InRomania

Right is Left

2006-12-16T17:44:00.000-05:00

A wise guy's always right. Even when he's wrong, he's right.
- "Lefty Two Guns" Ruggiero

Unless successful business means wasting money, the top-three nightmares of your average Romanian company (and my daily job pesters) are by far:

3. Corruption
2. Social Taxes
1. Labor Code

Oh the Labor Code... In a country where less than two years ago the so-called "Right" came to power, one may have expected heavily-Socialistic laws to die vertiginously buried in amedments and abrogations.

Not the Labor Code. It is by far the single, most leftist element of the Romanian civil law; it sends chills down employers' spines and builds invisible Lenin-like statues to the wonder of it all, the one and only worthy product of a civilized society, the pinnacle of existence, the almighty social warrior - the Employee.

Decreasing but existent corruption and humongous social taxes are a strong deterrent to prevent investment. For a given net salary, an employer has to pay about 80% more in taxes; that means the cost of hiring someone for EUR 1500 net is actually EUR 2700. No wonder salaries stay low. Nevertheless, investors keep showing up motivated by recently-decreased income taxes (from about 70% to 50%), high-profile anti-corruption cases and the land of opportunity that is 21st century Romania. Until the gold runs out, that is.

While fiscal laws and EU-induced regulations are slowly but steadily steering the legal system away from the Communist path, the Labor Code and employment law in general show no signs of change. How is it possible, I ask, that in a country where the Liberal party took over the government on anti-Communist speeches and where the Right is supposably leading the country, a law recently passed (2003) so heavily favors the employee?! Just a few examples:

- overtime is limited to 8 hours a week, except for specific cases (legal field not an exception, of course);
- remaining vacation days cannot be reimbursed, nor do they roll over; it's an inviolable right that cannot be renounced unless you quit (and I thought only the French believed in the God-given right to relax);
- as an employee, you can pretty much break an employment contract anytime you wish, pending 15-day notice;
- determined contracts are just a capitalistic invention meant to trap the helpless employee, therefore all contracts are undetermined, with minor and almost impossible exceptions;
- you cannot fire your employees unless extensive anti-disciplinary investigation is carried through;
... and so on.

I cannot but conclude that as a foreign investor I would think twice about opening up a branch in Romania. Maybe the low salaries and the sharp minds are worth the trouble; maybe there are poor employees that need protection. But a government that sustains anti-capitalism laws and builds its policies on pro-capitalism speeches is all talk, no action. Admittedly, here I favor the "Right" more than the "Left"; honestly though, there is no true Right. It's at most a Center-Left government with delusions of liberalism. The Right is Left in as much as the Left is Communist.

In the U.S. I would disagree with Donnie Brasco's "Lefty Two Guns"; but in Romania, I concur: A wise guy's always right. Even when he's wrong, he's right.

Temporary Relocation

2006-11-12T10:25:00.000-05:00

Still in Romania; random impressions and more personalized ramblings were temporarily relocated to another site. I will occasionally replicate here any posts deemed "worthy." When in Rome, one can't blog about being away from Rome.

A World Without Romania

2006-09-12T08:15:00.000-04:00

Ever wondered?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eSoruzRkj7g&mode=related&search=

Avian Scare

2006-05-25T06:20:00.000-04:00

Initially I was going to analyze the EU's renewed demands for 2007 accession; since I can't turn on the TV anywhere in Romania without hearing something about the Avian flu, the former will have to wait and the bird-flu scare shall take priority - for now.

The Deal
In a nutshell, the Avian flu virus (H5N1) originated in Asian birds; ducks seem to be immune to it, but it's lethal in other birds, chickens included. According to ABC News, "Since 1997, over 120 million birds have died of the flu or been destroyed in an effort to stop the spread." Humans can contract the flu by handling infected birds. The
WHO reports 218 human cases with 124 deaths since 2003. NONE of these deaths took place in Romania. In fact, if we regard Turkey (4 deaths) as a fully-Asian country, the human death toll hasn't reached Europe yet.

The Fear
At least one case of human-to-human transmission was reported in Asia in 2005. HOWEVER, the virus is not yet in a form that is easily transmissible from person to person. There is significant concern that it may mutate and change into a more lethal version, inducing human-to-human contamination; this is NOT the reality at the moment. In fact, according to Romanian health authorities, the virus hasn't changed since the fall - which could facilitate the development of appropriate vaccination.

Where does Romania come in?
Multiple cases of bird flu have been reported in Romania since October 2005. The scare accelerated over the last month following outbrakes in various counties. Perhaps the most alarming report accounts for infected birds in Bucharest - apparently the first capital subjected to the virus. After the "termination" of 450,000 birds, human quarantine and diplomatic havoc, distressful political hypotheses are taking shape, such as the possibility of delayed EU accession on account of poor handling of the Avian crisis by Romanian authorities.

I have to admit that quarantine of several Bucharest areas and mass vaccination of individuals with the only preventive medicine assumed to have some effect on humans (Tamiflu) may have been too drastic. WHO representatives in Geneva definitely thought so; their recent severe criticism of the measure triggered the end of the quarantine on humans, announced today.

Truth be told, I think we'd rather be safe than sorry. Killing the birds, vaccinating the population, controlling national traffic, spending considerable amounts on acquisition of appropriate agricultural equipment are but a few of the measures taken by the government. So far, the only human casualties of the Avian scare in Romania are of a professional nature: several top veterinary officials have been dismissed as a result of their mediocre crisis approach. At the moment, the Romanian President asked the Prime Minister to take over the issue. For a parliamentary republic where the PM is the most important power player, the change signifies a considerable reaction to an ultimately veterinary concern.

Speaking from a region in Romania that hasn't witnessed any outbreaks thus far, it's probably easier for me not to seek a scapegoat. This wasn't the case of the Romanian Secret Service (SRI): in a recent report, they claimed the bird flu escalation was caused by poultry imports from Hungary and Slovakia. It's not hard to imagine the diplomatic repercussion of this claim; the Hungarian reaction hasn't been pleasant and since the Romanian President himself criticized the SRI report, the accusations hold little credibility.

What may be the worst and most alarming factor specific to Romania's approach on the Avian crisis is the general reaction. I don't believe the nature of the virus is fully understood or taken seriously in many rural areas that are still heavily relying on poultry farming. Exaggerated media paranoia may have some beneficial effect after all.

In the end, while preventive measures and alertness are far from superfluous, I hope anyone hurrying to add the Avian flu to the black list of Romanian shortcomings will pay more heed to the WHO statement: "Bird flu mainly affects poultry and rarely represents a threat to humans." (Mediafax)

There and Back Again

2006-05-11T17:58:00.000-04:00

No, I'm not writing a book about hobbits; the title just seems oddly appropriate.
I'm currently in Romania; it's been about 1 year and a half since my last visit in the fall of 2004, so I figured I might as well profit and relate as many reactions as I can. From heartfelt articles in the likes of Washington Post about treatment of Romanian disabled children, to the Luxembourg's diplomatic support of Romania's accession to the EU, I'm far from lacking in subjects. The truth is, my physical presence here calls for more than just media analysis. I'll try to stick to personal impressions and hopefully take as many pictures as I can. A particular project I have in mind is going to a Roma village and potentially writing more about a previously-tackled issue - the striking difference between the poverty and opulence of the Romanian gypsy community.
Until then, here are some "memorable" thoughts thus far:

- NYC cabbies have nothing on Bucharest taxi drivers;
- I've seen fewer street beggars than in 2004;
- Prices increased, though market choice is definitely more eclectic;
- More local banks issue internationally-accepted debit cards;
- Mass media is less haunted by Communist paranoia;
- Even without Starbucks, $4 coffee can easily be found;
- Dial-up lost the battle to broadband;
- Books don't really sell;
- Polite customer service and decently-priced establishments are mutually exclusive;
- Reality TV is an international evil.

More to come...

EU Preliminaries: Bucharest - Sofia

2006-04-26T03:04:00.000-04:00

[courtesy of SofiaECHO.com]

Via BLOOMBERG.COM
EU Says Romania, Bulgaria Made `Enormous Progress' for Entry
April 25 [reporter: Jonathan Stearns]

Romania and Bulgaria won praise from a senior European Union regulator for upgrading their justice systems, bolstering the likelihood that the two Balkan nations will join the EU on schedule in January 2007.

