There are reports from Poland. They're watching the presidential election here.
– We besides had 2 weeks of campaigning before the second round. I keep my fingers crossed for you," says Prof. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi, a very celebrated Romanian political scientist.
– I think that in the second circular of elections in Poland the competition will be rather equal, especially since candidates from 3rd and 4th places are besides nationalists, and the PiS candidate has large election potential. However, if Conservatives win, Poland's position in the EU may weaken again. This concerns us in Romania due to the fact that strong Poland could besides strengthen our position, especially on Ukraine, but not only – George Vadim Tiugea, a political scientist, analyses.
Prof. Cristian Pîrvulescu, besides 1 of the most celebrated Romanian polytols: – I want Poland democratic and peaceful elections.
We are talking about elections in Romania to realize how the democratic and pro-eurpian forces managed to awaken the Romanian people. What did the run look like on the last consecutive line, and what weighed most about the defeat of populist George Simion? But also, what lesson do they see after the Romanian elections for Poland, just before the second circular of presidential elections?
Lesson for Liberals in Poland? Unite. Show me the threat. Fight for the Young
– The case of Romania offers 2 key lessons. First, unity is crucial. Liberal camp must act together, avoiding divisions. And secondly, the debate must be presented as a choice of system, not personality. The voters are able to overcome ideological differences to prevent the erosion of democracy. A clear message on the rate – a democratic order versus populist demolition – can mobilise undecided voters – is advised by Prof. Pîrvulescu.
George Vadiim Tiugea: – As for liberals in Poland, my advice is to avoid entering a populist game and accepting populist themes (e.g. anti-immigration). And focus more on the real problems of average people, including young people. It's economical prosperity, work, health, education, housing, security.
But how to do this and how to scope young people, erstwhile the 1 in Poland has just placed on the utmost right of Sławomir Menzten?
– I can't believe all young people in Poland think that. I think that all young people in Europe care about freedom of travel, that they are in the Schengen area, that they can survey and work in Western countries. I besides think that people are delicate to the fact that EU funds can be cut if incorrect candidates win. And all of this must sound in the run – emphasizes Prof. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi.
It resembles Poland's problems with the European Court of Justice. We don't want any fresh problems. The country barely made it through these difficulties. I think that should be adequate to guarantee good mobilisation in society. And it's not that you gotta win by overwhelming majority. It was crucial for us to win at least minimally, which yet worked out – he says.
What advice would she have for a liberal candidate in Poland?
– I'm afraid that threat was a mobilizing slogan in the Romanian elections. People were forced to face very clearly the imagination of what would have happened the next day if the presidential election had been won by another candidate," he says.
"Poles can! Romania set an example!"
Let us remind – erstwhile Poland voted in the first circular of presidential elections on 18 May, Romania elected the president in the second round. As she showed a red card to the populists, she was admiring the Vistula.
The utmost nationalist George Simion, who flaunted his relationship with Karol Nawrocki and the PiS (and vice versa), won the first circular on May 4, and much indicated that he could win the second.
Further part of the article below:
And yet he lost. The president of Romania was Nicușor Dan, mayor of Bucharest, known for his fight against corruption, who won 53.6 percent of the vote. “I hope that the pro-European candidate will win”, he said referring to Poland. 46.3% of voters voted for Simion. present the utmost right-wing leader of the Union of Romanian Unity (AUR) challenges his failure and demands the annulment of the election.
In Poland, after the win, Dan was euphoria. Politicians, publicists, spoke. Alive net users responded: "Poles can! Romania set an example!", "The example of Romania was that the Union is more crucial than Russia! We're not worse!".
So how did the Romanians do it?
Mobilization. This is the key to the success of the democrats in Romania. It resonates in all Romanian media and electoral analyses. Each of the Romanian politicians asked by us besides emphasizes this very strongly. So let's see how our callers see it.
"This fear has mobilized voters," "Mobilization was powerful," "The immense function of students"
“The failure of George Simion in the second circular was the consequence of broad democratic mobilisation,” emphasises prof. Cristian Pîrvulescu.
– The first circular won, utilizing social frustration and antisystemic moods. The second circular became a referendum on the nature of the political system. Around Nicoșor Dan were united by democratic, pro-European voters, residents of cities who could otherwise support various candidates. It is fear of the authoritarian phrase and possible alignment of Romania with the Orbán-style politics or Putin that has mobilized voters beyond ideological divisions," he says.
Prof. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi says that this mobilization was powerful both in the country and abroad, so people were frightened by the country's imagination of nationalists and wanted Romania to stay in the EU and NATO. As he points out, it was not driven by any party. They are different associations and social groups that have different goals on a regular basis, have been exploited, united. A coalition of different coalitions was formed to prevent populist power.
– All these coalitions have utilized their well-trained mechanisms to keep Romania in Europe. Against Putin. And it worked. It was simply the mobilisation of Romanian society. immense mobilization. Starting with university cities that have shown election attendance of over 70 percent, which has not occurred in years," he says.
But most of all, he pays attention to students. As he says, don't let Dan turn to it, although it was active on TikTok, they mobilized themselves.
– all student in the country has become a propaganda student against Simon. Students appeared in a immense number at the election – he says.
George Vadim Tiugea besides talks about young people.
"The decisive origin was the mobilisation of fresh voters by Nicușor Dan, which yet secured his victory. This is seen compared to the first round, but besides to another choices. They are especially young people who are not usually curious in politics, but have seen Simion as a threat to freedom and democracy and as a renovator of erstwhile dictatorships from Romania's history. Fascist and Communist – he emphasizes.
