Romanian presidential election: right-wing populist in the lead
The far-right candidate of the AUR party, George Simion, has won the first round of the rerun of the presidential election in Romania. In the run-off on 18 May he will now go up against the non-affiliated mayor of Bucharest Nicușor Dan. The country's Social Democratic Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu resigned after his governing coalition's candidate, Crin Antonescu, came in third.
Exploiting the anti-elitist mood
Simion wants to follow in the footsteps of his role models Trump and Orbán, Népszava speculates:
“Many hope that the second round will be a repeat of the scenario in the year 2000, when all democratically minded voters - albeit with gritted teeth and holding their noses - voted for the post-communist Ion Iliescu and against the far-right Corneliu Vadim Tudor. Now, however, the US scenario seems more likely - with Simion scoring a historic victory thanks to the anti-elitist mood, just like Donald Trump. The far-right candidate is already talking about a historic success and promising almost word for word what brought Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán to power and keeps them there.”
Frustration with the government
Tygodnik Powszechny writes:
“Simion is closer to European mainstream politics than Georgescu. You won't find any praise for Putin in his statements, but he criticises the existing elites and institutions of the state as well as the European Union, liberal values and Ukraine. The social frustration fuelled by the misguided actions of the government camp with regard to the annulled elections seems to be driving Romanians towards the emotions voiced by Simion.”
Derailed by Moscow
Der Standard warns:
“Romania is a vivid example of how Russia's government has been able to destabilise a key EU and Nato country within just a few years using hybrid warfare - especially in social media. The Kremlin's motive is obvious: defence equipment for Ukraine is being supplied via Romania. Nato military bases are located here and Ukrainian fighter jet pilots are trained here. Romania is central to the defence of all Europe. This makes the fact that US President Trump - also at Putin's request - is considering withdrawing US troops all the more ominous. Precisely because the Kremlin wants an anti-Western Romania, the election on 18 May is about freedom or the lack of it.”
Simion now unbeatable?
Dan has a huge gap to bridge in the second round of voting, Spotmedia notes:
“How can this election result be explained? ... Generally speaking one can say that it's partly due to frustration over the cancellation of the presidential election last year [6 December] and partly to a campaign in which the pro-European candidates discredited themselves by insulting each other. Nobody really understood what happened in the last year, and we're paying the price for that. ... The question now is whether Simion can still be defeated on 18 May, given the huge gap in votes. ... He only needs an additional eleven percentage points to win, whereas Nicușor Dan needs 30.”
A familiar script
History is repeating itself, says La Repubblica:
“Simion is proof that the sovereignist model is very popular in many countries of the former Eastern Bloc. The script is very similar in Hungary, Slovakia, Poland and now Romania: victimhood and nostalgia for the good old days, hostility towards the elites, Euroscepticism, anti-migrantism, crude nationalism and aversion to Ukraine. ... Simion stressed that he wanted to signal his 'sole mission: the restoration of constitutional order and democracy'.”
A country on a knife's edge
Jurnalul Național is pessimistic:
“The presidential election foreshadows a potentially profound political crisis. ... The current government, caught between the need for drastic fiscal measures and populist pressure, risks collapse regardless of who moves into the presidential palace. ... But these elections are not just about the office of president but more importantly about the country's economic and geopolitical future. Romania is on a knife's edge. ... The country risks being perceived as unstable, a place where investments are uncertain and political decisions are dictated more by populism than by economic reason.”