The poll-topping victory of hard-core nationalist Calin Georgescu in first-round presidential elections in Romania over the weekend can only be described as meteoric. Georgescu came from a standing start of a few percentage point poll support just weeks before the election to take more than 23% of the vote.
He vancquished the candidates of the two most established parties, prime minister Marcel Ciolacu from the former Communist but now Socialist PSD party, and former liberal (PNL) prime minister Nicolae Ciuca, to respective third and fifth placed finishes. In every prior election since the fall of Communism in 1989 the PSD and PNL have seen their candidates in/around second round run-offs. As is Georgescu will go head to head in the second round run off with the pro-EU reform candidate from the USR party, Elena Lasconi.
JOIN US ON TELEGRAM
Follow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official.
Georgescu’s win is being painted as another victory (coming after Orban in Hungary, Fico in Slovakia and Georgian Dream in Georgia) for a pro-Putin politician - as he has openly expressed his admiration for Putin, appeared on panels with Russian nationalist thinker Alexander Dugin, and has criticised Western and NATO policy towards Ukraine and the wider region. There is some of this pro-Russian-anti Western politicking in there for sure, as fatigue with the war in Ukraine is widespread in Romanian society and indeed in many places in Europe. But there are other broad conclusions from his win:
How Putin’s Invasion of Ukraine is Driving Up the Cost of Thanksgiving Dinner for Americans
First, his victory shows the power of new forms of political influence and campaigning and the dangers therein to democracy more generally. Georgescu ran a hugely impactful, last minute, campaign on Tiktok and other social media channels. While this can be celebrated in helping to better connect with a wider section of society (particularly the young) there are concerns over its financing, and checks and balances over the truthfulness and accuracy of such campaigns. Free and fair elections depend on some degree of accuracy in campaigning and that voters are not captured by outside interests. In this case there is much concern, as in the recent presidential election in Moldova, that Russia helped fund Georgescu’s campaign and that Russian bots were active in support of Georgescu on social media.
Second, populism is, well, popular in the current global political setting, where mass migration has elevated voter sensitivities about immigration, and especially where post Covid populations have been hard hit by the cost of living crisis. Add in a smattering of Xenophobia and campaigns, whether it be MAGA, or Georgescu can do very well in elections. They have resonance with disgruntled electorates ignored by establishment parties.
Third, all this comes as incumbent parties are in retreat - whether that is with Biden and the Democrats in the US, the ANC in South Africa, Erdogan in local elections in March in Turkey, Modi in India, or the Tories in the U.K. It is hard to think of an incumbent party in a democracy that has performed well in elections over the past year - Georgia Dream won elections last month in Georgia but doubts have been expressed as to the fairness of that particular poll.
Fourth, and related to all of the above, Liberal politicians in Western Liberal market democracies have perhaps spent too much time focusing on pushing out WOKE or Liberal agendas and perhaps they have either tried pushing that reform agenda out too rapidly, or not read the room. They have failed to get their priorities right in terms of the core and pressing issues which are central for a large weight of the electorate.
In Romania, Hungary, Georgia and even the US, a large section of the population, are socially conservative and are put off by woke agendas, and therefore respond well to politicians banging anti LGBT et al, platforms. This was the case in Romania with Georgescu but also with Georgia Dream in Georgia, et al. Putin is playing on this and presenting himself as a defender of “traditional values” globally - as perhaps would the MAGA movement in the US. But in Romania, especially, a large section of the particularly rural constituency see the EU as providing lots of stuctural funds while at the same time trying to push a socially liberal agenda down their throats which they view as destroying traditional Romanian values - whatever they are. The liberal alternative perhaps need a rethink herein about how they counter the battle playing out over values. I would argue that Putin et al are hiding their autocratic and kleptocratic core modus operandi behind a fascade of “defending traditional values”. Are traditional values fascism, corruption, racism, sexism and in Russia’s case colonialisation? They are certainly for Putin’s world, and unfortunately European history has plenty of form across the board when it comes to plenty of these issues.
But all is not lost in Romania.
First, Georgescu still only secured 23% of the vote in the first round and even, assuming the votes of the other nationalist candidate George Simion also goes to Georgescu, that’s still only 37% of the vote. That’s still some way of the 50% plus one required in the run off vote on December 1.
Set against that the combined votes of pro-EU candidates from the PSD, PNL, USR, UDMR et al come to 58%. All but the PSD have come out for Lasconi so as to counter the threat from the extreme nationalist Georgescu. The PSD leadership likely will also come out for Lasconi if only to ensure their position in a future government and access to the patronage that comes from the huge EU structural fund flows that benefit Romania. The PSD electorate though might not follow the advice of their leadership as they tend to hail from rural, more socially conservative backgrounds which might also play well to the traditional messaging from Georgescu.
Second, the power of EU fund flows cannot be under-estimated in Romania. Under the latest EU budget cycle for 2021-2027 adding in RRF facilities, Romania is slated to secure over €83 billion in EU funding, as the biggest net beneficially from such funds in the EU. As a percentage of GDP that runs at 3-4% of GDP a year, covering half the budget deficit and current account deficit. A Georgescu Presidency would deteriorate relations with the EU and risk these fund flows, as has been the case in neighbouring Hungary with Orban. Would voters really risk the economic prosperity of the country by voting for Georgescu to actually assume the presidency? Some voters might think they have seen little personal benefit from EU structural fund flows (as the political elites have) and think they have nothing to lose.
Third, Romanians are not particularly pro Russian - millions of Romanian soldiers died on the battlefields of Stalingrad et al in WW2, and the country’s penalty for fighting with Nazi Germany in WW2 was to be cast under the Soviet yolk for the period from 1945 - 1989. But former President Ceucescu still tried to sow a somewhat independent line from Moscow with mixed results - it did not work out particularly well for his still impoverished population. But Romanians, as their ethnic brethren in neighbouring Moldova, still mostly fear an expansionist Russia. Notable only last month in Moldova a similar EU vs Russia election played out with victory eventually in a second round contest for Maia Sandu against her Russian inclined contender, Alexandr Stoianoglu by 55-45. When push comes to shove, likely Romanian society will split a similar way if the election is counted on a pro EU versus a Russian leaning agenda.
Fourth, even if Georgescu wins the second round presidency, Romania is a parliamentary - presidential democracy, perhaps more akin to Germany. The powers of the presidency are limited, and with Georgescu lacking a strong political party structure it seems unlikely that he will be able to secure enough of a bridgehead in parliamentary elections due on December 1 to be able to participate in government. Likely elections will bring a hung Parliament but where a broad pro EU coalition will be the only concoction likely to secure a stable majority. And likely pro EU parties will refuse to participate in a coalition with supporters of Georgescu. Georgescu as President will complicate domestic and foreign affairs but might not totally derail Romania’s EU/Western orientation.
Reprinted from the author’s @tashecon blog! See the original here.
The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.
You can also highlight the text and press Ctrl + Enter
