Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947):
Gespeichert in:
| 1. Verfasser: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Romanian |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Chişinău
Pontos
2011
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Monografii
10 |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Inhaltsverzeichnis Abstract |
| Beschreibung: | Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Basarabia, Romania and the geopolitics of the great powers (1914 - 1947) |
| Beschreibung: | 355 S. |
| ISBN: | 9789975512213 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV039815187 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20151023 | ||
| 007 | t | ||
| 008 | 120118s2011 |||| 00||| rum d | ||
| 020 | |a 9789975512213 |9 978-9975-51-221-3 | ||
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)793465351 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV039815187 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a rum | |
| 049 | |a DE-Re13 |a DE-12 | ||
| 084 | |a 7,41 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Micu, Gabriel |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) |c Gabriel Micu |
| 264 | 1 | |a Chişinău |b Pontos |c 2011 | |
| 300 | |a 355 S. | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Monografii / Asociaţia Naţională a Tinerilor Istorici din Moldova |v 10 | |
| 500 | |a Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Basarabia, Romania and the geopolitics of the great powers (1914 - 1947) | ||
| 648 | 7 | |a Geschichte 1914-1947 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 650 | 4 | |a History (general) and history of Europe | |
| 650 | 4 | |a History (General) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Moldova. Moldovian S.S.R. Bessarabia | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Internationale Politik |0 (DE-588)4072885-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Großmacht |0 (DE-588)4125218-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Politik |0 (DE-588)4046514-7 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Geopolitik |0 (DE-588)4156741-9 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 651 | 7 | |a Rumänien |0 (DE-588)4050939-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 651 | 7 | |a Bessarabien |0 (DE-588)4006036-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf | |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Bessarabien |0 (DE-588)4006036-6 |D g |
| 689 | 0 | 1 | |a Großmacht |0 (DE-588)4125218-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 2 | |a Geopolitik |0 (DE-588)4156741-9 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1914-1947 |A z |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 1 | 0 | |a Bessarabien |0 (DE-588)4006036-6 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 1 | |a Politik |0 (DE-588)4046514-7 |D s |
| 689 | 1 | 2 | |a Rumänien |0 (DE-588)4050939-4 |D g |
| 689 | 1 | 3 | |a Geschichte 1914-1947 |A z |
| 689 | 1 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 689 | 2 | 0 | |a Bessarabien |0 (DE-588)4006036-6 |D g |
| 689 | 2 | 1 | |a Internationale Politik |0 (DE-588)4072885-7 |D s |
| 689 | 2 | 2 | |a Geschichte 1914-1947 |A z |
| 689 | 2 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 830 | 0 | |a Monografii |v 10 |w (DE-604)BV021255856 |9 10 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=024675419&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=024675419&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Abstract |
| 940 | 1 | |n oe | |
| 940 | 1 | |q BSBWK1 | |
| 999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-024675419 | ||
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 355.009 |e 22/bsb |f 09041 |g 947.08 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 355.009 |e 22/bsb |f 09041 |g 471 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 909 |e 22/bsb |f 09041 |g 471 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 355.009 |e 22/bsb |f 09041 |g 498 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 909 |e 22/bsb |f 09041 |g 498 |
| 942 | 1 | 1 | |c 909 |e 22/bsb |f 09041 |g 947.08 |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1804148749715374081 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri
(1914-1947) 319
SUMMARY
BASARABIA,
ROMANIA AND THE GEOPOLITICS
OF THE GREAT POWERS
(1914-1947)
Of all the issues that have targeted Romania in the first half of the 20th
century, few are so controversial, yet very little known, even after a broad
historiogtaphical approach of the
Basarabia
problem in all its manifestations.
As a Director of the Republic of Moldova division in the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, I coordinated bilateral relations with the neighboring country that
were deeply flawed by the approach of the Moldovan representatives of the
existent communist leadership. That is when I was caught by the idea of
studying in-depth the history of the territory beyond the Prut River and trace
the characteristics of the political-diplomatic realities that were built around
the
Basarabia
issue during the last century.
There is the stringent need to find appropriate solutions to manage the
present situation concerning Moldova, as the Romanian nation is divided in
two countries and significant forces are trained to falsify history and distort
reality, seeking accreditation for the existence of a people
—
Moldovians and
language
—
Moldovan, that are both nonexistent.
The subject of research, named by historians the question of
Basarabia,
involves more than two actors and is consequently more that a Romanian-
Russian/Soviet territorial dispute. The main sources of controversy on the
legitimacy of the political affiliation of
Basarabia
to Romania are rooted in a
series of interlinked international events that occurred at the end of the 19th
century and first half of the 20th century. That is why an objective analysis
of the European diplomacy s actions during the World War I, the interwar
period and the World War II up to the Paris Peace Conference of
1947.
