Ethnicity and Politics in Romania

During 1990s, Romania was deemed by historians and scholars alike as one of the countries plunged into the challenge of ethnic minorities. However, the country has ascended to surpass various political impediments throughout her history which would have inflicted lifelong turmoil to the country’s political stability internally and Europe at large. In the mentioning of ethnic composition of Romania, Radu Cinpoes examines the impacts and role which ethnicity played in political redemption and how the influences of ethnicity react with centre-left and extreme-right representations in parliament.

The historical explanations behind the genesis of Romania’s ethnical composition before the First World War are not dealt with herein. But this study takes cognizance of how the First World War and the peace treaties following the war elevated the threshold of Romania’s minority population from 10% to above 18%. Out of this manifestation, 133,000 people were Roma, constituting 0.8% of the entire population. In acquiring a new territory, Romania was pressurized to commit herself to international consensuses concerning with human rights, in hope for the country to improve her ethnic status. However, the government of the day had visions of a homogeneous nation, with the lifelong dream of nationalism suggesting a need for the minorities to become integrated for economic, social and political prosperity (Cinpoes, 2010).

During the communism reign particularly in 1960s, nationalism began to be associated with communist ideology, which conceived a special kind of Romanian communism (Bugajski, 1993). The accumulation of national integration and the conception of Romanian society became the core agenda of this new Romanian communism. In the realm of initiating the new socialist worker, the communist regime equally sought to meet the process of assimilation. The core aim was to slowly eradicate national differences through the alleviation of ethnic minorities. The present Roma were perceived as alien elements that had to be assimilated and become Romans, and their culture which was associated with unemployment and poverty reinstated. By eradicating any elemental references to Roma, the country rejected the specificity of the Roma community within the larger context of Romania. In addition, based on the communist tenet, “private” occupation had to dissolve and completely disappear. In this regard, every factory and businesses owned by private individuals were confiscated by the government. Besides, materials and tools used in the constructing ancient Roma such as carpentry, metalworking, and jewellery making were equally confiscated and dismantled.

In return, the Roma were meant to assimilate modern agricultural practice and take part in the formation of cooperatives for production. The Roma who were eloquent in crafting metals were absorbed and employed by metallurgical cooperatives. Following the collapse of communist dispensation, about 50% of Roma employees were working in the agriculture domain because trade was prohibited for them. The Roma who kept on with traditional occupations were legally considered as “social parasites” and were capable of legal punishment. After the start of the Communist regime and the quest to assimilate the Roma, the communist regime undertook various measures and policies tailored to forcibly settle the Roma and later on ignore their existence (Schreiber, Rusu and Man, 2017).

Hungarians living in Romania constitutes the biggest minorities in Europe. Based on the formal 2002 census report, about 1, 431, 807, representing 6.6% of the total Romania population are Hungarians. The report equally exhibited the Hungarians occupy a larger share in Transylvanian counties (Brubaker, Feischmidt and Grancea, 2018). Transylvanian region was an epitome of social-economic importance in Romania, but besides this it also had a central symbolic value for both Hungarians and Romanians. Whereas the Romanians considered as the original motherland for the Romanians, the Hungarians on the other side linked it with the genesis of contemporary Hungarian culture. Based on these regards, it was assumed that the ethnic tensions before 1989 were to escalate and transform Transylvania into a potential area of risk. Until 1990, political actors and scholars contended in a view that it is through modernization that the disparities that come along with ethnicity would be bridged in the process of homogenization.

Ethno-politics is a multifaceted and complex economic, social, political and cultural process in the perspective of Romani’s political transitions. The role of ethnic nationalism after the communist politics differs inversely with not only the democratic credential of previous governments but also with the success which the economic reforms and overall levels of economic prosperity bestowed.

Following the collapse of communism, the changes of right-wing extremism in Romani have pursued a peculiar pattern. Cinpoes (2010) observed that the extreme right-wind nationalism witnesses resurgence after the disintegration of communism in Romania. The application of communism as an approach to consolidate and legitimize power, and the violence experienced during the December 1989 gives a vivid impression about Romania’s resilience with which the right wing-extremism thrived.

The events of the Great War yielded unprecedented liberalization to access of citizenship in Romania. As a result of international pressure, Romania was obliged to undertake multiple steps towards the emancipation of Jews, leading to the establishment of the new legislations on citizenship which gave citizenship to every legal inhabitant of the old kingdom and the annexed territories. The new enactment equally safeguarded the major elements of the Romanian citizenship through which citizenship would be accrued namely by descent, by marriage, and by naturalization.

