English
Reporter: Why did you choose to make an "analysis" of the Romanian political scene?
Ionel Niţu: Because it is an intellectual challenge. And because I believe that 2014 is the zero year for Romanian politics. It is the year that marks the end of a manner of governing; it is the year when the polarization of society will have reached its peak, it is the year when in the vicinity of Romania things that were hard to imagine one year ago.
From an economic point of view, 2014 will be the year of the reset, many businesses will disappear to leave room for others, because unfortunately in Romania politics determine economics.
In my opinion, 2014 is an important year because it will define what will happen to Romania for the next ten years. The presidential election which will be held in the autumn of 2014 is one that marks the end of a politically tense period: two suspensions of the president, two periods of cohabitation, four prime-ministers with countless government changes, two successful votes of no-confidence. It is also the possible beginning of a new political era (I've called it "the second republic", to the extent where the Constitution will be changed as well) and of the recalibration of the power relations in Romania.
Whoever gets elected president this year will also appoint the new prime minister in 2016, when the legislative elections will take place. Unless it is changed, Romania's constitution has very clear provisions, which state that the president automatically designates as prime-minister the leader of the party that has the simple majority, and in Romania this hasn't happened since 1992.
What I am trying to say is that, in fact, whoever gets elected president this year, could govern, one way or another, or in the form of a tandem, until 2024.
Reporter: Who are the possible candidates for the presidential elections which will take place in November?
Ionel Niţu: The list could have about 12- 13 names - Victor Ponta, Crin Antonescu, Sorin Oprescu, Călin Popescu Tăriceanu, Mugur Isărescu, Klaus Iohannis, Raed Arafat, Cătălin Predoiu, Mihai Răzvan Ungureanu, Elena Udrea, Eugen Tomac, Teodor Meleşcanu, George Cristian Maior. Let's not forget the surprise candidate (that I have already written about), even though the more time goes by, the likelihood of such a candidate appearing decreases. We may however get some more exotic candidates.
The mechanism by which one of the 12 - 13 will become a president is far more complicated than it looks. The need for a strong political support is obvious (either from a political party or from an alliance), as well as the need of an intelligent strategy, of some mobilizing messages. Unlike in other years, given the unpleasant experience of cohabitation, I think that this year the team will matter as well, especially the president/prime-minister pair.
Reporter: What kind of president does Romania need until 2024?
Ionel Niţu: There are many opinions on that subject, but after a rather difficult period, and which- is being made more difficult by the complex and international regional and international developments - I think that we need to have a less conflict-inclined, balanced president, that has vision and that places the nation's interest above their own.
Reporter: Does such a character exist?
Ionel Niţu: I don't know yet. I've only started watching carefully the political news four months ago.
Reporter: Over the last nine years, the political scene has been rife with scandals. Do we need more scandals or do we need quiet?
Ionel Niţu: What matters is what we really want. Do we want more conflicts or do we want a quiet government?
I repeat, I think that Romanians are tired of conflicts. Whether it's good or bad, we could argue that for a long time.
But when I say quiet, I don't mean in the meaning used by the spokespersons of the Popular Movement, namely "everyone should stop running their mouths so we can keep filling our coffers". I mean quiet in the sense of everyone doing their job, no longer attacking each other, and the institutions doing their jobs as set out by law.
We currently have constant bickering on TV and I expect the aggressiveness to increase.
Reporter: But people do want bread and circuses.
Ionel Niţu: That is the perverse effect of televised debates, as well as of their polarization. We don't have a neutral press, with very few exceptions, everyone has an affiliation and there is almost no show on TV where a political leader or party doesn't get attacked, discredited, sometimes even insulted.
On the other hand, that is what the audience is like: they need their ever bigger dose of tabloid material, of scandals... But in that regard, politicians have their own contribution as well, because their communication strategies focus on the negative, on criticism. Have you ever seen any discussion focusing on projects?
Reporter: When Traian Băsescu started his own scandals (whether they were right, that they had a correct motivation or not), they did break the "peace" from the period of Adrian Năstase, thus creating the opportunity for things that were being concealed, to be brought to light. For example: "the clever boys in energy" is an expression which shed light on a situation we didn't know about. And he brought it out in the open.
