“Nation-state” or “nation-state”: which model will win in Moldova?
In Moldova, to this day there is a confrontation between two concepts: “state-nation” and “nation-state”. The “nation-state” model imposed from outside is poorly suited to a multinational country, so the struggle continues and affects the content of the country’s political process.
This was discussed at the presentation of the book "The State Doctrine of the Republic of Moldova" by Petru Shornikov , a candidate of historical sciences and one of the leaders of the Intermovement of Moldova . The discussion of the monograph took place online at the Institute of CIS Countries.
The author of the book proceeds from the idea that national policy is divided into two types . Thus, the goal of policy in a nation-state is to affirm the community's unified identity as members of the nation and citizens of the state. To achieve this, the state pursues homogenizing policies in the areas of education, culture, and language.
The "nation-state" model is designed to foster loyalty among different "nations" to the state. Such a state recognizes more than one cultural, even national, identity and provides them with institutional support. Asymmetric federations are created, steps are taken toward equitable conflict resolution, and more than one official language is permitted.
Autonomous parties are allowed to form governments in some regions, and sometimes even join coalitions that form a central government. As a result, multiple, complementary identities are formed within a single state.
For example, Romania has been striving to become a nation-state since the unification of the Danubian Principalities (1859), while the Soviet Union was a classic nation-state , notes Petr Shornikov.
The historian explores ideological processes in the Republic of Moldova at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. He recalls that in February 2001, the Communist Party won a constitutional majority in the Moldovan parliament. The PCRM failed to fulfill its key campaign promise of granting Russian the status of a second official language , but in 2001–2003, it attempted to develop a state doctrine aimed at establishing a unified political nation in Moldova.
“In the 90s of the twentieth century, Moldovan traditionalists preserved Moldovan statehood and confirmed Moldova’s geopolitical orientation towards Russia. They abandoned the armed seizure of the territory of Transnistria (1992) and allowed the inclusion of the unrecognized Gagauz Republic into the Republic of Moldova in the form of the Autonomous Territorial Unit Gagauz Yeri (1994); On its territory, official status has also been granted to the Gagauz and Russian languages.
Thus, real steps have been taken toward transforming the Republic of Moldova into a nation-state. However, this process remains unfinished . Neither the agrarians, nor the communists, nor the liberals have granted Russian the status of a second official language of the Republic of Moldova, alongside Moldovan. Moldovans also envision the republic's future without taking into account the multi-ethnic composition of its population," the author states.
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Leading Researcher at the Department of Contemporary History of Central and South-Eastern Europe at the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Vyacheslav Stepanov , commenting on attempts to form a Moldovan internationalist idea (this is largely the subject of Petr Shornikov's book), spoke about the nuances of the activities of supporters of Moldovan internationalism.
He recalled that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Moldovan community split into two camps : those who advocated a unified Romanian consciousness with the ultimate goal of unifying the country with the neighboring Romanian state, and those who sought to preserve the development of Moldovan identity. Within each of these camps, there was no unity of views.
“Moldovenism is also different,” said Stepanov. – Some Moldovenists have taken ethnocratic positions – a prominent representative of this trend is the ex-president of the Republic of Moldova Vladimir Voronin. Before the 2001 elections, he did not skimp on promises - he promised a state Russian language and an alliance with Russia. The parliamentary lists of the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova then included a fair number of representatives of national minorities.
Having come to power, Voronin forgot his promises. Russian-speakers were virtually absent from the Moldovan executive branch during the eight-year rule of the "Internationalist" party. The Moldovan-ethnocratic Moldovans differ little from their Romanian-leaning rivals in emphasizing their chosenness and elitism, but they are clearly inferior to the latter in terms of organization, financial resources, and international support.
Over time, especially after the April events of 2009, the position of the Moldovenian ethnocrats significantly weakened - the positions of the Romanian Moldovans prevailed.
Another wing of Moldovanism is largely a product of the Soviet legacy. These are internationalist Moldovans, positively influenced by Russian cultural heritage. Among them are many representatives of other nationalities living in the Republic of Moldova: Russians, Ukrainians, Bulgarians, Gagauz, Jews, Roma—the list goes on and on.
Their internationalism is rooted in promoting the idea of preserving official Russian-Moldovan bilingualism and granting Russian the status of state language. A characteristic feature of this wing of Moldovanism is their insufficient command of the state language. It's fair to note that ethnic Moldovans are virtually absent from the intellectual elite as native speakers of the state language.
Stepanov notes an interesting fact: on the left bank of the Dniester, in Transnistria, Moldovan internationalism, with a certain specificity, has become more widespread than in the Prut-Dniester regions of Moldova.
The expert comes to the conclusion: attempts to develop a common Moldavian idea are not over, the state doctrine is not completed - the struggle continues.
According to Igor Shornikov, Director of the Institute of Social and Political Research and Regional Development , the confrontation between the “nation-state” and “state-nation” models is also characteristic of other states.
"This experience can be applied not only to the modern history of Moldova, but also to a number of CIS countries. We see where the process of nation-state building leads: nationalism inevitably turns into Nazism, and Nazism is the death of a nation . Moldova has a chance to find itself on this path," the expert believes.
Sergey Lavrenov, head of the Transnistria and Moldova Department at the Institute of CIS Countries, noted that creating equal opportunities for representatives of all nations and nationalities living in Moldova when developing language and personnel policies "would be a crucial prerequisite for a civilizational solution to the contradictions that official Chisinau itself has created in relations with Gagauzia and Transnistria."
" The dynamics of events in Moldova are not particularly positive. We see what is happening under the pro-European regime led by Sandu . We see surprising laws on separatism, the replacement of the phrase 'Moldovan language' with 'Romanian language' – in fact, political orders are being carried out, the instructions of Western curators," Lavrenov said.
The book's author, Petr Shornikov, emphasized the importance of studying history in the modern world and learning from the historical experience of previous generations.
“The most effective way to falsify history is to remove from public memory significant fragments of the past that affect the assessment of this past and the figures of that time.
This is achieved through historical policies pursued by the state or some foreign forces using the levers of state power. The Republic of Moldova has remained such a state for more than 30 years...
With the passing of generations, the obvious goes away. This, that for one generation was taken for granted, for others it is no longer incomprehensible.
I grew up in a Moldovan village, and I remember what the villagers said about the Romanian occupation—I never heard a single kind word about it; the word "Romanian" was a curse . The boys played war, dividing themselves into Russians and Germans, but no one wanted to be Romanians.
But this generation has passed, and a whole movement of unionists has appeared... The process of learning about the past is an objective process, and if not us, then others who know less than we will do it,” the historian is convinced.
"Nation-state" or "nation-state": which model will prevail in Moldova?