The great dangers to Romania, identified by an Oxford expert: “I doubt we can avoid an even smoother scenario”

A researcher at Oxford University, the political scientist Mihail Chiru explains, in an interview for “Adevărul”, from what directions the great threats are profiled to Romania. Austerity policies, continuous degradation of democracy and growth of extremist parties are the main dangers.

Austerity policies will push the Romanians to vote on radical parties. Photo: video capture

The truth: the bad news abounds in the last period, but perhaps the worst was the relegation of Romania from “deficient democracy” to “hybrid regime” in the Democracy Index, well under Hungary, but also under Serbia and Albania. Can we talk about an exaggeration or are we really so low?

Mihail Chiru: The initiative of Varieties of Democracy, which is based on a much more robust methodology and is the source of data most often used by political scientists, it considers Romania an electoral democracy and not an hybrid regime. The Romanian democracy has serious problems, but we are not in an electoral autocracy regime.

Is there a major risk that this process by which the Romanian democracy, as much as it is, is even more degraded, and with this the situation in Romania?

The failure of the state to ensure compliance with the legislation of electoral financing and election campaigns, and to block external interference, which has led to the cancellation of the elections and the fulminant ascension of some anti-democratic actors in the last two years show how fragile the situation is. I doubt that we can avoid an even smoother scenario at the next round of elections in the absence of a new social pact and real reforms of both institutions and inside parties.

Enormous responsibility for the CCR

There are voices claiming that precedents were created by the fact that the RCC has rejected the candidacy of controversial people such as Diana Şoşoacă and Călin Georgescu. From now on, it is said, the Pandora's box has been opened, and anyone who comes to power could be tempted to “ban” their uncomfortable opponents. Should the candidacy of the two have been blocked or have the decision-makers rush?

Both mentioned candidates have shown through their actions and speeches that they would not hesitate to restrict and erode democracy if they reached a position as the president. The application of any measure in the arsenal of militant democracy comes with considerable risks, one of them, being indeed, their abusive use against some democratic opposition actors. This is why it is extremely important not only the creation of predictable procedures in such cases, but especially the insurance by appointments of judges with an irreproachable reputation of the existence of a competent and credible constitutional court. In order for measures of militant democracy to be widely accepted, the Constitutional Court must be outside the suspicion of a political partisan and be able to explain such measures convincingly and from time.

Mihail Chiru. Photo: Facebook

There have been voices talking about the fact that parties such as gold, accused of collaboration with Russia and extremism, should be banned in Romania, as in Germany is discussed about AFD. Do you think such measures would be required or would they be disproportionate?

The prohibition of parties should be an exceptional measure, based on clear evidence related to the actions or intentions of undermining the democratic order of these parties. The German debate comes after years of pursuit of AFD politicians and organizations of this party by the institutions of the status emphasized to appear. There is always the risk that the prohibition of a party will increase the popularity of the successor organization, as in the case of the Party of Justice and Development (AKP) in Turkey.

In Romania I had the example of the Romanian Communist Party, which was forbidden during the interwar period, but the example of the communist period, when all the other parties were forbidden. Returning to parties such as gold, not the mere fact that such discussions give them the opportunity to victimize themselves?

The repression against the communists in interwar Romania was real, not imaginary, as was the terror exercised by them against political opponents, including legionaries, after 1947. As a parenthesis related to victims and victimization, which is happening in Romania around the cult of “prisons' saints” must be understood as an entrepreneurship of the memory. No wonder the use of such a heroic narrative for the rehabilitation of legionaries and promoting their values ​​among young people, because it is a form of memory entrepreneurship that has already been successfully tested in other states as a fascist past. The Romanian authorities should apply the law when it comes to legionary propaganda that is increasingly present in the public space, either by the voice of politicians, or through the actions of some associations involved in the entrepreneurship mentioned above. The civic education and the accusation of the values ​​of the liberal democracy are clearly necessary not only for the new generations, but also for the staff of the state force institutions, which is ubiquitous after early retirement in extremist parties and in the campaign staff and the entourage of Calin Georgescu. In a paradoxical way, the fact that our political and military elites are not aware of the size of Romanian responsibility for interwar pogroms and for participation in Holocaust can explain to a certain extent the position of the state, beyond geopolitical and military interests, regarding the genocide in Gaza.

