia had always been part of the Principality of Moldova. The annexation of Bessarabia by Russia effectively split the Moldovan Principality in two. And as I've stated above, Moldova as well as Wallachia were never ruled to the same extent by the Ottomans that the Greeks were, because luckily for us, we didn't happen to border them. Fair enough, you make a good point.


Moldova did join of their own accord, and Romanian troops were sent at the bequest of the Moldovan government (Sfatul Tarii), after an attempt by the Bolsheviks (i.e. Russians) to overthrow the the Moldovan government. The vote of the Moldovan National assembly was largely in favor of union with Romania (86 for, 3 against, 36 abstentions), and the preconditions that they set out for unification were respected. You know, when the Bolsheviks first seized power, and indeed before they did at the time of the first coup which threw the Tsar out of power, a lot of areas took the oppurtunity to declare their independence. The Bolshevik view on this was that this was the work of local bourgouise and nobility who intended to mobilise archaic nationalist impulses among their populations in order to crush working class movements and prevent their people taking power into their own hands. I think in many ways, at the time the Bolsheviks were pretty much dead on. Take a good look at all these declarations of independence and you will see that the people who made such decisions (almost all Boyars, Nobles, Officers and other representitives of the upper classes) weren't as much romantic freedom fighters who were longing for their people's independence, as much as they were afraid of their own people rising against them. In many cases, these very same people who declared independence were quite agreeable towards the Tsarist regime, and subsequently supported the White Army during the Civil War (Finland springs to mind with Mannerheim)

In addition to Moldova, there were such exotic states as Idel-Ural (Tatars + Bulgars) and others springing to independence, whose proponents to these day claim that they were 'democratically backed'. Now whether they really were I don't know, and most likely such facts have been lost to the constant manipulations and twists of history; but what I can say is that there were very few Tatars and Bulgars in 1991 who wanted to declare an independent state from Russia. That is why I am very skeptical, towards the 'democratic' processes of 1918, that claimed to be representing the people's will.


First off, it was only the radicals in the Popular Front of Moldova who called for the expulsion of Slavs. The party as a whole would never have adopted it. Secondly, I believe it was a mistake for Moldova to go to war over Transnistria.Well obviously Moldova's leaders at the time didn't consider it a mistake; they realised their mistake later, as often happens when nationalism goes too far.


They should just have let it go. However, today in Moldova, Russian as well as Ukrainian are secondary languages, and Gagauz is autonomous. More so, there are Russian and Ukrainian schools, and there is no discrimination towards them. The same cannot be said for Transnistria. While I believe that Transnistria ought to be independent, It should only be so if the large Romanian minority there have their rights respected. Given previous actions by the Transnistrian government (attempting to shut down Romanian schools) that are as recent as 2005(!), I do not have much confidence that they would do so. I don't think things are so bad for the ethnic Moldovans there, they seem to be largely russified and go to Russian schools anyway; although I don't have any first-hand experience with any from that region. Certainly though stupid decisions like those you mention should be reversed. I haven't heard of much discrimination towards ethnic Moldovans in Pridnestroivie though.


During the Transnistrian war you had idiots on both sides do stupid things, but Moldova today respects the rights of its Russian/Gagauzian/Ukrainian minorities. None of the parties advocate ethnic violence/segregation/discrimination. Like I've stated before, they've taken a conciliatory approach, which is more than can be said for the communists. And if unification were to occur, I very much doubt that you'd have ethnic violence.
For proof of this just look at the Hungarian or German minorities in Romania. I've been to Sibiu and Sigishoara, and both I believe have German mayors. Likewise the Hungarians in Harghita county get along well with Romanians. In fact Hungarians are represented very well by UDMR, the Hungarian political party, which usually plays a pivotal role in government coalitions.Only one problem, many in Moldova would oppose such a unification, even if many were to support it. And among those who oppose it there would be plenty of ethnic Moldovans. Such a situation would have little similarity to small Hungarian and German minorities in land that has been part of Romania at least since the end of WW2.


It would actually mean less. Russia would have no more excuse for keeping their 14th army there. Similarly, they would have no more independent government (Smirnov) to support.Well the Russian government will have less direct influence; but there's no reason to assume that it controls things in Pridnestrovie any more than it does in Abkhazia or South Ossetia anyway.

