Macron & Iohannis: Assault on Romania’s Democracy

What’s more hybrid than an attack led by Iohannis and Macron—backed by the mainstream media, Intelligence services, and a controversial Constitutional Court?

In my previous post, I described at length the case of the many disenfranchised people who voted for Călin Georgescu, his blitzkrieg TikTok campaign, and the nervous breakdown it triggered among the privileged elite. I also examined the various theories surrounding these events, tracing their roots to Romania’s dark past, including the lingering influence of the Securitate’s heirs. Additionally, I clarified why it is a gross propagandist lie to label the sovereigntist movements—and Georgescu himself—as pro-Russia, anti-EU, or anti-NATO. Finally, as I questioned the need for a genuine debate on the struggle between the sovereigntist/democratic forces and the globalist/technocratic forces, I also suggested that the country may produce intellectuals capable of explaining the stage humanity is entering and offering new frameworks to understand it.

Two unanswered questions

Two questions remained unanswered in my previous post.

One centered on what really happened behind Georgescu’s campaign, especially considering President Iohannis had suggested that Russia was involved, despite the conflicting signals from Romania’s intelligence services.

We now know that President Iohannis’ party, the PNL (Partidul Național Liberal), funneled money into a campaign mentioned in the Defence Council (CSAT) document, which was presented to the Constitutional Court to justify the suspension of democracy.

Yes, the man who claimed that Russia launched a hybrid attack on Romania had no proof when he made those accusations. In reality, it was his own party that violated Romania’s political communication laws and supported Georgescu. The world can watch as Iohannis clings to power beyond the end of his mandate (December 21), sustained by a lie built on illegal activities tied to his party. The world may laugh, but in the meantime, the Romanian people will have to wait for the day when this fraud is held accountable in court.

I’ll leave you with Klaus Iohannis’ response when asked—12 days after triggering the annulment of the elections—why he didn’t protest to the Russian embassy, the usual first diplomatic step in such cases:

"Attribution is very complicated, because it can only be done if you have concrete evidence - and irrefutable evidence-, but in cyberspace, it's very difficult to find something irrefutable." (18/12/24)

Two days later, the news site Snoop revealed, based on confidential information likely leaked by intelligence services, that the only concrete proof of illegal promotion on TikTok was tied to the PNL campaign, which had actually boosted Georgescu.

So here we are, about a month after the fake Russian hybrid attack narrative was launched, and now even the New York Times has reported on the fraud perpetrated by President Iohannis. So much for the Russian hybrid attack, but rest assured, the playbook of shouting ‘Russia’ while undermining democracy will be used again…

The second unresolved question I raised concerned the broader implications for the citizens of the European Union.

My previous text concluded with this:

Years ago, as I was showing my wife images of Macron’s brutal political repression of the Yellow Vest movement (thousands injured, 30 losing an eye, 4 dead), her reaction was that if the EU wasn’t saying anything about it, this is what awaited the rest of us - as it did during the lockdowns.

Now that “the system” has performed a coup against the Romanian people, with no protest from EU institutions and no sanctions against Romania for violating European values, we can only wonder if this is what lies ahead for the rest of the European countries.

At the time I was writing this, I had only heard that Macron had voiced his support for Mr. Georgescu’s opponent, Elena Lasconi. This was quickly overshadowed by a much larger scandal: the entire democratic process was halted by the Constitutional Court. However, now that some time has passed, it’s crucial to take a closer look at this part of the story.

For the record, I typically avoid discussing Macron, as he doesn’t deserve the attention he craves. The Butcher of the Yellow Vest movement, a man constantly waging chaos and obsessively seeking revenge against the ungrateful masses, is not worth your time. What he said, however, is very important, and it gives us the opportunity to review the whole hybrid attack narrative in the light of his discussion with Ms. Lasconi.

What Macron actually said…

The video of Macron’s support, which has been posted on Ms. Lasconi’s Facebook page, contains critical information.

E.  Macron: Hello, Elena. How are you? I'm happy to see you and to tell you my support in this campaign. And I think what is at stake is obviously the future of Romania, but I think it's very important and strategic for the whole Europe.
E. Lasconi: I  fight here for democracy and I will use all my power and my knowledge to keep democracy here in Romania and to keep my country on a European and NATO trajectory.
E. Macron:  Very important for all of us. Because your country is a very decisive one. You are on the eastern front of NATO. You're a very important member of our Europe, and during the past seven years, I constantly assessed and felt myself the importance of Romania, and I want to thank you for this very clear fact, and I think this is in the interest of Romania, Romanian people, and all Europe.
E. Lasconi:  And I want to thank you for all French military support.
E. Macron:  I decided on day one of the Russian aggression war in Ukraine in February 2022 to send troops to Romania and we were the very first one to deploy troops in your country to protect this front. And I want to tell you again my commitment and I will be very clear. The Georgian experience is very telling in this context. And this is not a blank check we provided to Romania. We provided our support to a country clearly committed in EU and NATO. And it is very important to say that if somebody arrives being ambiguous with Russia, or explicitly pro-Russian, it will totally change the security policy of Europe. […]  If I can do anything to be of help in this context, I will do anything. You are the only one to be clear on Europe and NATO and de facto you are the only one to protect the country because all the solidarity you have from the others is due to this point.