Ionel Niţu: That's true, that was when the public finally found out about that kind of business that was harmful to the state budget. But that doesn't mean he has resolved that issue.
Reporter: He didn't, but at least he has put it in the spotlight. This is a quality as well. It was a progress. It's true, however, that he did not follow it through.
Klaus Iohannis, the most redoubtable candidate of the right
Reporter: What do you think the parliamentary elections in May will be like?
Ionel Niţu: That moment will be a political litmus test, and when that time comes we may see changes in the candidacies for the presidency.
We will probably have the lowest voter turnover, I have estimated it to reach about 33%. It may increase by 1 or 2%, due to the stakes of the presidential elections and of the announcements made by the right-wing parties, according to which, once the parliamentary elections are over, it will be decided if Crin Antonescu remains the president of the PNL, or if alliances get made.
The Europarliamentary elections are already foreshadowing political communication strategies concerning people and with very few exceptions, debates on issues which are relevant in a European context.
Reporter: Will Crin Antonescu resign if the PNL gets less than 20% of the Europarliamentary elections?
Ionel Niţu: I think he will resign and if he doesn't, I still don't think that he would run for the presidential elections. That has been my opinion for more than a year. Mr. Antonescu plays the role of the kibitzer on this chess board. He comments from the side, he doesn't join the game, he doesn't want to lead.
Reporter: There are talks that Antonescu is getting ready to run for president with Klaus Iohannis as a prime-minister.
Ionel Niţu: Yes, this partnership has been announced, but in my opinion, Antonescu will be replaced by Iohannis. I don't rule out, the return of Tăriceanu and even of Teodor Meleşcanu, even though it is unlikely,.
Reporter: Does Klaus Iohannis stand any chance?
Ionel Niţu: Yes, looking at the right-wing parties, he currently appears the most redoubtable candidate, even though, paradoxically, he is the least vocal.
The most likely scenario: Victor Ponta - Klaus Iohannis in the second round
Reporter: Which personalities are the most trusted by the public?
Ionel Niţu: It depends on who's doing the measuring ...Those who have been featured the most frequently at the top of the chart are Mugur Isărescu, Raed Arafat, Klaus Iohannis, followed by Sorin Oprescu, Victor Ponta, Călin Popescu Tăriceanu.
Reporter: It's interesting that there are two foreigners in that top 3 of personalities people trust.
Ionel Niţu: Yes. If I were to quote Lucian Boia, a foreigner could save our nation.
Reporter: Which do you think will be the most reliable scenario for the presidential elections?
Ionel Niţu: It's far more complicated than it seems. I am working on a methodological framework for that purpose. Very simplistically put, it now seems that we will have Victor Ponta and Klaus Iohannis in the second round. Just as well, in the final round we could have Mr. Antonescu versus Mr. Tăriceanu or Mr. Oprescu versus Mr. Ungureanu. The left will choose the candidate that has the best odds against the candidate of the right.
Reporter: Going back to Ponta-Iohannis, who wins in that scenario?
Ionel Niţu: It depends on who each of them teams up with. The strength of a team comes from the fact that you can attract votes from the other faction.
Together, the left and the right share two almost equal voter pools of 40-45%, and between them lie the UDMR and PRM-PPDD. There are also the so-called "anti-establishment" voters. Another significant block will be that of the undecided (perhaps somewhere around 20%). Whereas in the first round the strength and the infrastructure of the parties will matter the most, in the second round the personalities or the two candidates will take precedence. What will also matter will be the partner. The one that is presented as the current or future prime-minister must succeed in attracting votes from the 10% pool of voters (it's rather unlikely they will succeed in attracting votes from the UDMR). The strategies are in fact focused on taking votes from others.
Right wing leaders are quarrelling among themselves, they are fighting within that pool of 40-45% and, for example, any rise of the "Miscarea Populara" (People's movement) party will result in a loss of votes by the PDL. It's a zero-sum game.
The important victory for the right is that of the elections for the European parliament, because out of that one or two leaders will emerge. In my opinion there will be two pairs for the right, most likely Klaus Iohannis - Vasile Blaga and Mihai Răzvan Ungureanu - Elena Udrea. But the PDL will have a difficult decision to make, and a potential pair made up of Ponta and Blaga could win easily.
