The sizeable surprise that came with the televised speech of the acting President Emil Constantinescu has struck the political class like a locomotive. Much more so in the fiery combination between a stage coup and a national political premiere.
Parties, especially PDSR, will be marked from now on by two components of Constantinescu’s gesture: the implications of the gesture and the message of the presidential speech.
On the first level, political forces must reconsider their alliances, whether existing or potential. Also, presidential candidates will be unable to have the same profile, and the bow-out of the number two in the polls leaves room not only for another candidate, but for another kind of candidate, whom the president called the manager-candidate.
Emil Constantinescu’s speech strikes even harder at parties’ strategies and electoral messages. The president has renounced another run because, according to his own words, he lacked the chances for a second mandate.
If his opponents prefer stopping at this explanation and stay idle, they will only have to lose. On the other hand, what were Constantinescu’s arguments? He clearly pointed out what aches the voting Romanian: corruption, poverty, generalised theft. His gesture lent legitimacy to his speech, which may be called populist by some, but can never be called politicianist.
In light of this, PDSR, which made a strategy out of criticising the present government and Constantinescu, is left without a boxing dummy. In other words, it will have to swap its destructive campaign for a constructive one. That is, for every criticism against the last four years of government, they will have to come up with concrete solutions. And this is where PDSR is vulnerable, because the question is, “if you know everything so well, how come you did nothing in 1992-1996?” Nor can Teodor Melescanu’s party, which focuses on criticism against the coalition, preserve its existing position.
As to the changes on the list of presidential candidates, the person most affected by the president’s gesture will be Ion Iliescu. Although he is trying to act as if nothing happened. First of all, it is still unclear whom he is going to confront instead of Constantinescu. It is unclear whether his counter-candidate will be Prime Minister Mugur Isarescu – a tough opponent – or someone else, whether he is going to be a politician or a technocrat, whether he can be attacked, and with what. In any case, “novelty” will be a plus enjoyed by Constantinescu’s replacement, a quality that will clearly work against Iliescu. From this standpoint, neither Teodor Melescanu nor Petre Roman have anything to cling to, because every poll done so far amounts to nothing. The Peasants also have serious reason for concern, because they lost their own candidate who might have earned them at least 10% in the polls, from an extremely confident and homogeneous electorate. PN?CD is being forced to pull another candidate out of the hat, because it would be disastrous to come forth with none. The Liberals seem favoured, for now, because, on one hand, they seemed too unwilling to back Constantinescu and, on the other, they still haven’t said who they are going to back, therefore they can easily take on any new surprise candidate who stands a good chance.
Therefore, Emil Constantinescu’s statement leaves room to many question marks and many unknowns on the political stage; the only certainty is that dramatic changes will ensue. It remains to be seen whether the president will be able to complete the programme he announced in his speech. In other words, will Constantinescu be able, in the last four months, to achieve something spectacular in fighting corruption, something he failed to do in three years? Will the economic reform he promised to back have a sufficiently visible effect so that Constantinescu seems to have had any weight?
Moreover, it remains to be seen whether the president’s move will lead to a better coagulation of political forces – other than PDSR – around a different candidate, if the gesture materialises into a political victory of the successor, with or without a victory of a centre-right pole. Or will it remain a personal victory of Emil Constantinescu, whom the history will name “man of state, the first president of Romania to renounce candidacy for a new mandate, appreciated for his moral standing”?