The complexity of the subject requires a thourough bibliography analysis
and an especially close attention toward the primary sources. The primary
sources used in this book, held in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Diplomatic
Archives in Bucharest, the National Central Historical Archives and the
Romanian Military Archives as w<
il as
the National Archives of the Republic
of Moldova, are mostly unpublished. A series of diplomatic Romanian-Soviet
documents, as well as other published Russian/Soviet documents occupy an
important place in our study. The sensitivity of Romanian-Russian/Soviet
relations imposes prudent conclusions on the arguments that were based on
die all acquired sources.
According to
Mihail Bruhis,
from the period immediately following the
World War II the position of die Romanian historiography on the subject of
320 Gabriel
Міси
Basarabia
was very similar to the official position of the Soviet Union, as the
internationalist communists who came to power followed Moscow s direc¬
tions by the letter. In the atmosphere of ideological terror, the Romanian
historians did not dare to treat the matter differently, limiting themselves to
just exposing events according to the vision that resumed from the diplo¬
matic relations between the two parties. „Soviet historians and particularly
those from Moldovan
SSR,
always try not only to impose to the Romanian
historians the general concepts of the Soviet historiography on the problem
of the Romanian/Russian relations between
1917-1940,
but also to oblige
them re-write their very distant past relating to Basarabian problem in the
convenaient
and advantageous way to the USSR . This state of affairs lasted
until Stalin death, when divergences between Bucharest and Moscow started
to emerge.
Immediately after
1960,
Romanian historians no longer subjected to
Kremlin ideology and, as an immediate consequence, criticism surrounding
Soviet researchers emerged. This was not based on any historical fact or a
new documentary discovery; it was a formal criticism, based on the prole¬
tarian slogans that forced Romanian leadership to align to the ideas, opin¬
ions and directions traced by the Soviet historiography. This lasted until the
divergences between Bucharest and Moscow were permitted to be formally
expressed. During Nicolae
Ceauşescu s
era the works of Romanian historians
became more and more independent of Moscow s directives and that was
also favored by the fact that there were no more Russian troops on Romanian
soil.
In the mid 1960 s the dispute between the Romanian and Soviet leaders
partially brought the expression of historical truth and, as a consequence, led
to the rejection of concepts validated by the Soviet historiography during the
interwar periof of
1918 -1940.
Thus, Romanian historiography s assessment
regarding Romanian foreign policy differed from the Soviet historiography s
account on the topic of
Basarabia.
Generally, the Soviet historiography kept a constant line of historical
interpretation of the issue, varying only in intensity and magnitude. Justifying
USSR s foreign policy, it sought to constantly hide the reality and present its
denaturate
version. We are referring to the purposeful omission of documen¬
tary sources; in the best case these were fragmented and presented in a context
that suited the writer. Thus, most aspects of the Romanian-Soviet relations
caught historians attention, but were treated in a biased form. Numerous
monographs, memoirs, articles and studies were part of the propaganda, so
Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri
(1914-1947) 391
as the most
important
aspects of Romanian history were falsified through
submitting historical evidence to ideological imperatives. The purpose of the
Soviet historiography was to permanently seek legitimization of the forcefully
annexed
Basarabia,
Bucovina and the
Herta
county, by constantly presenting
Romania as a participant to the anti-Soviet interventions, by occupying
Basarabia,
both in
1918
and
1941,
and a promoter of anti-Soviet policy.
Once the communist regime went bankrupt the Soviet thesis became
redundant and the research undertaken by Western historians revealed the
historical arguments that marked Basarabia s history and Romania s rela¬
tion with the USSR. It is obvious that this difference, with a political and
diplomatic connotation, had consequences on the foreign policy of the Great
European Powers, whose interests in the Basarabian issue were, if not direct,
at least indirect.
One must also consider the fact that before World War I, the Great Powers
courtesy towards Romania, both from one camp and from the other, was
promising in fulfilling the Romanian unification goal. However, the Powers
generous promises were not honored, as these fulfilled primarily their own
interests. The Allies attitude toward the small states, such as Romania,
changed by the end of World War I.
However, the perseverance of Romanian diplomacy allowed Romania
to impose, by the force of negotiations, the international recognition of its
national interest. In this context, although at the Paris Peace Conference
Romania was in the camp of the winners, a number of its goals were chal¬
lenged even by former allies.
In this context, we have to acknowledge the clear and unequivocal posi¬
tion that Basarabians had in relationship with Romania. Even if the scale of
«vents that marked the World War I was so huge that the issue of
Basarabia
in the political concerns of the major European powers was placed in obscu¬
rity, it was
Basarabia
itself that was placed in a favorable context because
°f the Russian revolution. At that time,
Basarabia
imposed itself through
*he desire of self-assertion, which required the treatment of a full subject of
international relations, and then, under the principle of self-determination of
peoples and their right to decide for themselves, this step culminated in the
act of union of
Basarabia
with Romania.
Strengthening the Romanian unit was just a matter of time, and the inter¬
national recognition of the act committed the first step in this regard. The
of the problem, its history and the situation after World War I
indi-
322
Gabriel
Міси
cates
that the question of
Basarabia
was not only a Romanian problem, but
rather a European one.