``Both of them under EU pressure have made enormous progress,'' Michael Leigh, head of the European Commission's enlargement department, said in an interview today in Brussels. ``We must give full credit where credit is due.''

The commission, the EU's executive arm, will recommend May 16 whether to delay the accession of Romania and Bulgaria -- or one of them -- until January 2008. Last October, the commission told both countries to strengthen their justice systems to avoid missing EU membership in 2007.

Romania and Bulgaria, with a combined population of 30 million, are counting on entry to help raise per-capita wealth from a third of the EU average. Their accession would expand the world's largest trading bloc to 27 nations and to the Black Sea.

Leigh stopped short of saying the commission would propose that the two ex-communist nations join on time, saying ``there are still a number of challenges to be met.'' The final decision rests with the EU's national governments.

Under EU rules, it would be harder to delay membership for Bulgaria than for northern neighbor Romania. EU governments can postpone Bulgaria's accession only by a unanimous decision and Romania's membership by a majority vote.

This reflects the fact that the EU was more concerned about Romania than Bulgaria when the two were negotiating membership. Romania and Bulgaria concluded their entry talks in 2004 and signed accession treaties in April 2005, before completing the process of aligning their legislation with European standards.

Safeguard Clauses

One scenario is that Bulgaria and Romania will join in January 2007 while being denied membership rights in areas where their standards haven't improved enough. Such ``safeguards'' can be decided by the commission on its own. [...]

The Adoption Dilemma

2006-04-19T00:17:00.000-04:00

April 17th:
No child is to be adopted internationally [Bucharest Daily News]
U.S. Congressman to press for answers on Romanian adoption cases [American Chronicle, CA]

April 18th:
Adopted Romanian to testify before the EU on adoption success [The Ledger, FL]

Not to praise my own estimations, but the Romanian government’s response is far from surprising: some form of domestic protection is preferable to international adoptions and it's in the children's best interest; the law will not be changed despite international pressures.

And there is significant pressure. U.S. Congressman Jeb Bradley is trying to address the Romanian adoption issue in Brussels and a 16-year-old Romanian adoptee from the U.S. is expected to testify next week before the EU on the formidable success of her case. Considering that EU pressures lead to the 2001 moratorium on adoptions in the first place, it’s highly possible that the number of children adopted by foreign nationals not holding Romanian permanent residence decreased in direct proportion with the country's EU accession chances. Indeed, in February 2004 the invitation to join the EU by 2007 started to look less like a dark tunnel and more like the light at the end of it; coincidently or not, that's when Romania decided to pass a law that would permanently ban ALL international adoptions. While the moratorium had allowed for some exceptions, the new legislation left little room for bargaining and denied positive answers to about 1400 foreign adoption requests.

I don't think the EU was expecting an ad litteram compliance with its criticism of Romanian adoption policies back in 2001; and it should be pointed out that Romania has made enough anti-corruption progress to diminish said criticism and the government's reaction to it.

However, even if the adoption mechanism may receive better EU "ratings", the real reluctance lies somewhere else. It's not that Romania wants to facilitate the foreign adoption of its abandoned children, but it's holding back on account of European reprimands and fear of being scolded right before the big accession date in January 2007. The pros of the no-adoption law also include reasons such as the necessity to keep the children in their native environment by favoring domestic adoptions over foreign ones; lack of parental agreement; strong connection with at least one parent; reintegration within the biological or extended family; adoption by a legal guardian, etc. These are not all orphans living in miserable facilities and being denied a bright future as a foreign adoptee. Some cases entail at least one biological parent and the rational decision by such parents to leave their kids in homes or with foster families for strong financial reasons; other cases refer to abandoned children still in touch with their extended family.

Truth be told, the Romanian orphans may constitute a stronger case for the reevaluation of said law. I find little justification in denying their adoption by certified foreign families, especially when the extended family members - if they exist at all - are not able or willing to adopt. This is one point at least where the law could and should be more lenient.

Nevertheless, there is still an adoption dilemma. Considering the higher standard of living in most countries requesting adoptions (such as U.S. and Canada), adopted Romanian children could theoretically have many more financial, educational and healthcare options (to name but a few.) If the child's existent family members give their consent, does the Romanian state have the obligation to prioritize the best domestic option over a foreign one? Why does integration in one's native environment (be it through foster care, group houses, etc.) serve the children's best interest more than a potential future in - let's say - the U.S.?

There is no right answer, as far I'm concerned. Every case is different and it should be given considerable attention; however, I do believe that as long as there is no legal avenue for any foreign adoptions, Romania risks disregarding potentially better options. And that is not in the children's best interest.

Between a Rock and a Hard Place

2006-04-12T01:22:00.000-04:00

Congressional Resolution Urges Romania To Amend Adoption Ban

In light of the upcoming May 16th decision on the country's EU 2007 adherence, I doubt that Romania will take any stands against the 2001 moratorium on foreign abortions imposed as a result of EU pressures.

However, since 5 years ago, the European Parliament has shown more leniency in supporting the international adoption of Romania's abandoned children - mainly in unique and imperative cases. Additionally, the moratorium was initially justified based on accusations of corruption in the adoption process; times are changing, there's a new government in place and the Anti-Corruption Department has "started hunting impressive fish" as The Economist pointed out earlier this year.

All in all, the Romanian government may just have enough leeway to finally reevaluate its no-foreign-adoptions policy, though after EU membership is secured. Until then, the choice between the U.S. Congress and Europe seems pretty simple - there will be little or no change at all before January 2007. In seeking an effective answer, this resolution may have been poorly timed.

How Close We Came

2006-03-26T14:01:00.000-05:00

For quite some time now I've been contemplating a post about Mr. Adrian Nastase's fate - former Communist, turned Prime Minister, turned Presidential Candidate, turned leader of the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament, turned deserted politician in search of a party.

Oddly enough, Nastase's life scale makes me recall the words allegedly attributed to pastor Martin Niemöller - Iron-Cross decorated WW1 captain, turned Hitler supporter, turned theology scholar, turned Allies-rescued concentration camp prisoner, turned right-wing Christian public speaker:

First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew./ Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist./ Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist./ Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me!

It's not that I'm trying to draw an analogy between the two, but rather point out that chameleon-like political figures have always existed and Mr. Nastase is but another example, rather than the exception. In fact, I wonder whether adaptability to profound change isn't the trademark of a skilled politician.

For Romania it's not uncommon to encounter former members of the Communist party in top political positions. Mr. Nastase's pre-Revolution period was quite prolific and I dare say he may have succeeded in his political career had Ceausescu never been shot. Married twice to daughters of prominent Commi figures, Nastase ironically represented the Romanian Communist Party at various international conferences on human rights and published exhaulted articles in the Romanian pre-1989 press. His avid attack in a Romanian Communist magazine against Freedom House for having ranked Romania at the time as a "Not Free" country is of particular notice, so are his illustrious writings on the "retrograde concept" of human rights.

Sarcasm aside, it's rather baffling to me that such a character managed to become the Prime Minister of "free" Romania for almost 4 years; he barely lost the Presidential elections in 2004 to Traian Basescu, the current President. It's baffling that a Revolution wasn't enough to shake Communist ties. It's baffling that no longer than 3 years ago my own father was still reluctant to make anti-governmental remarks on the phone for fear that someone "may be listening."

We came very close, indeed, to having a Communist chameleon as a President, once again. I don't think a lot of Romanians understand the weight of their decision to vote for Basescu. It's true that before the Revolution many current politicians had to be members of the Communist Party - or else. But there's a significant difference between belonging to the Communist Party and marrying it. Between silently adhering to a system for your own safety, and condemning human rights in the name of that system.

At the moment Mr. Nastase is what one may call a fallen politician. Following a corruption scandal, having resigned as the leader of the Lower House of the Romanian Parliament, ostracized by his own party, he may never be able to return to the Romanian political scene. But if he does, it would only prove that chameleons will always find a way to adapt.

