Transatlantic Politics

From this week's Economist:

FOR those hoping for political calm in Romania and Bulgaria, the European Union's newest members, last weekend was a reasonably good one. The Romanian president, Traian Basescu, won 74% in a referendum on his impeachment on May 19th, wrongfooting the minority Liberal-led government that suspended him. The prime minister, Calin Popescu Tariceanu, now concedes that the vote was a “waste of energy and money”. What happens next depends largely on the Socialists, heirs of Romania's Communist Party. With 150 deputies, they are the largest party in parliament. The ruling coalition of Liberals and the Hungarian minority musters only 109. The best outcome would be an early election, perhaps to coincide with a European one this autumn. This is backed by Mr Basescu's Democrats, flushed with their referendum victory. One deal has the Socialists backing an early poll and dumping their more egregiously corrupt members in return for a big role in a post-election government. Failing that, the Socialists might team up with the battered Liberals, in return for Mr Tariceanu's job. In theory, the Liberals could also continue with their minority government until the scheduled election in autumn 2008. But their plunging popularity suggests this would be unwise. On current form, they could even miss the 5% threshold for parliamentary seats.

And on the President's slur against a journalist:

Amid his enemies' confusion, Mr Basescu should be preparing for a glorious return to the Cotroceni Palace. But his triumph was marred by scandal. On the day of the referendum, Mr Basescu was hassled in a supermarket by Andreea Pana, a journalist who tried to film an interview on her mobile phone. Mr Basescu lost his temper, insulted her and grabbed the phone, telling her she could have it back on Monday. Unaware that it was still recording, he complained to his wife in the car about the “aggressive, stinking gypsy”. Ms Pana, as it happens, is not Roma (gypsy) by ethnicity. But the incident reveals Mr Basescu's common touch (sometimes a strength) and his short-tempered manner (definitely a weakness). Many liberal-minded Romanians, including those who support his policies, condemned him; he has apologised. The scandal will dent his image among foreign admirers.

Share This

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

"YES" (DA) was the Romanian Orange elections slogan in 2004. Now President Basescu’s supporters have to say "NO" (Nu).

For the first time, Romanians voted today in a referendum whether to impeach the president on  alleged anti-constitutional gestures or not. 75% of the voters backed Basescu. Although the turnout was not as great as expected - 48% - the results show a clear option: NO to the impeachment procedure, seen as a reaction of a corrupt and antireformist parliamentary majority to the president's bold moves against corruption and push for openness and reforms.

The new government under the same Premier who used to be Basescu's ally in the DA-Alliance is now his fiercest fiend. Calin Popescu Tariceanu chose to back down on the reforms pushed forward before Romania's accession to the European Union, in January this year. He and the members of  the new minority government, backed by the socialist (post-communist) opposition are championing in doublespeak, a skill trained by Romanian politicians in over 45 years of communism.

 “We will continue and accelerate the fight against corruption,” promised the new justice minister, Tudor Chiuariu, when he took office one month ago. But his first move was to request the dismissal of a top anticorruption prosecutor who was investigating senior members and supporters of the ruling coalition. The reasoning was that these probes were proving fruitless. “A prosecutor should by evaluated by the number of cases he has won. Until now, there have been no verdicts, which mean the cases are not solid enough,” the minister argued. He omitted to mention the fact that prosecutors didn't get the chance yet to present the probes in a trial of high level corruption, due to the delays and procedural loopholes that allow the defendant to postpone the actual trial.

Still, a good sign was the reaction of  several prosecutors and magistrates who openly protested against Chiuariu's measure. A German expert named this "the Macovei effect" - named after Chiuariu's predecessor, Monica Macovei, broadly appreciated by the EU and US for shaking up the judiciary and granting independence to the magistrates. Due to the "Macovei effect", Romania has now a critical magistracy, aware and openly opposing to any brutal interventions like the Chiuariu incident. The same day Chiuariu asked the interim president - an old-guard communist, Nicolae Vacaroiu - to approve the dismissal of the anti-corruption prosecutor, the Parliament passed a law establishing a new control body to verify the assets and conflicts of interests of politicians and civil servants.

That was a key condition for EU membership; failure to get it going would have triggered a "safeguard clause" from Brussels. But the newborn “Integrity Agency” has a major weakness: it is not an independent body, but subordinated to the very same parliament it is supposed to investigate.

Nonetheless Tariceanu  hailed the new body as a great success, proving that Chiuariu's negotiating skills as opposed to his predecessor's uncompromising style. Still, media and foreign observers concentrated their attention on Chiuariu's move regarding the anti-corruption prosecutor. Especially since he was investigating some cases regarding current government members or allies from the Socialist Party.

