Why K. Iohannis has been elected president of romania. Some considerations
There are basically, at least three aspects in considering this reality: personal, external and internal. The first one refers to what Klaus Iohannis stands for while the second puts in spotlight the Diaspora, the ubiquitous pervasive pressure of international opinion and the impact of instantaneous digital communication via Facebook. The third one focuses on the rallies for the Diaspora within the country, the past of the Social-Democratic party, V.Ponta’s ethos and public image, the poor, BOR’s mixture and manipulation and the nation’s attitude and behaviour.
The president-elect Klaus Iohannis’personality has impacted the country in the past weeks. His image is one associated with being “different”, trustworthy, discrete, no “chattering box, “doer” and contrary/other than what Ponta and his party stand for. Having German ethnicity makes him altogether different. “The German”, as he was nicknamed by the media, has proven resilient and civic throughout the election period, mostly during the two confrontations with “the red candidate”. His personality as popular, with good communication competences, interacting differently with people were part of his public image, too.
As mayor of the 2007 cultural European capital, Iohannis has had appropriate administrative experience at the local level. Though lacking political experience, in comparison with Ponta who has had much since his “budding years” in the former Romanian Social Democratic Party, being mentored by former hardcore communists Iliescu and Nastase, Iohannis was somehow at a loss during his first confrontation with Ponta on November 11, 2014. The latter seemed well-prepared, with lots of facts, data and statistics, arguing for each position he took. However, Ponta became obnoxious and Stalin-like when he reminded Iohannis that he should be “still and obedient”. The next day, the second broadcast appearance between the two candidates took place. Iohannis was much better prepared and remained confident and composed all through. He revealed various unknown facts to the public regarding what the Social Democratic party stand for.
Iohannis was judged on the basis of being different from Ponta. People voted him because he is to be trusted, has integrity and gives hope. In his political program, Iohannis reiterates the “blue thread” that spans it: the focus on the citizen. The supremacy of law is also another tenet of his program. Therefore, he is identified with the fight against corruption, collusion and nepotism, at least. They all characterize the mega-party of Social Democrats. Moreover, the scandals involving notorious political figures from the SD party, such as Hrebenciuc, Sova, Sirbu, Adam, etc. also contributed to the downfall of Ponta.
In a word, Iohannis’ public image is bright and hope-giving. He may have also been judged through his being tolerant, a family man, “educational”, civilized and cosmopolitan. At the same time, his support from various German politicians and European officials gave him momentum. He remains, at least for the time being, the “other side of Romanian politics”, one that is not sensational but “normal”, as he reiterated when he had his book “Step by Step” launched in Bucharest yesterday.
The internal factors influencing the election campaign refer, first, to the rallies held in major Romanian cities during the past two weeks until November 16 for the support of the Romanian Diaspora whose majority did not vote due to the immorality of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Romania. Hundreds of thousands of Romanians could not vote because there were not enough voting sections and bulletins despite the written requests made by the ambassadors in, for instance, Great Britain, Italy, France, Germany and Belgium. Simply put, ministers Corlatean and Melescanu did not take any measures to correct the situation. Moreover, the police force was used to calm down and disperse the frustrated Romanians in Italy and France. Basically, ministers Corlatean and Melescanu obstructed the constitutional right to vote of some over 2 million Romanians abroad. According to Article 385, Penal Code, this is to be punished with 6 months to 3 years of jail.
The past of the Social Democratic party may be regarded as another reason for Ponta’s presidential failure. The party has remained the proponent of communist mentality due to the presence of Moscow-educated and propagandist Ion Iliescu of the 70's and 80's and Adrian Nastase, besides other notorious politicians. The Social-Democrats have backed up and nurtured an ever-growing pool of “red robber barons” that emerged shortly after the violent events of December 1989, who became stronger at the beginning of the 2000s. The collapse of the country took place in the 1990s when the first political regimes between 1990-1996 were the Iliescu ones.