No Comment

2006-02-02T14:43:00.000-05:00

> Romania critical of US court ruling
> Romanians shocked by verdict in musician's death

Sex Tourism a.k.a. Let Me Buy You A Drink on Your Birthday

2006-01-15T22:08:00.000-05:00

I could have chosen a different topic for my first post in quite some time: positive declarations by members of the French Cabinet in favor of Romania's 2007 EU adherence, on account of swift judicial reforms; negative feedback from German top politicians on account of Romania's thriving corruption and opposition to the 2007 said accession; the rather hilarious contrast between the above two (if you dig political humor rooted in the history of EU internal dynamics, that is); the 8 miners killed in a mine crash in Southwest Romania; the Avian flu situation which makes me wonder if I can even travel to Romania in the next couple of months, eat anything with chicken and come back to the U.S. without having to sign some last-minute declaratory form the USCIS came up with (and yes, I believe the former INS, current United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, is indeed capable of coming up with overnight forms tailored to citizens of countries on the "Avian" list; but hey, I would rather be on that list than the "black" one); K. Rowling's upcoming visit to Romania for a charity dinner to the joy of Harry Potter fans and European orphans; and the list could go on. Instead, I chose a seemingly appalling subject not only for its abhorrent nature, but also for its ties to the U.S.:

U.S., Moldovan, Romanian Cooperation Leads to Sex Tourist Arrests
... or as a Romanian source put it, clearly emphasizing the attention-grabbers in Romanian mass media:
American Millionaire Arrested for Sexually Abusing Romanian Children

I had initially read the news on Romanian sites and only after did I realize the indictment was actually filed in Philadelphia. According to the U.S. Department of State Press Release Linked above, the American citizen in question - Anthony Mark Bianchi - is charged with one count of conspiracy to engage in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places, two counts of traveling with the intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct, two counts of engaging in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places, and one count of using a facility in foreign commerce to entice a minor to engage in sexual activity. The "facility" is allegedly a pub in Romania where Mr. Bianchi took a teenager on his birthday, got him drunk and engaged in illicit sexual conduct with him.

There is much to be said about legal drinking age in Romania; although drinking establishments have a legal obligation to prohibit selling of alcohol to anyone under the age of 18, the law is hardly ever enforced in urban centers, and almost never in rural areas. While the debate about governmental age restriction on drinking is neverending, I don't believe many of the arguments against it include sexual abuse by foreign tourists. It has been my experience that drinking on one's birthday starting at the age of 15 (or even before that) is an established practice amongst Romanian teenagers, highly tolerated by society and inducive of the high lack of enforcement of said law.

What I find particularly interesting is that while Bianchi was arrested in New Jersey and the crimes were mainly committed abroad, the indictment was brought in a Philadelphia court, since he conspired to travel from Philadelphia International Airport to Cuba, the Republic of Moldova and Romania. There is a clear explanation for this - according to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, unless a statute or these rules permit otherwise, the government must prosecute an offense in a district where the offense was committed. The respective "conspiracy" took place at the Philadelphia International Airport; since the purpose of Bianchi's trip is correlated to a criminal intent, then I assume the logical extension is the crime was committed in a U.S. district.

There are a lot of issues with the Romanian - American collaboration - suspected CIA prisons in Eastern Europe being just the latest in a long stream. However, maybe once in a while all the bickering, bitter anti-American diatribes should take a break and remember what we wouldn't have without said cooperation. Now whether spies and war prisoners are - or should be - terrorized and interrogated in secret camps in Romania is a different story. And no matter how many rectifying acts of the Bianchi type there are, I don't think the matter here is a quid pro quo. It's just another way of looking at an issue, that I hope will be less overlooked by mass media in general - and the European ones in particular.

Finally on the Map?

2005-09-13T18:59:00.000-04:00

http://news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/470986

Tough to say whether Romania's recent positive economic evaluations have any connection with this. Hopefully at least tourism will benefit from the country's new digital map.

The Report Card

2005-09-06T16:32:00.000-04:00

via www.reporter.gr

Romania: Upgraded by S&P on Declining Debt Burden Outlook Stable
____________________
17:10 - 06 September 2005 - Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said it raised its long- and short-term foreign currency sovereign credit ratings on the Republic of Romania to 'BBB-' and 'A-3', from 'BB+' and 'B', respectively, on improving government indebtedness indicators. At the same time, the long-term local currency rating on Romania was raised to 'BBB' from 'BBB-', and the 'A-3' short-term local currency rating was affirmed. The outlook is stable.

Romania is the twelfth sovereign currently rated by Standard & Poor's that has made the transition to investment grade from speculative grade. The full analysis on the Republic of Romania will be published later today on RatingsDirect, Standard & Poor's Web-based credit analysis system. The report will also be posted on Standard & Poor's public website, www.standardandpoors.com (select Credit Ratings, then select Sovereigns from the left-hand menu, then find under Credit Reports).
"The upgrade stems from the improvement in general government fiscal indicators that has occurred on the back of buoyant domestic demand," said Standard & Poor's credit analyst Moritz Kraemer. "GDP looks set to grow at almost 6% in 2005, with domestic demand expanding almost twice as rapidly."

As a result, the general government deficit will reach 1.3% of GDP, despite a comprehensive tax cut associated with the introduction of the 16% flat tax in 2005, and additional spending pressures related to the floods affecting part of the country this summer. General government debt will drop to less than 20% of GDP in 2005, well below the 'BBB' median. Sustained fiscal consolidation and parastatal budget control will lead to a stabilizing general government debt ratio. By the end of the current decade, this ratio will inch up to a moderate 22% of GDP, as GDP growth will ease toward a more sustainable 5.0% and EU-accession related spending pressures will make themselves felt.

The ratings on Romania remain constrained by institutional weaknesses, significant external imbalances, low levels of economic prosperity, and a large, albeit declining, loss-making parastatal sector.

"Romania's external imbalances are offset by its EU membership prospects, which would make the growth- and investment-enhancing economic modernization process irreversible," said Mr. Kraemer. "Furthermore, we expect that the government will take the necessary action to reduce the large current account deficit, which could reach 9% of GDP in 2005."

In this context, a prudent approach to public finances and the careful management of capital inflows and the ongoing domestic credit boom will be vital. Failure over the medium-term to effectively mitigate the vulnerabilities caused by the persistent external imbalances could bring the ratings under renewed downward pressure. A delay to EU membership to 2008 is now more likely than entry in 2007, but would not in itself put any downward pressure on the ratings on Romania.

Further improvements of the rating would hinge on policy predictability, sustainable continued real convergence with higher-rated peers, and tangible success in reducing Romania's governance problems.

Gypsy Flashbacks

2005-09-04T18:57:00.000-04:00

If you believe Isabela Fonseca's "Bury Me Standing" the Gypsies of Albania and Poland are as idealistic as the troubadours of medieval Al Andaluz, and as underestimated as the civil rights activists of 1950's America. Fonseca's work is titled based on an allegedly Gypsy saying - "Bury me standing for all my life I have been on my knees" ("Ingroapa-ma stand in picioare, am stat in genunchi toata viata.") To be honest, I've never heard of it before, but I'm hardly the guru of Gypsy folklore.

What I take from her book is those mixed feelings I've been dealing with my entire life, both in Romania and the U.S. - the dichotomy between the Gypsy myth, music and stories, and their lawlessness, deceit and misery. The Gypsies or Roma are a tough subject and a sore issue for Romania. For me, it's been the single, most constant topic of conversation I've had with most foreigners (read non-Romanians.) To list but a few painfully-amusing cases:
NYU student: "Are you sure you‘re Romanian? I mean... your hair is so light, you don't look like a gypsy..."
Professor X at NYU Undergraduate Research Conference: "Why doesn't the Romanian government implement some form of Affirmative Action program? It worked in the States…"
French immigration officer: "Oh, you're Romanian, well, we must check your passport twice - you can't just be going to France as a tourist…” (Read: "Most Romanians we come in contact with are beggars; incidentally, 99% of them are gypsies; ergo, all Romanians steal.")

Apart from the blatant sophisms of the French immigration, I have learned one truth about the average international perception of Romania: at least 50% of Romanians must be Gypsies.

