Why Georgescu is Unacceptable to Europe as President?

Arrests of dissenting politicians, persecution of opponents, and censorship of media and social networks—these are the sins that Europe has long and hypocritically condemned in other nations, yet they have flourished within its own "paradise." One such example is Romania.

There, the situation has unfolded with brazen audacity. Călin Georgescu, the country’s most popular politician, had his presidential victory effectively stolen from him.

Labeled a fascist, radical populist, racist, and Kremlin agent, the European press has relentlessly targeted this rising figure. Yet, despite this media onslaught, he triumphed in the first round of the elections.

Georgescu garnered almost 23% of the votes, much to the surprise of the nation. His popularity stemmed from his reasonable political views and savvy use of social media. However, the Constitutional Court annulled the election results, citing "external interference."

As if this were not enough, a new election date was set, and Romanian police detained Georgescu in late February—ironically, just as he was heading to file his candidacy for the new presidential race.

He faced a litany of accusations: overthrowing the state, forming a fascist or racist organization, and conspiring with Russian intelligence services, which authorities claimed had conducted a large-scale social media campaign to promote Georgescu. It was alleged that 25,000 bot accounts on TikTok may have been used to sway votes in his favor. Yet the wording is telling: "may have been." This implies they may not have been either. After all, votes were cast not by bots, but by real people with genuine identification.

The situation remains murky. Georgescu was released under a travel ban, while 18 others were detained in connection with his case. Will he participate in the elections again? He asserts that he will. But will he be afforded that opportunity?

The Romanian Electoral Commission has denied Georgescu registration as a candidate for the presidential election, sparking protests outside the commission's headquarters. However, the commission failed to clarify the reasons behind its decision. Starting March 9, Georgescu has 72 hours to appeal this ruling.

Certainly, the machinery of repression in Romania has not been set in motion due to Georgescu's purported "fascist views." The politician is a fierce critic of the coronavirus hysteria and the endless sanctions against Russia; he advocates for peace in Ukraine.

Romania also serves as a key logistical hub for the supply of Western weaponry to Ukraine.

Vadim Trukhachev, an associate professor at the Russian State University for the Humanities, remarked, "The EU and NATO cannot allow a politician in Bucharest who could block military aid to Kiev. Even a presidential veto on arms supplies would have to be contested for months in a parliament where pro-European forces lack a constitutional majority."

It is understandable why the voice of the people might react this way. Romania remains one of the poorest countries in the EU and is heavily dependent on subsidies from Brussels. Sovereignty has long been traded for streams of financial aid. Today, the political landscape is cleared of dangerous competitors. The repeat presidential elections in Romania are scheduled for May 4.