Romania – Moldova: Unionism, province or sovereignty? Caliber.Az reporting from Bucharest and Chișinău

"Anyone who supports the unification of the Republic of Moldova with Romania must understand that it won’t be easy, because the problems lie not only with Moldova, but with Romania itself." This statement was made by Romanian political analyst H.D. Hartmann during the Podcast Politik online programme.

The expert dismissed as a joke the remarks made by Romania’s president-elect Nicușor Dan regarding his plans to support Moldova during his term, with a view to possible future unification.

Hartmann believes that unification is impossible, as in his opinion, the Romanian people themselves do not support it. "There is only a small group of unionists, just as there are monarchists – even though Romania is not a monarchy."

“Unification is a joke. Yes, it’s a political project, and there is a group of people who want to unite Bessarabia with Romania — ‘unirea’ sounds nice, I have nothing against it. But what will you do with Transnistria? And with Gagauzia? The moment you, as a state, decide to pursue such a political project, I, as a profiler, pour cold water on it and say: hold on, here’s one problem, here’s another — are you ready to take them on?” the expert asked.

The political analyst from Bucharest stressed: “Integrating Bessarabia into Romania would be a colossal problem: regional conflicts, anti-Semitism, issues with the Roma population.”

These are fundamental challenges, which, in his opinion, the Romanian state would ultimately be unable to resolve.

“Yes, we share a common territory, a common history, we have Ștefan cel Mare (the prince who fought for the independence of the Moldavian principality), but our paths have been different. It’s not my fault, and it’s not yours, that Stalin pushed Transnistria towards Moldova. That’s just how it happened. From this perspective, I repeat — I respect unionist views, but we must take into account the fundamental problems that will arise along the way. And know this — it won’t be easy for you either. Don’t think you’ll be entering a land of milk and honey,” H.D. Hartmann concluded.

Currently, pro-European forces are in power in Moldova, and Romania’s newly elected president is also a pro-Western politician.

Does this open the door for joint efforts to promote the idea of unification between Moldova and Romania?

How widespread are unionist sentiments in both countries?

Prominent experts from Romania and Moldova shared their views with Caliber.Az.

Romanian political analyst Mihai Isac noted that Bucharest recognises the independence and sovereignty of the Republic of Moldova and remains one of Chișinău’s key allies.

“At present, none of Romania’s main pro-European parliamentary parties openly advocates for the political goal of uniting the two Romanian states. The reunification of Moldova and Romania is largely seen as a mid-term utopian project, primarily due to developments in regional security.

Russia’s illegal full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the annexation of Ukrainian territories have heightened concerns about any potential changes to national borders.”

Much of the unionist sentiment from the 1990s, he added, has since evolved into a more pragmatic form — envisioning the reunification of Moldova and Romania within the framework of the European Union as a more realistic goal.

“Romania’s president-elect Nicușor Dan recently stated that Moldova’s primary goal is integration into the European Union. He added that there is a roadmap for integration by 2030, which Romania must support both diplomatically and operationally, highlighting Romania’s own pre-accession experience as valuable knowledge that should be shared with its neighbours across the Prut River.

He also stressed the need for better integration of energy and transport networks between the two countries, along with the expansion of economic relations. Dan mentioned a proposal to enhance economic interconnectivity through an investment guarantee fund to support Romanian investments in Moldova.

In addition, he advocated for simplifying bureaucratic procedures for Moldovan citizens seeking to restore Romanian citizenship under existing legislation. Dan expressed his wish for Moldova to be the destination of his first official visit as President of Romania.

It’s difficult to accurately gauge how many Romanian citizens support unification with Moldova, since the topic is mostly discussed in symbolic terms, without thorough political or economic analysis. However, public opinion polls suggest that more than 50–60% of Romanian citizens support the idea of unification between the two countries,” the expert explained.

He continued that political unionism in Moldova has weakened due to the betrayal of Iurie Roșca, once a fervent supporter of unification who later began backing Russian interests.