The interwar objectives of Romanian foreign policy, the international
recognition and the preservation of territorial integrity, made Bucharest
one of the most ardent proponents of the continuation of the construc¬
tion of Versailles, and one of France s most loyal allies in Eastern Europe.
The sequence of events after
1918
revealed that the Great Union brought
the discontent of some influential factors in international politics. For these
reasons, the international recognition of the union was a difficult process, in
which, in order to safeguard its territorial integrity,
Romaina was
threatened
by the revisionist forces and face other multiple problems.
The analysis of the evolution of the Soviet foreign policy
—
the state which
never formally recognized the legitimacy of the Greater Union of Romania
since
1918 —
brings us toward the conclusion that it was the post-War first
revisionist state, which opened a dangerous niche in European political
stability. It served as an example to other regional actors that were unhappy
with how the geographical patterns were established in the interwar Europe.
It was to be expected that, with Bolsheviks coming to power in Russia and
the union of
Basarabia
with Romania the political situation between the two
countries would worsen. Moscow constantly tried to put pressure on Bucha¬
rest, both directly and through a policy of inducement to the other Great
Powers of Europe, which could tip the balance of Soviet-Romanian relations
toward the USSR. For these reasons, the Romanian-Soviet interwar relations
occupied an important place in European diplomacy.
Like any other highly controversial issue, several solutions were presented
for the issue of
Basarabia.
The two solutions that emerged during World
War II failed to simultaneously satisfy all stakeholders. Every solution was
regarded as fair for one party but was disapproved by the other, depending
on the interest of each party s concerns of the legal status of the province.
Romania was disadvantaged by the Treaty of Bucharest of
1812,
but just
over a century later the Romanian province of
Basarabia
was brought under
Romanian rule. A series of circumstances at the end of World War I were
favorable to Bucharest. Certainly the grit, with which the new Soviet power
acted for thwarting the Romanian efforts to reclaim territory between die
Prut and Dniester has made these events inconclusive and uncertain. For
this reason, a series of burdensome conditions and consequences for new
geographical shape of Romania followed primarily in terms of its interna¬
tional consecration.
Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri
(1914-1947) 323
In this context it is important to mention a historical reality, namely
that of the completion of national unity, through the act of December
1,
1918,
preceded by that of Chisinau in March
27, 1918
and one in
Cernăuţi
in November
1918,
that represented a fait accompli of Romanian national
policy before the opening of the Paris Peace Conference of
1919.
From this
point of view, the conference had to take note of the union achieved by the
Romanian people following the exercise of its right to self-determination and
give it the widest international recognition.
The discussion of Basarabian issue at the conferene revealed its signifi¬
cance at the European level. In fact, it should be noted that whenever the fate
of
Basarabia
was decided
-
by the treaties of Bucharest
(1812),
Paris
(1856),
Berlin
(1878)
and Paris
(1920
and
1947) - ,
the Romanian-Russian/Soviet
territorial dispute was not addressed as the Soviet-Romanian or Russian-
Romanian problem. It was addressed in the European context, as
Basarabia
was always considered as being situated at the „border between East and
West. Basarabia s anexation by Russia intervened in the moments of weak¬
ness of the Western European countries, where there was a weakening polit¬
ical cohesion and, consequently, the lack of unity of action on the issues of
common interest.
Viewed from this angle, the return of
Basarabia
under Romanian admin¬
istration was the result of two major events. The question of
Basarabia
was
first and foremost an actual realization of the aspiration of national unity.
The second element that created favorable circumstances for Romania was
the Russian Revolution, which influenced gready the situation in
Basarabia,
as well as in the entire Europe and directly impacted the state of events by
favoring Romania in the end.
The period starting with the eve of World War I until the Paris Peace
Conference is distinguished as a first step in bringing back the issue of
Basarabia
on the agenda of the Great Powers politics. This step foreshad¬
owed, we might say, a new „era of Soviet-Romanian relations, which marked
the relations of the two states throughout the interwar period to the Peace
Conference of
1947.
The Romanian state wanted the recognition of the union that would
provide stability in its efforts to integrate historical provinces. Like other
Romanian territories,
Basarabia
was part of the „Romanian question which
signified restoring Romanian national unity and territorial integrity. The same
ideal was shared by other people from this
patt
of Europe on the eve of
World War II, and that confirms the viability of the principle of
naţionali-
324
Gabriel Meu
ties proclaimed by the U.S. administration at the beginning of the twentieth
century, through the voice of President Wilson, and taken as a basis for the
future European construction.
The national aspiration of the small nations was however used by the Great
European powers to promote their interests. Thus, concerning the ques¬
tion of
Basarabia,
the Central Powers speculated many times the upcoming
Romanian nationalist discourse.
