The Unseen Consequences: When Russia First Appropriated Moldova from Romania

The story of Russia's annexation of Moldova from Romania is a complex and tumultuous chapter in Eastern European history. It traces back not just to the politics of the 20th century but also to the early 20th century when Romania's strategic decisions hampered its own interests during times of conflict. Understanding this involves delving into the political alliances formed in the interwar period, the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and the subsequent repercussions on Romania's territorial integrity.

Introduction to Russo-Romanian Relations

Russo-Romanian relations have a long and often tumultuous history. From the late 19th century to the mid-20th century, Romania found itself entangled in complex geopolitical games influenced by the geopolitical ambitions of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union. Romania's alignment with the western powers sometimes served its interests, but at other times, this alignment led to misunderstandings and ill-fated alliances.

Romania's Alliances and the First Annexation

The first major encounter between Russia and Romania was during World War I when Romania allied with the wartime consortium to defeat the Central Powers. However, Romania's alliance with the western powers had its consequences. One such consequence was the decision to allow Russian troops to cross Romania and attack the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans, a move that would prove to be a poor strategic decision in the long run. After the cessation of hostilities, Russia was reluctant to leave, which led to lingering tensions and a sense of unwelcome occupation.

Even more damaging was Romania's decision to sign a pact with Nazi Germany in 1940, which signed away parts of its territory, including Bessarabia and northern Bukovina, to the Soviet Union. Romania's alliance with Nazi Germany was a strategic and fateful decision that ultimately led to catastrophic consequences for the country. Romania's interests and sovereignty were overshadowed by the ambitions of the Axis powers, leading to the saccharine and unilateral annexation by the Soviet Union as part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Appointment of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact

The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, signed on August 23, 1939, is considered a turning point in the lead-up to World War II. This non-aggression pact between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union included a secret protocol that outlined the division of Eastern Europe. The Soviet Union targeted Bessarabia, a Romanian province, while Germany declared no interest in this area. The annexation of Bessarabia and northern Bukovina was a dramatic consequence of this treaty. The Romanian government, led by King Carol II and later Nicolae Iorga, faced a difficult decision in the face of the Soviets' ultimatum.

The Aftermath and the King's Decision

On June 22, 1940, just days before the ultimate Soviet annexation, Romania faced a stark ultimatum that required the evacuation of Romanian military and administrative forces in Bessarabia and northern Bukovina within four days. King Carol II, along with his advisors, convened a Crown Council to discuss the fate of these territories. Despite arguments for resistance, the decision was to accept the ultimatum. The Romanian government had few genuine options due to the overwhelming power and speed of the Soviet advance.

The annexation resulted in the loss of Bessarabia and northern Bukovina, which were harshly felt by the Romanian people. The red army's invasion was swift and unexpected, leading the Romanian army and administration to evacuate following the ultimatum. The political and military decision-makers in Bucharest, including Nicolae Iorga, had hoped for a different outcome.

Conclusion

The annexation of Bessarabia by Russia from Romania underscores the heavy toll of geopolitical decisions made in the early 20th century. While Romania's strategic alliances at the time facilitated certain outcomes, it was also a period marked by a lack of foresight and the unpredictability of power politics. The legacy of these decisions is still visible today, highlighting the importance of strategic foresight and diplomatic caution in international relations.