Fear of Russia, which interfered in the Romanian elections in December, has done its job, and surely in this respect the situation and social sentiments are incomparable to Poland today.
However, there are many similarities between the 2 countries. It's a strong polarization of society. A immense increase in anti-system sentiments and aversion to the major parties that have ruled so far. Even the division of the country erstwhile it comes to the electorate – into the country and the city. Romania, smaller in numbers than Poland, however, has a very strong diaspora abroad.
Further part of the article below:
This division is an crucial background. There's no mention of it.
Country breakdown, Romanian society breakdown
George Vadim Tiugea thus explains the division of Romanian society: – There is simply a deep division between conventional conservative groups that inhabit mainly agrarian areas and tiny cities, and progressive liberal groups, concentrated in large and medium-sized cities. Each group sees the another as Romania's betraying national interest. Sometimes this division even breaks down conventional political parties – specified as social democrats, supported mainly by conservatives and nostalgics towards communism – or even full families.
Professor Alina Mungiu-Pippidi besides refers to this division.
– Romania, like Poland, is simply a very agrarian country. Even more than Poland – he emphasizes. Many people in this village went abroad. As he says, all the villages left, "with all their mentality." They did not integrate, and even did not adapt to the level of the country to which they emigrated.
Romanian diaspora mostly voted for the right and hoped for this Simion. This time, however, the mobilisation of society has caused the voices abroad to become very equal.
– It wasn't a uniform mass of right-wing people. They were right-wing people. Among Mr. Simion's supporters were actual fascists. But there were fewer of them – he says about his voters a political scientist.
However, many – as he points out – were those who nostalgically mention communism. – They were besides the strong backbone of the anti-vaccination movement, which played a very crucial function in Romania. Romania is the lowest vaccination rate in the EU. This is partially due to the activism of these groups, Mr. Simion himself and the wife of Mr. Georgesc, whose candidacy was cancelled in December. She was the leader of the anti-vaccine movement. In this way they built their facilities – explains Prof. Alina Mungiu-Pippidi.
As we hear, people were told that they were never in power, that they were not corrupt, that they promoted Romania's interests and a healthy lifestyle.
– wellness and nature are a very crucial component of their communication and attractiveness. But it worked for people erstwhile political parties were divided before the first circular of elections. The minute everyone else united against them, and they themselves were portrayed as the enemy force of Europe, everything changed. The fact that Moscow enjoyed Mr. Simion's advancement was adequate evidence, says the political scientist.
Further part of the article below:
Ultimately, the consequence of the elections in Romania was decided not by diaspora, but by large cities.
– They are more populated than agrarian areas. And that shifted the balance. Actually, all the townspeople across the country, but three, and we have 42, voted for Mr. Dan. On the another hand, the districts, the deep province, voted for Mr. Simion. It utilized to be the electoral base of the erstwhile communist party. However, attendance there was now low, as active residents left for the West," he added.
What did this fight look like in practice before the second circular of elections?
What the run looked like on the last straight
As Cristian Pîrvulescu says, the final phase of the run was very intense.
– civilian society, independent media, and even any spiritual and academic voices have made strong calls for democratic vigilance. Diaspora took part in the election in a evidence number. It was more a voice against Simion than a voice against Dan – against extremism, against Romania's imagination of turning distant from liberal democracy. Nevertheless, Dan's image as a rational, uncorruptible and predictable leader made this choice possible," he comments.
George Vadim Tiugea tells that the final phase of the run was different due to the fact that George Simion avoided direct debates with Nicușor Dan due to the fact that he wanted to avoid losses. That during the only debate in which both participated, Dan presented himself as a more experienced politician, and Simion utilized mostly rhetoric and personnel attacks.
In addition, he relied mostly on the support of Călin Georgescu, the winner of the first circular of December 2024, which was disqualified by the Constitutional Court decision.
– Therefore, Simion was never seen as an independent candidate, but simply as an agent of Georgescu and more broadly – Putin. He besides made controversial statements, e.g. that he would release 500,000 government officials to make the state more effective (prawlikely inspired by Elon Musk's actions towards DOGE in the US), or that he would halt supporting Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression," he added.
In his opinion, George Simion's defeat with Nicușor Dan was not truly a large surprise: – Only the numbers proved higher than usual. Turnout at 65 percent is simply a consequence that Romania has not seen in 20 years.
Is he arrogant of the election results?
Here is the main lesson from Romania: "There is specified a danger in the countries of Central and east Europe
– Of course, I can say a little. Especially since young people realized that their voice could make a difference. The main impulse for them was the fear of losing rights and freedom. Social media were the main tool to scope them. However, I am not arrogant that so many people inactive want to return to the past, and that they are dissatisfied with their lives," he replies.
He stresses:
"These groups consist not only of the elderly, but besides of young people who did not experience totalitarianism, whose parents went to work in Western Europe, and whose grandparents gave them a distorted version of the story," he says.
Prof. Cristian Pîrvulescu adds that Romania has sent a strong signal to Europe: "Despite its weaknesses, it is not ready to turn democracy into populism. These elections reposition Romania as a committed associate of the European Union, distancing it from the non-liberal axis of which Hungary is part. This is besides a blow to external actors, including Russia, who tried to usage the elections in Romania for their own purposes.
What moods are being observed present in Romania?
– Public discourse after the election is besides full of relief and caution. Many celebrate the triumph of democratic values, but at the same time see the fragility of the current situation. Social media are full of reflection on what may have been lost, and conventional media item the request to reconstruct assurance in the institutions," she says.