A strong signal came on Wednesday, when 9 foreign diplomats participated to the hearings of the High Council of Magistracy, where the fate of the anticorruption prosecutor was to be decided. "The European Commission and the EU Member States follow closely the reform of the justice system and the fight against corruption in Romania. That it is why they attended today's meeting of the High Council of Magistracy, which was a public one", stated the EU Representation in Bucharest. Opposition spokesman Cristian Diaconescu said "It is an unprecedented embarrasment. Romania has become a country with limited sovereignty, under a stronger monitoring than Kosovo."

The Council ruled to postpone the decision and requested an evaluation over the activity of the prosecutor. Chiuariu backed down and said he will respect the Council's decision, one way or the other.

Romanians can only hope that with Basescu's return to the presidential palace, the push for a reform of the political class will grow stronger. The first signs seem to appear: the Socialist opposition leader Mircea Geoana spoke about the need for MPs being elected directly and for a much stronger parliamentary discipline and transparency. Even the Premier admitted that "the public agenda is totally different than the politicians seem to be aware of" and that "this month with a suspended president was a waste of time and money". If this is "the beginning of a beautiful friendship" remains to be seen. Campaigning will continue in the next two years, as Romania will elect its 35 members of the European Parliament in autumn this year, followed by local and regional elections next spring and by parliamentary elections in the fall of 2008. The next presidential elections are due in autumn 2009. Foreign observers expected early parliamentary elections after today's referendum. "It will be a great political loss for the ones who voted to impeach the president. In Germany, we would expect early elections, since the people vetoed the Parliament's decision", said Holger Dix, the representative in Bucharest of the German conservative foundation "Konrad Adenauer." But Romania is not Germany…

[I contributed to the today's cover story in The Economist]

Share This

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

A comment I published in EUObserver: 

EUOBSERVER / COMMENT - Of all the central and eastern European countries to have joined the EU, Romania appears to still have the strongest ties with its communist past.
If transition went smoothly in countries like Slovenia, now a proud eurozone member and next year's holder of the EU presidency, Romania is again dominated by old-guard politicians from the former communist party, doing their best to scrap or water down the reforms started in the past two years.
With a suspended president and all reformist ministers kicked out of office this month, the situation surpasses even the worst-case scenarios predicted just after Bucharest joined the EU on 1 January.

The new political configuration around liberal prime minister Calin Tariceanu is using and abusing every possible democratic tool for its undemocratic goals: delaying the European elections for fear of facing the voters, an impeachment procedure against president Traian Basescu based on no constitutional grounds and a cabinet reshuffle to get rid of performing ministers thought to be "too close to the President".

The majority of MPs voted last week to suspend president Basescu from his duties, despite the Constitutional Court's ruling that he had not overstepped his constitutional rights. But since the court's verdict was just an "advisory" one, the parliament could go ahead with the impeachment procedure.

The socialist old-guard politician Nicolae Vacaroiu, the speaker of the senate, has taken over the duties of interim president for one month.

A referendum on the impeachment is due on 20 May and is likely to produce a reconfirmation of Mr Basescu - who is still the most popular Romanian politician - as president.

But the socialist plan does not stop here, as they are also plotting a modification of the constitution in order to weaken the presidency's attributions, adding an amendment so that a suspended president can never be allowed to run again.

Reversible reforms
For the newly installed "Black Coalition" – the one Romanian voters never approved – the stakes are great. The four "Black Coalition" parties – Liberals, Socialists, the ethnic Hungarian UDMR party and the small Conservative Party of former communist secret police agent and media owner Dan Voiculescu - are trying to defend the very privileges and impunity they have been used to so far.

The European Commission seems to have predicted something like this when it constantly called for "continued reforms that are irreversible."

Four months after Romanian accession, it is clear that not even the post-accession monitoring mechanisms imposed by Brussels and the threat of safeguard clauses are real means of pressure for the Romanian politicians.

A proof: the new justice minister Tudor Chiuariu who tries to distance himself as much as possible from his reformist and EU-acclaimed predecessor Monica Macovei. When talking about his priorities, Mr Chiuariu bluntly said that "I care about the needs of the citizens, not about pleasing Brussels and getting nice phrases in the monitoring reports."

Of course, the young and very politically-motivated minister failed to explain in what way the two are in contradiction.

Without the bold reforms and anticorruption measures implemented by Ms Macovei, who was sacked this month, Romania probably wouldn't have made it into the EU on 1st January. But the new justice minister underlined he doesn't want to become a "Robin Hood" after what he called a "Joan d'Arc."

Romania's return to kleptocracy
The EU's cautious and often too diplomatic approach could prove wrong in this case and perpetuate a modus operandi that will ultimately backlash at Brussels itself.

Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso last week expressed his wish that the crisis be solved "by the Romanian institutions in full respect of the democratic and constitutional principles as soon as possible".