Related to the Social Democratic Party is Ponta’s public image, at least from the liberals’ point of view, and the Diaspora’s: corrupt, encouraging collusion and nepotism (his “political family”), clientelism, deceit and lies, ambivalence and manipulation. The last one refers to the political and religious manipulation that the party retorted to, in this respect an example in point being the one on the occasion of the Iasi Religious Celebrations of St. Parascheva of October 14, 2014 when a poster representing Ponta and one of his supporters and first marriage godfather, Gabriel Oprea, shaking hands, beside a poster representing St. Parascheva the protectress of the city and country.
Thus, the Romanian Orthodox Church seemed to have got involved in the elections by means of influencing openly the public in favour of Victor Ponta by using the Orthodoxy and ethnic card. Iohannis is not Orthodox and not a true Romanian. It is well known how various high clergy got involved and how the SD Party made substantial financial contributions to the ROC during the campaign.
At the same time, the poor citizens may have been fed up with the social practices of the Social Democratic Party in the past years. Paradoxically, the may have not "afforded" to vote again with this party. As such, people accuse President Basescu that he has destabilized the country. But people also forget that in the past two years PM Ponta has been the leader of the Executive. There are 24 ministers and between 580-588 members of Parliament. How is this possible? No matter how controversial the present president may be, at least one of today’s realities is that various “heavyweight” politicians and "business people" such as Nastase, Voiculescu, Vantu, etc. have been brought to justice. The National Anticorruption Directorate has been making efforts to ensure that nobody is above the law. And this is the greatest fear of potential political white collars. Therefore, it is no wonder that many SDP-leaning robber barons may be investigated. As K. Iohannis mentioned in his second confrontation, there are some 37 Social-Democrats that have legal issues.
The final argument is related to the external factors that shaped the presidential campaign. The Romanians abroad were frustrated and angry at the Ponta government when they could not vote in the first round of elections. Moreover, in spite of the conducive rhetoric, there were no higher numbers of voting sections in the second round. The first minister, Titus Corlatean, resigned shortly after the first round and he was replaced by a former apparatchik of the Ceausescu regime, that is Teodor Melescanu, former head of the Romanian Foreign Intelligence Service (SIE). Thousands of Romanians within the country demonstrated against the recklessness of the two ministers, as well as against Victor Ponta’s, requesting his resignation, between the two rounds. Yet, no measures to correct the situation were taken. Thus, even angrier Romanians abroad had to bear the immorality of their own government at home. No wonder that many political voices abroad were on their side, among them being Bernt Fabritius and E. Krichbaum within the political scene in Germany.
Thus, more and more international pressure was applied in regard to the way the Romanian voted in the first tour. Obstructing the right to vote was something unheard of in a country that is a EU member at the dawn of the XXIst century. Thus, a negative vote was given to the Romanian political apparatus by foreign officials. And Ponta's popularity plunged, again.
Last, but not least, was digital, instantaneous communication via Facebook. Prompt, encouraging, “centripetal” public messages were posted. Simultaneous protests were coordinated and staged at the same time in cities like Cluj, with the highest number of protesters (some 10,000 - "This is Cluj" is evidence of this at http://m.adevarul.ro/locale/cluj-napoca/video-this-is-cluj-film-devenit-viral-prezinta-mai-coerent-proiect-tara-proclamatia-cluj-1_5467220b0d133766a8e31e33/index.html), Timisoara, Bucuresti, Iasi, etc. Various slogans and songs were chanted. The crowd was on the side of the Diaspora and against Victor Ponta. “Mythical” counties such as Iasi and Suceava, considered as SPD’s fiefs, voted with K. Iohannis not with V. Ponta. Thus they turned “blue”. “We have taken back our country” read one of the slogans on the streets. By far, the most impressive protests were those in Cluj and Timisoara. On November 14, 2014 the Cluj Proclamation was read in front of thousands of people gathered in the central market. The wave of protests and anger shook the political scene in the country and gave cold quivers to Ponta & Co. Solidarity was the buzzword of the presidential campaign. The Diaspora gave the first signal and the Romanians inside the country took over.
