2007, Give Or Take

The unanimity wall was been breached. Someone has dared ask out loud whether we would be better off if we waited for the next train to Europe, arriving in Brussels probably in 2010. At this point, the strong air of integration may even hurt us! So unprepared as we are, after an epic transition "longer than Time itself,' we may not be able to face the cruel real life: competition, free circulation of capital and persons, prevalent European legislation and, above all, a legal system that functions by completely different rules than those applied in Romania: normal rules.

Since the voice that dared sing a different song than the majority does not belong to one of those people who always blabber about everything and anything, it is obvious that the signal came from high levels of power. Worries about a possible official postponement, corroborated with The European Commission's Country Report, can only gain proportion. In an electoral year, a major failure by the incumbent administration could result in a collapse of the Romanian politics as we have known it for the past 14 years. So, "image' preparations have started early.

How much substance is really behind this theory, we cannot know. What we do know is that this theory cannot be excluded from the calculations related to an electoral year. Beyond it, however, remain the big questions.

Is Romania prepared for integration?

Definitely not! Not economically and not institutionally! Not to mention mentality, infrastructure and resources. This is not news, of course. Never in the history of The EU has a country been truly ready for accession when its time came. There is always a gap between what a candidate really is and what it really should be at the time of accession. There is a change that the gap currently separating Romania from EU accession standards may be smaller than the gap between EU standards and, let's say, Ireland or Greece at the time of their accession. Other countries in the region are not necessarily better prepared to face the enlargement wave either: not Poland, not Hungary and not Slovakia. Nevertheless, they have taken the step across EU borders. Romania may do the same in 2007, by virtue of the same logic. Both the politicians and the technicians in Brussels are aware of this when they negotiate with Bucharest. This is why, despite significant lagging, a political decision may prevail over technical considerations. The inertia characterizing the political processes in Brussels favors such possibility.

What could postpone Romania's accession to EU in 2007?

First of all, a domestic decision. If The Government does not accession to take place in 2007, nothing could be simpler. It is not even necessary to dispatch an important envoy to Brussels. A more or less explicit message from the chief negotiator to EU officials would do. That message would be checked with higher authorities for a possible miscommunication and, if it was confirmed, no one would force us to join Europe. All that The Romanian Government would be asked to do would be an evaluation of the time deemed necessary to surpass existing obstacles. Negotiations would go on, but under different circumstances. The EU would be free to decide how much to extend Romania's timeline, according to its own calculations and interests.

Another thing that could upset the existing timetable would be a dysfunction in the process of institutional clarification within The EU. As we all know, The Constitution and related arrangements continue to disunite the member countries rather than unite them. A prolonged crisis, a trivialization of the constitutional process would push Europe into a political "ice age' in which no strategic decision would be taken lightly. Romania's accession could therefore postponed indefinitely. There would be enough technical grounds for such postponement; no one would have to make up any. Our every-day life provides plenty such grounds.

A third reason for postponement would be a scandal big enough to ruin the credibility of Romania's Government. To some extent, one can say that the "adoptions topic' was sort of a general rehearsal. A devastating report, reactions by influential MEPs, reactions by The Commission, perhaps by governments, too, could climax into a more than justifiable and necessary postponement - from EU's standpoint, that is. Corruption would be a topic serious enough. Toying with EU documents - especially the reports by OLAF, EU's office against fraud with EU money - could ignite quite a scandal. Unlike ours, European politicians value their credibility greatly, especially when it comes to public money and illegal use of public money! The final question can, of course, be none other than: What is the best thing to do for Romania? To join EU in 2007 or wait?

Whichever way we ponder things and irrespective of how may arguments we may bring forth to fuel our fear of the dreaded encounter with the truth, there is only one answer: the sooner the better! The reason is simple: after we join EU, the governance of Romania will be only partially a function of the whims of those who use public offices exclusively for their own good! The strategic mechanisms of governance will have to comply with reasonable directives: the ones from Brussels. Even though such directives may not necessarily consider our "particularities' or our interests, these directives are the only hope for taking Romania to a point where it may resemble Europe.