While growing up in Romania, even long after the first 8 Communist years, I had little PC awareness. "US" and "THEM" was omnipresent, and I can’t imagine my country without the ethnic differentiation. The way I see it, the Gypsies, the Roma or "Tiganii" are an inherent but not integral part of Romania. One of my first memories of Gypsy exposure is a picture of my parents' wedding - outside the City Hall in our home town, my mom and dad holding hands next to three beautifully-dressed Gypsy women posing and smiling to the camera. I asked my mom more than once why they took that photo; she always gives me the same answer "For good luck." This is the same mother who would often warn me against the omnipresent Gypsy thieves.

It wasn’t hard to dislike them. Their poverty was everywhere - holding their children and begging for money by the church entrance; holding signs and begging for money in every train on the way to our summer vacation; on the beach, selling candy and Coca Cola to tourists or begging for money; in the market, selling chrysanthemums or begging for money.
It wasn’t hard to fear their shrewdness: stealing my ring after a palm reading; hiding the rotten cherries underneath the ripe ones in the market; stealing my grandparents' horse; breaking into our garden and stealing the construction bricks. Stealing. Stealing. Stealing.

And yet I still remember their beauty: one summer while traveling with my parents to the opposite side of the country, close to the Hungarian border, I saw what my mom called "beautiful Gypsy women" - your idealistic, pastoral, red-skirt, big eyes, long hair, large smile. They were selling lace in the town market. "They are so clean!" my mom noted.

And then there is their opulence, a strikingly ironic complement to the overwhelming poverty: especially after the 1989 Revolution, I remember noticing entire villages, sprung overnight - large houses, with shiny, tin roofs (a "clear" sign of Gypsy architecture, whatever that means); in my mind, gold chains, car theft, deportations, commerce with children and prostitution were as commonly associated with the Roma, as poor education, street begging and traditional wedding music.

Over the past few years I've had many discussions with several members of the Romanian Diaspora in America about the Roma's lack of education. The most common commentary I get is "But they don't want to be educated; they don't go to school." In a country where education is free and mandatory, you'd think that any Gypsy family would send their kids to school. Yet as anywhere in the world, kids can be extremely cruel. Officially, integration in school is avidly mandated by the government. In reality, there is no doubt in my mind that the few Gypsy kids in any public school are and would be regarded as "them" by both students and teachers.

However, I’m fairly reluctant to even applying the above social explanation. Is the lack of education really based on discrimination, or is it just the parents' decision to utilize their kids to steal, beg, work and purchase alcohol, as opposed to sending them to school?

Not all Gypsies sell their children or abandon them in orphanages; and not all Gypsies sing, dance and wear large beautiful red skirts. Some steal when they don't have to, some sing because they are great at it. Do the Romanians discriminate, or do the Roma choose to deny any help? I honestly don't know. However, I do know that I wish the world stopped generalizing about Romania and that Romanians stopped generalizing about Gypsies.

They Train Gymnasts, Don't They?

2005-08-30T12:21:00.000-04:00

ViaAssociated Press [English] & Mediafax [Romanian]

Romanian women's gymnastics team disbanded

Tue, Aug. 30, 2005

BUCHAREST, Romania - Romania's gymnastics federation disbanded its women's gymnastics team Tuesday after two leading gymnasts left a training camp and were filmed at a birthday party.

The decision comes after triple Olympic gold medalist Catalina Ponor and Floarea Leonida left a training camp Saturday night without permission in violation of their contracts, said Adrian Stoica, the federation's secretary general.

Stoica said the federation decided all gymnasts would train at their own clubs. The other gymnast on the team, Daniela Sofronie, has sided with her teammates and has threatened to retire.

Ponor, 18, told a Romanian television station that she attended the birthday party of a male gymnast where only athletes were present. She denied reports that she drank alcohol and vowed to train hard for the world championships in November.

"I hope I will prove that it's possible to perform well even without the tough restrictions at the training camp," Ponor said.

Team coach Octavian Belu said the gymnasts would get a chance to prove their form at the national championships in October.

Belu and his assistant Mariana Bitang asked the federation to cancel their contracts as coaches. They said they have been left without a gymnastics team to train after Monica Rosu and Alexandra Eremia were sent to their clubs last week because they were overweight.

The new crisis raises doubts on whether Romania, which dominated women's gymnastics in recent years, will take part in the world championships.

© 2005 AP Wire and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved (http://www.aberdeennews.com)
_______________

It's somewhat fascinating that AP mentions the gymnasts' partying habits and overweight issues, while Mediafax focuses on the contract stipulations of the Olympic team's coaches.

Truth be told, Romanian gymnasts have some of the hardest training routines in the world, which has paid off tremendously in the past. Imagine you're 18, training about 8 hours a day and bound by contract to remain within camp premises on your friend's birthday. It's incredible to me how these girls get motivated at all. At one level or another, I believe human determination functions based on incentives and rewards. Sure, winning the Olympic gold medal is a fantastic reward, but would the achievement be possible without the aforementioned sacrifice? I’m not claiming the training routine is not sufficient, but I doubt it is truly necessary. Obviously, all athletes must give up on the idea of having a "normal life", but how far is too far, and were the Romanian coaches overly demanding?

The thing with Romanian gymnasts is that when your country is ruled by a dictator, when the line of people waiting for milk goes around the block at 4 a.m., when Pepsi is a luxury and BBC is the anathema of “free” radio stations, there is no "normal life"; succeeding through sports is a fantastic motivation to emerge out of the poverty hole. That said, this is not the case of present-day Romania - though in transition and "developing", the country offers enough opportunities, attractions and distractions to keep the average 18-year old happy.

Romanian young girls might have envied Nadia Comaneci for becoming famous, traveling the world and succeeding altogether. Today we face the flipside of the coin: gymnasts are feeling trapped, worked to death and tyrannized; they demand their freedom, their youth, their choice. They envy the "normal" Romanian young girls.

Whether the varsity gymnasts leaving the Olympic team will still be successful while training at local clubs, it remains to be seen. But should they be sensational at National and World Championships, Romania may have to face yet another great consequence of transition - the loss of fierce discipline and sacrifice. And I'm not exactly sure how dreadful that is. Maybe it's about time these girls realized they have alternatives.

Marriage Panacea

2005-08-29T12:18:00.000-04:00

Almost every phone conversation with my grandma back in Romania used to bring about the highly-dreaded question - "So... any news of marriage yet?" Needless to say, it was a long-lost battle. But are early weddings truly an antiquated generation gap, or do young women still jump on the marriage bandwagon?

I suppose people in Romania are getting married later into their 20s nowadays than decades ago. Yet, unless your education or parents can support you - given that your job hardly does without said education - the option of the average Romanian young woman is basically the same: get married and do your best not to divorce your husband.

A huge role is played by the Romanian Orthodox Church and its invaluable influence. Since 8 out of 10 people share the same religion, chances are that divorcing a man whom you married in Church is not only ecumenically difficult; it becomes a societal stigma when the next person on the street can claim a similar understanding of your religious beliefs and - hence - the right to pass judgment. In other words, if you marry, you'd better marry for good, unless you want to become "that girl."

Though divorce does happen, more often now than before, I think many families tend to stick together for the simple economic troubles or comfort losses. Men just earn so much more than women in the land where being a housewife is somewhat of a national hobby. Sure, most women have a job, but laundry, cooking, cleaning and all that are top priorities. This is by no means a feministic attempt at misandry, but really - how many Romanian men ever do laundry, considering that cleaner's services are an ultimate luxury?

I don't think I would have been a housewife anyway, but I do wonder whether more women will give up marrying early the better Romania's economy is doing. Is there a direct correlation between the income per capita and the number of marriages per year, in a given country? I suspect so. One explanation would be that in many rural areas marriage is just the thing to do, spinsters are not "top" members of society and it's rather "improper" to stay unmarried after you turn 24 or so.

Economic development and labor migration from rural to urban areas might actually have a pretty beneficial impact on female emancipation. It's not only the effect of Westernization on income, it's also a first-world lesson on equality. So if you are a woman and you ever wondered what those old, rickety men in the Romanian Senate can do for you, next time they sign a free-trade agreement, you might want to think again. I DO.

The Psychopath in the Office

2005-08-28T18:03:00.000-04:00

Here's another article by Paul Wood alluding to the Romanian HR environment. I must apologize to Mr. Wood for the delayed posting. My college graduation and the eternal job hunting saga have considerably affected my blogging consistency in the past few months.

