Moldova/ 1. Historical perspective: cultural policies and instruments  

Moldova as a country, territory or political entity has undergone great changes in the past few centuries and has a long history of foreign domination; indeed, questions of territory and cultural identity have been at the core of its development as an independent Republic.

At the dawn of the 19th century, Moldova was a province of Romania. In 1812, it was annexed by Tsarist Russia until 1917, when Moldova first declared itself a Democratic Republic. This political status was short lived as the parliament (Sfatul Ţării, - the National Council) voted for unification with Romania just 4 months later - resulting in a 22-year period when the Moldovan language and culture became increasingly more Romanian and Western-oriented. In 1940, Soviet forces reoccupied the Region. Moldova remained part of the USSR until the collapse of Communism in the early 1990s.

As in other USSR Republics or Eastern European countries, cultural policy was a propaganda tool of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Moldova. The Ministry of Culture and several arts associations were, therefore, obliged to conform to the Party's ideology and to ensure that cultural policy and activities were carried out according to the Central Committee's instructions.

Writers, artists and the cultural elite were also engaged as propaganda agents. The Committee granted them certain benefits and privileges in return for their efforts to consolidate the ideology of the system in a "credible and accessible" manner (Lenin's slogan "art belongs to the people"). The totalitarian state controlled the process of creativity by valuing and rewarding works of "socialist realism" and rejecting a diversity of artistic approaches.

Arts associations were originally set up to monitor and promote artistic uniformity. As they became increasingly disparate and the composition of their membership was questioned, authorities set up three state Committees - for Publishing, Press and Radio-Television - to strictly monitor and censor the ideological content of literary and artistic works. They were also given the task of suppressing any expressions of affiliation to the Romanian language or culture. During the 47 years of Soviet occupation, Moldova was denied the right to their centuries-old common language, history and culture based on ancient, classical and contemporary Romanian traditions. The result was the disappearance of a distinct national culture during the period of Soviet Moldova. This fuelled a resistance and opposition to the ruling regime.

On 27 August 1991 the Republic of Moldova was declared an independent country. This historical event was precipitated by civil war. Public demands were made for official recognition of the Moldovan-Romanian linguistic identity, a return to the Latin alphabet, and the re-establishment of Romanian as the official language.

During the years 1991-2006, the main objectives of Moldovan cultural policies were:

• to ensure conditions to promote creative works by preserving existing national institutions and revising procedures to remunerate artists for their work;
• to protect the cultural heritage by improving the copyright system, supporting the publishing sector and developing archives;
• to promote human potential through a reform of staff policy in the public cultural administration;
• to support diverse cultural processes by identifying priorities and attracting human and material resources to realise these priorities;
• to re-focus cultural management towards new models and mechanisms; and
• to promote culture through electronic media and to create an integrated information space in the cultural field.

The most visible signs of change during this transition period were the freedom of speech, elimination of ideological censorship and development of legislation which has been modified to correspond with the rest of Europe. There are a large number of "good intentioned laws" in the Republic of Moldova, which have not yet been implemented or made viable on a practical level. Shallow reforms (too often understood as a simple reduction of funding) and the lack of a comprehensive cultural policy have also suspended the full implementation of cultural policy objectives.