Nation-Building and Contested Identities - MEK

CRISTINA PETRESCU24 For a balanced evaluation of the relations between Bessarabia and Romania inJanuary-March 1918, and of the entire process of Bessarabia’s unification ascompared with those of the other provinces, see Sorin Alexandrescu, ParadoxulRomân (The Romanian Paradox) (Bucharest: Univers, 1998), especially pp.46-49.25 An illustrative example in this respect is that of Ion Inculeþ, the chairman of theSfatul Þãrii, who, on 27 March 1918, announced “with emotion,” as he said, thatthe union with Romania was voted. Just a couple of months before, Inculeþ hadargued that the path of Bessarabia was alongside Russia, because it was a freercountry than Romania. See Stere, Singur împotriva tuturor, pp. 94-95.26 It is worth mentioning that the incorporation of Bessarabia into Romania wasnever protected by an international treaty. The representatives of the GreatPowers were disturbed by the fact that a plebiscite was not held in the province.Nevertheless, Take Ionescu, the president of the Council of Romanian NationalUnity in Paris, succeeded in signing a treaty that recognized the union. However,that treaty was a worthless document as long as the United States andJapan did not ratify it. Moreover, the Soviet Union never recognized the incorporationof Bessarabia into Romania. In fact, during the interwar period, thiswas a subject of endless diplomatic negotiations between Romania and theSoviet Union. However, by 1940, the two countries could not reach any agreement.The Romanians’ position was that their rights on Bessarabia were historical,and therefore a plebiscite was futile. See Alexandru V. Boldur, Basarabiaºi relaþiile româno-ruse: Chestiunea Basarabiei ºi dreptul internaþional(Bessarabia and the Romanian-Russian relations: The problem of Bessarabiaand the international law) (Bucharest: Albatros, 2000).27 National integration of the peasant population is a long-term process. AsEugen Weber has shown, the integration of rural France into the modernFrench nation occurred only a century after the Revolution, during the 1870-1914 period, when remote villages were connected to the outside world and thepeople’s traditional way of life dramatically changed. Weber identifies severalagents of change, i.e., means of opening the isolated rural communities to thevalues of the “imagined” national community, such as: the establishment ofa road network, the migration of the workforce from region to region, the militaryservice, and the schooling system. See Eugen Weber, Peasants into Frenchmen:The Modernization of Rural France, 1870-1914 (Stanford: Stanford UniversityPress, 1976).28 For a comprehensive analysis of the process of national awakening of the TransylvanianRomanians, see Sorin Mitu, National Identity of Romanians in Transylvania(Budapest: Central European University Press, 2001).29 The refugees from Transylvania and the Banat were astonished by the fact thatthe Romanians from Bessarabia lacked the sentiment of belonging to the samenation with the Romanian-speaking population from across the border. OnisiforGhibu, who was also instrumental in establishing the Romanian school system inBessarabia, described with bitterness the Bessarabians’ lack of enthusiasm forlearning the Romanian literary language or history. Such an attitude was also specificfor the local teachers of Romanian origin. Besides Pe baricadele vieþii, see alsohis Trei ani pe frontul basarabean (Three years on the Bessarabian front)(Bucharest: Editura Fundaþiei Culturale Române, 1996), and De la Basarabia170