Paul Wood is Managing Director of Apple Search and Selection, the executive search company, and has worked in executive recruitment in Romania since 1998. He can be contacted at pwood@execs.com.
__________

The Psychopath in the Office
How many do you know?

The word ‘psychopath’ instills a pleasurable ripple of fear into anyone who saw a conscienceless killer in a Hollywood film such as Basic Instinct or The Silence of the Lambs. But psychopaths exist outside the movies. Only a fairly small minority are violent criminals, more are confidence tricksters but most are not criminals at all. Many hold positions of power (think of Saddam Hussein or Slobodan ). Psychopaths are also known as sociopaths and the syndrome is also named Anti-Social Behaviour Disorder. The Victorians used the term ‘moral insanity’ but in fact psychopaths are exceptionally sane. They simply have no consciences and no empathy. Every reader of this article has knowingly or otherwise met some. Long-term their goal is always to accumulate power or money by any means available and to damage and abuse those over whom their power extends.

‘Industrial psychopaths’ is the term recently coined by psychologist Paul Babiak, author of Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go To Work, for psychopaths who hold good jobs. They can be priests, academics, charity workers, actors or media stars, HR managers or accountants but very frequently they are found in professions that enable them to have power over others: in particular, the medical and legal professions (they are especially attracted to becoming judges and prosecutors), the police and armed services and, most irresistible of all to psychopaths, in politics.
How do you recognise a psychopath in a social or business setting? You probably wouldn’t. They are pathological liars, masters of dissimulation and excel at interviews, the perfect theatres for their talents. In the West‘s increasingly atomised and competitive world, where ambitious go-getters are valued and efficiency sometimes prized above moral scruples, the psychopath’s qualities resemble those of the successful business leader. In developing economies where power structures are fluid and standards of business and political ethics are hazy psychopaths thrive. Present-day Romania is a perfect breeding ground for the species.

The psychopath thrives in situations of rapid change. The industrial psychopath identifies and ingratiates himself with the people whom he identifies as easily manipulated and those with power who can help him reach the top. According to Professor Babiak, 'During the manipulation stage, the psychopath spreads disinformation to enhance his image and disparage others. He is adept at creating conflict between those who might pool negative information about him. This is followed by a confrontation stage in which he abandons the pawns who are no longer useful to him and takes steps to neutralise detractors. Finally, the most successful psychopath enters an ascension phase during which he abandons his patrons - those who have helped his rise to power.' In the Romanian expression “treading on dead bodies to the top”.

No-one knows what are the causes of the condition although research suggests that the psychopath’s brain functions abnormally and that a lobe may be missing. There is no cure. No-one can be given a conscience transplant.
Professor Robert Hare, Professor of Psychology at Vancouver University, is the world’s leading authority on psychopaths. He estimates that about 1% of the population are psychopaths. Hare says they are "amusing and entertaining conversationalists, ready with a quick and clever comeback, and can tell unlikely but convincing stories...They can be very effective in presenting themselves well and are often very likeable and charming. To some people, however, they seem too slick and smooth, too insincere and superficial. Astute observers often get the impression that psychopaths are play-acting, mechanically ‘reading their lines.’

Psychopaths are always highly intelligent (a parallel can be drawn with autists) and often possess photographic memories but their knowledge tends to be wide but superficial. They can be superb linguists and readily assimilate the latest jargon expressions as they emerge. Lacking normal human feelings, they are actors who learn how to behave by mimicking those around them. They may therefore come across as affected, insincere or false. Hare says they have a "narcissistic and grossly inflated view of their self-worth and importance, a truly astounding egocentricity and sense of entitlement, and see themselves as the centre of the universe, as superior beings who are justified in living according to their own rules.” They can seem very charismatic but are rarely popular with those who work or interact with them closely. A few perceptive people sense at once that they are evil.

The psychopath will always prefer what he can gain by trickery, dishonesty or force majeure to the fruits of honest toil, which bores him. He is usually lazy and unfocused where routine work is concerned although at networking or marketing he can be a workaholic. As a boss he will steal his subordinates’ ideas, pick on victims to bully and very often sexually harass staff but also use manipulative skills to retain subordinates’ loyalty (Adolf Hitler remembering his secretaries’ birthdays).
In business psychopaths will take pride in using every dishonest subterfuge from bribes to blackmail to acquire mandates or retainers, happily getting away with substandard work as a result. They are exceptionally astute at reading others and are adept at gleaning information about those around them to feed their sense of power and enable them to exploit others. If they judge it safe to do so, they will delight in hurting those whom they can injure (I know of one HR Manager who framed a series of staff members with no ulterior object beyond the fun of sabotaging their careers). Psychopaths inhabit a Hobbesian universe where power is the only value and love of power means love of mischief.

The female psychopath (there are thought to be roughly two male psychopaths for every one female psychopath) is exactly as pitiless as her male counterpart but will use the advantages open to her as a woman to help her career path. If attractive she will exploits her looks, sleep her way to promotion or with clients to make deals happen, while at the same time she may be ready to concoct false charges that she herself is the victim of sexual harassment rather than the perpetrator. If appropriate she will cultivate the image of a devoted wife or mother as a useful cover.

Industrial psychopaths of either sex can be very effective at PR, at sales and marketing and their management techniques can be effective in the short or medium term but in the long term their business enterprises are likely to founder, their companies fail, their partners part ways from them or their employees vote with their feet. Psychopathy causes enormous damage in all our lives. We have seen in recent years the consequences when a succession of fraudulent businesses have collapsed. Who will psychoanalyse Enron or Worldcom, Bancorex or FNI?

So what should we look for as pointers to alert us against this dangerous breed of people when for example conducting interviews? The tell-tale signs include contradictory lies, oleaginous flattery, haughty body language, the penetrating and prolonged ‘psychopathic stare’ with which they fix their victims, poor spelling, an excessive interest in status and material things, their love of belittling others, boasting particularly about their lack of scruples and all sorts of unusual ways of talking, dressing or behaving, designed to draw attention to themselves.

Hare and Babiak have joined forces to create a new diagnostic tool, the “B-scan” intended to help businesses keep psychopath- is a series of questions asked of referees rather than candidates, looking for sixteen key qualities including: insincere, arrogant, insensitive, remorseless, shallow, impatient, , unfocused, parasitic, dramatic, unethical and bullying.

How many do you know?

[April(?) 2005, Vivid magazine]

Our Lord, the European Commission

2005-03-18T18:08:00.000-05:00

http://www.eubusiness.com/afp/050318133702.6r4xxpe2

Since when does catching an indicted war crimes suspect equal strengthening anti-corruption laws? If the European Commission wants to postpone Romania's planned date of accesssion to the EU by one year, the almost-definite early Parliamentary elections in May should be enough reason. Equating the failure of the Croatian government to cooperate with the UN war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, to Romania's slow implementation of reforms in domestic affairs and market competition, is at best a political scheme.
What baffles me most is the EU's readiness to attribute the policies of the former Romanian govenrment to the current one, in power only since December 2004.

Bottom line: for whatever reasons, Romania's hopes of EU membership in 2007 look dim at most.