What is certain is that the ball is now in the court of the righ. We are waiting to see what they do after May 25th.
I've used the terms of fight, battle, etc. because, unfortunately, that is another one of the realities of Romania in the year 2014: we don't have a competition, but rather a political struggle.
Reporter: What chances does Crin Antonescu have to run for the presidential elections? He seems better when he in the opposition.
Ionel Niţu: It's true, and that is why I don't think he will run for president. He is good when he is in the opposition, but he has kind of lost his edge because he has already been campaigning for a year, and he makes decisions without consulting with anybody first, which the party accepts increasingly hard. In my opinion, Mr. Antonescu will eventually retire.
Reporter: What will the "hostilities" be like after the Europarliamentary elections?
Ionel Niţu: By the end of June, the right must rebuild itself, because they are fighting for the first round. During that time, the left will only have a candidate unofficially. September 17th is the deadline for filing the candidacies for president. I expect the left will take their time, because it's got enough time between June and September.
Furthermore, the left will not have any issues in the first round, as their official candidate could reach the second round without any difficulty, provided they only have one, rather than several. If the right brings forward more than four candidates, (which is the current situation), then the left can opt for 2 candidates that it can take into the second round. In doing so, the second round would not cause any major worries for the government alliance.
In my opinion, after the elections for the European Parliament, the right will have two teams, and it will be either one of them, or a permutation thereof that will be elected, because those pairs aren't set in stone.
The most predictable are PDL-PNL. Let's not forget the recent speculations concerning the fact that the PNL will enter the European Popular Party.
The PNL and PDL are the "big" parties in the opposition and they could create an alliance, which the others can opt to join or not. Then we also have the parties that share the common trait of being detached (maybe also afraid) of Traian Băsescu.
The political considerations are simple, if the PNL and PDL (which are in an obvious decline) don't join forces, even though they are now the biggest political parties in the opposition, a merger of the smaller parties (the People's Movement Party - PMP, FC, New Romania - NR and perhaps the National Peasant's Party - PNŢCD and the Romanian Ecologist Party - PER) will bring to the creation of an opposition force which would surpass each of them taken separately (somewhere around 12-16%).
If that's how thing end up, then it becomes predictable that the PNL and PDL would enter an alliance and designate a single candidate for the presidency, in tandem (ex: Klaus Iohannis/Crin Antonescu - Cătălin Predoiu/ Vasile Blaga). The other right-wing political parties (PMP, FC, NR, PNTCD) will also designate a candidate or a pair (for example Mihai Răzvan Ungureanu-Elena Udrea).
Reporter: Should we expect a candidacy of Elena Udrea for the presidential elections?
Ionel Niţu: Elena Udrea will run for president even if she were to do so merely to force the PSD to do the same, as well as to further divide the electorate, and to get it accustomed to this idea/test the waters for the next elections.
Isn't it clear that the communication strategy of the PMP is to never have Elena Udrea miss a day on TV?
Mrs. Udrea is a controversial character, but the PMP-Traian Băsescu strategy is bringing her to the forefront almost every day. Monopolizing the attention of the public - regardless of the controversies she causes (for example through the announcement that Miss Romania has a member of the party) - also helps force the other political factors to accommodate her.
If it comes to having to make such a decision, perhaps the PSD will choose Ecaterina Andronescu, who is at the opposite end of the spectrum.
"The rebuilding of the USL could be the card for an easy victory in the second round"
Reporter: What did you think of the move of Călin Popescu Tăriceanu? Was it a winning or a losing move?
Ionel Niţu: Risky. In the short term, it was a winning move, in the long it probably wasn't.
If the USL gets rebuilt, the problem of Mr. Tăriceanu will have to deal with is how the party will perceive him - if they take him back or not. Another scenario sees him as a possible candidate backed by the PSD-PC-UNPR alliance, which is rather difficult because the PSD will most likely call for a candidate of its own.