“At present, no major parliamentary party in Chișinău openly supports this goal. Most unionist voters in Moldova now back pro-European parties that strengthen ties with Romania.

Most polls show that around 50% of Moldova’s population would support unification with Romania. More than one million citizens of the former Soviet republic hold Romanian citizenship and played a decisive role in Romania’s presidential elections by supporting Nicușor Dan.

The ruling Moldovan party PAS does not openly endorse a union with Romania but firmly advocates for integration into the European Union. Relations with Romania significantly influence Moldova’s security architecture and its foreign relations.

Romania remains Moldova’s most important economic partner and key political ally within international organisations. Russia frequently exploits fears linked to unionism to intimidate Moldova’s population, portraying a union with Romania and its NATO membership as threats,” Isac added.

Dr. Vitaly Andrievsky, historian and director of the Institute of Effective Policy in Chișinău, stated that the idea of unionism remains an important and sensitive topic for both Moldovan and Romanian societies.

“At the core of this idea lies a shared historical, cultural, and linguistic heritage interrupted by geopolitical catastrophes in the 20th century. Despite its steady popularity among a segment of the population, unionism has yet to gain the critical mass necessary for implementation. The reasons for this are found in various spheres — geopolitical, demographic, mental, and socio-economic.

According to several sociological surveys, the idea of unification with Romania enjoys support from about 30–40% of Moldova’s population (depending on how the question is phrased), but it faces serious internal barriers.

Significant parts of the country categorically reject the idea of unionism: Transnistria, which is outside Chișinău’s control, is strongly pro-Russian and openly anti-unionist; Gagauzia, where fears of losing autonomy and assimilation drive elites to strongly oppose unification; and northern Moldova (especially Bălți and surrounding areas), where the Soviet and East Slavic cultural influence remains strong.

Many Moldovan citizens fear that the country would lose its independence and become a ‘province of Romania,’ with the Russian-speaking population becoming marginalised.

Moreover, there is a significant segment of Moldovan society, especially among the youth, who believe that the path to the European Union is more important than unification with Romania, and that within the EU framework, Moldova can build equal relations with Bucharest without losing its sovereignty.

Finally, Moldovan authorities — even those with a pro-European stance — avoid raising the issue of unionism at the state level, fearing geopolitical destabilisation, the strengthening of pro-Russian forces, and even the provocation of internal conflicts. Moscow directly links any moves towards unification with increased pressure on Moldova,” the institute director explained.

According to him, despite symbolic and political support for the idea of unionism, Romania approaches it in practice with restraint and caution.

“Moldova remains one of the poorest countries in Europe. Romania fears that reunification would require enormous costs to equalise infrastructure, education, and healthcare, and that there is a risk of increased social tension due to resource redistribution. Moreover, supporting Moldova could weaken domestic economic reforms within Romania itself.

In Bucharest, there is an understanding that pushing the unification agenda could provoke a strong reaction from Moscow, potentially escalating into a hybrid war. Hungary might demand autonomy for the Hungarian minority in Transylvania, similar to Gagauzia or Transnistria, creating a risk of separatism. Relations with the EU could also become complicated, as the Union demands stability rather than territorial revisions in Eastern Europe.

Even among Romanian politicians who formally support unionism, there is no unified plan for Moldova’s integration. All statements remain largely symbolic: passports, cultural programmes, scholarships. There are no real steps toward rapprochement in the form of a confederation, monetary union, or harmonised legislation.

Unionism remains an inspiring myth for a segment of society, but on today’s regional political map, it is a largely unfeasible idea given the lack of majority support among Moldovan citizens, regional fears, the pragmatism of the Romanian political elite, geopolitical pressure from Russia, and the cautious stance of the EU.

At the same time, the EU itself could become the very unionist project through which Moldova and Romania unite not de jure, but de facto — through shared rules, freedom of movement, an integrated economic space, and political rapprochement. Perhaps this path is the most realistic and safest option today,” Andrievsky concluded.