At 9 AM, the interview was published on Ms. Lasconi’s page. By 10 AM, the Constitutional Court held an ‘informal meeting’ (outside of its official processes) to discuss requests for the annulment of the first round of voting, a round the same Constitutional Court had previously validated just days earlier. Then, at 3 PM, the Constitutional Court declared the entire electoral process annulled.

The entire discussion is, of course, based on a lie: Mr. Georgescu has no intention of leaving NATO or the EU, and the Constitution doesn’t even grant him the authority to do so on his own. It was a rhetorical scam.

But the content of Macron’s remarks to Lasconi is deeply concerning. It represents foreign interference and election meddling at its highest form: threatening to withdraw military support, exploiting the fear of being left vulnerable to Russia, as if NATO wasn’t a mutual defense commitment between all its equal members, and as if Romania were nothing more than a colony with a French outpost.

He didn’t resort to the usual dull rhetoric about the European project, combating extremism, hate speech, and the rest of his standard authoritarian centrist playbook.

By stating that the troops he sent to Romania on day one of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine weren’t a blank check provided to Romania, and that this would “radically change” if someone ambiguous toward NATO were elected (despite no candidate being ambiguous, as long as you listen to their actual statements), Macron clearly defined what was acceptable and unacceptable for the Romanian people to vote for. Moreover, his claim that he would “do anything” to help in this context could mean the worst, and it’s crucial to shed light on any further election interference that may have occurred under his direction during those days.

The context of all this is the fact that Macron and UK’s Starmer had been spinning, in the weeks prior, the project of sending troops to Ukraine—using Romania’s bases, of course. The issue here is about the blank check France believes it should have regarding the handling of the Ukraine war, no matter what Romania thinks about using its territory as a launch point to escalate the conflict. Macron’s remarks go beyond just interfering in Romanian politics; they’re about dictating the parameters of Romanian sovereignty when it comes to the war in Ukraine, with little regard for what the Romanian people might choose.

With this crisis, the Romanian people have learned that going against the “bon vouloir du prince” can cost them their democracy.

America too, but with a bit more elegance

Macron’s threats came just hours after Antony Blinken broke the 10-day silence of American diplomacy regarding the Romanian vote, stating that:

We have been closely following the elections in Romania. It is the choice of the Romanian people whom they elect, and the United States does not interfere with that choice or process.

We are concerned by the Romanian Supreme Council for National Defense (CSAT)’s report of Russian involvement in malign cyber activity designed to influence the integrity of the Romanian electoral process. Data referenced in the report should be fully investigated to ensure the integrity of Romania’s electoral process.

The CSAT report Blinken is referring to highlights a TikTok campaign that, as later uncovered by the Snoop investigation, was financed by the party of President Iohannis. The involvement of both the CSAT and the Romanian presidency in orchestrating this international hoax is indisputable.

The United States values Romania’s contributions as a strong NATO Ally and partner in the European Union. Romania’s hard-earned progress anchoring itself in the Transatlantic community cannot be turned back by foreign actors seeking to shift Romania’s foreign policy away from its Western alliances. Any such change would have serious negative impacts on U.S. security cooperation with Romania, while a decision to restrict foreign investment would discourage U.S. companies from continuing to invest in Romania.

Through an enduring partnership, we have made important progress in our defense cooperation and economic partnership and taken steps towards visa free travel. We will continue to work together to preserve the security of our nations and the prosperity and well-being of our citizens.

Hinting at a few achievements realized through the partnership with America, the US State Department’s communiqué is far more moderate than Macron’s.

Furthermore, everyone can clearly see that a sovereigntist movement coming to power in Romania during the ongoing republican revolution in the US is hardly a losing hand for Romania…

The hybrid attack

So the first and most important thing we now know is that there wasn’t any meaningful, and certainly not successful, hybrid attack meant to bring Georgescu to power. Whatever actions that can be traced to Russia are superficial and anecdotal in terms of reach, especially when compared to the massive vote Georgescu received. He garnered 23% of the votes and led the first round of the election because actual people cast their votes for him, as happens in a democracy.

What happened next, though, right after the first round of voting, seems as hybrid as you can get when it comes to destabilizing a country and tearing down its democratic process.

It involves French President Macron’s threats against Romania, it involves a local party, USR, allied with Macron’s party in the European Parliament, the US State Department’s declaration, the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, contradictory reports from the Romanian secret services, the ghost of the Securitate in a Constitutional Court presided by Marian Enache—one of the few who got their Securitate informer file stolen during the Romanian Revolution. It involves street protests informally backed by a civil society that had massively received George Soros funding, a chorus of mainstream Romanian media, largely compromised by infiltrated agents from the Romanian intelligence services, desperate to impose a fake narrative about pro-EU vs anti-EU, and of course, the head of the whole masquerade: President Iohannis, the man whose party supported a competitor painted as so dangerous that Iohannis had to stay in power beyond his mandate, like some banana republic dictator.

This is the true hybrid attack, one that used all the tools of power—foreign threats, intelligence networks, manipulative media, and judicial subversion—to dismantle Romania’s democratic process and suppress the will of its people.