The liberalization of easy access to Romanian citizenship was equally preceded by significant socio-political reunions in the country. Concrete reforms including global male suffrage, new liberal constitution of 1923, and extensive land redistribution of 1921 all contributed to restructuring the country into a multi-party parliamentary monarchy (Lugosi, 2011). The monarchy system which ensued is yet another political dispensation which articulate Romania’s lifelong struggle from the chains of ethnical suppression and salvage, based on the conception the monarchy was organized on the threshold of ethnic lines. It is after the abolishment of the monarchy system that Romania shifted to yet another dispensation of communism.

Romani’s first constitution was promulgated in 1866, and reviewed in 1923 and 1938 respectively. The country remained a constitutional monarchy until the rapture of the Second World War. In 1940, Romania suspended the 1938 constitution, leasing to the establishment of military dictatorship which reigned until the 1945. Following the end of the war, military pressure from the Soviet Union led to the abolishment of the monarchy in 1947, and in 1947 Romania became a republic under the rein of the communist regime. Later on, the constitution was reviewed in 1952 and 1965 to pump in responsive economic and social ideals for the transformation of the country. After the end of the Second World War, Romania as a constitutional monarchy enjoyed good economic and political relationships with the rest of European nations. Even as these changes happened, the majority ethnic tribes actively took roles, with the minority being suppressed politically, socially and even economically. This elemental exclusion of the minority group from issues directly impacting them bred forth protests, which shifted into a revolution in 1989 leading to the overthrowing of the communist regime, while ushering in a democratic dispensation (Czarnota, 1995).

The journey towards a democratic state was conceived in 1990, and it encompassed a paradigm shift in two fundamental areas namely; political life involving a shift from totalitarian to democratic governance and also economic life involving the shift from planned economy to market economy which was to be constructed on competition. A new constitution was passed following a referendum in 1991 which laid solid foundation for equity in ethnic representation in politics. As a result, social and political prosperity ensued and the views and need for accession led to the constitution amendment later in 2003.

The political temperatures in Romania began cooling following the first free election in 1992, but still political arrangement basing on ethnicity such as Democratic Union of the Hungarians in Romania (Uniunea Democrată a Maghiarilor din România UDMR) or the Democratic Forum of the Germans in Romania (Forumul Democrat al Germanilor din România FDGR). Irrespective of the elections, parliament became represented with minority groups as provided in the constitution. Romania, based on these chronological occurrences has survived the test of hostile regimes which upheld ethnic group superior over the other. This conviction continually aroused feuds in the quest to uplift the voice of the minority who for too long felt dissociated from politics, and economics of their country. It is through such resiliency built in the unquenchable quest for inclusivity that Romania managed to transit the various regimes.

Joining the European Union received significant support, and was given national preference, with the negotiations over her joining opening in 2000. In 2007, Romania’s accession into the European Union was actualized. Comparatively, Romania has fared on well with the Hungarian minorities after its accession to the European Union. Representation in Romanian parliament is increasing with also minority protection laws also finding space in policies (Drace, 2012). However, there are still some setbacks; for instance it is a criminal offence for anyone to sing a foreign national anthem or carry an alien flag. This view intends to attack the minorities and silence them. Romania is equally plunged into a challenge of corruption and inadequate goodwill by the government to enforce laws.

References

Brubaker, R., Feischmidt, M., Fox, J. and Grancea, L., 2018. Nationalist politics and everyday ethnicity in a Transylvanian town. Princeton University Press.

Bugajski, J., 1993. The Challenge of Ethnic Conflict: The Fate of Minorities in Eastern Europe. Journal of Democracy, 4(4), pp.85-99.

Cinpoes, R., 2010. Nationalism and identity in Romania: a history of extreme politics from the birth of the state to EU accession (Vol. 40). IB Tauris.

Czarnota, A., 1995. Constitutional Nationalism, Citizenship and Hope for Civil Society in Eastern Europe. Nationalism and Postcommunism: a collection of essays. Aldershot: Dartmouth, pp.83-100.

Drace, A., 2012. Radu Cinpoes, Nationalism and Identity in Romania. A History of Extreme Politics from the Birth of the State to EU Accession. London: Tauris Academic Studies, 2010, 256pp. £ 65.00 (hbk). Nations and Nationalism, 18(4), pp.773-774.

Lugosi, N.V., 2011. The Hungarian minority question in Slovakia and Romania. Review of Applied Socio-Economic Research, 2, pp.111-120.

Schreiber, E.W., Rusu, R. and Man, T., 2017. National Minorities in Romania. Their Present Demographic and Political Situation. ISR-Forschungsbericht, 42, pp.439-446.