However, with the addition of Pridnestrovie to the Moldovan heartland, the amount of pro-Russian population would increase, the proportion of people in favour of annexation in Romania would decrease, the economical ties with Russia will increase, and in general I think it will turn out to be quite positive for Russian-Moldovan ties in the future. For the same reason I oppose the idea of Crimea splitting from the Ukraine and joining Russia or anything silly of the sort; better a whole country is Russia-friendly than a small region.


Really? Cause her blog is in Russian. I've also seen her only speak in Russian or English, never in Romanian.Sounds like Kasparov; his insistance on speaking English in front of the cameras doesn't make his Russian citizenship any less valid, unfortunetly :).

Well she's Moldovan, a proper one. I have a feeling that you don't know Moldovans so well, they are above all a pragmatic people; she is writing in Russian and English because she's a politician and wants to reach the widest audience possible. You will find that very often Moldovans neglect their own language when there is so much as one foreigner around; certainly whatever their political views I have never met any Moldovan who is anything but keen to speak Russian when the opportunity presents itself. So if you want Moldova in your country so badly; you better get used to it.


Well my mistake then. I thought that your support of Russian troops in Transnistria because it is de facto an independent nation, implied support for their independence. My support of Russian troops there extends to my desire to not see Pridnestrovie come under attack Saakashvilli-style. That is all, and if there is no such threat than there is no need for troops there in my opinion.


This might come as a shock, but some Romanians in Romania call themselves Moldovans as well! Others call themselves Ardelean, Oltean, Bukovinean, or Dobrogean. This is due to the fact that Romanians were divided amongst different principalities and regions throughout our history, similar to Germany. It would be similar to a German calling himself a Bavarian. So a Moldovan might call himself or herself a Moldovan, but he/she is still ultimately a Romanian. The language is the same (albeit with an accent), the culture is the same, and the history is the same. Moldovan identity is very much alive as a reflection of the Moldovan Principality, not the Moldovan S.S.R. or the Republic. As for the Romanians supporting the Transnistrian government, I very much doubt they were supporting them when they forcibly closed down the Romanian schools a couple of years ago. :-( I don't mean the regional stuff; I mean proper Moldovan patriotism - as in loyalty to the state of Moldova, not Romania. Yes, it exists believe it or not :)


I very much doubt it is manifest amongst the younger generation, and if it is it's because of a misunderstanding of what it really was, as well as the whole hippie/leftist leanings you usually see in young people. The older people tend to remember the good things (state pensions primarily) and forget everything else, which was mostly bad stuff. Well perhaps it's a misunderstanding, perhaps its hippies, and perhaps its pensions, but it is there, both young and old. In a way it's simply the typical North-South or East-West regional rivalry that you get in any nation; but its stronger, min you not quite to the level of rivalry that you get between Russia and the Ukraine (which is regional rivalry at its extreme), but there is definitely an East German identity somewhere there.


What you fail to understand is that nostalgia is one thing, a deep rooted history/culture/ and language is another. And neither has much bearing on world politics.


:roll: You seem to always ignore that Moldova was never Russian. It was annexed illegally, and against the wishes of its people, not once, but twice. In 1939 AND in 1812. Ah-ah-ah... naughty-naughty :slap: Moldova was only illegally annexed once, in 1939. In 1812 it was perfectly legal; which is where the Russian Empire's claim towards the territory originated from.


Yes there are, but that does not mean that Russia should have a say in what nation should be artificial or not, unless it comes to Russia itself (like a possible Ukraine-Russian unification). It should only be between the parties involved, which in this case is Moldova and Romania. Russia doesn't belong in that equation.You know what, screw the history; at the end of the day I really don't care about it. You're right and I'm wrong.

Now listen, Moldova is part of the former-USSR; I know many people from there. This land has been part of the same country as Russia for the last 60 years, and now it's part of the CIS. I don't know who Romania thinks it is, that it can just come and grab it, but I think you guys are out of your damn mind. You're foreigners, it's not yours to take, and it's not yours to tell anyone here who should be involved in its fate and who shouldn't.

What do you think Poland would do if Germany came to it and demanded that it's territories that it lost after WW2 be returned? That's right, it would tell it to **** off. Let bygones be bygones, don't change borders that so many people have shed blood to stabilize 60 years ago, and live a peaceful life. All this nationalist bitching and moaning is only going to bring misery otherwise.