C.P. Tăriceanu could also act as a team mate for Ponta, with the latter running for president. The recent statements of Mr. Ponta, the ones concerning the center-right president and center-left prime-minister, are interesting as a political message. He is thus attempting to tear down one of the main one of the main arguments of the of the opposition that the PSD is "the overarching party that rules the country". "Don't give them everything, don't give them the Cotroceni palace, because then they will have full control ", that would be the message of the opposition.
If the PNL gets less than 20% in the European Parliament elections, and as a result, Crin Antonescu resigns, as per the rumors making the rounds, there are the alternatives of Călin Popescu Tăriceanu or Teodor Meleşcanu, both of whom support the restoration of the USL.
The rebuilding of the USL could be the ace that would allow winning the second round without any problems, even though, I repeat, it seems rather unlikely.
Reporter: Will Victor Ponta run for the presidential elections?
Ionel Niţu: There is a 49% chance he will.
Victor Ponta will only run for president if he has no choice (pressure from the party, as a result of the political context, the polls etc.). At any rate, he can join the race at any time, because he has the inherent visibility that he gets from his roles as prime-minister and party leader.
A problem that would bring additional complications to the elections would be if Victor Ponta didn't follow his prime-minister term through. Traian Băsescu said, and I quote: "The day is not far when I will file a criminal complain against Victor Ponta for corruption and abuse in office".
If Victor Ponta loses his position of prime-minister, then he will run for the presidential elections, because otherwise he would have legitimacy problems as head of the party.
A possible problem could be the person that they intend to create a team with, because a team made up of people with the same political affiliation could prove unsuccessful in the second round.
The statement made on April 4th, by Victor Ponta, on Facebook, has two parts: I will step down from the position of prime-minister, if I don't have a president I can get along with, and I will retire from politics if I become president. It is also an explanation intended to show us that he isn't clinging to power.
The prime-minister subsequently explained the reasons. His strategy, of saying that if he were to become president, he would appoint a prime-minister from outside the PSD, is noteworthy, as it invalidates the criticism of the opposition, which describes the PSD as the "all-powerful party". He has also reiterated the idea that he will only run for president if the candidate proposed by the USL can win the elections. This is a reference to the candidates favored by the left, an option which Mr. Ponta will most likely follow until June, depending on how the right will reposition itself, without Mr. Antonescu.
For a long time I thought that the duel between the PNL-PSD is part of a strategy intended to accaparate the public space by driving out other players. The more the threat represented by the fragmentation of the right and the actions of Mr. Băsescu becomes clearer to the PSD and the PNL, the more the chances of a restoration of the USL increase. Even Mr. Antonescu recently mentioned a possible option with a president from the PSD (Ponta) and a prime-minister from the PNL (Iohannis).
Reporter: Is Sebastian Ghiţă the weak link Ponta's chain?
Ionel Niţu: Some say he is his "Achilles' heel".
Reporter: And what is Crin Antonescu's Achilles' heel?
Ionel Niţu: I think everyone has such a heel.
Reporter: Dragoş Dobrescu?
Ionel Niţu: Possibly.
Reporter: And in the case of Elena Udrea?
Ionel Niţu: She is her own Achilles' heel.
Reporter: And in the case of PDL, Videanu, Blaga, Berceanu its weak points?
Ionel Niţu: Possibly. And I think that for everyone more weak links can be added. To me, a serious problem is that which, put very simplistically, sounds kind of like this: our corrupt people are less dirty than theirs.
"Băsescu and the institutions will make the difference between the first and the second round"
Reporter: What do you think is the strategy of Traian Băsescu? He has already announced he intends to remain active in politics.
Ionel Niţu: One of the keys of the electoral process that will take place this autumn concerns not so much what the president does until the time of the elections, but what he does afterwards. Once we know what the president does on the first day that he is no longer in Cotroceni, then we will be able to decrypt both the messages, as well as the scenarios he is currently working on.
There was a scenario which stated that the president has considered (at least under a certain context) ending his term ahead of time, for two reasons: so he can enter the campaign against his preferred candidate; so he can influence the course of the presidential elections, by shortening the electoral pre-campaign and thwarting the plans of the PSD to bring in a surprise candidate or to rebuild the USL.
Another alternative would be Traian Băsescu's departure from the country. There have been signals something like that might happen, whether it would be his occupying of an important position in an international organization, whether there has been speculation on an agreement in that regard with another country, that would offer him hosting, in order to protect him against possible vendettas.