Not wanting to take sides, Mr Barroso reminded both the premier and the president of Romania's commitment to fight corruption and to reform the judiciary.

But promises from the acting interim president, the "Black Coalition" and the new justice minister resemble too much what the socialists were so proficient in doing when negotiating Romanian membership with the EU commission in 2000-2004: shallow promises, institutions that worked perfectly on paper and no real reform.

The rule of law and the end of the impunity era that seemed to take a hold in Romania the past three years proved to be a short lived effort championed by a handful of reformists, who now have been cast away.

Romania's return to kleptocracy will be devastating for its citizens and business environment.

But ultimately, Romania's backlash will prove that EU's "soft powers" are sometimes too soft. This is particularly so when facing old guard communists with decades of experience in cooking the books, corruption and promises that are never fulfilled.

See also: Ukraine and Romania (2): rotten oranges

              Ukraine and Romania: countering the orange revolution
 

Share This

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The oranges of November 2004 are becoming rotten. The "orange revolution" in Ukraine and the "orange elections" in Romania are ending in very similar ways: an anti-reformist majority in the Parliament is backing the Premier and trying to impeach the President, blocking early elections and any further efforts to shake up the judicial system, to fight corruption and to further democratize the country.  The Constitutional Court in both countries is very busy these weeks, trying to determine if the two Presidents are overstepping their constitutional rights. In Romania, the Parliament is going ahead with an impeachment procedure despite the Court's advisory ruling that there are no legal grounds for it. (UPDATE: The President has been suspended today from his duties. There are two options: either he steps down and in 3 months Romania will have early elections, or there will be a referendum on his dismissal. The opposition is already trying to modify the law in order to forbid him to run again. Over 5000 people gathered in the University Square in Bucharest stating their support and asking Basescu not to step down.)

In Ukraine, the President's decision to dissolve the Parliament and call for early elections is being contested in Court, although it is a presidential right.

Behind the "democratic" facade, there are very similar hidden agendas. In both countries, the "orange" shakeup started in 2004 has disturbed the oligarchs' privileges and impunity and has engaged too firmly both countries in a pro-NATO and pro-Washington foreign policy. Much to Russia's disdain. Kremlin's leverage on Ukraine is much more powerful - just a twist on the gas-faucet and the "orange" government crumbled. Yushchenko had to hire his former rival and pro-Kremlin politician Yanukovich as a Prime-Minister. Under the promise that Ukraine will keep its pro-EU, pro-NATO path.

Political promises, later forgotten. Same thing happened in Romania. Once EU accession was a closed deal, the reformists were kicked out of office in a "cabinet reshuffle". The current ultra-minority government has the broad backing of the Socialist opposition, whose interests evolve around protecting their "stars" on trial for corruption. The new Romanian Justice Minister understood the message. According to him, the main priority is to have a "dialog with the Parliament" and to do the reform "for and with the magistrates". "I'm not interested in obtaining nice lines in the EU Commission's reports, I care about the citizen's interests", the Justice Minister said, alluding to his predecessor, Monica Macovei, who was broadly acclaimed in the EU for her success in shaking up the judiciary.

What's EU's position on the recent slides in both countries? Neutrality, of course. Upsetting the Kremlin is the worse "faux pas" in its foreign policy. Not surprisingly, Mr. Yushchenko's didn't receive the desired support during his visit to Brussels today:

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso says Brussels will not take sides in Ukraine's political crisis and urges both parties to seek compromise.Barroso was speaking after meeting with Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko in Brussels. Barroso says he urged the Ukrainian president to find a compromise in his power struggle with Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, and "to pursue efforts to find with all key parties a viable solution to the situation in full respect [for] the principles of democracy and the rule of law."

 Meanwhile, Ukraine's pro-Russian Prime-Minister was lobbying his cause in Strasbourg, in front of Europe's human rights watchdog, the Council of Europe. Ironically, the Council who is supposed to pressure governments to respect human rights in dealing with its own citizens was last year headed by…Russia.

  Speaking the same day at the Strasbourg headquarters of the Council of Europe, prime minister Yanukovych said the call for May elections could "have negative consequences for president Yushchenko, including impeachment."

A similar struggle on EU grounds took place after the Romanian Prime-Minister met with EU Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini. President Basescu promptly reacted, stating that the PM was trying to "discredit" him in front of the Brussels officials:

“The Prime Minister’s attempt to discredit the Romanian president while meeting the European Commissioner for Justice, Franco Frattini, in Zagreb, is a prove of political irresponsibility”, said Basescu, adding that Tariceanu had a major role to play in generating the current political tensions. 