Before the union of
Basarabia
with Romania the problem was viewed
from the perspective of the restoration of Romanian ntional unity; with the
completion of that act the solving of the problem was not over, but rather
took a new dimension. In that historical context, in Bucharest the interna¬
tional recognition of the union became an issue, in which the question of
Basarabia
was regarded as a separate one and related to many aspects of the
„Romanian issue as well as to the „Russian issue .
Thus, Bucharest had to face the interest of the Great Powers that were to
play a decisive role in solving the historic dispute that was linked to the overall
settlement of the „Russian problem . On the eve of the opening of the Paris
Peace Conference, the Great Powers had no doubt about the correctness
of adding
Basarabia
to Romania, later on thier position became uncertain.
Under the new circumstances, the question of
Basarabia
was „revived in
the polical interest of the Allied Powers. In this uncertain environment that
dominated at the Paris Peace Conference, Romania had real concerns about
the approach that will be taken on the union of
Basarabia
with Romania.
Finally, the Conference recognized the union of the province with
Romania, but that did not mean
a de
facto settlement of the issue in favor of
Romania. The real battle for
a defacto
recognition
Basarabia
status will take
place during the mterwar period that culminated with the Molotov-Ribben-
trop Pact
The issue of
Basarabia
was more complex than a diplomatic dispute
between Bucharest and Moscow. Because of its international implications,
it was one of the „hotest issues in Europe, taking into account the interest
expressed by the Soviet Union that supported the claims on the territory.
Thus,
Basarabia
was a very sensitive issue of the Romanian foreign policy, in
relation toward the European states and toward the USSR,
During the interwar period, the main concern of Bucharest authorities
was to obtain practical recognition of the union. This did not mean adding
more legitimacy to the act of union, as the results of the plebiscites that took
place in each province were subsequently ratified by the Romanian
legisla-
Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri
(1914-1947) 325
ture. The internaţional
recognition of the union, both
defacto and de
jure, on
which Romania had to insist further to legitimate its international status and
satisfy the spirit of coexistence of nations, was based on the logic of the
international law.
Eventually, Romania had to pass over this difficult stage and that was to
culminate in the act of October
28, 1920,
which recognized the sovereignty
over
Basarabia.
At that moment the diplomatic history of Romania entered a
new stage, the one that was full of essential political and diplomatic actions.
The cornerstone of the interwar diplomatic policy of the new national states
that emerged after the World War I and of those states mat were recovering
from decades of division was to keep the new territorial configuration of
the national states, based on the principle of sovereign equality of states and
nations, as well as on the peaceful coexistence of peoples.
Romania became the leading voice of the diplomacy persuaded by small—
and medium-size states of Central and Southeastern Europe. At the same
time, the Romanian diplomacy devoted itself to the cause of the preservation
of its national territory and status. Unfortunately, the whole system of alli¬
ances, diplomatic games and political axes of authorities in Bucharest in all
that time will prove to be bankrupt because of the events that foreseen the
World War II.
In the face of this danger, which threatened its very being, Romania acted
promptly, building a system of alliances designed to withstand the pressure of
the revisionist forces of the interwar Europe.
Among the territories that were tracked in that web of complicated rela¬
tions was
Basarabia.
The Romanian diplomacy focused itself on building
normal political and diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union, which chal¬
lenged since die very beginning the act of October
28,1920.
Thus, the ques¬
tion of
Basarabia
continued to be subject of litigation between the two coun¬
tries and that marked profoundly the Soviet-Romanian relations during mat
period. On the other hand, these relations were shaped by the international
situation. There were forces that claimed the revision of the peace treaties
and the
restauration
of the pre-war map. Facing this danger, Romania acted
promptly, building a system of alliances designed to withstand the pressure of
revisionist forces of the interwar Europe.
In carrying out its foreign policy objectives, Romania chose to promote
its national interests as a code of conduct which had three distinguishing
features. Firstly, an anti-revisionist stance, in which Romania addressed terri¬
torial claims, rose against it by a firm policy of keeping the status quo established
326
Gabriel
Міси
by the Paris Peace Conference. Secondly, the foreign policy of the Romanian
government was built on the principle of peaceful settlement through the
dialogue of any international dispute, a principle which was enshrined at the
Hague Conferences of
1899
and, respectively, of
1907.
Last, but not least, the
Romanian foreign policy of the interwar period was purely defensive.
Paradoxically, it was precisely this last approach to morality in international
relations that disadvantaged Romania in its relation with the Soviet Union.
An essential aspect of this relationship, which created great difficulties to the
Romanian state throughout its existence was the directive that in relation with
Moscow Romania can not have a different approach from that of its political
allies. It took Romania a decade after the Paris Peace Conference to realize
that that directive was not valid and that each ally had its own political inter¬
ests considering the Soviet Union. Bucharest was just outmanoeuvred by its
pragmatic allies every time.
After signing the Treaty of October
28 1920,
Bucharest planned to place
the thorny issue of
Basarabia
on a priority list in Romanian-Soviet relations.
