weekly's Children of the Street [11.23] Constitution [10.08] Who Is Protecting Who? [08.04] Statistics [07.21] Derogations [07.07] The Mammouth [06.15] Criticism [05.25] State Theft [05.17] The "Christian" Socialism [05.09] Freedom of Speech [04.21] Circle of Power [04.16] Redistribution [04.05] Anti-corruption [03.22] CNSAS [03.15] Working Code [03.10] Health [03.03] special Romania, for whom? [05.31] Perversion of diplomacy [04.30] Iraq War [03.25]

04.30.2003

The perversion of diplomacy

The latest critics of some American or European officials regarding corruption in Romania, get out, through theirs toughness, from the usual international critics pattern. They betray a doubtless exasperation, and warn, at first, upon the risk as Romania not to achieve the strategically political and economical objectives; these ones just relatively overlap with the American or European objectives, so only the governors' current paranoia made them to qualify the critics as "threatening" to Romania. Actually, threatening to Romania cannot be but the demagogical style of a government weak and abusive at the same time, who compensates, for example, the incapacity to collect taxes by raising them to absurd levels or who controls the corruption by a legislative pack that rather made it official.

The violent and absurd reactions of the prime minister and some of his ministers to the international critics explain even through this tendency to solve exclusively by demagogy any problem. The Romanian problems are, for the Nastase government, exclusively image problems, so minimize the critics of the American ambassador or of the European Commission Delegation chief is vitally to save the appearances. It doesn't really matter how stupid or infantile are these minimizing reactions, for example the prime minister insinuation that the international critics do not matter because they don't come from the inside of the respective governs, or the pretending of a minister that the American ambassador was speaking just hypothetically, about corruption in general (fact that obliged him to specify he was not speaking hypothetically, but referred to a quite real corruption). The same cynical is the prime minister pretending that it is trying the control of corruption by institutional mechanisms, for example by forming some competent and non-corruptible public agents: the PSD is the one that -right after the elections- dismissed a big part of the agents employed by "the others", politically conditioned the ones who remained and drastically reduced their salaries. But for the PSD demagogy to transform a reality in exactly its opposite is not such a big problem.

There is a simple reason for which it doesn't matter too much how hypocritical are the government reactions: they have only a purpose - namely to offer a pretext , however weak, to its electorate who feel the need of getting off the complicate problem of the corruption. Because the unanimous corruption accusation is only one of the ways in which a big part of the electorate makes itself a surrogate of political participation, meaning justify the total missing of political participation; the paroxysm of the paradox is reached by the PSD electorate, who promote into the Parliament people and interests of the most suspect under the slogan " Down the mafia".

From this point of view, the Government attitude, however aberrant would be under the rules of logic and common sense is a skilled populist attitude. The government anticorruption demagogy reflects the less content anticorruption attitude of many Romanian people, especially PSD and PRM electorate. Everybody is against the corruption, but those who reject it firmly in everyday life are rare exceptions. There are very appreciated radical solutions, from executions on stadiums to establishing institutions specialized in corruption control, but these are only able to "manufacture" some material to government press conferences.

Only a few see yet, and effectively sustain real solutions: the independence of the Justice, forming a stable and competent team of civil servants etc. Instead are preferred circus acts as to dissolve The General Council of Bucharest, a measure which encourage the corruption instead of control it: it does not punish anybody, but encourage those in case to move the corruption to another area, it substitutes itself to the institutions able to investigate and judge, and serious affects them so, and not at least it is unfair to the uncorrupted councilors. Nevertheless, an aberrant and counter-productive measure like this is even the prototype of the fight against corruption in Romania, manifesting exclusively by fire-works which put out as suddenly as they kindle and have the prime destination to enjoy the sight.

The corruption was always con-substantial to the Romanian society, and it directly reflects the low level of assimilating democracy, respectively the people equality of principle as essential value of it. That ones who explain the PSD success by a wish of equality unsatisfied yet, mystify themselves because this wish of equality is totally minor. Also, any kind of equality as democratic values bases itself on the formal equality, of principle between citizens, meaning the equality in front of the law. There cannot be an aspiration of social-democrat type of equality tending to reduce the social inequalities , if there is not assimilated yet a liberal type of equality, a chances equality in frame of which individuals have the freedom to make themselves their destiny and enjoy things get by their personal merits , in limit of some reasonable conditionings. A performant social assistance must be preceded not just by a performant economy, but also by instituting the formal equality between citizens, fact that in Romania is far away of what it should be.

Precisely that is why the "equality" reflected by the decisions of Nastase government is not an equality that assists those in difficulty by the help of the other , but an "equality" that hinders those who want to develop themselves on legal ways and spend the so obtained resources in an arbitrary way. It is an collectivist type of aspiration, not a democratic one, but who has not a precise ideological color, cannot say it is "of left", for example. It is an "arbitrary equality" , nontransparent and impossible to be formulated in clear, universal rules, making a natural base for corruption; the collectivist equality of surviving represented by PSD tells that nobody has the right to separate himself by the nation body and build an individual destiny , because by doing this puts the national destiny in danger. The corruption is accepted , beyond the nervous declarations in interviews, as a natural privilege of the leaders who "shepherd" the people on its destiny way, which is the way of surviving no matter of the conditions. But, it should be the time as this mentality to be not singular anymore on Romanian political scene. It should be the time as the parties who consider that spoliating the budget is a natural privilege to be electoral sanctioned, and another mentality to rule the anticorruption fight.

The corruption which is now solid installed in the Romanian society will begin to withdraw only when the principle equality between citizens will become an aspiration representative enough as to make the governors to assure the law respect. Until then , the corruption remain a tolerate reality , and "investigated" in a mockery way by organs leaded by PSD members as Victor Ponta or people loyal to PSD as Ion Amarie; to them , the fight against corruption means to investigate those corrupted individuals which are not in PSD and to protect the own corrupted ones. The Romanian present corruption basic reality is that the Nastase government has not even the smallest intention to control it , but just to manage it as well is possible in its own interest and reduce its negative image.

By having these, the real solution in the corruption problem, as in other serious Romanian society problems, is a new type of political action, based on a high political participation who to sustain radical decisions, with palpable results. Until then , the Romanian governments demagogical game , who fights against corruption only in speeches, and in reality is able just to instrument it more or less successful , will only keep Romania far from the Europe and its democracy standards.

The arrogance of the Nastase government in front of the international critics regarding corruption is very serious; not only because it affects the Romanian relationships, but also because it tends to preserve this essential defect of a disastrous political system, which sooner or later will revenge. The fact that Adrian Nastase practices a double language, agreeing and rejecting these critics at the same time, keeps by a perverse and pedantic model of diplomacy, actually accountable for somebody who practiced the "diplomacy" as before as after 1989. And while the prime minister gets down by criticizing those who accuse the corruption from Romania, to the level of some suburbia obscenities that we feel ashamed to reproduce, he is not just throwing in ridiculous the corruption problem, but also builds new barriers in the European integration of Romania.

So the international warnings regarding a possible failure of integrating Romania in EU should be considered absolutely serious, and not to be taken into derision. Because at this moment the perspective of the failure it is outlined clear enough.