Real solutions

And how should it be done in the case of parties considered extremist?

This is why democratic parties should first of all address the substantive dissatisfaction of citizens who feed the success of extremist parties. Steps in the direction of solving these problems, should be coupled, some political scientists say, with the refusal to collaborate with these parties in the Parliament or in other forms. The establishment of such a sanitary cord around the extremists would show that they are non -recognizable and that the vote for them is an wasted vote.

We are witnessing in recent years and not only in Romania to increase the parties labeled in general as extremist. What would be the main causes?

The ascension of the right -wing radical parties is due to a cumulation of causes related to economic policies, cultural transformations, but also to the decredibility of traditional parties and to normalize the discourse of extremists. We already know from countless serious studies that austerity policies, the restriction of public services and the social state at the same time as increasing the inequalities and the decline of social mobility have fully contributed to this ascent. When the left parties were the ones who implemented such policies, the success of the right -wing radical parties came much faster because they could mobilize a wide mass of voters with conservative social values ​​and left economic preferences, who felt betrayed by the neoliberal policies of the traditional left.

But this phenomenon is also a contraction to the more progressive tendencies in European societies that have tried to discuss and rethink the gender or ethnic hierarchies and propose policies to meet the needs of these minorities. In Romania and in other Eastern European countries, a very important basis for extremist parties are the ones who believe that the Christian Church and faith are generally subject to a systematic attack and a political force is needed to defend the Church against attitudes and anticlerical measures.

And Mainstrem parties carry some of the blame

Do not some of the guilt have the other parties, those that claim democratic, so -called mainstream parties?

Last but not least, the response of traditional parties from countless European countries was to copy the topics of the extreme right, hoping that they will recover their former voters who migrated to these parties or stop their ascension. But we know, again from rigorous empirical studies, that this tactic has become more and more counterproductive, increasing the votes of radical and extremist parties, because they have normalized this discourse and validated the politicians who initially supported it.

How can the advance of radical parties be stopped throughout Europe and in particular in Romania?

Certainly not by measures to adjust the economic deficits that disproportionately affects the most vulnerable and enhancing the feeling of social marginalization and abandonment of entire communities, such as closing of schools and abolishing libraries in the rural area. Many of the measures adopted by the Government of Romania lately will only increase the revolt towards the “system”, and to strengthen the conviction that these parties either do not want or are not able to solve the problems of society in a fair way.

In Romania, as everywhere in Europe, it is necessary for the air of democratic politicians who can demonstrate authentic intellectual and moral leadership, to be recognized as such by society. Leaders who have solid doctrinal beliefs, for which they are ready to work for years and who also have the intellectual scope needed to articulate a national social transformation project that will facilitate alliances between classes and give legitimacy. But until the identification of such leaders, the parties must regain their credibility through measures to prove that the purpose of governing is not to capture the state to follow their own narrow interests or the preferences of the economic elites. And they have to wonder why they are no longer recognized by a large part of citizens as their legitimate representatives.

Instead of copying the speech of the extreme right, these parties need to inspire and bring hope to people by promoting effective solutions for the great dilemmas of this century: how will we adapt and how will we limit the climatic crisis? How will we adapt the economy of the revolution of artificial intelligence? How will peace be assured in Europe and in the world?

In democratic systems, politics remains a game of ability to mobilize, so that organizational reforms adapted to the digital era we live in, allowing traditional parties to attract and maintain supporters and members, develop parallel associations and alliances with civil society and cultivate intellectuals attached to their cause. Things most of the successful radical parties already do.