Stateless

2005-02-17T16:39:00.000-05:00

=====
Rejected Romanian Adoptee Sues Canadian Couple
Via Reuters
Thu February 17, 2005 3:30 PM GMT-05:00

TORONTO (Reuters) - A Romanian woman, adopted as a child by a Canadian couple, who sent her back after only five months, is suing the family and the government for years of hardship and loss of identity, her lawyers said on Thursday.
Alexandra Austin, now 22, was given up for adoption by her mother and brought to Canada in 1991.
After five months, the couple sent the girl back to Romania where she ended up in legal limbo. Authorities there refused to recognize the newly named Austin as a Romanian while Ottawa said she did not have Canadian citizenship either.
"She's suing to hold everyone accountable for what happened to her, falling through the cracks," lawyer Jeffrey Wilson said. "She was a child who was adopted into a foreign country and then, remarkably, sent home on a one-way ticket to Romania.
"She remained there without school opportunities, without health services."
Austin's C$7 million ($5.7 million) lawsuit targets her adoptive parents, who have since separated and live in the United States and Italy.
It also names the Ontario and Canadian governments and Swiss International Air Lines, which flew her back to Bucharest more than a decade ago. The lawsuit alleges all three failed in their fiduciary duty toward the girl.
The parents, who adopted a Romanian baby two days before sending 9-year-old Austin back, are cited for negligence for "reckless infliction of nervous shock, mental distress and abandonment of a child."
"It's not the first case where an international adoption has broken down," Wilson said. "The obvious answer is simply to place the child in the care of the Children's Aid Society and the child grows up in Canada ... with all the benefits."
Instead, the lawsuit says, she was left stateless in Romania, unable to access state-run services and subjected to grinding poverty.
Austin, the subject of a book and a documentary shown on Canadian television this week, said her life fell apart after she was shipped back to Bucharest where her birth mother no longer had parental rights to her.
"Nobody should ever do this to a child," she told reporters in a brief visit to Toronto. "I've lost my childhood and my identity."
Austin, whose schooling ended at Grade 3, launched the lawsuit after giving birth to a daughter who was also deemed a stateless person in Romania.
($1=$1.23 Canadian)
=====

The U.S. has been dealing with the ongoing legal dilemma of the citizenship of children of illegal immigrants for a while now. Let's say you are a Mexican citizen who either crossed the border illegally into the U.S. or who came to the U.S. on a visitor visa and then decided to stay, forfeiting your legal status. If you have a child, who in theory should have U.S. citizenship, does your status become legal? Should you be considered permanent resident on account of the child's nationality? Should you recieve benefits? In the case of the U.S. at least, the child's rights are immediately recognized.

The situation of the adopted woman mentioned above entails two cases of the child's rights: 1.her status in Canada post adoption, case in which parents should have entrusted her to the Canadian authorities to receive benefits; 2. the status of the woman's child, born in Romania after she was sent back via Swiss Airlines.

In the first instance, I don't think it's arguable the Canadian adoptive parents had the responsibility to keep the child in Canada and intrust her to the authorities. Once you petitioned for Canadian citizenship and - as a consequence - the child lost the Romanian citizenship - you can't expect the Romanian state to recognize the child as a Romanian citizen.
In the second instance, though, the logistics are even more complicated: because the Canadian state doesn't recognize the Canadian citizenship of the woman (now a mother) and the Romanian state declares the Romanian citizenship was renounced upon adoption, the mother is declared "stateless", a status which transfers onto her child, born in Romania. If she were a Canadian citizen it would be easier to claim Romanian citizenship for the child than without any citizenship recognition from either state. Is this at all justified?

I believe that if the Canadian citizenship of the mother is recognized, the issue should be pretty simple, the child should at least receive Canadian citizenship.

According to Article 29 of the 1991 Citizenship Act of Romania (available only in French):

L'enfant mineur citoyen roumain, adopté par un citoyen étranger, perd la citoyenneté roumaine quand des adoptants, ou le cas échéant l'adoptant demande exprès cette chose, et la loi étrangère prévoit que l'adopté obtienne la citoyenneté de l'adoptant. [i.e. "A minor who is a Romanian citizen, adopted by a foreign citizen, forfeits her Romanian citizenship if the adopting parties [...] specifically request it, and the foreign law stipulates that the adoptee must obtain the citizenship of the adopters."] In other words, the mother doesn't have Romanian citizenship under Romanian law.

As for her 4-year old child, born in Romanian, Article 10 of the same act states that L'enfant né des parents citoyens étrangers ou sans citoyenneté, et qui n'a pas encore l'âge de 18 ans, obtient la citoyenneté roumaine en même temps que ses parents [i.e. The child born of parents who are foreign citizens or without citizenship, and who is under 18 years of age, obtains the Romanian citizenship at the same time as her parents.] Unlike the U.S., in Romania you cannot obtain Romanian citizenship by simply being born there. At least ONE of your parents must be Romanian. I suspect the father is not. If he is, then her daughter should get Romanian citizenship. That said, given that the Romanian state's point of view is that the mother lost her Romanian citizenship, the only hope the child may have to obtain ANY citizenship is if the Canadian state recognizes the adoption as a sufficient claim to Canadian citizenship.

Finally, it's very unclear whether Swiss Airlines officials were even checking passports at the time of the mother's return to Romania, and how her entry into Romania was possible in the first place, as a 9 year-old child.

It will definitely be interesting to see how this pans out.

It's About Time...

2005-02-14T22:52:00.000-05:00

http://www.romanianjewish.org/en/index_isro.html#i1

15 Years of Freedom

2004-12-22T22:10:00.000-05:00

On December 22, 1989, I was 7 years and 7 months old. Around noon, home alone in my parents' old apartment in Romania, I'm listening to some fairy tale on an LP, when suddenly the electricity stops; though not out of the ordinary, this is a terrible disappointment - the story was very exciting. A few minutes later, my mom walks in from work, 3-4 hours earlier than the usual: it was the first and probably the last time I actually saw my mom jump up, smiling and yelling something I didn't quite understand at the time: "The dictator has fallen!" ("A cazut dictatorul!"); it was the great day of Romanians - the Revolution, the fall of Communism, the Victory.

She hadn't heard from my dad in a while, so we walked to my aunt's house, pretty close by. December was extremely warm that year; I remember wearing a white T-shirt and a jacket, which for a Romanian winter is rather unusual. My dad's sister and my uncle were watching the "free" Romanian Television - a bunch of ex-Communists, poets, intellectuals and the director of the only broadcast station in the nation, all crammed against each other in front of the camera, shouting to the entire nation: "The National Television is free! The dictator has fallen!"

Back in 1989, my aunt and uncle were among the few people we knew who owned a car. Apparently, on the way home a small crowd on the street had asked them to drive over Ceausescu's portrait, in exchange for letting them pass. I remembered that portrait, it was on every wall in kindergarten; it was hanging in my 1st grade classroom; it was on the first page of every 1st grade textbook (I was pretty shocked when my teacher told us the following week we were allowed to tear out that page, that it's not a bad thing, that we're not destroying the books...)

Like many Romanians, I don't think I'll ever forget that day. We later gathered back at our apartment, still watching the "free" television, hearing continuous rumors about how Ceausescu flew the "People's House" (currently the Palace of Parliament building), about the increasing number of people killed in Bucharest and all over the country, either by the army or by the authorities, who opened fire against civilians. When some reporter on TV started to shout "The army is with us!", I couldn't quite understand what that meant, either, but my mom and my aunt and uncle seemed pretty happy.

Earlier that day we had gone downtown to look for my father; it was rather impossible to find him in the mass of people gathered in "Union Square." At 1 a.m. we finally got a call; he was alright. I later found out that on December 14th my dad and a few other writers had organized a meeting in the same Union Square, in light of other events that were happening all over the country. Their attempt never truly succeeded; someone had betrayed them.

On Christmas day, 1989, as much as it impacted me, I was happy to see Ceausescu shot on the same National Television. I'd never seen someone killed "live" before, or after that. It's weird how right it felt; it may be un-Christian to say it, but I'm glad he died.

Today, 15 years later, my dad is considered one of about 20,000 "Revolutionaries" in Romania. I've kept wondering for some time whether what they all hoped and risked their lives for has been accomplished. No matter the hardships, I believe Romania is by far better now than before; with all the corruption, despite the same ex-Communist we had as a president for about 10 years, with all the nepotism, bribes, discrimination and poverty - this is nothing compared to Communism. Yes, it was all worth it.

Here's to the 15-year anniversary of Romania's Revolution!

It's All Happening

2004-12-13T04:45:00.000-05:00

Romania's New President:

Traian Basescu

======
Basescu Ahead in Romanian Presidential Run-off
VIA www.scotsman.com:
8:59am (UK), "PA" [The Press Associaton]

"Mayor Traian Basescu was ahead in the Romanian presidential run-off, according to official partial results released today.

Basescu had 51.75% of the vote, to Nastase’s 48.25 based on 92.1% of the vote counted. He was 600,000 votes ahead, the Central Electoral Bureau said.

Basescu’s opposition Justice and Truth Alliance said that Basescu had 51.5% of the vote, compared to Nastase’s 49.5%, according to a parallel count of ballots carried out by the opposition."
======

If the U.S. 2000 elections taught the world anything, nothing is over till it's over. And which nation would be more likely to have fairer elections: Romania or the U.S.? Tough call on that one, for sure.