Over the next fourteen years, the question of
Basarabia
was gradually placed
in the shadow, as restoring the diplomatic relations with Moscow was consid¬
ered essential. In this sense, the attitudes of the Great Powers were different
from those of Romania. No wonder that the attitude of the Moscow leaders
remained ambiguous concerning
Basarabia
and, in fact, reflected the ambiva¬
lent political attitude of the Great Powers. On the one hand, they showed
an official position, on the other, a nuanced position presented only on the
political backstage
-
that was typical for the Soviet way of approaching the
countries with whom it was in dispute.
Nonetheless, by following the direction traced in international relations
Romania based its politics on the methods of classical diplomacy and managed
to obtaine remarkable successes in that complex political environment. In
this sense, it worth mentionning The Convention for Defining the Aggressor, signed
after a positive and constructive dialogue between Soviet and Romanian
foreign affairs ministers. Thus, after signing the Convention, M.
Litvínov
would declare: „I know that by signing this convention I have given you
Basarabia.
If I cannot admit this officially it is because of public opinion,
especially in the Ukraine. If I commit to never wage war on
Basarabia nor
to
ask for a revision of the Treaty, not only because the USSR is not a member
of the Society of Nations, but because, in principle we are against a revision,
as it means war, by what other means could I get
Basarabia
back? .
The above passage does not reveal an eloquent admission of Romania s
Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri
(1914-1947) 327
historical right concerning the province on behalf of the USSR and based on
its Romanian heritage. On the contrary,
Litvínov
is talking about excluding
classical means to get
Basarabia
back and not about the refusal of reclaiming
this province. This reasoning is all the more real as the Soviet MFA docu¬
ments clearly confirm that the signing of the London convention of
1933
did
not change the USSR s position concerning the „illegitimate occupation of
Basarabia
by Romania.
However, starting with
1934,
the premises for resuming diplomatic
relations between Romania and the USSR were present something which,
apart from calming spirits in the
Basarabia
matter, would bring Romania
the perspective of internal and international stability. Thus, by presenting
to the Romanian deputies the political relations between Romania and its
neighbours, Nicolae Titulescu concluded that in all these years, through the
efforts of the Department of Foreign Affairs, all the country s borders were
covered by political agreements: „The Western one through the Small Settle¬
ments new status, the Southern one, through the Balkan Pact, the Eastern
one through the Convention with the USSR .
Beyond the fact that achieving a compromise in signing the convention
gave an overall positive outlook to Romanian-Soviet relations none of the
countries deluded itself in thinking that a compromise of
Basarabia
was
possible.
Therefore, it can be said that managing the problem of
Basarabia
was
one of the most difficult diplomatic challenges for Romania in the interwar
period. It was difficult not only because the Bucharest authorities had to
fight for the Soviet recognition of
Basarabia
as a Romanian territory, but
also because of revisionist forces were emerging throughout Europe. In this
respect, in order to regain
Basarabia,
the Soviet Union promoted a diplomatic
expansionary policy. Serving this ideal with devotion, the political echelon of
the Soviet Union resorted to various challenges, made steps, notes of protest
and all that could be described as anti-Romanian propaganda devices.
In the run of the year of
1939,
a favorable time to carry out Soviet expan¬
sionist territorial claims was shaped. In new international circumstances the
USSR intensified its claims on
Basarabia,
which that time were based on the
new shape of the Soviet-German relations. It is clear that the Soviet-German
understanding could not bypass Romania, which became captive within the
political game shaped by the Great Powers. The German-Soviet rapproche¬
ment took place slowly, starting with January
1939
and on August
14
the same
year the German foreign Minister, Ribbentrop, proposed his Soviet counter-
328
Gabriel
Міси
part,
Molotov,
directly, without any diplomatic wish-wash, to conclude on an
agreement in order to regulate East European territorial issues.
The
Basarabia
question had even less promising prospects, as the issue
was not discussed at that time, due to a slightly naive Bucharest s policy,
overly loyal to its Western allies interests. Meanwhile, Bucharest was forced
to approve the Great Powers attitude towards the Soviet regime, so as not to
remain isolated in terms of new international realities, which first confirmed
the Soviet Union as a great power, and then announced ever insistently a
revisionist wave in Europe. In such circumstances the Basarabian problem
was placed outside resuming conditions and principles of Soviet-Romanian
relations.
In subsequent years Romania made efforts to keep its borders intact. In
any case, the Bucharest authorities pursued a constant domestic and interna¬
tional policy aiming at the consolidation of the national state, and Romanian
diplomacy made an immeasurable effort to achieve this goal.
We also should not neglect the fact that the interwar period was marked by
the Great powers disagreement on Romanian hopes for unification. It is the
year of
1939,
the problem of
Basarabia
led to completing „negotiations of
the Soviet-Romanian relations that were marked by the Molotov-Ribbentrop
pact. The Soviet ultimatum of
1940
destabilized the whole system of alliances
of Romania, which complied with Moscow s demand to „return
Basarabia,
without taking into account the subsequent permanent consequences it had
in terms of political and diplomatic confrontation between Romania and
Soviet Union on
Basarabia.