[Derbedeu]

They are Moldovans, ethnic or not, because they come from the nation of Moldova

Just the same, you wouldn't call English-descent Americans, South Africans, Canadians, Aussies, etc... English. In fact they would probably be offended if you did.

Now I specifically alluded in my last couple of posts, that the real identity building did not happen during the 'russification' efforts of the Russian empire; but in fact during the Soviet times as a result of the literacy & education campaigns and industrialisation/urbanisation which resulted in mixing between ethnic groups in the cosmopolitan city areas, and the emergence of Russian as the main language of inter-ethnic and urban communication in the republic (Romanian remained very widely used in the rural areas). Indeed it was during the Soviet times that Moldova gained republic status; it's first step to the sovereignty that it later achieved.

You clearly have no idea what the hell you are talking about. First off, Moldova as a nation is barely 19 years old. You can drop all pretense that it experienced any sovereignty under the USSR, since everything was run from the Kremlin. Moldova refers to a region. Not a people.


Oh brother, here we go again... Hey look, Poland is a Slavic country; their intelligencia must be orientated towards Russia right? What about Kazakhstan? Well they're a Turkic country, but their intelligencia is orientated towards Russia. Is it strange? No it's natural - we're both ex-Soviet countries and have a lot in common despite our lack of ethnic ties. And that isn't to mention the fact that we're their largest trade partner, won WW2 together, etc... Looking at the world; rarely does the orientation of a country's intelligencia have any correlation to ethnic or linguistic origin. And even if it does; the foreign policy of a country is not necessarily decided by its intelligencia. Welcome to the real world.So I suppose Pushkin, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Tchaikovsky, and the Russian intelligentsia had nothing to do with the forging of a Russian identity, and a rising Russian consciousness? :roll: And the intelligentsia did have a say in the foreign policy, at least in Wallachia, Transylvania, and Moldova. Not so much Russia since the Tsar ruled absolutely and censorship was always imposed. Your intelligentsia, from Herzen, to Lenin, and all the way to Solzhenitsyn, had always fled to the West, since it is only there that they found refuge and freedom of thought. As a result, I'm not surprised by your ignorance on the matter.


Anyway you guys shouldn't feel sad. Let's face it, you're Orthodox Christian, some 20-30% of Romania's vocabulary comes from Slavic languages (for the Moldovan dialect this percentage is even higher); you guys lived under a socialist regime and were part of the Warsaw Pact, and well... you're an Eastern European country - I don't really know how else to break it to you, but I think you'll find that you have more in common culturally and life-style wise with your immediate neighbors than with the French or Italians who you share some ancient linguistic ties with. In fact I'm pretty sure that you'll be met with some funny looks if you highlight your common ties in their company; to them you're an ex-commie Eastern European state like the rest of us.Don't worry about us, we don't feel sad. If anything, we've been pretty happy since the whole communist system that was imposed against our will has fallen. :) Culturally and lifestyle wise, we don't have much in common with Russia (outside of those ugly commie apartment blocks). In fact even when Romania was in the Warsaw Pact, the second most commonly studied language was French, not Russian. Having traveled throughout Europe, as well as having family and friends in countries such as Spain, France, and Italy, I can assure you that they don't see us as an ex-commie Eastern European state.


You're quite right that when the russification campaign started, the nobility must have got into a right state and mobilised the peasentry together with it. However this came later; when Moldova was annexed and for some time after, it was largely left alone and allowed to deal with its own affairs. Look it up on Wikipedia :PBut nonetheless it was still hated by the Romanians when it did come.