Though Klaus Iohannis was elected president on November 16, 2014, he has to restructure the entire political system of the country by relying on the first pillars of his campaign: the rule of law and the focus on the citizen. The entire political structure is morally corrupt. The administrative one, too. The educational and medical systems need restructuring. Homo Sovieticus is still haunting the country after some 25 years. The struggle has just begun. But, after all, Homo Europaeus is once again at home.
The president-elect Klaus Iohannis’personality has impacted the country in the past weeks. His image is one associated with being “different”, trustworthy, discrete, no “chattering box, “doer” and contrary/other than what Ponta and his party stand for. Having German ethnicity makes him altogether different. “The German”, as he was nicknamed by the media, has proven resilient and civic throughout the election period, mostly during the two confrontations with “the red candidate”. His personality as popular, with good communication competences, interacting differently with people were part of his public image, too.
As mayor of the 2007 cultural European capital, Iohannis has had appropriate administrative experience at the local level. Though lacking political experience, in comparison with Ponta who has had much since his “budding years” in the former Romanian Social Democratic Party, being mentored by former hardcore communists Iliescu and Nastase, Iohannis was somehow at a loss during his first confrontation with Ponta on November 11, 2014. The latter seemed well-prepared, with lots of facts, data and statistics, arguing for each position he took. However, Ponta became obnoxious and Stalin-like when he reminded Iohannis that he should be “still and obedient”. The next day, the second broadcast appearance between the two candidates took place. Iohannis was much better prepared and remained confident and composed all through. He revealed various unknown facts to the public regarding what the Social Democratic party stand for.
Iohannis was judged on the basis of being different from Ponta. People voted him because he is to be trusted, has integrity and gives hope. In his political program, Iohannis reiterates the “blue thread” that spans it: the focus on the citizen. The supremacy of law is also another tenet of his program. Therefore, he is identified with the fight against corruption, collusion and nepotism, at least. They all characterize the mega-party of Social Democrats. Moreover, the scandals involving notorious political figures from the SD party, such as Hrebenciuc, Sova, Sirbu, Adam, etc. also contributed to the downfall of Ponta.
In a word, Iohannis’ public image is bright and hope-giving. He may have also been judged through his being tolerant, a family man, “educational”, civilized and cosmopolitan. At the same time, his support from various German politicians and European officials gave him momentum. He remains, at least for the time being, the “other side of Romanian politics”, one that is not sensational but “normal”, as he reiterated when he had his book “Step by Step” launched in Bucharest yesterday.
The internal factors influencing the election campaign refer, first, to the rallies held in major Romanian cities during the past two weeks until November 16 for the support of the Romanian Diaspora whose majority did not vote due to the immorality of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Romania. Hundreds of thousands of Romanians could not vote because there were not enough voting sections and bulletins despite the written requests made by the ambassadors in, for instance, Great Britain, Italy, France, Germany and Belgium. Simply put, ministers Corlatean and Melescanu did not take any measures to correct the situation. Moreover, the police force was used to calm down and disperse the frustrated Romanians in Italy and France. Basically, ministers Corlatean and Melescanu obstructed the constitutional right to vote of some over 2 million Romanians abroad. According to Article 385, Penal Code, this is to be punished with 6 months to 3 years of jail.
The past of the Social Democratic party may be regarded as another reason for Ponta’s presidential failure. The party has remained the proponent of communist mentality due to the presence of Moscow-educated and propagandist Ion Iliescu of the 70's and 80's and Adrian Nastase, besides other notorious politicians. The Social-Democrats have backed up and nurtured an ever-growing pool of “red robber barons” that emerged shortly after the violent events of December 1989, who became stronger at the beginning of the 2000s. The collapse of the country took place in the 1990s when the first political regimes between 1990-1996 were the Iliescu ones.
Related to the Social Democratic Party is Ponta’s public image, at least from the liberals’ point of view, and the Diaspora’s: corrupt, encouraging collusion and nepotism (his “political family”), clientelism, deceit and lies, ambivalence and manipulation. The last one refers to the political and religious manipulation that the party retorted to, in this respect an example in point being the one on the occasion of the Iasi Religious Celebrations of St. Parascheva of October 14, 2014 when a poster representing Ponta and one of his supporters and first marriage godfather, Gabriel Oprea, shaking hands, beside a poster representing St. Parascheva the protectress of the city and country.
