A Hypothetical with History: Moldova’s Union Debate, Then and Now
Putting Maia Sandu’s Podcast Answer in Context
“If we have a referendum, I would vote for the unification with Romania.”
In an hour long episode1 of the Rest is Politics “Leading” podcast, that line stood out. Moldova’s President Maia Sandu stated that, given the option, she would vote to unite her country with its neighbor and effectively eliminate her own elected position. This line has made waves inside and outside Moldova and led to a whole lot of confusion around the world. So let’s unpack what’s going on here a bit for the non-Moldovan audience.
A Unique Relationship in Europe
Moldova and Romania are neighbors that share a language and a lot of common history. The relationship between the countries doesn’t have any clear analogs elsewhere in Europe. In the middle ages modern day Moldova was part of the principalities that would later go on to form the Kingdom of Romania in 1881. But modern Moldova, historically called Bessarabia, was left out of this new nation because it had been annexed by the Russian Empire in 1812. When that empire disintegrated in 1917, Moldova declared independence and a year later voted to unite with Romania. The countries remained united until the Soviet Union re-annexed Bessarabia as part of their secret deal with Hitler in the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.
There are a lot of people on both sides of the River Prut that look back to this period of greater Romania nostalgically. Romania allows anyone with Romanian ancestors who were citizens before 1940 to reacquire their lost citizenship. Currently, there are no precise, public estimates of how many people in Moldova are dual citizens, but it is likely somewhere between a third and half of the population. This count includes President Maia Sandu, Prime Minister Alexandru Munteanu and many other politicians in the pro-EU camp.
Was This a Signal of a Change in Policy?
Short answer - no. In her interview Maia Sandu goes on to note that there is no popular demand for union and that it is not a realistic goal. She states that joining the EU is a realistic goal and that is what she and the government are committed to doing.
The context of the answer was important, the Rest is Politics hosts Rory Stewart and Alastair Campbell try to draw out a full picture of the people they interview starting with their childhood and early life. President Sandu was speaking about Moldova’s 1991 independence and how the swirl of ideas and movements included mass demonstrations for union. She noted that we’ll never know if there was a majority for union at that moment because no referendum was held. She answered the question in this context and made it clear it was a personal opinion and not a part of her political project or political ambitions.
Political Blunder or Careful Signaling?
That depends on who you ask. Union is usually considered to be the 3rd rail of Moldovan politics - you don’t touch this issue unless you have a political death wish. While small political parties have made their whole identities about union, most politicians recognize it is too divisive and far too unlikely to speak about. Maia Sandu has answered this question before in Romanian language interviews. She answered it exactly the same way, basically honestly giving a personal opinion. Some people find this refreshing in a politician, some find it to be a political blunder. If she did have a political calculus in the answer, the fact that she is not running for reelection may have played a role.
With that said, there is a case to be made that this was slightly more calculated than just that. When asked by the hosts to clarify why she would support it, President Sandu said:
“Look at what’s happening around Moldova today, look at what’s happening in the world. It is getting more and more difficult for a small country like Moldova to survive as a democracy and a sovereign country… and of course to resist Russia.”
For context we should go back to the Union of Bessarabia with Romania in 1918. Contrary to what many modern unionists claim, this was not principally a nationalistic or ethnically driven process. At that time Moldova was substantially more ethnically and linguistically diverse than it is today. The urban centers largely spoke Russian and while the large majority of the population were Romanian-speaking they were spread out in smaller towns and agrarian communities. The first parliament, the Sfatul Țării, actually debated and ultimately chose to join Romania while speaking in Russian, underscoring how little nationalism played in the decision.
So if this wasn’t totally a national project what was it? It was a decision based on national security.
As the Russian Civil War raged in the east, Bolshevik units, often acting as rogue raiding parties, made more and more incursions into the new Moldavian Democratic Republic. They burned estates and villages, occupied rail links and began an attempt to overthrow the Sfatul Țării to replace it with revolutionary committees. In January 1918 the Sfatul Țării requested military support from Romania and the Romanian army quickly restored order. This led to a debate about what ultimate political settlement would ensure security and resulted in the vote for union in April 1918.
This is important context for the President’s modern remarks and for Moldova’s current situation. Both in 1917 and in 2025 there was no mass political movement for union. The option was and is popular with a segment of the population but nowhere near a majority. At the same time, a vast majority of the country would look for almost any solution rather than rejoin a Russian Empire. That was true in 1918 and it is true today.
Whether or not it was intended, President Sandu’s comments can be read as an implicit warning to the EU. She implied that while we are standing at the front door waiting to get in, if you don’t open it, then we might just climb through the window.
Anyone paying attention to the events of the past few years cannot help but conclude that when this ends there will be no small, neutral countries between the EU and the new Russian Empire. Unlike Ukraine and Belarus, Moldova does have this extra option to find itself on the right side of that divide - a kind of geopolitical “pull in case of emergency” lever. So while people should really not read much into President Sandu’s comments on a podcast, it is relevant to remember that this complex history informs how Moldovans view their options in an ever more dangerous world.
Thanks for reading this on Moldova Matters, or via the cross-post at World Briefing with Michael Bociurkiw. Consider becoming a free or paid subscriber to Moldova Matters to keep up with the most important news about this small but very important country.
This part of the discussion starts around 6 minutes 30 sections
I very much enjoyed this historical summary and modern implications of the relationship between Moldova and Romania. Thank you for the lesson.
Very interesting. Is Romania interested in absorbing Moldova?