Iliescu, the man of his times. Lavinia Betea, historian: “He was a leader according to an era of” communism with human face “”

The historian Lavinia Betea, known for research on the communist elite, offers a nuanced reading of Ion Iliescu's trajectory. Far from demonizing or mitiza, she speaks in an interview for “Weekend Adevărul” about the role of the first Romanian president chosen democratically, places him in the historical context of the Romanian transition and analyzes his legacy with a dose of realism.

The first post-December president of Romania, Ion Iliescu. Photo: Getty Images

“Weekend Adevărul”: How do you place the figure of Ion Iliescu in the chronology of the recent history of Romania? Is it rather a link between the communist and the democratic regime, or an obstacle to an authentic transition?

Lavinia Betea: It's a link link. The key character of the transition from a dictatorship to a democratic one. A controversial and interesting natural character as were the times whose representation, in his capacity as president of Romania for a decade, assures it imaging.

How do you think Ion Iliescu will be detained in the collective memory of the Romanians? Given the conditions in which it is most often talked about in an ironic or comical note (part of the pop culture of Romania), and only on the occasion of commemorating the events of 1989 or of the miners, with anger.

In close terms I asked the same question to Alexandru Bârlădeanu, shortly before death. The former communist dignitary who had lived in the nucleus of power under three regimes-Gheorghiu-Dej, Ceausescu and Iliescu-, to my question “How do you think Iliescu will end?”, Replied “in forgetfulness”. It was not true. After retiring from the political scene, when he could have forgotten, threats with the processes on the events of December 1989 and the miners continually planned on him. It will be mentioned below, either in these black coughs, or the politician who had the intuition, inspiration, courage and energy to go forward in the power vacuum created by “Ceausescu's escape” on December 22, 1989.

“Ion Iliescu was a convinced communist”

How much was his training in Soviet ideology and the proximity to the PCR core in modeling his decisions after December 1989? What took over from the old system and what has effectively changed?

No one can count phenomena such as beliefs, feelings, wishes, or “normal pace” or variables of change. Ion Iliescu was a convinced communist, we can say a family legacy. Motivated and greedy of power, seeing himself as a straightened successor of Ceausescu. A leader according to an era of “communism with human face”. History had no “patience”, and he has adapted his political exercise to national and international major changes.

How do you evaluate, in historical terms, the responsibility of Iliescu both regarding the events after December 22, 1989 and in the mining?

These are his great capital sins. If the fellows have delayed his judgment in legal terms, he will do history. Being declared an atheist, I do not think he was afraid of God's judgment. As the years passed, you begin to ask you questions about a “other world”. You know, in fact, of all the forms of known life, only people believe that the soul is immortal, that it can give account for those committed on earth. Ion Iliescu will not be bypassed the reprimands of consciousness either.

Ion Iliescu was noted in two historical events: the revolution and the mining. Photo: Shutterstock

How do you explain the huge popularity he enjoys in the 1990s, despite his communist past? What did his categorical victory mean to the first presidential elections of 1990?

In 1989, a quarter of the active population of Romania owned the red party book. Four million citizens. In the Communist Party he entered after certain requirements and rituals. As professionals, as good citizens, of course, with exceptions, these people have counted in social life. And in the other countries in Eastern Europe, most transitional leaders were former communists. Including Lech Walesa, the former leader of Polish “solidarity”. His victory in the first elections was the effect of expectations at that time of the great majority of the population and charisma of Ion Iliescu.

How much do you think the actions matter, but also its inactions (regarding the history of communism) in the recent poll that emphasizes the nostalgia of Romanians to the Ceausist regime?

I do not believe in the results of this survey. A cuttings that circulate among sociologists is that you can prove anything with statistics. After the polls in the first stage of the latest presidential elections, the public opinion polling institutes will have something to work on to regain their credibility.

“Providential man” vs “avid of power”

What were the main achievements and mistakes of Ion Iliescu as president of Romania, both internally (economic, political, social) and externally (international relations, European and Euro-Atlantic integration)?

Through his death, Ion Iliescu entered history. It will take time to analyze the economic and political decisions of the ten years as held by the mandate of President of Romania. Of course, with the prior study of the prerogatives of the post-communist institution of the presidency. Let us not confuse or attribute to President Ion Iliescu the power of President Nicolae Ceausescu wrongly.

What does Ion Iliescu mean for the political class in Romania? Often, political parties refer to it, either in an admiring or negative note.

Many and diverse. It depends on the perspective, on the angle in which you are. Ion Iliescu can be simultaneously the president in the mandate of which the pluripartidism and democracy, the supporter of Romania's entry into the EU and NATO, have been legislated. But also the leader who feared the opposition of the historical parties, by the king, who labeled the contestants from the University Square and called the miners in Bucharest. Overall, it was a political personality, in consonance, sometimes in dissonance with one moment or another in the communist and recent history of Romania.

Ion Iliescu, along with the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin. Photo: AFP

How should we relate, as a society, to the inheritance of a leader who marked almost two decades of the political life of post -communist Romania?

I don't think it “should” is the most suitable verb. Thinking and social memory are imprinted by the dominant political current of the time. We think and interpret now the events of 1989-1990 through the grid of some unexpected democratic practices then by the vast majority of those who lived. However, the biography, the personality, his decisions, Ion Iliescu were and remains a historical personality.

How could the former president be defined in a single word?

One word, no, an expression – yes. For those who challenge him-avid of power. For admirers – the providential man.