Speak for Romania, don't speak for Moldova. I have more legitimacy to decide who gets elected there than any Romanian, seeing as half my family was actually born there. But of course I'm not a Moldovan either; so let the Moldovans decide. And i'm sure that like in any CIS country, the main political parties are torn between a pro-Russian platform and a pro-Western one. Not everyone there is Russophobic and Westward-leaning as you imply; very far from it. There are many pro-Russian Moldovans especially in the rural areas, and this isn't to mention the large numbers of Russians, Ukrainians and Gagauz in the country who are all traditionally pro-Russian. In Moldova this division is represented by the conflict between the Communists and pro-Western parties; although looking deeper its apparent that things aren't so simple; one of the pro-Western countries could just as easily become sponsored by Russia as the Communists are likely to move closer to the EU if it ensures them more support. For this reason, the most stable Moldova I can envision is one that remains neutral; neither pro-Western nor pro-Russian. And such a Moldova, it goes without saying, shouldn't be part of either power bloc, which means it should remain an independent state.Well, well, well, at least we have something in common. I myself have family there (maybe we're distantly related p-)). As for your supposition that Moldova must remain a neutral country, you make the same mistake that all Russians seem to do, which is namely equate pro-Western with anti-Russian. If Moldova wishes to reunite with Romania, or to join the EU, that does not mean that it is anti-Russian. A neutral Moldova would be anything but stable. I don't see Moldova ever consigning itself to some sort of Ukrainian or Russian union either. Ultimately it would benefit the most if it did manage to join the EU, regardless of the mechanism (as a separate state or as a union with Romania).


Fair enough, you make a good point.Look's like there's hope for you yet. p-)


You know, when the Bolsheviks first seized power, and indeed before they did at the time of the first coup which threw the Tsar out of power, a lot of areas took the oppurtunity to declare their independence. The Bolshevik view on this was that this was the work of local bourgouise and nobility who intended to mobilise archaic nationalist impulses among their populations in order to crush working class movements and prevent their people taking power into their own hands. I think in many ways, at the time the Bolsheviks were pretty much dead on. Take a good look at all these declarations of independence and you will see that the people who made such decisions (almost all Boyars, Nobles, Officers and other representitives of the upper classes) weren't as much romantic freedom fighters who were longing for their people's independence, as much as they were afraid of their own people rising against them. In many cases, these very same people who declared independence were quite agreeable towards the Tsarist regime, and subsequently supported the White Army during the Civil War (Finland springs to mind with Mannerheim)

In addition to Moldova, there were such exotic states as Idel-Ural (Tatars + Bulgars) and others springing to independence, whose proponents to these day claim that they were 'democratically backed'. Now whether they really were I don't know, and most likely such facts have been lost to the constant manipulations and twists of history; but what I can say is that there were very few Tatars and Bulgars in 1991 who wanted to declare an independent state from Russia. That is why I am very skeptical, towards the 'democratic' processes of 1918, that claimed to be representing the people's will.Sorry, but the collapse of the Tsarist empire was the same as that of the Soviet Union, i.e. it finally gave nations like Poland, Armenia, Georgia, etc, to escape a despotic Russian government. Moldova is no different. The representatives of Moldova at Sfatul Tsarii voted for independence and later unification, and all evidence points to them having support from the people. You cannot equate Tatars or Bulgars to Moldovans. I very well do believe you when you say that they (Tartars and Bulgars) didn't much care for independence, but their wishes has no bearing on the situation in Moldova.


Well obviously Moldova's leaders at the time didn't consider it a mistake; they realised their mistake later, as often happens when nationalism goes too far.It wasn't Moldova's leaders who proposed that in the first place. It was only the fringe of the party. It never would have found support from the government. Since the PFM was a coalition comprised of all parties and politicians, it was inevitable that you'd have some ultra-nationalists. But that does not mean that they would have established their agenda over all others. Like all ultra-nationalistic parties they would have been marginalized.


I don't think things are so bad for the ethnic Moldovans there, they seem to be largely russified and go to Russian schools anyway; although I don't have any first-hand experience with any from that region. Certainly though stupid decisions like those you mention should be reversed. I haven't heard of much discrimination towards ethnic Moldovans in Pridnestroivie though.Well you don't have to take my word for it, but I've heard plenty of stories of discrimination from family members, and then there is the official reports like the one that I've posted above, that only reinforces my belief that Romanians are discriminated.


Only one problem, many in Moldova would oppose such a unification, even if many were to support it. And among those who oppose it there would be plenty of ethnic Moldovans. Such a situation would have little similarity to small Hungarian and German minorities in land that has been part of Romania at least since the end of WW2.Technically speaking there are no official stats of who would support unification, since the government is naturally adverse to running a poll on such a question. But don't kid yourself, Hungarians and Germans were anything but a small minority. Today there are over a million Hungarians in Romania, and at one time you had close to a million Germans as well. Thanks to that idiot Ceausescu, and his stupid policies of expatriating Germans and Jews for money, hundreds of thousands of Germans fled to West Germany, and Jews to Israel. It was a dumb (and discriminatory) policy by a retarded dictator.