I think that he will remain in the country, and he will try to take over the leadership of the opposition, of the right, in preparation for 2016.
Ionel Niţu: On the other hand, if one sees the political stage through the eyes of Traian Băsescu, they will notice that his strategy for the People's Movement (Mişcarea Populară) (since back in 2013) had two steps: 2014 and 2016 (the parliamentary elections).
Băsescu entering the opposition would seem obvious, even though he is the president.
If we watch his speeches, we will see that he only sees things in black and white, friends and enemies. His favorite targets seem to be Victor Ponta, Călin Popescu Tăriceanu and Crin Antonescu, at least for now. I expect his strategies to undergo some changes, starting in June.
Traian Băsescu will be tempted to designate his successor, to the extent possible one that resembles him. I think that between the first and the second round, Băsescu and his institutions will make the difference. I've been constantly saying that.
Reporter: Will we see greater scandals this year?
Ionel Niţu: I think we haven't seen nothing yet.
And in this equation, the institutions of the state, such as the DNA and the DIICOT, will play an important role next year.
Reporter: Traian Băsescu usually bluffs.
Ionel Niţu: He does, sometimes. Sometimes, he actually does hold good cards. The good cards come from the institutions and sometimes from his political instinct.
Reporter: All of his scenarios are included in other scenarios and sometimes they are so rich, that they can be hijacked.
Ionel Niţu: Imagine that we are sitting at a poker table and that Băsescu is playing. He keeps asking for more cards, he raises with a confidence that makes you think he is holding the best card. He doesn't hesitate. Reality shows us that often times, he wasn't holding the best card.
But Traian Băsescu does set the public agenda. He makes the topics that the others raportează.
Reporter: Each time he was forced to reveal his cards, people were taken by surprise. Each time he had something.
Ionel Niţu: It's true. He always has something to say.
Reporter: Sometimes, his strategy is to get you to run into an obstacle that he had prepared beforehand, which was not even visible.
Ionel Niţu: Yes, when he lets you know that something may happen and you can't tell what is next, but sometimes it hits you directly.
As a simple observer, it would seem to me that he has pushed the limits of the Constitution all these years. I am not saying that he broke it, but he has pushed its limits. In the last referendum, a decision which required the modicum of morality would have been to resign. We would have no longer had the USL, and he could have possibly played a different role in the reconfiguration of the political scene.
Moreover, we now have the flood of corruption cases that is spilling on top of us. I would be curious what the West thinks of us now?
We've come to the point where we are bragging about the bad things, we are exploiting the number of corruption cases.
Reporter: These institutions usually do their job in electoral years, don't they?
Ionel Niţu: I hope so. But I can't help but notice that after the PNL was brought to its knees, the PSD now seems to have become the main target. And it makes sense anyway, the only difference will be that the ones who tell me that the ones who are stealing will be in the government. But I am intrigued at the celerity and at the almost daily frequency at which these cases are being put in motion.
Reporter: Maybe they were already prepared.
Ionel Niţu: The prosecutors receive a notification in January and by March we already have a conviction, when other cases have been lying around for ten years?
Reporter: What will the strategy of the UNPR be?
Ionel Niţu: I myself call it the "beck and call party", which, in the name of a so-called national interest, can change allegiance at a moment's notice. It currently seems to be rallied behind Ponta.
Reporter: How will the political scene change after a possible conviction of Voiculescu?
Ionel Niţu: It matters for perception purposes. If he gets convicted by the time of the presidential elections, then yes, it will affect the government's alliance. He is one of the leaders in power. And one of the topics that the opposition is using in its message is corruption.
Reporter: What will George Maior do?
Ionel Niţu: My opinion is that the current head of the SRI is not to be considered for the presidential elections. He told me himself that he doesn't have any such intentions.
One such scenario would be for George Cristian Maior to run for prime-minister, together with Victor Ponta as president.
It is worth mentioning, that the head of the Romanian intelligence service, has his popularity polled by several polling institutes. Moreover, he would have the support of Traian Băsescu, who did not hesitate to express his preference in that regard.