UPDATE: The leaders of the conservative European Popular Party Joseph Daul and Wilfried Martens expressed their concern today regarding the situation in Romania and their support for president Basescu:

 ´´It is regrettable that a country like Romania, which just recently joined the European Union, has gone to this situation of institutional crisis. President Basescu has made an important contribution to Romania’s path in the last two years, thus facilitating its accession to the European Union. The slogan during preparation for accession was: ”Romania is the solution, not the problem of the EU”. At the moment, the procedure of  impeachment of a President in an EU country, against the decision of the Constitutional Court, creates rather then solves problems.
We hope that the political situation in Romania will not further degenerate. We expect that Romania should be an added value to the EU, namely with its active involvement in the European major projects, and in the Black Sea region. Further developments of the political crisis in Romania could endanger the attainment of these goals.´´

(see also Ukraine and Romania: Countering the orange revolution)

Share This

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Again, it is Kiev that gets all the headlines. But the similarities to Bucharest are there. Just like in November-December 2004, when both countries held elections and the orange opposition candidate won the presidency. It was weeks of protests in the cold winter streets of Ukraine for Viktor Yushchenko who managed to reverse the framed first result and topple Viktor Yanukovich, Kremlin's protegee. It was a massive turnout, media reports on fraud and the look at the neighboring Ukraine that got Traian Basescu into power, although the parliamentary elections were won by the post-communist Socialist Party (former president Iliescu being a Kremlin-fan trained in Moscow when he was young). Like in Ukraine, Basescu's allience was orange and formed of 2 parties - the Democrats (Basescu's party) and the Liberals (Premier Calin Popescu Tariceanu's party). Like in Ukraine, where the Premier Julia Timoshenko didn't play the same game with the President, the Romanian Premier demonized the President and preferred deals with the post-communist and corrupt Opposition, sabotaging and ultimately kicking out the Democrats from the governing coalition. Unlike Ukraine, the Romanian president has neither the right to dissolve Parliament and call for early elections nor to fire the Premier. Even if Tariceanu is not a Kremlin protegee like the current Ukrainian Premier Yanukovich who organized the counterrevolution in Kiev, ignoring Yushchenko's constitutional right, the Romanian Premier and his new cabinet formed just of Liberals and members of the tiny Hungarian Party plays now exclusively by the book of the Socialist opposition who voted unanimously in favor of this new "ultra-minority" government. The numbers prove it: representing just 20% of the current Parliament, the current cabinet has yet obtained almost 80% of the votes. Corruption, Romania's nr.1 problem before accession to the EU and the reason for the unprecedented "post-accession monitoring" from the EU Commission, is no longer a priority for the current government. After sacking the only true reformist and dedicated minister in the cabinet, Monica Macovei, the Premier stated that Romania's main objectives are promoting a better image abroad and withdrawing the troops from Iraq. The new Justice Minister, a young lawyer with the appropriate "political friends" has already made clear that "my concern lies in the needs of the citizen, not in getting a good report from the EU". What he seems to ignore is the fact that a bad report from the EU will affect precisely the citizen, as the Romanian verdicts would no longer be recognized in the EU, with a huge negative impact on the economy and on property rights.

Like in Ukraine, everything evolves around energy. The Premier, the new Defense Minister and the new Transport Minister are all close friends of the main financing patron of the Liberals, the CEO of a Romanian oil company called Rompetrol. He's charged for money laundry, insider trading, fraud, tax evasion and manipulating the stock exchange. The Premier tried several times to intervene in favor of his friend - by calling the Attorney General, by arranging a meeting with Patriciu and Justice Minister Macovei, even by writing a memo to the President asking him to talk to the prosecutors about his case. The former Energy Minister is being investigated for giving insider information on strategic privatizations. The new Communication minister appointed by the Premier on Monday is also under investigation in this case. The President himself has been accused, on the other hand, of trying to influence the energy distributors in dropping the price for certain industry sectors. Just like in Ukraine, where former premier Julia Timoshenko accused the President of cutting a bad deal with Gazprom after the natural gas crisis in the winter of 2005.

The current situation in Ukraine looks like a gordian node. The Economist sums it up perfectly. "Early elections? Maybe." The following analysis fits perfectly to Romania as well:

The coalition's leaders are now openly bent on amassing a majority big enough to override the presidential veto and strip Mr Yushchenko of his residual powers. It sounds like the sort of constitutional fine-tuning to be expected in a young democracy. In Ukraine, alas, disputes that may seem like issues of principle are often disguised struggles for wealth. Politicians' attitudes to any given office depend on their prospects of occupying it. Beyond the Rada, the country is worryingly divided between Yanukovich supporters in the east and south, and those mostly in Kiev and the west who want a more enlightened government.

 It seems like the EU membership has changed only the surface and the language of the Romanian politicians. Deep down, the same post-Soviet deals are still being made. And with the EU focusing on climate change and the famous Constitution, what is happening in Romania doesn't seem to bother too many. Ukraine even less.

Share This

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!