Numerele anterioare

2, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71,
 

Lunile anterioare


 

Autor


 

CDR 3.0 vs. PLD 2.0

Cristian BANU

The offer Traian Băsescu made to the Liberals, to depose Tăriceanu and stay in Power, only confirms the failure of PLD and proves Traian Băsescu is running out of ideas. The President knows that he must do something quite soon, because his voters are getting bored and may find another outlet for their frustration. P(L)D is not helping; on the contrary, it raises serious image problems for Băsescu. Meanwhile, PNL gets ready to re-launch the Democratic Convention, currently at version 3.0.



PLD 2.0

 

But Traian Băsescu’s problem now is that, apart from political migrants, hardly anybody trusts him any longer. Basically, Traian Băsescu’s offer comes down to the death of PNL as a political party, and I have serious doubts that any Liberal leader is willing to take responsibility for this, particularly keeping in mind that the current position of PNL is fairly solid. PD can’t force Tăriceanu out, and PSD has no reason to do it, although Geoană keeps talking about a second no-confidence motion (which would be a nonsense, though: I can’t see why should two motions be tabled within a month), because this would have him depend entirely on Traian Băsescu and eventually vanish from the political arena altogether. Had PSD actually decided to dismiss the Tăriceanu Cabinet, they might as well have done it by backing the PD motion.

A proof that Tăriceanu doesn’t feel at all threatened is the negotiation with PSD, or rather, the absence of such negotiations. To my mind, this is hardly a man clinging on to his seat.

It may well be that this “indecent” proposal is only intended to divert attention from the P(L)D impotence and from recent debates on the collection of political migrants having enrolled with the presidential party. This is like counting the eggs before they are hatched, since there is no way the PD motion will pass, and for the time being there’s no evidence that tabling one would benefit PSD.

Further proof that this is a red herring is also the fact that the proposal is unrealistic, considering that:

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         Such a government would have an approx. 35% parliamentary support, as against the 22% of the incumbent Cabinet; is this really worth the effort? But of course, since PD would get back in the government!

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         After all the fighting of the past few months, PNL and PD would be the nation’s laughing stock if they got back together;

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         This solution requires the Premier’s voluntary resignation, because I don’t think any group in PNL would venture into a coup—not after what happened with the Stolojan wing, which has serious problems raising above the electoral threshold;

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         The solution, just like the Tăriceanu 2 Cabinet, depends on the PSD goodwill.

Insofar as it leaves PSD out of the equation, Traian Băsescu’s proposal results in a shift in focus from the battle between PD and PSD—as it was the case in the referendum campaign (when PNL was virtually ignored, just as it ignored Băsescu in its turn)—towards a battle between PNL and PD. Traian Băsescu may have noticed that PSD no longer scares anyone, with all the chaos in its structures, that Ion Iliescu is not much of a menace, and that he must give his electorate something more spicy. On the other hand, acknowledging Tăriceanu and PNL as the main political opponents only boosts their “market value,” particularly as they did quite well in the “negotiations” with PSD and even the Cotroceni propagandists have ceased to believe that secret agreements (rather than plain fear of elections) are behind the PSD support for the Tăriceanu Cabinet...

 

CDR 3.0

 

In reply to the right-wing Pole announced by Stolojan, PNL prepares the third version of the Democratic Convention, through a project targeting cooperation with PNȚCD and merger with AP. Like anything else that PNL does, this latest initiative was heavily criticised by the mass media, which gives me reasons to believe that this time around the Liberals are on the right tract. Let’s see the pros and cons for this move:

 

Pros

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         PNL reaffirms its right-wing identity, a legitimacy vehemently challenged by PLD and PD, which propose, in their turn, an “authentic” right-wing pole. But the opponents’ claims exclusively rely on the “cooperation with PSD,” which is increasingly difficult to prove, as it has become clear that PSD has supported the Tăriceanu 2 Government primarily out of fear of early elections, and that it has received nothing in exchange. Moreover, PNȚCD and AP are undeniably right-wing parties, whereas PNG and Ioan Talpeș are obviously anything but right-wing.

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         The P(L)D right-wing identity is shattered, which was not very hard in the first place, since PD has generally preserved its left-wing rhetoric, and the break with the Socialist International was rather off-the-cuff. Moreover, the competitor of CDR 3.0 might ring a “New FSN” bell. At best, P(L)D will be pushed towards the centre, or even to the left, where a gap seems to be yawning further to the chaotic moves PSD has made as of recently.

