Valter Roman - Controversies

Controversies

Several aspects of Roman's past remain under dispute.

In 2000, investigations by Russian historian Tofik Islamov concluded that, after Soviet authorities charged Maxim Litvinov to investigate the issue of Northern Transylvania, disputed between Romania and Hungary, Roman approached the commission in late 1944 with plans to have Transylvania declare itself independent (under a common guarantee from the Soviets and Western Allies). Petre Roman has repeatedly contested the conclusion, advancing documents which, he argued, proved that his father was in favor of Transylvania's status inside Romania.

In his own reply to Petre Roman's arguments, Islamov repeated his statements, and contended that views such as those attributed to Valter Roman were commonplace among internationalists of the time. He also cited Valter Roman's own 1944 statement — according to the document, Roman viewed both Hungary and Romania as guilty of waging war on the Soviet Union, arguing that the region (Transylvania) was "an ethnographic conglomerate" with a tradition of regional sovereignty, economic independence, and status as "the most progressive part of the country".

In 2006, Petre Roman was involved in a polemic with former Securitate chief and defector Ion Mihai Pacepa over the extent to which Valter Roman took part in political repression in the wake of the Hungarian Revolution.