The diplomatic clumsiness would fully satisfy the
wishes of Moscow.
The fact that Romania entered into dialogue with the Soviets on the ulti¬
matum notes aimed
Basarabia
and Northern
Bukovina,
without taking into
account the fact that Bucharest has responded to these notes, meant chal¬
lenging the position and the decision set out by the Great Powers during
Paris Peace Conference, which ended officially the World War I. Thus, the
Soviets were getting a very important legal argument as a forced military
occupation of the national territory of a country, even if it had been recog¬
nized as such by the international postwar community; this would be not in
conformity with the principles of international law and consequently would
not be recognized as valid by international public opinion. In such a scenario,
if the Bucharest government would not „accept ultimatum, or at least not
respond to Soviet
ultimative
notes, even if the occupation of
Basarabia
by the
Soviets took place, there would have certainly been a possibility of advancing
Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri
(1914-1947) 329
international protests and
generate
discussion in which the Soviet state could
be blamed
fot
the breach of internationalykr
coge
fis.
Just a year after the Greater Romania fall
appart,
it would re-asses its alli¬
ance system and join Germany in order to free Romanian territories under
foreign occupation.
If the year of
1939
entered, for Romania, in the interwar policy logic,
then the year of
1941
is part of a World War II period, which meant active
involvement in the conduct of military actions. In the spirit of respect for
historical truth, apart from the undeniable merits of Marshal Ion Antonescu
in restoring national unity, a less deserving element assigned to the Romanian
army leader is how he tried to fix the new reality
—
using inadequate legal
terms that were actually reached after regaining Romanian territories taken by
force by the Soviet authorities in the summer of
1940.
The regime instituted
in Bucovina and
Basarabia
was described by M. Antonescu as
„bella ocupatio
regime . In other words, this arrangement would last until the end of hostili¬
ties, that is, until the war with the Soviet Union and its allies when edicts were
to a „decree of annexation . Until then, the military authorities and military
occupation regime remained the only legal situation that could be created on
its territory.
As a first remark, it was not about establishing a system of „military occu¬
pation of the Kingdom on the provinces. In fact, it was a national territory
recovered or, more specifically, liberated from occupation of a foreign State,
because of which the legal status quo of the interwar
Basarabia
was violated for
the second time since the singing of the Soviet ultimatum notes of
26-27
June
1940.
Also, by accepting the Soviet ultimatum notes, the Bucharest govern¬
ment accepted their formula for „the return of
Basarabia
at all costs , which
questions the right of national belonging of the province, recognized by the
Paris Peace Conference.
In addition, Antonescu s statement, that at the end of hostilities a „decree
of annexation would be issued marks an end point, unfavorable for Romania
in handling the legal aspects of this problem, were it not for the protests
of politicians and experts in the field of jurisprudence. In a statement Iuliu
Maniu s insisted that: „The way the government will be organized in
Basarabia
and Bucovina after their annexation can be far-reaching
(...).
Why do we need
a „decree of annexation ?
Basarabia
and Bucovina blended in the Romanian
kingdom
23
years before, through union decrees. An annexation decree gives
a whole new meaning to the union.
At the end of World War II, and in the post war period not all states had
330 Gabriel
Міси
a fair and equitable attitude towards these territories. Big states following
their own interests, did not support Romania. Moreover, after the war all
of Eastern Europe, including Romania were abandoned by the West under
Moscow s influence. Thus, the foreign policy of these countries was mostly
controlled by the USSR. In this setting, the Soviets obtained the international
recognition of
Basarabia
inclusion in USSR, where the communist totalitarian
regime would be installed.
The evolution of the World War II led to a tragic destiny for Romania, as
it had to accept the terms imposed by the Soviet Union as a consequence of
Moscow convention, signed on September
12 1944,
and pay the reparations
to the Western states.
The winning powers established Romania s frontiers the same as the
one in January
1941.
This meant that
Basarabia
and Northern Bucovina
remained under USSR s occupation and Cadrilater under that of Bulgaria.
The economic clauses established heavy damages, refunds and compensa¬
tions from the Romanian state.
The foreign affairs Minister, Gheorghe
Tătărescu,
presented the official
point of view at the Paris Peace Conference in
a mémoire,
read during the
plenary session of August 13th
1946.
At the same time, Tatarescu s view was
supported by a group of former diplomats lead by Grigore Gafencu, V.V.
Tilea,
Constantin
Vişoianu,
Grigore
Niculescu-Buzeşti.
Thus, there were two
memoires
that criticised the Treaty that kept
Basarabia
and Northern Buco¬
vina under the Soviet rule.
