The Plenary of the European Parliament adopted, on Thursday, a resolution regarding the restitution of the Romanian national treasure illegally appropriated by Russia, which was initiated by MEP Eugen Tomac. The document shows a recognition of the situation coming from the EP, but which will not have too great effects, according to the analysts consulted by “Adevărul”.
The resolution on the return of the treasure appropriated by the Russians will not have major effects Photo: Shutterstock
“Parliament regrets that Russia has not fully returned its national treasure to Romania, which is a violation of international norms and customs“, stated the European Legislature.
The MEPs emphasize the fact that, despite several attempts at diplomatic negotiations after the First World War, Romania's national treasure, sent to Russia between 1916 and 1917 to be kept safe, was never fully returned, an unprecedented international case.
The deputies asked the European Commission and the European External Action Service to include the restitution of the Romanian national heritage on the bilateral diplomatic agenda that regulates EU-Russia relations, as soon as the regional context allows the resumption of the political dialogue between the parties.
What the specialists say
“Truth” spoke to several specialists regarding the effects of the resolution. Adrian Cioroianu, former Minister of Foreign Affairs, claimed that the concrete effects of this approach “they will not be measured in the near future“, emphasizing that there is no point in selling illusions “that after this resolution something spectacular will happen in Moscow“.
“Moscow is currently subject to several Western sanctions. I suspect that they will pass this on to the chapter of Western sanctions. But for us it is important, because it is a kind of European recognition of a legitimate Romanian demand. Until now the treasury was a bilateral issue between us and Russia, now the Romanian point of view through the European Parliament is also taken up by the European partners, as part of this difficult relationship between today's Russia and Western Europe“, stated Cioroianu.
For his part, the historian Dan Falcan, museographer at the Museum of History and Art of the Municipality of Bucharest, appreciated that it is an approach “good, wholesome, but without any practical effect”, highlighting an aspect that could have solved this problem.
“The European Parliament voted on the proposal, but the treasury is with the Russians, not in Brussels, and, as far as I understand, the European Parliament refused to give the funds, so to speak, almost under sanctions, the funds taken from the Russian oligarchs, part of them to be given to Romania in the account of the treasury in Moscow. So that thing would have been the most appropriate, but otherwise we will return to the same game, the Russians say that they gave it, that in fact the reparations that we paid anyway after the Second World War were not enough and that's why they keep the treasure, and we start the same game where the Russians say there is no treasure, we that we have documents that we gave it away. In the end, there is still a matter to be resolved between us and Moscow“, stated Falcan.
Unfortunately, the effects of this approach will not be major, confirms the historian, because: “the treasury is all in the hands of the Russians. So as long as they don't want to give it or they're not forced to give it, what can we do, we're not going to come in on them, let's go all the way to Moscow to get our treasure“, Falcon added.
