Romania- The Struggle for European Acceptance

Reasons for Pursuing this project

I have always been very interested in the economic, social and political transformations Romania has been experiencing starting with December 1989, the significant moment in which the Romanian people put a stop to the tyrannical communist regime and welcomed democracy.

In my webpage, I provide an overview of the economic transformations Romania experienced beginning with the fall of the communism, placing emphasis on the more recent years during which the government has accelerated the transition from a centralized economic system to a market economy that protects and respects democratic values, in order for the country to join the European Union. In addition, I discuss the expected costs and benefits of Romania joining the EU.

The Legacy of Commuism

December 1989 brought a period of tremendous change in the lives of the Romanian people and the following years were characterized by instability and endless fights among Romania’s political parties, on the grounds of who is responsible for the economic failure experienced by the country (Kaldor 142). Besides having to face “market distortions and structural problems common to all transition countries” (Romania – Country Assistance Evaluation 11), the Romanian people, severely weakened by former president’s Nicolae Ceausescu ambition of repaying the country’s entire external debt, also suffered the consequences of living in a country in which the bureaucracy was “insecure, politicized, and prone to corruption” (Romania – Country Assistance Evaluation 11). The legacy of communism was hard to shake off and, backed by a presidential regime, many former Communist party members —who gained power after the December 1989 revolution— took advantage of their political positions and pursued their own selfish interests, disregarding, at the same time, the needs and rights of the people. (Tismaneanu 319). The 10 years in which President Ion Iliescu— a former leader in the Communist Party and one of Ceausescu’s protégé— ruled the country (1989–1996, 2000-2004), were a severe transition period during which true reforms failed to be implemented and democratic institutions were practically inexistent (Kaldor 144). Thus, communist rule was followed by an inefficient “democratic” leadership that had tremendously weakened not only the economy but also its society. Iliescu had “established a governing coalition with the country's most anti-Hungarian, anti-Semitic, and anti-liberal movements,” which allowed members of the former Securitate — Ceausescu’s private army, a ruthless security apparatus— to became successful businessmen (Tismaneanu 320). Also, “Romanian civil society remained particularly weak, with paltry levels of civic engagement compared to other countries, with low levels of trust, tolerance, and other measures of the cooperative spirit that underlies the civic culture” (Badescu 335).

Post - Communism Economic and Social Life

In 1993 the Romanian government undertook measures for the development of a market economy and a functional democracy by adhering to the European Council and to the Partnership for Peace— a formula of cooperation between NATO and the associate states on their way to membership. However, these strategic movements did not bring the expected benefit (Dawisha 434). Led by an uncaring government who didn’t feel compelled to adopt development measures, the Romanian people lived in a permanent state of economic and social instability during the 1990s. During that period, despite the World Bank’s willingness to provide assistance towards the economic and social development of the country(over the years, Romania received significant financial aid packages (about US $400 million per year), directed mostly towards private sector development (60%), agriculture (18%) and social development (15%)) , there was no significant improvement. In 1999, the county experienced a major financial crisis, with inflation rising to 36% (Romania – Country Assistance Evaluation 9).

When analyzing the Development Indicators, for 2000, one can easily see the instability that characterized the Romanian society and economic life. The Rule of Law, Governmental Effectiveness, Political Stability and Lack of Violence Human Development Indicators for 2000 were very low compared to those of many other countries; moreover, due to slow economic growth, the poverty level was very high (in 2000, 20.5% of Romanians had to live to live with only $2 a day, while 2.1% were only earning $1 a day) (www.freedomhouse.org). Also, distribution of income between the rich and the poor was clearly uneven; while the richest 10% of the population held a 23.6% share of the income and consumption level, the poorest 10% had access to only 3.3% (www.hdr.undp.org). Romania was perceived as a country that that lacked an independent judiciary, had an inadequate free press, and had not halted torture carried out by police officers” (Evans-Pritchard 16). EU specialists classified the electronic media, as being “increasingly sensationalistic and avoiding politics altogether to minimize the risk of political pressure”(www.freedomhouse.org). Also, they assessed that the Romanian media carefully screened the talk-show guests in order to “avoid harsh criticism of the government” and manipulated newscasts “to the same effect” (Evans-Pritchard 16). The EU Commission also accused political parties of bribing journalists —most of who had low incomes— in order to favorably portray these institutions in the press (www.freedomhouse.org).

In 2000, discrimination against women and minorities was another widespread problem. Although the Romanian Constitution clearly specifies that women have equal rights with men, gender discrimination was widespread in the country (www.freedomhouse.org). Not only were women underrepresented in the government – only 10.4 percent of the deputies and 5.7 percent of the senators in the current parliament are women— but they were also disadvantaged by not having the same job opportunities as equally qualified men (www.freedomhouse.org). Also, despite the country’s “democratic” political and social system, the 1.5 million Roma (the largest population of gypsies in Europe) living in Romania was permanently ostracized and refused basic rights like education, employment, and proper medical care. Moreover, the 2 million Hungarians living in Romania (the largest ethnic minority in Europe) could not use Hungarian as an official language in administration (www.freedomhouse.org).