After the Nov 28th election, the opposition (Basescu) vehemently accused the government of fraud and manipulation of the results. In all truth, what's happening in Ukraine is no small game, and I don't wish that outcome to any country, especially my own. However, to be totally honest, I did see somewhat of an effort at the Romanian Consulate in NYC to insure the accountability of the electoral process. For example, this time I had to sign a "voting declaration"; it's pretty much a statement indicating my name, address and - most importantly - the fact that I voted in NYC on the respective date. I'm not clear on the effectiveness of these documents in matters of actually comparing the information they contain. However, it's highly possible that if anyone was inclined to vote twice, the simple fact of signing the declaration acted as a deterrent. Some effect is better than none, I guess.

Bottom line: OPPOSITION WON! I'm happy; after 15 years of post-Ceausescu Communist entanglement, I'm truly happy for my country. The urban voters, the middle class, the business men, the intellectuals, the new generation - they finally shifted the electoral demographics. Maybe mentalities can change after all.

What's to be expected? In a nutshell:
- some curtailing of corruption
- legal restructuring
- strenuous efforts to push for the 2007 EU adherence
- better taxation for private companies

Out of the endless hole of populism, Romania is finally stepping into the right direction. It's quite new territory; if it will be able to adapt - that remains to be seen.

E Pluribus Duo

2004-12-12T23:46:00.000-05:00

Another day of voting. Second round, just presidential elections. Unprecedented so far in Romania, almost all exit polls predict a very close call, 50% - 50%, give or take 0.5% That's pretty impressive, yet a huge burden on election officials; accountability is key, and - yes - every vote does count. I guess we won't know till they count the last ballot. All in all (what else is new?) I'm happy I had my share of it. Now I just have to keep my fingers crossed and hope that at least 51% of Romanians finally came back to their senses.

Sources:
[English]: Associated Press
[Romanian]: www.adevarulonline.ro

P.S.Intersting fact: absenteeism was significantly high in most of the regions where the Romanian Hungarian Democratic Union (UDMR) won the Parliamentary elections.

To Vote or Not To Vote

2004-11-29T07:35:00.000-05:00

Today I voted at the Romanian Consulate in New York, thus contributing to the 57% turnout in Romania's first round of general elections since 2000. It's hard to explain to your American friends the choice between a moderate liberal, a socio-democrat (with communist ties) and an altogether communist presidential candidate. Not that there was much of a choice for me - I don't like the communists (dah!) and I haven't received any overnight retirement money from the current leadership to make me overlook corruption, nepotism and unfair competition (to name but a few.)

The truth is, Romania doesn't have much of a right wing, and the "Alliance" ("Alianta DA", a.k.a. "The Justice and Truth Alliance"), as much as they like to claim the center-right, are at most on the center-left. The real right, the Christian-Democratic Party, has at best 5% political supporters. It's hard to advocate conservatism in a country thirsty for change; it's even harder to promote capitalism when a considerable majority of voters rejoice in insignificant increases in retirement pensions.

All in all, we will have new presidential elections. Even if the current governing party, PSD, won by a margin of 7-8%, they weren't close to passing the 50% needed for a definite win in the first round of elections. That said, on December 12th we'll witness "Elections in Romania - Part II."

One thing made me happy - the Romanians in New York were waiting in a pretty long line to vote. At least they care more about it this time. Last time I went to vote in New York on Romania's Constitutional reform (79 amendments!!), it was just me and a bunch of consulate officials offering me cookies on my way out of the electoral booth.

I feel that my civic duty is complete. If only others got off their asses on December 12th and took the respectable walk to the nearest voting section.

No Comment

2004-08-20T14:21:00.000-04:00

Israel News : Romania Jewish Cemetery Defaced

Deja Vu

2004-08-18T13:25:00.000-04:00

Olympics - Romania locks up women's gymnastics gold

Yes, I live in America. For the time being. And yes, there are amazing things one can do in this country. But right now I'm happy to be Romanian. I'm happy for the girls who won the Olympic women's gymnastics gold medal, replicating the 2000 Sydney result.

I know Romania is striving to get out of the transition shit hole (pardon my colloquial demeanor); and I know hard work and athletic triumphs are not the only way to success anymore (though they have been for many years and for many girls.) But to be honest, if your pool of choice is 280 million (U.S. population), or 23 million (roughly Romania's population), common sense tells you Americans have about 12-1 chances to win more medals than the Romanians (further proof: the Chinese are 3 gold medals ahead of the Americans as of today; and 1 billion people tops 280 million by far.)

Nevertheless, we did it, and I can proudly say to all the generalizing, stereotypical, narrow-minded, ignorant dweebs in the world that out of the four life styles a Romanian is prejudicially expected to embrace (gypsy, dictator, vampire or gymnast), I vote for the latter.

Time Will Tell

2004-07-20T12:14:00.001-04:00

IHT: Romania acts to lure investment

Socialists: "The welfare system is already going down the drain; this won't help much. Tax the foreigners, damn it!"

Conservatives: "Foreign investment is the only path to prosperity. Sacrifices must be made, but in the long run businesses will start spending for the benefit of the people."

Ceausescu: "We don't need foreign investment. Invigorate the industry and promote the local workers. Less corporate tax means more external loans. When I was around, foreign debt was close to zero..."

Average Romanian: "Will this pay me a higher salary?"

P.S. I wonder if Ceausescu would have used the word "invigorate"? Can't seem to find it on the list:"to dictate, dictated, dictator, dictatorial, dictatorially, dictatorship... "

My Faith, My Opium

2004-07-04T19:14:00.000-04:00

While I was walking out of Grace Church in New York on July 4th, this bum across the street looks at the congregation and yells: "I don't believe in this bull!"

I don't go to church too often, and when I do it's almost never to a Greek Orthodox church. Coming from Romania, chances are that 8 out of 10 people are Greek Orthodox, have been baptized as such and don't care much about the Catholic Church or any other denomination for that matter. Grace Church is Episcopalian, but I honestly couldn't care less if it were Lutheran, Catholic, or Greek Orthodox - as long as it's Christian. I find it hard to expose this sort of attitude when I travel back home. The truth is, I respect people's faith; it is blind, organized, rule-oriented faith, however, that I can't cope with. Though the Romanian Constitution does guarantee freedom of religion and separation between church and state (hell - we used the French constitutional model and Chirac's latest "veil of secularism" in schools is definitely a tribute to said separation), the secularity of the state is deeply doubtful in my opinion. Or maybe I have attended too many civil liberties courses at NYU.

Many Romanian public schools (the private ones, though rising, still constitute an insignificat percentage) teach religion in school, even if attendance is not compulsory - anymore. American missionaries often use public university classes to spread the word of God to students or anyone interested; free pizza and drinks couldn't hurt, and if you've been a student in a Romanian university you know that free food is a rare opportunity. And you go; and you listed to the good missionary, though you're only in for the pizza, and though tomorrow you'll listen to a Political Science lecture in the same class.

While still attending school in Romania, I had this American teacher for one of my English classes - he was thouroughly convinced that his true existential purpose was to bring "the faith" to us; the default response of many teachers and intellectuals at large would probably be something in the lines of - "but we've been Christians for hundreds of years, long before America was even on the world map." That may be true, but while it is probably wise to preserve traditional religion and customs, I don't understand why American missionaries are relatively scrutinizes while secularism is not fully granted. If we deny one side of the American faith, yet we fail to learn from its legal aspirations, we might find ourselves deeply rooted into a religious state.

I dare one acclaimed journalist from any major Romanian newspaper keep his job and / or reputation while preaching atheism.

Baby Steps

2004-06-17T19:16:00.000-04:00

Could THIS be the beginning of the end? The end of corruption, that is. A teacher in Romania once quoted Cicero to me: "Corruption will end when honesty becomes profitable." ("Coruptia inceteaza cand cinstea incepe sa renteze.")
Is the E.U. benefit such a huge profit, or rather the profit to outweigh years of bribe, nepotism, elitism and what not? More to come.