Well the Russian government will have less direct influence; but there's no reason to assume that it controls things in Pridnestrovie any more than it does in Abkhazia or South Ossetia anyway.

However, with the addition of Pridnestrovie to the Moldovan heartland, the amount of pro-Russian population would increase, the proportion of people in favour of annexation in Romania would decrease, the economical ties with Russia will increase, and in general I think it will turn out to be quite positive for Russian-Moldovan ties in the future. For the same reason I oppose the idea of Crimea splitting from the Ukraine and joining Russia or anything silly of the sort; better a whole country is Russia-friendly than a small region.Well unfortunately for what you think, Transnistria fought a war to gain independence. They are effectively gone, and I don't see reunification as being plausible. Personally, I see nothing wrong with that.


Sounds like Kasparov; his insistance on speaking English in front of the cameras doesn't make his Russian citizenship any less valid, unfortunetly :).

Well she's Moldovan, a proper one. I have a feeling that you don't know Moldovans so well, they are above all a pragmatic people; she is writing in Russian and English because she's a politician and wants to reach the widest audience possible. You will find that very often Moldovans neglect their own language when there is so much as one foreigner around; certainly whatever their political views I have never met any Moldovan who is anything but keen to speak Russian when the opportunity presents itself. So if you want Moldova in your country so badly; you better get used to it.Well, I never heard of her before the April riots, since apparently she's worked in Russia.


My support of Russian troops there extends to my desire to not see Pridnestrovie come under attack Saakashvilli-style. That is all, and if there is no such threat than there is no need for troops there in my opinion.I think we can both agree that the chances of that happening are astronomical.


I don't mean the regional stuff; I mean proper Moldovan patriotism - as in loyalty to the state of Moldova, not Romania. Yes, it exists believe it or not :)I have no doubt that it does. Mostly amongst the ethnic Russian and Ukrainian population, who do not wish to see Moldova reunite with Romania. Every single "Moldovan" that I know or have met who was not Russian or Ukrainian had more patriotism for Romania than the Republic of Moldova.


Well perhaps it's a misunderstanding, perhaps its hippies, and perhaps its pensions, but it is there, both young and old. In a way it's simply the typical North-South or East-West regional rivalry that you get in any nation; but its stronger, min you not quite to the level of rivalry that you get between Russia and the Ukraine (which is regional rivalry at its extreme), but there is definitely an East German identity somewhere there.Feel free to think so.


And neither has much bearing on world politics.rofl Please tell me you're kidding right? History has no bearing on world politics?


Ah-ah-ah... naughty-naughty :slap: Moldova was only illegally annexed once, in 1939. In 1812 it was perfectly legal; which is where the Russian Empire's claim towards the territory originated from.That is simply not true. Besides, even if your above statement is correct, then it means that Moldova must revert back to it's position before the last illegal takeover, which would be (according to you yourself) 1939. Hmmm.... what was Moldova part of pre-1939? Oh yea, that's right, Romania! :p


You know what, screw the history; at the end of the day I really don't care about it. You're right and I'm wrong. Well first off, thank you for admitting it. It takes a real man to admit when they're wrong, so props to you. ;-)


Now listen, Moldova is part of the former-USSR; I know many people from there. This land has been part of the same country as Russia for the last 60 years, and now it's part of the CIS. I don't know who Romania thinks it is, that it can just come and grab it, but I think you guys are out of your damn mind. You're foreigners, it's not yours to take, and it's not yours to tell anyone here who should be involved in its fate and who shouldn't.Where to start? Well, for one, I have never said that Romania should "come and grab it". I have always stated that reunification should occur only if both populations voted on it. Secondly, Romanians have been living in Bessarabia (i.e. Republic of Moldova) since at least the 14th century, if not earlier. The only foreigners there are the Russians. And it is the Russians, that have stuck their noses in Moldova's affairs, starting in 1812.