Romania and the European Union

The major turning point in Romania’s development represented the decision of the EU Council of Ministers in December 1999 to begin accession negotiations for Romania resulted in the Romanian government being stronglyy compelled to implement reforms directed towards achieving stability, growth and private sector development (Romania – Country Assistance Evaluation 9). EU accession is now the strongest driving force that shapes the decision making process of the Romanian government.

According to the European Union, in 2002 Romania “scored last among EU accession countries in the World Bank's composite index of government accountability, effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law, control of corruption, and political stability” (Freedom House). More than this, Romania experienced “the least improvement in performance between 1998 and 2002” of all the Eastern European states that candidate for EU membership (www.freedomhouse.org). The European Commission declared that, although Romania achieved a functional market economy and was moving towards a stable democratic system, that is able to guarantee “the rule of law, human rights, and respect for minorities”, the country still had major problems in what concerns the corruption level, which “affects almost all aspects of society” (Evans-Pritchard 16). The high level of corruption— most prevalent in parties and in courts— categorically infringed the process of economic and human development. Romania was listed in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index as the most corrupt of the EU accession countries, ranking 85 out of the 133 countries surveyed and the second most corrupt in Europe, after Russia (Freedom House). One of the country’s most severe limitations consisted in the underdeveloped private sector “with state-owned enterprises continuing to account for a significant share of economic activity” (Economist Intelligence Unit). The principal reasons for the low level of foreign investment were represented by unofficial barriers, mainly “Romania’s inconsistent legal and regulatory system” (Freedom House- 2002 Index of Economic Freedom). In 2002, what further discouraged foreign investors was that tax laws were frequently changed and were unevenly enforced. Moreover, tort cases required “lengthy, expensive procedures, and judges’ ruling faces uncertain enforcement.” (Freedom House). In 2002, the World Bank ranked Romania “last among EU candidate countries in terms of the responsiveness and efficiency of its administration, the quality of government regulations, the rule of law, and political stability” (Freedom House).

Economic and Social Improvements

In the last few years, Romania has significantly improved its economy and human development process, and its almost certain acceptance to the European Union in 2007 seems to confirm the fact that the country is slowly but steadily moving in the right direction. Romania was invited to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 2002 and, ever since, the country recorded significant improvements in its attempts to foster economic growth and social development. Many political and economic analysts consider the presidential elections in November 2004 as the beginning of an era full of great prospects for Romania. The new president, Traian Basescu –who is not associated with the old regime-- has an amazing popularity among intellectuals and the young generation, and was a remarkable minister with an innovative, highly efficient way of finding the best solution to a wide variety of challenges. [edit]

In an address to the Annual Meeting of Romania’s ambassadors and general consuls, the Romanian Prime Minister, Calin Popescu Tariceanu declared that Romania’s EU accession in 2007 is a fundamental objective and “the only policy option for the government”(Government of Romania). In Tariceanu’s opinion, although Romania’s economy continues to grow in a pace “comparable to that of the most dynamic economies on the continent”, the government finds it very challenging to efficiently implement measures that can counteract the “long series of promises and populist decisions that were made by the previous governments on the occasion of the electoral year” (Government of Romania). In order to be eligible for becoming a EU member, Romania has to meet specific requirements which were comprised in 31 chapters adhere chapters (small and medium sized enterprises, science and research, education and training, external relations, common foreign and security policy, statistics, company law, health and consumer protection, fisheries, economic and monetary union, social policy and employment, industrial policy, telecommunications and IT, custom union, institutions, culture and audio-visual policy, free movement of capital, free movement of goods, taxation, free movement of persons, transport policy, financial control, agriculture, financial and budgetary provisions, energy, free movement of services, regional policy structural funds, environment protection, competition, justice and home affairs (Strategy paper of the European Commission on progress in the enlargement process) So far the country managed to provisionally close all these chapters. However, the EU reserves the right to postpone Romania’s admission in the EU till January 2008, if it will be estimated that the country is not fully prepared to successfully meet membership requirements.

The Romanian’s government objectives are centered around “strengthening the external current account balance, further reducing inflation, sustaining continued GDP growth, and preparing the economy for EU accession”(International Monetary Fund) and in recent years, it implemented key stabilization policies (i.e. reduction in the general government budget deficit, strengthening of the finances of state-owned enterprises through energy price adjustments and wage restraint, measures to contain credit growth, strengthening of the judicial system, and decreased corruption). While the EU Commission praises Romania for the improvements it already achieved, it also requires the government to work towards “strengthening macroeconomic stability, carrying out intensive economic reforms, gradual decrease of inflation, cutting arrears, improving transparency and stability in the fiscal system, liberalization of prices and adjustments of regulated prices, accelerating privatization, improving administrative procedures for companies entering and leaving the market and improving the legal framework necessary for developing a market economy” (Ernst & Young Doing Business In Romania 2005).