More than 100 years after the Romanian authorities sent 41 wagons of all the national treasures of the time to Moscow, the treasury seems further than ever since the repatriation.

The chances of ever getting it back are even slimmer today, when Russia has practically turned its back on the West and international norms, but they were just as slim in years past.

And even if the topic of the treasury still periodically appears in the public discourse of Romania, brought there by politicians or the governor of the BNR, or historians and journalists.

This is the oldest trial in Romania, which is truly unique in the world. No other country has appropriated the wealth of another state, which handed it over to them for safekeeping with the appropriate documents.

One of the best documents created in Romania on this topic is the document of journalist Marian Voicu in the book “Treasures of Romania from Moscow. An Outline of a Century of History’, published by Humanitas in 2016.

The work presents documents and information useful to anyone who wants to understand what happened in this 100-year history, which began in 1916 and 1917, when the then Romanian authorities decided to send the national wealth to Moscow for rescue. it’s from the German army we fought with.

Despite some anxiety, the Russian option was preferred over the one in which the treasures were loaded onto a ship and sent to London, due to the very high costs of securing such a valuable cargo.

The ship had to pass through waters where German submarines made life difficult not only for warships, but also for civilians.

The decision of the Romanian authorities was also made in the context of the desire, even insistence, of the Russians, who were disappointed by the fact that the Romanian army had fallen short of expectations in the First World War (after the disaster at Turtukai).

Thus, Russian allies would like to be guaranteed that Romania does not capitulate quickly, leaving the Russian front completely open.

“The delivery of Romanian gold to Moscow was intended to further strengthen the alliance between our two countries, and thus the arrival of Russian reinforcements would be much easier,” Russian Ambassador Oleksandr Mosolov told IIC Brătianu, according to documents cited in the book. .

The first Treasury train was sent from Iasi to Moscow in December 1916 and consisted of 17 cars, loaded mainly with coins and gold bars belonging to the BNR, as well as Queen Mary’s jewels.

The cargo was valued, at the money value of the time, at more than 314 million gold lei (to which was added 7 million gold lei, which was the estimated value of the queen’s jewels).

A second shipment was sent to Moscow in July 1917, just before the German offensive, and its value was significantly higher than in the case of the first train.

This time, 24 wagons arrived in Russia with gold and assets of the National Bank of Romania, banks and private institutions of Romania, a treasure estimated at the then value of 6.5 million gold lei.

Also, a significant part of the artistic and cultural heritage of the country, thousands of paintings and works of art, monastery spirits, as well as the archival fund of Romania was loaded in the second transport.

It is also worth saying that the second shipment was sent to Russia at a very turbulent time for the country, when the revolution was knocking on the door (the Bolshevik uprising began three months later, on October 25, 1917).

Later, everything changed, which no one expected, and Romania ended the struggle both with the Germans and with the Bolshevik army of Russia.

The latter devastates several cities in Moldova, Galati, Paškany, etc., retreating towards Russia.

In 1918, diplomatic relations between the two countries were broken, and the Soviet Council of Russia, under the signature of Trotsky, announced to the governors in Bucharest that “the golden treasury of Romania can no longer be obtained by the “Romanian oligarchy”. The Board of Commissioners assumes full responsibility for the preservation of this fund, which will need to be returned to the hands of the Romanian people.”

Even if this statement did not cause much emotion in Bucharest at the time, Romanians will never again have access to their own treasury, which they entrusted to Russian allies for safekeeping.

However, in the following years, the international press would publish information and investigations about how Romanian gold was used for all kinds of payments that the Bolshevik authorities made in Sweden, France, Great Britain, the USA, as well as in Central Asia and China.

The new government in Russia needed money to rebuild the country after civil war and famine, and the tsar’s gold reserve, considered one of the largest in the world, was insufficient.

In 1935 and 1956, two small parts of the treasury were indeed returned to Romania, the first time the archives (along with the bones of Dimitrie Cantemir) and the second time the art objects.

Even if Ceaușescu at one point referred to the declaration of the Council of Commissars that “the treasury will be handed over to the Romanian people”, the gold sent to Moscow in 1916 and 1917 never returned to Romania.

And the reasons were different:

“As for the gold, the NBR has documents that are not subject to arrest, the Russian side claims that it does not find the Russian version of the documents in the archives, neither that the gold was stolen by the White Guards, nor that it was spent on communist needs. movements, including the Romanian one, or that the opening of this topic would lead to the conclusion that the Romanians are indebted to the Russians.

For Romanians, the issue of the treasury is simple: “we gave all our wealth to the Russians for safekeeping, with the appropriate documents. We have been asking them back for 100 years.”

