Bedlam in Bucharest: But Why? : Iliescu Government Has to Understand the Meaning of Democracy

There is still much confusion about the origin and sequence of events that last week brought to Bucharest the worst violence Romania has seen since the December revolution. There is no uncertainty, however, about the persistent brutish side of Romanian politics that this deadly confrontation revealed.

President-elect Ion Iliescu’s new regime has been shown to be as nearly intolerant of dissent as its dictatorial predecessors. Romania’s efforts to replace authoritarian Communist rule with more open and representative government have never seemed more fragile. A party that says it is composed of former Communists, and that just last month swept to power with more than 80% of the popular vote, could think of no more creative way to deal with opposition protests than by a panicky recourse to primitive vigilantism. Most of Eastern Europe is democratizing. Romania appears simply to be reverting to form.

It remains to be explained why the police and army failed to handle the angry response when the interim government moved at mid-week to quash what until then had been a peaceful anti-Communist protest. Were these forces inactive out of sympathy for the protesters, or were they trying to sabotage Iliescu for less noble motives? In any event, Iliescu turned to rent-a-mob, calling in miners whose loyalty he had secured with a huge pay raise. Besides random assaults on the populace, the mob staged well-planned attacks on opposition party leaders, headquarters and publications.

The United States and the European Community, whose goodwill and support Romania desperately needs, have responded appropriately. Washington says it will withhold all but humanitarian aid to show its displeasure, while the EC has postponed a trade and cooperation agreement with Bucharest.

Iliescu says his regime is committed to democratic principles. He has yet to show he understands the meaning of those words.