What do you think Poland would do if Germany came to it and demanded that it's territories that it lost after WW2 be returned? That's right, it would tell it to **** off. Let bygones be bygones, don't change borders that so many people have shed blood to stabilize 60 years ago, and live a peaceful life. All this nationalist bitching and moaning is only going to bring misery otherwise.No one stabilized the borders 60 years ago. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed. If they had been stable, they naturally wouldn't have collapsed. But they did, and the reason for that was due to Russia illegally imposing itself on not just Romania, but Armenia, Poland, Georgia, and the rest of the Eastern European Bloc.

Moldova, if it is as an independent state as you claim, should then have every right to do as it wishes. If this includes reunification with Romania or entering the EU, then this must be respected. I have no problem with that. However, it seems that you do. Why is that?

[Difool]

They are Moldovans, ethnic or not, because they come from the nation of Moldova

You have to distinguish nationality and citizenship. It's the US-American definition you're speaking of. Europe developed a different view on that in the early 19th century. Btw in the SU both citizenship and nationality was written into the passport.


Now I specifically alluded in my last couple of posts, that the real identity building did not happen during the 'russification' efforts of the Russian empire; but in fact during the Soviet times as a result of the literacy & education campaigns and industrialisation/urbanisation which resulted in mixing between ethnic groups in the cosmopolitan city areas, and the emergence of Russian as the main language of inter-ethnic and urban communication in the republic (Romanian remained very widely used in the rural areas). Indeed it was during the Soviet times that Moldova gained republic status; it's first step to the sovereignty that it later achieved.

The mixing between ethnic groups has no positive influence on identity building, with one exception: the USA. Other nation buildings are based on cultural and historic similarities.


you guys lived under a socialist regime and were part of the Warsaw Pact, and well... you're an Eastern European country - I don't really know how else to break it to you, but I think you'll find that you have more in common culturally and life-style wise with your immediate neighbors than with the French or Italians who you share some ancient linguistic ties with. In fact I'm pretty sure that you'll be met with some funny looks if you highlight your common ties in their company; to them you're an ex-commie Eastern European state like the rest of us.

:hug:



Speak for Romania, don't speak for Moldova. I have more legitimacy to decide who gets elected there than any Romanian, seeing as half my family was actually born there. But of course I'm not a Moldovan either; so let the Moldovans decide. And i'm sure that like in any CIS country, the main political parties are torn between a pro-Russian platform and a pro-Western one. Not everyone there is Russophobic and Westward-leaning as you imply; very far from it. There are many pro-Russian Moldovans especially in the rural areas, and this isn't to mention the large numbers of Russians, Ukrainians and Gagauz in the country who are all traditionally pro-Russian. In Moldova this division is represented by the conflict between the Communists and pro-Western parties; although looking deeper its apparent that things aren't so simple; one of the pro-Western countries could just as easily become sponsored by Russia as the Communists are likely to move closer to the EU if it ensures them more support. For this reason, the most stable Moldova I can envision is one that remains neutral; neither pro-Western nor pro-Russian. And such a Moldova, it goes without saying, shouldn't be part of either power bloc, which means it should remain an independent state.

Most important is indeed to fight against foreign exertion of influence. Otherwise I fear we get a new conflict in eastern europe that can spread into EU countries, Ukraine and Russia. That would be a castrophe for everyone.


I oppose the idea of Crimea splitting from the Ukraine and joining Russia or anything silly of the sort; better a whole country is Russia-friendly than a small region.

Yep, it depends on the Ukrainian policy.



but there is definitely an East German identity somewhere there.

Some say so and other so. :)Honestly it's just rememberance on 40years of different history, but that cannot blow away what grew in thousand years. But it's amazing how fast a divided country builds a individual identity if it's pushed by the policy.
Austria for example has always been a German state. We're completly seperated but we speak the same language (more or less -double:)). I even know Austrians that say from themselves: We are Germans.


Now listen, Moldova is part of the former-USSR; I know many people from there. This land has been part of the same country as Russia for the last 60 years, and now it's part of the CIS. I don't know who Romania thinks it is, that it can just come and grab it, but I think you guys are out of your damn mind. You're foreigners, it's not yours to take, and it's not yours to tell anyone here who should be involved in its fate and who shouldn't.
What do you think Poland would do if Germany came to it and demanded that it's territories that it lost after WW2 be returned? That's right, it would tell it to **** off. Let bygones be bygones, don't change borders that so many people have shed blood to stabilize 60 years ago, and live a peaceful life. All this nationalist bitching and moaning is only going to bring misery otherwise.