But for the Russians, the situation is just as simple: if you keep digging into the past, we may find that you actually owe us the goods left behind in Romania during the First World War, the destruction caused by the Romanian army. in the Soviet Union during the Second World War, for non-payment of military reparations, for the occupation of Bessarabia, etc., and even for the intervention of the Romanian army in Hungary, in 1919, against the Hungarian Bolsheviks,” Maryan writes. Voice.

If at the beginning of the article we said that the issue of the treasury is all the more difficult to discuss in our time, then it should not be understood that if it were not for the war in Ukraine, the chances of the Russians to give us back the wealth would be greater.

The book “Treasures of Romania from Moscow” interviews several Russian experts, some of whom are part of a joint commission created by the two countries to solve the problem, and who show that what is simple theft for us is full-blown theft for the Russians something else.

The interview was made before 2016, that is, long before the war in Ukraine.

“I cannot imagine either now or in the future that the Russian leadership will start giving something to Romania”

Oleksandr Konovalov, president of the Institute of Strategic Assessments in Moscow, answered Liviu Yurea’s question as to whether the treasury issue is historical or political:

“When it comes to such values… we are talking about something important. But the history of our countries is rich.

We are still looking for Kolchak’s gold – the royal gold reserve, which was evacuated to Siberia and is unknown where it went. There is our gold from Japan…

So it is hard to believe that in the near future these problems will be solved and someone will give something to someone, because too many layers have been superimposed in the meantime.

When events of the magnitude of a civil war or a world war occur, all parties involved can lose a lot, and full recovery is nowhere near.

War is very expensive, we have to accept that. I cannot imagine, neither now nor in the future, that the Russian leadership will begin to return something to Romania.”

“Russia, as the successor of the USSR, believes that it has some advantages in relation to Romania”

Another Russian interviewed in the book, Volodymyr Bruter, an expert at the Institute of Political and Humanitarian Studies in Moscow, responded this way when he was told that the return of the treasure would be “a matter of honor” for Romania’s foreign minister:

“If public opinion in Romania thinks so, then you should know that public opinion in Russia thinks differently. As a result of the events of 1944-1945, Russia, as the successor of the USSR, believes that it has some advantages over Romania.

If Romania does not dare to ask for restoration immediately, it is quite possible that certain things will happen. However, this will happen slowly, and the result will be visible only at the end of this process.

If Romania is ready to accept that the process will be long and will cover the whole range of relations, then the process may not be negative.”

What does full spectrum mean?

“This means that Russia must be sure that Romania will be its partner. At least in those areas where we are partners. Russia behaves very differently with friends and enemies, and this should be understood in Romania as well.”

“Traces are lost”

Another person interviewed in the book is Viktor Volodymyrovych Ishchenko, secretary of the Joint Commission, deputy director of the Institute of World History of the Academy of Sciences of the Russian Federation:

“The most important thing was to trace the Romanian gold here in Russia. Our researchers worked in the archives and, despite their high qualifications, could not find anything.

I will name only one name of Tetiana Pokivailova, who deals with the latest history of Romania. Both she and Lidia Semenova put a lot of effort into finding documents and certain documents were found.

But the most important question – “Where is the gold?” – no answer was found. Traces were lost.

From what we managed to recover from the documents, this treasury was first kept in Moscow, and then during the years of the civil war it was transported to Samara and other places in Siberia.

Part of the gold ended up in the hands of the Whites, so to speak, the enemies of the Bolsheviks, that is, the head of the government, Admiral Kolchak, retreated to Siberia. Then, when the Bolsheviks came, they took everything valuable through China, through Manchuria, and the traces were lost.”

What can you say about the general description of the Treasury?

“I don’t know anyone who has ever had that description.”

“Being a realist, I understand that this will not happen”

Serhiy Mykhailovych Golubytskyi, writer:

“The USSR did not have this political will (to solve the treasury problem) because it saw the world divided into “ours” and “theirs”. For the USSR, Romania was our world and therefore decided what was good and what was bad for Romania. This manager is good, the other is not. (…)

I don’t think there will be a discussion about direct restitution, although there must be if we want to return to an ethical state, in terms of values. Being a realist, I understand that this will not happen.

“Probably, Russia is trying not to create a precedent so that claims do not appear from other countries as well”

Oleksandr Stekalin, senior researcher at the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, member of the Joint Romanian-Russian Historical Commission of the Romanian and Russian Academies:

“In Russia, there are different opinions on this matter. There are opinions that this is not one of the main issues, there are enough other issues that affect our relations: the issue of Bessarabia, the issue of the metropolises of Bessarabia, Transnistria and the weapons that are stationed there.

Of all, the treasury issue is not considered the most important. (…) Russia is probably trying not to create a precedent so that claims do not arise from other countries as well.”