These protests were directed at history itself, as the Great Powers had
already convened on the terms that were to be imposed on Romania. At the
same time, the actions taken by the exiled diplomats were ignored by the
Western powers, as these only dealt with the representatives of the Bucharest
government.
CUPRINS
PREFAŢĂ
(A. Petrencu)
......................................................................................7
INTRODUCERE
................................................................................................
И
CAPITOLUL
I.
ASPECTE ISTORIOGRAFICE PRIVIND
BASARABIA ÎN CONTEXTUL EVOLUŢIEI RELAŢIILOR
INTERNAŢIONALE
(1914-1947)................................... ..............................18
1.1
Problema Basarabiei în istoriografia românească
................................19
I.
1.1.
Problema Basarabiei şi relaţiile
romàno-sovietice
.....................19
1.1.2.
Politica externă românească şi puterile occidentale
...................28
1.1.3.
Istoriografia privind Basarabia în contextul relaţiilor
romàno-sovietice din
Republica Moldova post-sovietică
...................48
1.2.
Istoriografia universală
............................................................................56
1.2.1.
Istoriografia sovietică privind relaţiile
romàno-sovietice
..........56
1.2.2.
Istoriografia sovietică privind raporturile României
cu marile puteri
..........................................................................................63
1.3.
Scrieri istorice occidentale de referinţă cu privire la relaţiile
romàno-sovietice
.............................................................................................65
CAPITOLUL
II.
BASARABIA DE LA NEUTRALITATEA
ROMÂNIEI LA CONFERINŢA DE PACE
(1919-1920).........................70
II.
1.
Situaţia geopolitică şi diplomatică premergătoare
Primului Război Mondial
...............................................................................70
11.2. Basarabia între Marele Război şi Marea Unire
...................................82
11.2.1. Strategia înfăptuirii unităţii naţionale
..........................................82
11.2.2. Sfârşitul unui statut rusesc
(1917) ..............................................94
11.3. Basarabia de la Unire la recunoaşterea ei internaţională
................109
11.3.1. Poziţia diplomatică a Aliaţilor între Unire şi Conferinţa
de Pace
......................................................................................................109
11.3.2. Expectativa marilor puteri cu privire la definitivarea
statutului Basarabiei
...............................................................................123
CAPITOLUL III. BASARABIA ÎN CONTEXTUL RAPORTURILOR
ROMÀNO-SOVIETICE DIN
PERIOADA INTERBELICĂ
................140
111.1. Relaţiile
romàno-sovietice sub
influenţa unei diplomaţii
intransigente
..................................................................................................140
111.2. Basarabia între ezitările Bucureştiului şi intransigenţa Moscovei
... 157
111.3. De la intransigenţă la destindere
......................................................176
Gabriel
Міси
ІИ.3.1.
Divergenţe europene în chestiunea basarabeană
.......................176
III.3.2. Ascensiunea revizionismului în Europa şi relaţiile
romàno-sovietice
...........................................................................................186
CAPITOLUL
IV.
BASARABIA DE LA PACTUL RIBBENTROP-
MOLOTOV LA CONFERINŢA DE LA PARIS DIN
1946-1947........209
IV.l. Eşecul politicii de alianţe a României interbelice
...........................209
IV.1.1 Prăbuşirea unei construcţii diplomatice
...................................209
IV.l.
2.
Pactul Ribbentrop-Molotov
—
începutul sfârşitului
unui succes diplomatic
............................................................................231
IV.2. Colapsul unei construcţii diplomatice şi destrămarea
României Mari
...............................................................................................250
IV.2.1.
