That would mean taking territory from Ukraine,also Pridniestrovie was never a part of that, seeing as it's on the other side of the Dniester
RomCom1989
joined 1 year ago
I don't think Pridniestrovie will ever be Moldovan,nor should it be
Gagauzia too,for that matter,but they'd have a considerably harder time being independent,so again,we come back to either Romania or Russia taking over because these are not viable states
Personally,if they feel Russia would align more with their interests,let them join
I seriously doubt anything like Kosovo would happen,but then again,this is the west we're talking about,but our azovs are still woefully disorganized and frankly a joke
Ok,I will say that I did put the disclaimer that that "outlet" was western owned, basically I wanted to show people what the western narrative is.
Second,I disagree that Moldova is a "colony" of Romania. They are definitely distinct in their identity,but to classify them as a different people is quite frankly ridiculous. However,you are correct when you say that Romania practically colonized Transnistria during WW2 and that it has no legitimate claim to the area.
I just can't see how the "parent" nation of modern day Moldova,the Principality of Moldavia,and which is part of official Moldovan national history,is somehow not connected also to Romania,which it practically is a founding member of. I don't deny that Moldova has its own history or culture,but I just can't square the circle that they're not at all connected to Romania (which has more Moldova than actual Moldova now).
Also,people not familiar with the history of the region?I live next to the point where Romania,Moldova and Ukraine meet,I admit, Romanian education on our national history is a bag filled with shit spreading nonsense propaganda,but to say that Moldova,who literally speaks the same language,but with more Russian loanwords and an accent is not connected to Romanian is frankly hilariously ahistorical. Again,I will fully admit that this is my one China realpolitik take,by which I mean cozying up with the west is beneficial to Romanian national interests,I don't want the immiseration of Moldovans,far from it,but the idea that they'd be doing worse than small towns and villages in Romania already are I think is overblown.
Also,you can't sit there with a straight face and tell me Moldova has a future as an independent state.Either we get it or Russia does,and frankly I'm with my country's interest on this one.Not like the whole modus opperandi of the region wasn't shifting allegiances from way back to the Ottoman times.We take what we can from the west and then when they start looking less and less attractive as an option we go to the next power,which will most likely be Russia.
Again, let me reiterate,I do not condone the west's actions,but if Romania was not captured by the West,id be saying the same thing if it would engage in a tug of war with Russia over Moldova. I don't agree with the Soviet efforts to distance the Moldovan identify from the Romanian one,but it was done to liberate the territory from the Nazi aligned government,so it was ultimately beneficial.
Now,the USSR is gone and a capitalist Russia remains, so I'm not too inclined to attach a territory that is mostly populated by people way more culturally similar to Romania to the RF,just because we're in the pocket of the West for now.
Of course,if Moldova wants to take a chance at independence,let them,but they have no economic potential.
I'm really curious as to how this is any different from Belarus and Russia?Belarus is culturally distinct and yet it seems to be more and more integrated into Russia by the day. That's not a bad thing,is it? I agree that us being under the boot of the West will make this messy and cause a lot of pain,but you can't tell me Moldova is viable as a state.
What would you prefer?A "Moldovan federation" where Gagauzia and Pridniestrovie get to boss over Chisinau and Balti? That'd just be annexation by Russia in a different manner. I don't believe Russia taking over would necessarily be a bad thing,hell,if they do something with the region, godspeed to them,but I'd prefer it if we reunite as we are brotherly peoples.
Ok,let's say Romania wasn't under NATO,and Moldova wasn't under the thumb of the US. Would you be against unification if say,Dej's Romania unified with Moldova?
Also,I'm not campaigning or anything,I'm not cheering this on, basically I'm saying I wouldn't complain if they just happened to unite with us
I want my take on this one issue to be challenged,so I appreciate your comment,this is just my perspective and I will fully admit it most likely is deeply ingrained chauvinist brainworms,but I think this one is the hardest to budge on
Hell,Sandu herself has Romanian citizenship,but is born in Moldova
Possible,but they already have joint citizenship since 2007
Not like they haven't done so already if they could
Hell, Bucharest already is now full with Moldovans
Basically what you're saying already happened,so they wouldn't see a drop in quality of life,like then, because they are already gutted
Only Gagauzia,which could split and join Russia if they take Bugeac
I think the dutch will do what they did to us,let them in,but basically make them second class EU members, probably incentivised by US cash
Well,we'd almost have our pre fall of communism population again :)....for one second before half of the new population it goes to Germany or Italy...again...
Now,for the serious answer,I can't fully say I know,but probably most will just bolster the already existing parties,with some regionalist ones forming, probably very small
Well also have a new Szeklerland: Gagauzia,which will probably have something like the UDMR (Hungarian minority union of parties, basically a parliament bloc as a party) but for them
More strain on the economy,and we'll have a new Moldova inside of us (Romanian Moldova is the least developed,so the joke is that they'll become the new Moldova)
I think with the US pivot to the Middle East, Ukraine will fall by the wayside and with it,the hard line EU has against Russia
Most likely the US will cut Ukraine loose,force the EU to take the truncated western remnant into the EU and force it to foot the bill to fully kill the euro and the organization and that Moldova will be tossed in as a bonus
Frankly, Transnistrias future is with Russia,that is set in stone
As for Moldova,yeah, it'll probably become a Romanian appendage, which I'm not opposed to
https://youtu.be/eN6t02HanMs?feature=shared
Local,most likely western interest captured or collaborator "investigative journalism" agency made a documentary on it,if anyones interested,has English subtitles
Maybe I'm wrong,but I think they wanna capture the country before Russia wins the war in Ukraine
And yeah,they said it'd join by 2030,so not anytime soon
They're still Marshall planning it though, though maybe the money faucet will die down after the war ends
I think the fear is Russia is forced to take Odessa and it'll link up to Transnistria and they possibly wanna draw a strong partitioning line before that
Interesting point you made on joking about local politics
See,here this is like a national past time,and it frequently devolves into what you said. You may ask why that is. My theory is that this culture was more or less created during communism and arose out of initially justifiable misgivings maybe mixed with fascist lost causers that weren't gulaged. It became a useful tool for the US and CIA,a vector through which to spread pro capitalist thought,see Reagan and his Soviet jokes.
Now,after they succeeded in destroying socialism here,the remnants of that have coalesced into a sort of national inferiority complex built on the basis of even older sentiments during the times of national liberation,where eastern European revolutionaries were educated in Paris or Vienna and tried transplanting liberal ideas into post ottoman principalities.
In Romania,we had a writer,Caragiale, which frequently satirized the decisions of the "form without foundation" policies of the newly formed Kingdom of Romania which transplanted liberal institutions wholesale without actually creating a material basis for any capitalist development, seeing as the country was mostly agrarian and most of the land was owned by the church.
Also, he frequently made fun of the then francophilia of the newly forming bourgeois,the "new money", fighting with the landed nobility,the boyars,which were more accustomed to Turkish influence.
Edit:To go even farther,I think it's also an even more deeper shame of being conquered by a Muslim nation,and being forced to bend the knee to them,and pay jizya and also have kids kidnapped to become janissaries who would go on to fight against you.