100% agreed

[Derbedeu]

Just an update on the coalition talks:


"Negocierea dintre cele patru partide decurge lent, dar bine! Am negociat coalitia de guvernare in proportie de 99,9%. Vom veni cu solutia de guvernare inainte de prima sedinta a Parlamentului", a declarat miercuri, Mihai Ghimpu, presedintele Partidului Liberal, in cadrul unei conferinte de presa, transmite Unimedia. "Coalitia de guvernare cred ca ar trebui sa se numeasca Alianta pentru integrarea europeana", a mai adaugat Ghimpu. Liderul PL a mai adaugat ca, la orele 16:00, se intalneste cu ambasadorul Federatiei Ruse la Chisinau: "E normal sa fie asa, deoarece noi vom veni la guvernare si e important ca statele pe care le reprezinta sa afle ce se afla in Republica Moldova. Federatia Rusa trebuie sa se convinga ca suntem pentru relatii bune cu Federatia Rusa. Dar, e important ca Moscova sa ne respecte drepturile si sa-si retraga armata din regiunea Transnistreana"http://www.ziua.ro/news.php?data=2009-08-05&id=35398

Rough translation: The head of the the Liberal Party Mihai Ghimpu has stated that coalition talks are going slowly but very well. According to him they've managed to negotiate 99.9% of what needs to be negotiated. He proposes that the coalition be named "The Alliance for European Integration".

Additionally, he stated that he would be meeting with the Russian ambassador in Chisinau at 4. He said that the Russian Federation should be aware that Moldova desires a good relationship with Russia, but at the same time, Moscow should respect Moldova's rights, and honor its obligations to withdraw its army from Transnistria.

[Derbedeu]

Well, good news! The opposition parties have formally entered into a coalition!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8191443.stm

The following is the signed document by the parties (the Liberal Democratic Party, the Liberal Party, the Democratic Party, and the Our Moldova Alliance) stating their overarching goals and their declaration of achieving a coalition:

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/4484/coalitie.jpg (http://img23.imageshack.us/i/coalitie.jpg/)


The following is a rough translation of the points made within the document:

1. The Re-stabilization of State Law
-The Guarantee for the respect of fundamental human rights and liberties
-The liberation of mass-media and the reformation of TV/radio
-The elimination of the usurpation of powers by the state through the securing of the separate branches of the government, legislative, executive, and judicial
-The securing of democratic functions in state institutions
-The guarantee of judicial independence and the reformation of the judicial domain
-The reformation of state structures conforming to European standards
-The complete investigation of the events of April 2009 through an independent commission, as well as representatives of international institutions.
2. Getting over the economic crises and the securing of a brighter economic future
-Expanding and applying the program against the current economic and financial crises.
-Eradicating poverty, and the correct, honest, and transparent administration of public money.
-The optimization of administrative spending and a greater orientation of money towards the public sphere
-The liberalization of the economy, the elimination of monopolies and excessive bureaucracy, and the optimization of the fiscal and financial system
-The elimination of abuses and corruption in state contracts
-The re-stabilization and consolidation of relations with international financial institutions
3. Decentralization of powers and securing local autonomy
-The disassembling of "vertical power" and the elimination of political discrimination in the budgetary process and the allocation of investments towards the local public authorities
-Securing the autonomy of local public authorities in line with European standards
4. The territorial reintegration of the Republic of Moldova
-The continuation of the negotiation process for a solution to the Transnistria problem.
-Finding and securing a transparent solution and identifying a viable mechanism for the settlement of the complex problem of Transnistria
5. The European Integration of the Republic of Moldova and the promotion of a foreign policy that is balanced, consistent, and responsible
-The negotiation and signing of the European Association Agreement between the Republic of Moldova and the European Union
-The promotion of strategic partnerships with the United States and Russia
-The reestablishment and consolidation of good neighborly relations with Romania and Ukraine
-The elimination of visas for Romanian citizens and the signing of an accord deregulating border traffic between the two
-The re-imaging of the Republic of Moldova on the world stage and the reestablishment of trust in the government's internal and external policies



All in all, it seems to be a fair and reasonable outline. Here's hoping for the best in being able to attain these points! :)