Bucureştiul între expectativă şi inacţiune
................................250
rV.2.2 De la succes militar la eşec
politico-diplomatic
......................274
ÎNCHEIERE
......................................................................................................300
SUMMARY
.........................................................................................................319
BIBLIOGRAFIE
...............................................................................................331
INDICE
..............................................................................................................346
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Micu, Gabriel |
| author_facet | Micu, Gabriel |
| author_role | aut |
| author_sort | Micu, Gabriel |
| author_variant | g m gm |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV039815187 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)793465351 (DE-599)BVBBV039815187 |
| era | Geschichte 1914-1947 gnd |
| era_facet | Geschichte 1914-1947 |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>02983nam a2200709 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV039815187</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20151023 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">120118s2011 |||| 00||| rum d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789975512213</subfield><subfield code="9">978-9975-51-221-3</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)793465351</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV039815187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">rum</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-Re13</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,41</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Micu, Gabriel</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947)</subfield><subfield code="c">Gabriel Micu</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Chişinău</subfield><subfield code="b">Pontos</subfield><subfield code="c">2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">355 S.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Monografii / Asociaţia Naţională a Tinerilor Istorici din Moldova</subfield><subfield code="v">10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Basarabia, Romania and the geopolitics of the great powers (1914 - 1947)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="648" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1914-1947</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">History (general) and history of Europe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">History (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Moldova. Moldovian S.S.R. Bessarabia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Internationale Politik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4072885-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Großmacht</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4125218-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Politik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4046514-7</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Geopolitik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4156741-9</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Rumänien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4050939-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="651" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Bessarabien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4006036-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bessarabien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4006036-6</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Großmacht</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4125218-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Geopolitik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4156741-9</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1914-1947</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bessarabien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4006036-6</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Politik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4046514-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Rumänien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4050939-4</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1914-1947</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="2" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Bessarabien</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4006036-6</subfield><subfield code="D">g</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="2" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Internationale Politik</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4072885-7</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="2" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Geschichte 1914-1947</subfield><subfield code="A">z</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="2" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Monografii</subfield><subfield code="v">10</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV021255856</subfield><subfield code="9">10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=024675419&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=024675419&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="n">oe</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="940" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="q">BSBWK1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-024675419</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">355.009</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09041</subfield><subfield code="g">947.08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">355.009</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09041</subfield><subfield code="g">471</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">909</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09041</subfield><subfield code="g">471</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">355.009</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09041</subfield><subfield code="g">498</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">909</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09041</subfield><subfield code="g">498</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="942" ind1="1" ind2="1"><subfield code="c">909</subfield><subfield code="e">22/bsb</subfield><subfield code="f">09041</subfield><subfield code="g">947.08</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| geographic | Rumänien (DE-588)4050939-4 gnd Bessarabien (DE-588)4006036-6 gnd |
| geographic_facet | Rumänien Bessarabien |
| id | DE-604.BV039815187 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-07-10T00:12:03Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789975512213 |
| language | Romanian |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-024675419 |
| oclc_num | 793465351 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR DE-12 |
| owner_facet | DE-Re13 DE-BY-UBR DE-12 |
| physical | 355 S. |
| psigel | BSBWK1 |
| publishDate | 2011 |
| publishDateSearch | 2011 |
| publishDateSort | 2011 |
| publisher | Pontos |
| record_format | marc |
| series | Monografii |
| series2 | Monografii / Asociaţia Naţională a Tinerilor Istorici din Moldova |
| spelling | Micu, Gabriel Verfasser aut Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) Gabriel Micu Chişinău Pontos 2011 355 S. txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Monografii / Asociaţia Naţională a Tinerilor Istorici din Moldova 10 Zsfassung in engl. Sprache u.d.T.: Basarabia, Romania and the geopolitics of the great powers (1914 - 1947) Geschichte 1914-1947 gnd rswk-swf History (general) and history of Europe History (General) Moldova. Moldovian S.S.R. Bessarabia Internationale Politik (DE-588)4072885-7 gnd rswk-swf Großmacht (DE-588)4125218-4 gnd rswk-swf Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd rswk-swf Geopolitik (DE-588)4156741-9 gnd rswk-swf Rumänien (DE-588)4050939-4 gnd rswk-swf Bessarabien (DE-588)4006036-6 gnd rswk-swf Bessarabien (DE-588)4006036-6 g Großmacht (DE-588)4125218-4 s Geopolitik (DE-588)4156741-9 s Geschichte 1914-1947 z DE-604 Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 s Rumänien (DE-588)4050939-4 g Internationale Politik (DE-588)4072885-7 s Monografii 10 (DE-604)BV021255856 10 Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=024675419&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Inhaltsverzeichnis Digitalisierung BSB Muenchen 2 application/pdf http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=024675419&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA Abstract |
| spellingShingle | Micu, Gabriel Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) Monografii History (general) and history of Europe History (General) Moldova. Moldovian S.S.R. Bessarabia Internationale Politik (DE-588)4072885-7 gnd Großmacht (DE-588)4125218-4 gnd Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd Geopolitik (DE-588)4156741-9 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4072885-7 (DE-588)4125218-4 (DE-588)4046514-7 (DE-588)4156741-9 (DE-588)4050939-4 (DE-588)4006036-6 |
| title | Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) |
| title_auth | Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) |
| title_exact_search | Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) |
| title_full | Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) Gabriel Micu |
| title_fullStr | Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) Gabriel Micu |
| title_full_unstemmed | Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) Gabriel Micu |
| title_short | Basarabia, România şi geopolitica marilor puteri (1914 - 1947) |
| title_sort | basarabia romania si geopolitica marilor puteri 1914 1947 |
| topic | History (general) and history of Europe History (General) Moldova. Moldovian S.S.R. Bessarabia Internationale Politik (DE-588)4072885-7 gnd Großmacht (DE-588)4125218-4 gnd Politik (DE-588)4046514-7 gnd Geopolitik (DE-588)4156741-9 gnd |
| topic_facet | History (general) and history of Europe History (General) Moldova. Moldovian S.S.R. Bessarabia Internationale Politik Großmacht Politik Geopolitik Rumänien Bessarabien |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=024675419&sequence=000003&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=024675419&sequence=000004&line_number=0002&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV021255856 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT micugabriel basarabiaromaniasigeopoliticamarilorputeri19141947 |