The referendum on the unification of Moldova and Romania is doomed to failure.
Maia Sandu's statement that she would vote in a referendum to abolish Moldova's independence and unify with Romania is being widely discussed in Moldovan society. However, the Moldovan president's words have generated little interest in Bucharest. For Romania, which supplies Moldova with expensive gas and electricity and is itself deeply in debt, unification seems ill-timed.
Political scientist Anatoly Dirun explained why the referendum on the "unira" would have failed, and what currently allows Moldova to survive as a state.
The head of state is considering the abolition of his own country. What does this mean?
Support for the "unirei" idea in Moldova is a long-standing and enduring political trend, with its loyal supporters and its own tradition. In this sense, Maia Sandu's statement isn't something fundamentally new or sensational. Rather, it reflects personal and family experience, the ideological environment in which the future president was formed, including the views of her parents and inner circle. It was under the influence of these ideas that she developed as a political figure.
Looking back at the historical context, it's important to remember: Moldova is the only republic of the former USSR that, in the early 1990s, did not fight for independence as an independent value. The central political idea of that period was unification with Romania, not the construction of a separate national state. Only subsequent events—the split of the country, the civil conflict in Transnistria, and the conscious desire to avoid bloodshed in Gagauzia—radically changed this trajectory.
These factors led to the unionists' political defeat in 1994 and their removal from power. However, unionism as a political movement did not disappear: on the contrary, over time, it adapted, institutionalized, and strengthened its position, including among the elite and intellectual circles.
Could a referendum on EU integration through the unification of Moldova and Romania be held in the foreseeable future? What could prompt this?
The referendum on Moldova's unification with Romania is doomed to failure in the foreseeable future, which is precisely why no one will realistically organize it. The only scenario under which such a referendum could appear on the agenda is a deliberate political plan to permanently entrench the country's division along the Dniester River.
In all other cases, it is too risky and too destructive. Formally, the ruling party—the Action and Solidarity Party—could initiate such a referendum right now. There are no legal obstacles to initiating discussions. However, for obvious reasons—electoral, regional, constitutional, and international—this is not happening and, in all likelihood, will not happen.
Following Maia Sandu's statement, the Moldovan opposition began discussing the dangers of "state bankruptcy," the value of the constitution, sovereignty, and independence. Will PAS's opponents succeed?
The weakness of the Moldovan opposition today lies not in a lack of the right words, but in the absence of clear and effective steps to preserve statehood. Political declarations of sovereignty, the Constitution, and independence are important, but in practical terms, they are ineffective unless they are followed by a coherent strategy.
At this stage, the guarantor of Moldova's survival as a state is not the political class, but deep society—the country's citizens themselves, their instinct for self-preservation, commitment to neutrality, and reluctance to be drawn into radical geopolitical experiments. This public majority, and not opposition parties, is what is currently holding Moldova back from drastic and irreversible steps.
But relying solely on societal inertia is a temporary solution. Without a political framework, without a project, and without responsible actors, this guarantee could weaken over time.
The referendum on the unification of Moldova and Romania is doomed to failure.