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         The return of PNȚCD to the political forefront helps this party overcome the media embargo it has been subject to (PNȚCD has been getting some coverage only on OTV, where Miluț would pay for his monthly features, since on OTV nothing is on the house—on the one-room house, to be precise). One of the reasons for the almost-extinction of PNȚCD is this media embargo, along with a pragmatic vote cast for other right-wing parties with better chances to get into Parliament. True enough, even in their heydays the Christian Democrats have hardly exceeded 6% in polls, therefore their electoral contribution is not expected to be spectacular; however, the synergy with a truly right-wing party may gain over the right-wing electorate of P(L)D.

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         The international status of PNȚCD, a member of the People’s Parties International ever since style="BACKGROUND: yellow; mso-highlight: yellow">1987 is yet another important element, given that further to the accession much of the Romanian domestic politics is done in Brussels-. Frattini’s goodwill, for instance, may come in handy to the Tăriceanu Cabinet, especially since the EPP doesn’t seem all that happy with their association with Băsescu: they didn’t rush to openly support PD, as the Socialist International once did for PSD and again in this referendum campaign, and as the European Liberals did.

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         At present, PNL has the best position, which they seem to make intelligent use of. They managed, I believe, to put safe distance between themselves and PSD and to throw the hot potato to the Democrats: the latter can only get rid of Tăriceanu if they cooperate with PSD (which is just what the Liberals did when joining forces with PSD to eliminate Traian Băsescu).

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         This alliance may come up with a presidential candidate who may prove a worthy competitor for Traian Băsescu, and I don’t mean Emil Constantinescu, but Ciuhandu, whose performance in the 2004 elections was excellent.

 

Cons:

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         CDR failed, like all other right-wing alliances, and a lot of people have a negative perception on CDR, although, looking back, their governing was not that bad; similarly, Emil Constantinescu himself has a negative image.

lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-font-family: Georgia; mso-bidi-font-family: Georgia"> style="mso-list: Ignore">- style="FONT: 7pt ''">         There is a significant ideological barrier, which may pose problems in the future. One of the reasons of the D.A. Alliance failure was the incapacity to handle success, first and foremost because they never imagined they would actually get in Power, so they had no power management plan. Both parties have sound positions in the internationals they are affiliated to, so none of them is willing to give this up. But if they do come up with a concrete and coherent political project, clearly regulating the form of cooperation, then this problem can be solved, especially since none of the parties seems to include a destabilising element comparable to Traian Băsescu.

 

The missing ingredient:

 

There is one element in this strategy that everyone overlooks: The Magyar minority. I believe this party stands slim chances to get any Parliament seats (except, perhaps, for some symbolic representation in case of uninominal voting), which is a pity for everybody. Both PD and PSD have embraced more or less covert nationalist positions, and their electorate is clearly against the Magyars, whereas PNL and PNȚCD have so far chosen to ignore the issue. With Transylvania apparently under the electoral control of PD, a new right-wing pole has nothing left to lose, and I think that taking over some of the UDMR political leaders, like Eckstein or Zsolt Nagy, and paying special attention to the Magyar minority may do the trick and mobilise the Magyar electorate, which broadly matches the PNL-PNȚCD electoral profile. This would not affect the electorate of the two, generally urban, educated, refined people, who don’t fall for nationalist rhetoric. Not to mention that just like PNȚCD, UDMR is also a member of the Christian Democratic International. With the regionalisation (decentralisation) of politics gaining ground, the first Romanian party to come up with a political offer for the Magyar community will stand to gain the most. While at a national level the Magyar community representation is around 6-7%, at a regional level it may reach as much as 80% in Transylvania-. The new political structure would thus be able to secure regional domination (Banat through PNȚCD, Transylvania through the Magyar minority, <%Moldavia through PNL, Bucharest- through PNL) leading to a very good result at a national level.

Publicat în : English  de la numărul 48

Comentarii

Nu există nici un comentariu. Fii primul care comentează acest articol!

Număr curent

Coperta ultimului număr al revistei

Semnal editorial

Emil Constantinescu - Pacatul originar, sacrificiul fondator

Revolutia din decembrie ’89: Pacatul originar, sacrificiul fondator este prima carte dintr-o serie de sapte volume dedicate ultimelor doua decenii din istoria României. „Nu am pretentia ca sunt detinatorul unui adevar politic, juridic sau istoric incontestabil, si sunt gata sa discut si sa accept orice documente, fapte sau marturii care pot lumina mai bine sau chiar altfel realitatea. Educatia mea stiintifica si religioasa m-a ajutat sa cercetez faptele în mod obiectiv, eliberat de ura sau intoleranta. Recunosc însa o anume încrâncenare în ceea ce am scris venita din durerea unui om care a trait în miezul evenimentelor si se simte lovit de acceptarea cinica a crimelor, abuzurilor, coruptiei si minciunii, sau de indiferenta la fel de cinica cu care sunt înca privite de catre o mare parte a societatii românesti.... Am scris aceste carti de pe pozitia victimelor mintite sau speriate, care nu-si cunosc sau nu-si pot apara drepturile. Le-am scris de pe pozitia milioanelor de români cinstiti care cred în adevar, în dreptate si în demnitate.” Emil Constantinescu (text preluat din Introducerea cartii).