"Didn't we know we would become a target when we followed the Americans in Iraq?"
Reporter: Will the Ukraine-Russia conflict change the Romanian political scene?
Ionel Niţu: Yes, because it changes the perception of the electorate concerning the future leader.
Moreover, this evolution should generate talks and political debates concerning the functions of the future president when it comes to national security. I haven't seen any presidential candidate do that before, perhaps only Mihai Răzvan Ungureanu or Eugen Tomac did so in passing.
Not one of them brings in a vision concerning the nation's defense.
I think that, just like the Government comes before the parliament with all the ministers and the governing program, the candidates in the presidential elections should similarly present to the electorate their team (the future heads of the secret services, the presidential advisors etc.) and their proposals for the nation's security strategy.
In doing so we would not have a fight between people, but rather a debate which concerns projects. And the decisions of the future team, not necessarily of the future president would become more predictable.
Reporter: I've seen the Romanian politicians use the international conflict between Russia and Ukraine to gain points at home. What is your opinion on that?
Ionel Niţu: It is a ping-pong ball which they are throwing into the court. The statement of Ionel Blănculescu was extremely unfortunate. (ed. note: analyst Ionel Blanculescu recently said that the missile shield of Deveselu and the increase of the number of American soldiers make Romania a "perfect target").
Reporter: But why? It is a real threat. We are becoming a target.
Ionel Niţu: Which we have accepted. Didn't we know we would become a target when we followed the Americans in Iraq?
There is a balance between risk and security. You can't just reap the benefits. How can we except to be protected by NATO, and not contribute anything in return?
Reporter: Yes, but we also want natural gas from Russia.
Ionel Niţu: We need to decide. We need to achieve a fine-tuned balance: pragmatic trade relations with Russia, political and military relations with NATO. The strategic alliance with the US and our commitments in the EU and NATO are non-negotiable. With Russia we still have more negotiations to do, but it's like in the case of tango, it takes two to dance.
Reporter: There is an increasing number of regions that want to declare their independence - Catalonia, Venice, Scotland. How great is the risk of Transylvania separating from Romania?
Ionel Niţu: 0.1%. But we need to pay attention to the statements we make as a country. Because, if we acknowledge the independence of Kosovo, I don't know if we would be doing ourselves a favor.
Reporter: On that matter, you agree with Traian Băsescu.
Ionel Niţu: No. On that matter, I agree with Romania's position. I don't agree with the position of Victor Ponta, but at the time, when Romania adopted that decision, he wasn't the head of a political party, nor was he a head of government. And Romania can't just change its strategy whenever the people in power get replaced.
"Businesspeople did not come here to comment on the Romanian politics, but to make a profit"
Reporter: The investors I've talked to are very disappointed in what is happening in Romanian politics.
Ionel Niţu: I have many friends who are pleased with how their businesses are doing.
The biggest problem that foreigners see in Romania is the lack of dependability and predictability and of bureaucracy. This also applies in politics.
Reporter: They are afraid of the November 2014 moment.
Ionel Niţu: Let's be serious. They did not come here to comment the Romanian politics, they want to make a profit. They will probably stay here if they still turn out a profit.
I think the question is what will the Government do to bring in more investments, to make the business environment more attractive.
• "Romania seems a militarized state"
Reporter: There is increasing talk that people from the secret services have been leading the political scene from the shadows. What is your opinion about that?
Ionel Niţu: I think that in Romania, it's the politicians that dictate, that create economic mechanisms and not the former political police, or the current secret services.
Reporter: Whenever you have access to information, you have power.
Ionel Niţu: You have power when you have access to knowledge, not information.
Reporter: Does Romania have the highest number of informants?
Ionel Niţu: I would rather not comment. According to the press, the Romanian information services are the biggest in Europe (compared to the number of citizens). If that is true, then it is normal for the number of sources to be proportionally high.
When one looks at it from the outside, Romania seems to have become a militarized state; by the way, a prosecutor has just been appointed a prefect. There are many troops, forces with overlapping roles, I think we have the highest number of generals "per capita", so to speak, without being at war with anybody.
I think that we need to pay at least as much attention to prosperity (as we currently do to security). And when it comes to national security, we need to shift our emphasis from counteracting (and punishing) to prevention. It doesn't make me any happier that we are filling our prisons with corrupt criminals. I think that what we need to do is to prevent corruption. I won't go into detail here, because the issue is complex and it concerns certain institutional customs and management policies, but I believe that this would be a fundamental issue for the future president. As well as for the new republic, which involves a change of system, of paradigm.
Reporter: The large ratio of workers in the intelligence services could also mean, or at least that would be the expected thing, that we have the best informed decision makers.
Ionel Niţu: Not necessarily. It could also mean that we have a weak state that is incapable of using other means to solve its problems. The intelligence service are part of the immune system of society.
Reporter: Having such a large structure for collecting information, I normally address the reports to the decision makers, and they benefit from an extensive network for gathering information.
You were in charge of the quality of information.
Ionel Niţu: Of the analyses.
Reporter: Well that's pretty much what quality consists of, having analyses. However, this analysis is being conducted in one of the most corrupt countries in Europe.
Under these circumstances, I can ask myself the question: what do the decision makers use the information provided by the services for?
Ionel Niţu: To make decisions. Or not to make them. Or to read them and say that it is not their job to act on it. It is a touchy subject, which can't be approached theoretically. And in order to discuss concretely, we would have to give examples, which is something I can't do. I am only saying that there are clear legal provisions on what the intelligence services must do: report. From there on, it all depends on the conscience of the decision maker, on their ability to make decisions etc.
Reporter: Or perhaps to serve up cases to the National Anti-Corruption Department at the desired pace and on an agenda of personal interest?
Ionel Niţu: There are multiple ways for the decision maker to react to a piece of information, it depends on their personality first of all. And on their interests.
Reporter: What is your take on the process of corruption or the volume of corruption in Romania? Has it increased or has it decreased?
Ionel Niţu: It's the same.
Reporter: Is it one of Romania's important problems?
Ionel Niţu: It is an important problem because corrupt people are stealing from my money too, because they are affecting the fairness in the business sector, where I am present as well, it affects competition, the competitiveness and the image of my country.
Reporter: Has the level of corruption remained the same, or almost the same, since 1990?
Ionel Niţu: I think it was higher in the 90s, in the years of the robbers. I think that the institutions are now beginning, to work better, hence the numerous arrests and convictions. But the mechanisms for stealing have also become more refined. The problem is that the system hasn't changed. And I think that the blame for that lies with the entire political class, and especially the president. Over the last 9-10 years all the big political parties have been in power for certain periods of time, and yet the system hasn't changed. That is why I was talking about the zero-year in politics and about "the second republic".
• Polemic: Why are politicians important for Romania?
Reporter: Why are the president, the prime-minister important for Romania?
Ionel Niţu: Because our standard of living, security, prosperity depend on them.
Reporter: Did it look like to you that the entire number of governments that have succeeded one another over these 20 years have had any effect on the standard of living?
Ionel Niţu: Yes.
Reporter: To me it didn't.
Ionel Niţu: Yes.
Reporter: The opinion has taken shape that there are some permanent changes in the Romanian politics, such as the joining or the accession to NATO or the European Union. Right now for instance, we have as our consensual goal joining the Eurozone, but other than that, no strategy has ever existed.
People are spreading ideas that revolve around a core notion that the politicians have done nothing else but work for the benefit of the individuals it is made of, never for the country.
Therefore, I have a problem with understanding why the election of the president, of the prime-minister or of the government has any importance, because in that regard, nothing will ever happen. They will never care about us. Politicians have never cared about us.
Politics has become isolated, it has no connection to the economy as a whole, nor to my needs of a social, moral or of any other nature.
Politicians operate in a world of their own and if they do have any effects on my concrete life, it is just a coincidence.
Ionel Niţu: I can't agree with you.
Reporter: With the fact that nobody represents us?
Ionel Niţu: Yes. It is a generalization that I don't understand. Aren't they Romanians like you? You speak about them as if they were aliens.
Reporter: It doesn't matter that they are Romanians, the fact that a certain politician is Romanian doesn't mean he represents me. He joins a system that cares for itself and for his interests. The political system is a system intent on dumbing down, which doesn't involve working for the benefit of the community, but for one's own. This is obvious for everybody.
Ionel Niţu: I don't think it is obvious for everybody.
Reporter: Do we have any initiative that benefit people? Other then the fact that the public usefulness of the initiative happens to coincide with the idea of the politician of promoting himself so he can be elected to a higher position and to profit more?
There isn't any, ever.
Politicians can sometimes take measures that are beneficial to us. When that happens, it is clear that someone has a specific interest in it happening, and it is their own, that is their motivation, it isn't their motivation to create a better life for me, ever.
Note at what happens with the laws. For example, the Lupu law - of giving the lands to the peasants, was blocked by Traian Băsescu in the Parliament to avoid having the political benefit go to the PNTCD at the time.
Ionel Niţu: You rule out the politician who cares for the welfare of the society, of the state.
Reporter: I have no example of such a politician. Who would that be?
Ionel Niţu: What you are seeing is only the part that communicates a strategy, a policy ...
I don't think that the 20 million Romanians share your ideas. If that were the case, they wouldn't go and vote, they would no longer designate representatives.
Reporter: How big is the voter turnover in general?
Ionel Niţu: In the elections for the European parliament, about 30%, in the presidential elections - over 40%. In the last referendum it has neared 50%.
Reporter: Statistics confirm my claim, most people don't feel like politicians are important.
Ionel Niţu: The fact that citizens don't go and vote can mean that they are disgusted with politics, but it can also mean that they are not interested in the problems of the country, they have a business of their own and they don't care. I have many friends who not only haven't voted in years, but they refuse to read any political news. And that is a bad thing for democracy, it is a negative vote against the entire political class.
Reporter: People who are educated, who are intellectuals, don't go and vote. It is a well-known fact that it is the lower class that participates, that gets electoral presents, such as plastic buckets or food. What is your explanation for the fact that offering free meals in exchange for votes still works?
Ionel Niţu: This is a typical electoral method.
Reporter: This is a clear demonstration of the validity of the situation I described. Offering them meatballs to eat is the only way to motivate them to come to the vote, there is no other.
Ionel Niţu: The people who come and vote for this kind of electoral handouts are few.
Reporter: Spreading benefits is a generalized phenomenon. You start off with significant benefits by which you offer sinecures to the people who support you, you buy the rest with lower positions, and the masses you fool with free meatballs.
Ionel Niţu: You have a very simplistic view. First of all, what you are saying only happens in the electoral campaign.
Reporter: The free meals may only exist during the electoral campaign, but the promises of sinecures exist throughout the entire political cycle.
Ionel Niţu: The problem is how to bring the debate to become objective and to focus on results, because in Romania, we have this penchant for voting emotionally; people go and vote for a specific candidate because he is tall, clever, handsome, or because he promised them something.
Reporter: You claim that the existing parties are vectors of the various segments of the nation.
Ionel Niţu: Yes, that is the way it should be. That is why the parties have appeared, to represent different segments of society.
Reporter: You say that this is the state of things. Don't tell me that this is how it is in theory and that therefore it applies in real life.
I maintain that the actual state of things doesn't validate the theory.
Politicians follow their own interests. I don't know any politicians that represent vectors of Romania's national interest.
Ionel Niţu: But do you know any abroad?
Reporter: It hasn't interested me, I am talking about my life in Romania.
Ionel Niţu: I want to understand what vectors of the national interest means.
Reporter: Perhaps in past history we will be able to find some, even here in Romania.
Ionel Niţu: We have this tendency to overly value the past. In sociology it's called "the myth of the rosy past".
Reporter: What I am living now proves to me that this does not currently exist that there is no political force that really brings together the interests of a large portion of the population, that they are not interested in the progress of the country, and in the improvement of the economic and political life.
Ionel Niţu: I am convinced that among the current politicians there are some people that place the common good above their own or that of a group; people who believe that Romania deserves a different destiny and act towards that goal. If that is not true, then my preoccupation with political analysis is pointless. I am part of the idealists who think that Romania needs a different destiny, and that destiny is defined by its elites.
Reporter: Thank you!
Euro
Dolar SUA
Franc elveţian
Liră sterlină
Gram de aur