Thus, the Romanian Orthodox Church seemed to have got involved in the elections by means of influencing openly the public in favour of Victor Ponta by using the Orthodoxy and ethnic card. Iohannis is not Orthodox and not a true Romanian. It is well known how various high clergy got involved and how the SD Party made substantial financial contributions to the ROC during the campaign.
At the same time, the poor citizens may have been fed up with the social practices of the Social Democratic Party in the past years. Paradoxically, the may have not "afforded" to vote again with this party. As such, people accuse President Basescu that he has destabilized the country. But people also forget that in the past two years PM Ponta has been the leader of the Executive. There are 24 ministers and between 580-588 members of Parliament. How is this possible? No matter how controversial the present president may be, at least one of today’s realities is that various “heavyweight” politicians and "business people" such as Nastase, Voiculescu, Vantu, etc. have been brought to justice. The National Anticorruption Directorate has been making efforts to ensure that nobody is above the law. And this is the greatest fear of potential political white collars. Therefore, it is no wonder that many SDP-leaning robber barons may be investigated. As K. Iohannis mentioned in his second confrontation, there are some 37 Social-Democrats that have legal issues.
The final argument is related to the external factors that shaped the presidential campaign. The Romanians abroad were frustrated and angry at the Ponta government when they could not vote in the first round of elections. Moreover, in spite of the conducive rhetoric, there were no higher numbers of voting sections in the second round. The first minister, Titus Corlatean, resigned shortly after the first round and he was replaced by a former apparatchik of the Ceausescu regime, that is Teodor Melescanu, former head of the Romanian Foreign Intelligence Service (SIE). Thousands of Romanians within the country demonstrated against the recklessness of the two ministers, as well as against Victor Ponta’s, requesting his resignation, between the two rounds. Yet, no measures to correct the situation were taken. Thus, even angrier Romanians abroad had to bear the immorality of their own government at home. No wonder that many political voices abroad were on their side, among them being Bernt Fabritius and E. Krichbaum within the political scene in Germany.
Thus, more and more international pressure was applied in regard to the way the Romanian voted in the first tour. Obstructing the right to vote was something unheard of in a country that is a EU member at the dawn of the XXIst century. Thus, a negative vote was given to the Romanian political apparatus by foreign officials. And Ponta's popularity plunged, again.
Last, but not least, was digital, instantaneous communication via Facebook. Prompt, encouraging, “centripetal” public messages were posted. Simultaneous protests were coordinated and staged at the same time in cities like Cluj, with the highest number of protesters (some 10,000 - "This is Cluj" is evidence of this at http://m.adevarul.ro/locale/cluj-napoca/video-this-is-cluj-film-devenit-viral-prezinta-mai-coerent-proiect-tara-proclamatia-cluj-1_5467220b0d133766a8e31e33/index.html), Timisoara, Bucuresti, Iasi, etc. Various slogans and songs were chanted. The crowd was on the side of the Diaspora and against Victor Ponta. “Mythical” counties such as Iasi and Suceava, considered as SPD’s fiefs, voted with K. Iohannis not with V. Ponta. Thus they turned “blue”. “We have taken back our country” read one of the slogans on the streets. By far, the most impressive protests were those in Cluj and Timisoara. On November 14, 2014 the Cluj Proclamation was read in front of thousands of people gathered in the central market. The wave of protests and anger shook the political scene in the country and gave cold quivers to Ponta & Co. Solidarity was the buzzword of the presidential campaign. The Diaspora gave the first signal and the Romanians inside the country took over.
Though Klaus Iohannis was elected president on November 16, 2014, he has to restructure the entire political system of the country by relying on the first pillars of his campaign: the rule of law and the focus on the citizen. The entire political structure is morally corrupt. The administrative one, too. The educational and medical systems need restructuring. Homo Sovieticus is still haunting the country after some 25 years. The struggle has just begun. But, after all, Homo Europaeus is once again at home.