Trilingual Confusion

2004-06-08T16:19:00.000-04:00

You'd think that saying "I do" three times in any language would have anyone convinced of one's wish to be married. Not according to the following New York Times article:

_____________________________________

June 7, 2004
Romanian Official Refuses to Marry Couple
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 3:50 p.m. ET

CLUJ, Romania (AP) -- The groom said ``yes,'' but a city hall official said ``no,'' refusing to marry a couple because the groom didn't voice his consent first in the Romanian language, authorities said Monday.

Vasile Gherman, a civil servant who performs civil marriages, refused Sunday to marry Andrei Dombi, 44, an ethnic Hungarian with dual Romanian and French citizenship to Anca Diana Toma, 33, after Dombi said ``yes'' in Hungarian, Romanian and French -- ``igen, da, oui.''

Gherman may now face disciplinary action. ``He didn't act correctly,'' said Mircea Jorj, a legal adviser with Cluj City Hall.

The couple said they would sue Gherman.

``I said 'igen' because I am ethnic Hungarian, 'da' because I am a Romanian citizen and 'oui' because I am French,'' said Dombi of Sunday's ceremony. ``It was not something premeditated.''

Gherman said that he needed to hear a clear consent from the groom and hearing ``yes,'' in three languages was confusing.

``If he had said ``da'' first, I would have married them,'' Gherman said. He added that he called for the couple later in the day to marry them, but they weren't to be found.

Gherman already had refused to marry Hungarian couples twice in the past after they said ``yes'' in both Romanian and Hungarian.

After one of the couples sued, the court ordered city hall to pay them $1,200.

A law that took effect in 2001 grants ethnic minorities the right to use their mother tongue in legal affairs that take place in parts of Romania where their minority group exceeds 20 percent of the population.

More than 20 percent of Cluj residents are ethnic Hungarian. The city is 180 miles northwest of Bucharest, the capital. Cluj's nationalist former mayor, Gheorghe Funar -- known for his anti-Hungarian stance -- lost a bid for re-election on Sunday.

Most ethnic Hungarians in Romania live in Transylvania, which was under Austro-Hungarian rule for centuries until 1918. While ethnic tensions have eased, some members of both communities continue to harbor distrust of each other.

Romanians and the West

2004-06-03T15:49:00.000-04:00

From www.romania.org an article by Paul Wood, a foreign citizen living and working in Romania. Don't mind the British spelling, it's worthwhile.

_____________________________________

The psychology of nations is not intellectually out of fashion in Romania in the way that it has been for the last sixty years in the West, at least since the British army entered Auschwitz. Romanians, usually their own severest critics, talk at length and often with cruel accuracy about their national character and question the reasons why so much of Romanian society appears to be dysfunctional. On the other hand, foreigners who have the luck to live and work in Romania are often enchanted and exasperated in turn, or simultaneously, by what seems to them a curiously childlike quality in Romanians (in common with other central and eastern Europeans but to a more pronounced degree), even when they are taking part in activities that are far from innocent.

In a superficial sense adolescence is over much more quickly in Romania than in the Anglo-Saxon world where baby boomers squeeze themselves into jeans at sixty. At twenty or twenty-one the Romanian is a young adult earning his living, even if still at university, and surviving in a tough and dangerous world. Older people are treated with respect in a part of the world where the generation gap was never heard of and each generation follows fairly closely in the path of its parents. Important figures in business and politics seem rarely to talk to people under fifty. Yet at a deeper level Romanians seem, at least to outsiders, in some ways children of a larger growth.

One reason is that life in the West changed out of all recognition under the impact of sudden and unprecedented economic growth and technological advance in the fifty year period in which Romania was frozen in time under communism. Life in the West was once much less pressured, slower, simpler, more human and more innocent. Watch a British film from the 1930s or 40s and you will recognise a lot. Bolshevism’s final achievement, while destroying so much that was priceless, was to act as the only conservative force strong enough to put a brake on progress and preserve a traditional way of life which with astonishing rapidity was destroyed forever in the market economies.

But another reason is that for fifty years initiative and freedom of thought in Romania was crushed. And the Communists were only the last and worst in a long line of bad rulers. The Communist tyranny, bear in mind, extended from the central committee to every factory and office in the country. In psychological terms the result is comparable to the trauma inflicted on a child who is not allowed to detach himself from his abusive parents and to mature. He remains a perpetual adolescent. In Jungian terms we can speak of the phenomenon of the puer aeternus, the eternal boy, of whom the classic literary example is Peter Pan, the boy who never grew up.

The psychologist Jeffrey Satinover has described the puer aeternus as “characterized on the one hand by a poor adjustment to quotidian demands, a failure to set stable goals and to make lasting achievements in accord with these goals, yet, on the other hand, it is also characterized by noble idealism, a fertile imagination, spiritual insight and frequently, too, by remarkable talent.” Professor Satinover went on to refer to a “refusal to take the difficult path of adaptation, or work. The grandiose fantasy is preferred to the modest accomplishment.”

If this parallel holds true, Romanians are in a sense perpetual (and fascinating) adolescents traumatised by a disrupted and painful history who dislike and scorn authority, break rules without a qualm of conscience but at the same time are sorely afraid of punishment. Leaders (adults) are idealised and expected to solve all the problems, demonised when they (always) fail to do so. The puer is obsessively interested in how he appears to outsiders because he lacks a solid sense of identity. He is passionate, artistic and warm-hearted but often impractical, passive, shirking responsibility, seeking to shift blame, preferring nostalgia or fantasy to reality on which he has a tenuous grasp.

Such psychoanalytical comparisons are beguiling but should not be pressed too far of course. The puer aeternus is un vrai naïf and here the parallel with Romanians might seem to break down, for Romanians are nothing if not cynical. On the other hand children who are the victims of prolonged abuse become highly suspicious and unable to trust others. Romanians often combine naiveté and cynicism in a way that foreigners don’t easily understand. Maybe that’s the secret of the present Government’s high ratings in the opinion polls.

Romania’s orphans (in fact a misnomer since few of the institutionalised children are orphans) are, entirely due to pressure from opinion abroad, a political story that never goes away. They are may well play a large part in postponing Romania’s admission to the European Union. In a front page cartoon in a leading newspaper a weary Romanian complains: ‘Why do they keep talking about orphans? We Romanians are all orphans.’ And so indeed they are. The Romanian-American writer Andrei Codrescu in a speech in 1991 put it this way. ‘Romania is a country of abandoned children, literal children and grown-up children, abandoned by its own leadership, abandoned by the West and psychologically by its own citizens.’

In another sense too Romania is orphaned. Since the demise of Communism other former Soviet colonies have found Western countries to act as economic partners-mentors: Austria supports and invests in Hungary and its other ex-Communist neighbours: the Baltic States and Poland have Scandinavia; even wretched Albania has Italy. The Romanians have no-one, for surely the Greeks and Turks do not fulfill this role. They have only the EU whom Romanians look on as a rich and benevolent distant relative who will adopt them and thereby solve all their problems. Lady Nicholson’s career as a backbencher in the British Parliament was pretty undistinguished but as the European Parliament’s Rapporteur the hectoring style and meddlesomeness which grated in England the 1990s is what Romania now requires. Whether or not she is right in her opposition to foreign adoptions, how statesmanlike and how adult a figure she cuts among the Ministers and officials whom she harries. On balance, how lucky, did they but know it, Romanians are to have her.

Romanians are the terrible infants of Europe and if they succeed in joining the European Union in 2007 they will do so as the licensed problem children, expected to lag behind the others and embarrass the grown ups. Real children who have been ill-treated and neglected very often grow up to be child abusers. In Romania generations of cynical and self-interested leaders have taught succeeding generations to misuse power. Romanians hope that foreigners, like wise and beneficent grown-ups, will step in to make things better but what is needed to break the cycle is moral regeneration from within. Discouragingly, the only movement in recent Romanian history that sought to achieve this daunting task was the Iron Guard, the pre-war mystical-fascist movement who proposed a cure for corruption worse than the disease.

The Why of It

2004-05-19T15:55:00.000-04:00

I have officially decided to start a blog on issues concerning Romania's politics, society and culture. As an International Relations major at New York University and a Romanian citizen myself, I will most likely focus on matters related to Romania's foreign affairs and diplomatic ties with the E.U.