Minor but significant poll changes
The monthly IMAS poll is eloquent because it uses the same focus group and therefore allows a relevant analysis of changes in April. What happened in April? That month saw the talk around the “red telephone” with the Kremlin, which revealed, on one hand, the pressures of Russian special organisations in 1995-1996, and on the other, Ion Iliescu’s awkward stammering, highlighted by general Vasile Ionel’s factual admission. Also that month, we witnessed the Liberal manoeuvring of Valeriu Stoica and the Democratic manoeuvring of Traian Basescu on the future post-electoral coalition. We also observed the brawling between Liberals Christian Democrats in CDR and the violent Melescanu – Iliescu clash over PDSR’s performance prior to 1996.
We can therefore say the poll reflects the overall public opinion on these events. CDR plummeted again from its 22% February peak to 17% in April, but PDSR itself is taking a heavy toll from its lack of frankness and self-criticism over its previous experience in power, and slid from the 47% peak in March to 43% in April. ApR with 16% remains third; PRM with 8% and PD with 5% are constant. Among the small parties, the Union of Right-wing Forces is gaining ground, with 2%. The fact is that PDSR is by far leading the pack, but, as I predicted early this year, its share will fall significantly if the Isarescu Government gets its hands on foreign financial aid – which so far has been sublime but entirely absent.
In the Presidential race, the three candidates remain. Iliescu is falling from his 48% peak to 44%, but remains the favourite. Constantinescu, despite a powerful thrust to win back voters, remains under 20%, while Melescanu keeps second place with more than 20%.
Here we should stop on a political factor that can decide the fate of the second round – namely, whether UDMR will come up with its own candidate for the Cotroceni Palace. Let’s see what the Hungarian leader, Marko Bela, has to say: “We will discuss this matter and make a decision only after the local elections. Now it would be premature… Of course, our decision to have our own candidate will depend on the consequences of such a decision – who we are going to help with our option.”
Constantinescu couldn’t wait until after the locals and therefore went to TOrgu Mures to visit the Hungarians’ potential candidate, senator Gyorgy Frunda. It obviously was not a courtesy call, but an open negotiation, and it would be interesting to see what Constantinescu promised in order to get the Hungarians not to put up a candidate of their own. They know all too well they have an ace up their sleeve, but at the same time, it is unwise to draw the anger and wrath of Iliescu, since the government will anyway be in PDSR’s hands.
Given the decisive role of the Hungarian vote in round two, Melescanu, too, should be expected to have a go at UDMR and play the card of the man with a double chance: of winning the battle for Cotroceni and becoming part of the future ruling coalition, and therefore, of being able to meet UDMR’s demands.
The lead Mugur Isarescu enjoys among the public figures Romanians trust most has given rise to speculations that he may run for President. I don’t think this will happen, for two reasons: I know Isarescu has no such hopes, and universal knowledge shows that without a political machinery behind his back, even the most popular politician stands no chance in the elections.
The IMF decision, in May
Friday night, the dinner hosted by Premier Mugur Isarescu for the International Monetary Fund delegation led by Zervoudakis ended a week of difficult and strained negotiations. It was only natural, because while Zervoudakis had in front of him a tormented budget, but voted in Parliament with a 3% deficit, the question remains open whether for an IMF veteran this budget will hold in an election year.
As usual, Decebal Traian Remes was optimistic. Had he not been so robustly optimistic, he would never survive as the Romanian Finance minister in the year 2000. The formula he chose to describe the talks on the eve of Easter holiday was: “Negotiations with the IMF are proceeding in a Christian way,” which sounds more like a prayer than an objective appraisal. Zervoudakis, however, kept dead silent. He even avoided the traditional “Christ has risen” phrase, to prevent any hopeful interpretations.
There is some hope in a line on Romania in the IMF report on “World Economic Prospects”: “The IMF believes sustained international aid will be necessary to consolidate a prospect of economic growth in Romania.” I don’t mean to be malicious, but so far this support has been missing, and as we all know, the IMF is the institution most qualified in that regard. Mugur Isarescu, who is not engaged in the electoral campaign and is more blunt in his words, said the IMF negotiations had been “fruitful.” For the first time, Isarescu harboured an optimistic tone, saying the belt-tightening times are gone, and the Romanians should be ready to see a significant rise in the standard of living. Technically speaking, of the 25 conditions set by Zervoudakis, 20 are considered completed. Only five are left, which the Romanian Government pledged to deal with this year: outstanding salary in these units, recent salary raises, the pensions growth projected for 2000, debt restructuring and facilities that disappear as special privileges and remain as economic policies for all companies.
Anyway, the last word on everything comes from the IMF Board, due in mid May in Washington. Until then, let’s keep our fingers crossed.
The Treaty with Moldova is sealed
Whoever wants into the European Union must leave any territorial claims at the front door, whether historically, ethnically or religiously justified. Foreign policy is not built on sentiment, emotions or wishes of revenge and payback, but geopolitical considerations, state interests and intelligent calculation.
Had President de Gaulle been guided by the French affinity of Alsace and Lorraine, there would be no NATO or European Union, and none of the mutual trust and calm that dominates today the political climate in Western Europe, which comes in such striking contrast with the explosive tensions in Eastern Europe.
Partly, Romania has qualified to enter today’s political and economic Europe by signing treaties with Hungary and Ukraine, although in both it wisely waives some claims or animosities that are scarred deeply into Romanians’ conscience.
Of course, a reunification of the territories inhabited by Romanians remains a supreme goal of our people, but any man with a practical sense can realise it cannot be accomplished in the current environment politically and much less economically. The unification of Germany, especially its enormous cost, hundreds of billions of marks, has somewhat quelled the initial enthusiasm of the unification champions. What good would be a unification between a poor country and one entirely destitute? The treaty sealed by Foreign minister Petre Roman in Kishinev does not threaten at all Basarabia’s reunification with the motherland in a remote future. On the contrary, the Treaty is meant to strengthen the position of political forces in the Republic of Moldova who struggle against pressures and this is why it is labelled the “Partnership and Cooperation Treaty.” This being an election year, opposition parties could be expected to voice objections – from saying the paper has an electoral flavour, to complaining they were notified of its contents at the last moment.
I think this treaty’s significant electoral weight does not go either up or down.