PDF (Testo Online) - EURAC

Wöber – The Autonomy of Gagauzia
European integration and the economic crisis. Interlocutors in Comrat during
the expert interviews in July 2011 referred to the continuing internal divisions
in Chisinau as reasons for the little contact/interest from central authorities
and stressed that the frequent holding of elections on a state level led to
more passiveness of the electorate in the south.
3. Drawing Lessons from Gagauzia – Assessing the Autonomy in
2012
3.1. Evaluation of the State of the Autonomy in 2012
3.1.1. General Findings
All experts gave a positive assessment of the 1994 Law and that a peaceful
solution could be found to the conflict. Persons that had questioned the
content of the Autonomy Statute already during the negotiations back then
still maintained their position. 96
Some experts believed that the 1994 Law as a solution to accommodate the
Gagauz demands did not yield satisfactory results, citing the nondevelopment
of the Gagauz language as an indicator. The autonomy to some
extent might even be seen as a
“self-isolation instrument.” 97 To understand the situation of Gagauzia one
should see the wider perspective: Moldovan society had not agreed on its
fundamental issues, the center did not show willingness for consolidation, and
there was no agreement on certain historical facts; there was no substantial
discussion of what united people in the country and a dialogue between cities
was non-existent. 98 To some extent this view was voiced in the south as well:
A number of interlocutors negatively mentioned that Romanian history was
now taught in schools, and that it looked like only the Gagauz were fighting
for maintaining the ‘Moldovan identity’ and independence. 99 As one of the
leaders of the Gagauz movement, Stepan Topal, explained, it was the ongoing
unsatisfactory situation that in 2011 led to the foundation of the Council of
Elders. He said there was no danger of war, but it was now time to convince
96
Victor Popa (MP of the Liberal Party, Chair of the Legal, Appointments and Immunities Committee;
20 July 2011 – Chisinau) called Gagauzia “a secret republic”. He also brought up the question of who
they were and if it was possible for them to be called a nation, with respect to a number of
historical issues. He said cultural autonomy would have been more appropriate, as CoE experts had
recommended, and the whole law and the terms used were partly “non-sense” and in contradiction
to international standards. Today, nobody would monitor the laws that are adopted in Gagauzia.
97
Oazu Nantoi (Director of Programs of the Institute for Public Policy, former presidential advisor;
19 July 2011 – Chisinau).
98
Ibid.
99
Telpiz Nikolai (Deputy head of the New Gagauzia public movement; 21 July 2011 – Comrat), Gagauz
Fiodor (Chairman of the public organisation “United Gagauzia”; 22 July 2011 – Comrat), Topal
Stepan Mihailovitsh (Advisor to the Bashkan; elected president of the self-proclaimed Gagauz SSR;
22 July 2011 – Comrat)
www.eurac.edu/edap 18 edap@eurac.edu