Mircea Malita - Mintea cea socotitoare

MINTEA CEA SOCOTITOARE
de academician Mircea Malita, Editura Academiei Române, 2009
În volumul de eseuri „Mintea cea socotitoare“, aparut la Editura Academiei Române, acad. Mircea Malita formuleaza în crescendo o serie de întrebari grave ale timpului nostru: Daca omul este rational, de ce se fac atâtea greseli în economie
sau în politica?; Daca rationalitatea nu e de ajuns, care ar fi rolul întelepciunii?; Din viitorul imprevizibil putem smulge portiuni, daca nu certe, cel putin probabile?; Ce si cum învatam pregatindu-ne pentru viitorul nostru?; Este în stare omenirea sa îsi vindece crizele?; Ne asteapta oare un dezastru final? s.a. De-a lungul anilor, acad. Mircea Malita a staruit asupra acestor teme în lucrari recunoscute, însa acum o face raportându-se la dinamica realitatii imediate, inspirat de cuvintele lui Dimitrie Cantemir: „socoteala mintii mele, lumina dinlauntrul capului“. Eseurile sunt structurate pe patru parti - „Mintea senina“, „Metaforele mintii“, Mintea învolburata“ si „Privind înainte“. Finalul este de un optimism lucid care tine seama de potentialul de rationalitate si imaginatie al mintii umane si, fireste, de generatiile tinere care îl pot valoriza benefic.

Virginia Mircea - Poezii (vol.1 - Mișeii, vol.2 - Vise, îngeri, amintiri), Editura Cadran Politic Virginia Mircea - Poezii (vol.1 - Mișeii, vol.2 - Vise, îngeri, amintiri), Editura Cadran Politic

Această carte de poezie este seismograful de mare sensi­bilitate care înregistrează cele două întâlniri ale sufletului, deo­potrivă cu URÂTUL care ne schilodește ca ființă, ca neam, dar și cu FRUMU­SEȚEA sufletească nepoluată ce stă ca o fântână cu apă curată pe un câmp plin cu peturi și gunoaie nede­gra­da­bile. Ce poate fi mai dureros decât să surprinzi această fibră distrusă de aluviunile istorice încărcate de lașități, inerții, apatii, compromisuri devenite congenitale ale ro­mâ­nului? Vibrația ver­su­rilor, directețea lor, simplitatea dusă până în marginea cotidianului para­do­xal n-au efect distructiv asupra tonu­sului moral al cititorului, ci produc „neli­niștea cea bună”, cum ar spune Sfin­ții Părinți. Citești în revolta și durerea poetei un mănunchi admirabil de calități: o demnitate neînfrântă, o fizio­logie a verticalității și, mai ales, o inimă creștină, „o inimă din ceruri”, cum ar spune poetul latin. Căci, în aceast㠄inimă din ceruri”, există lacrimi deopotrivă pentru românul umi­lit, distrus până și-n visele lui, dar și pentru copilul din Gaza, cu sufletul și trupul chircite sub șenilele tancurilor unui război ce tinde să devină mai lung decât viața lui, ale unui „război-viață”, lacrimi pentru copilul evreu ce nu a putut fi salvat de la deportarea bestială, lacrimi pentru Tibetul sfâșiat. Și toate acestea fără impostura unui ecumenism sentimental, ci izvorâte din acel suspin curat românesc ce face esența lacrimii creștine. (Dan Puric)

ISLAMUL SI SOARTA LUMII - Fundamentalismul islamic ca ideologie politica

ISLAMUL SI SOARTA LUMII - Fundamentalismul islamic ca ideologie politica de Virginia Mircea "Islamul si soarta lumii - Fundamendamentalismul ca ideologie politca invita la o reflectie mai adanca asupra porceselor lumii contemporane. Judecata critica si independenta a autoarei a produs o lucrare de o veritabila investigatie stiintifica, exact la momentul in care tema tratata deseori fara solutii si perspective ocupa scena din fata a politicii si problemelor mondiale. Cititorii o pot aseza cu satisfactie in bliblioteca lor de referinta. Vor fi mult ajutati in intelegerea evenimentelor care ne sesizeaza in prezent si intr-un viitor in care tema nu se va desprinde de mersul lumii contemporane." (academician Mircea Malita)

Parteneri

Institutul de Proiecte pentru Inovatie si Dezvoltare The National Centre for Sustainable Development

Login: