George Simion describes his Right-wing AUR party as “Trumpist”. Credit: Daniel Mihailescu/ Getty.

“Simion, Georgescu same! Number one!” says my taxi driver animatedly, turning back to me and away from the busy traffic ahead, rubbing his forefingers together for emphasis, as we speed down the tree-lined boulevard into central Bucharest. His pithy analysis is precisely what’s alarming Brussels and Romania’s centre-left political establishment. Following December’s last-minute annulment of Romania’s presidential elections, purportedly but unprovenly on the grounds of Russian interference, the wave of populist support for the Right-wing candidate, Călin Georgescu, has been transferred to the national-populist George Simion, whose AUR party was only founded in 2019. Riding popular anger at both the perceived election interference by Romania’s political establishment, and the sense that the post-communist economic boom has stalled, the country’s populist wave seems to echo trends across Europe and the wider West.
Cited by JD Vance as an example of the centrist antipathy towards democracy, Romania’s dramatic election seems, at first, to echo narratives across the collapsing liberal order. On the one hand, an increasingly unpopular centre-left establishment invokes the spectre of Kremlin meddling to maintain its faltering grip on power; on the other, a dissatisfied electorate swings sharply to the Right for change — like it has across Europe. As a country with the EU’s longest borders with Ukraine, both Kyiv’s supporters and opponents in the West have divined in Romania’s electoral tumult fodder for their Manichaean worldviews. Yet in Bucharest itself, what emerges from talking to political insiders is something subtler, more uniquely Romanian, yet which also highlights under-emphasised aspects of the populist wave more generally: a Rightward swing driven not just by the dissatisfied masses, but also by elites increasingly willing to gamble on a dramatic shake-up of the country’s political order.
On the steps of Romania’s Senate, part of the vast and gaudy palace complex left unfinished by Ceaușescu at his overthrow, George Simion is giving an impromptu press conference to the assembled international and local media, as the first-round voting draws to a close. A dark, energetic man, derided as a gypsy hooligan by his bourgeois liberal opponents, Simion is a former football ultra barred from entering Moldova and Ukraine for his irredentist activism in the cause of a greater Romania. Now he glowers at the cameras as he accuses Romania’s political establishment of cooking the electoral books by registering long-dead citizens as active voters. “We were humiliated by annulling the elections,” he says. “It is against human nature to annul elections in a normal country. Nothing changed in Romania after 1989, we are still run by the security services.”
Much of Simion’s discourse derives from a popular belief that Romania’s post-Communist transition was only partial, and that behind the scenes, the country’s powerful intelligence services play an outsized role in politics. Romanian political figures speak more expansively off the record than on, regarding this claim: some suggest the security services prefer Simion to his opponent, the reclusive mathematics professor, Nicușor Dan, simply because they have more dirt on him. But in any case, they add defensively, is politics in the West really any different? Trump’s grappling with the FBI is well-known here: fighting the “deep state”, true or not, is a Romanian narrative that may yet play well with Washington’s new regime.
Yet if Simion feared deep state interference, he needn’t have: when the results came in hours later, he had won 40% of first round votes, as much as his two most popular challengers — the establishment candidate Crin Antonescu and the liberal reformist mayor of Bucharest Nicușor Dan — combined. Among Romania’s huge diaspora, formerly the engine of liberal reformist change, the scale of victory was even starker: Simion had won 61% of the diaspora vote, a marker of dissatisfaction both with Romania’s progress, and with life in the West. One Romanian friend in London, a liberal professional, highlighted the West’s increasing squalor and disorder as a major factor in the diaspora vote.
In his palatial office, watched over by framed portraits of historic Romanian heroes — Vlad the Impaler, the Dacian king Decebalus, Stefan the Great— and with an Orthodox icon of his namesake St George slaying the dragon behind him, Simion speaks to me after the results came in. “The diaspora always wanted a change in the country because they were forced to go and work in the West. They want to work and live here at home. And they voted not for liberals, not for sovereigntists, they are voting for a change,” he said, but “the European Union establishment is corrupt, greedy and in many ways shady. They do not respect the popular vote.” Instead, Simion describes his Right-wing AUR as “Trumpist” and “a MAGA party”, pledging to raise Romania’s already-high Nato spending even further. “Some would want to pay for the Green Deal and for gender operations for children,” he adds. “We would like to concentrate on the economy and to invest a lot in our military industry.”
In Bucharest, a stronghold of the liberal opposition, views on Simion are decidedly mixed. “We need a strong leader in Romania, like [Vlad] Dracul,” Ștefan, an older man shopping at the city’s Obor farmer’s market told me, “Not someone crazy like Ursula [von der Leyen], or a gay like Macron.” Florentina, the young, tattooed proprietor of a coffee shop in Bucharest’s bohemian Old Town, is less enthusiastic. “I want us to stay going in a European direction, but I am afraid that if Simion wins he will bring back Georgescu, who is an extremist, as Prime minister. If Simion wins I will move to Spain,” she says. Yet after a pause she adds, “This is the first time in 30 years that my parents did not vote [for the governing centre-left] PSD. Prices are higher here than Spain or Italy but wages are much lower — and all this inflation is because of corruption here.”
The collapse in the PSD’s vote share behind the establishment candidate, Crin Antonescu, is one of the most telling markers of Romania’s populist swing. I’d arranged to speak with the PSD, who some insiders suspected would tacitly swing behind Simion, on the night of the election. In between arranging the interview and meeting the PSD the next day, the government collapsed as the PSD Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu resigned, saying the ruling coalition now “lacks any credibility”.
In his parliamentary office, the PSD’s young deputy head Mihai Ghigiu seemed resigned to events. “Many people feel that they are not represented, feel that the politicians are not trying to deal with their needs. Because if we look to Georgescu, Simion, or whoever you want, their voters are not necessarily extremist, but they’re very unhappy with the current situation.
But Simion’s ascendant party feels history is on its side. Opening the French windows of AUR’s senate offices, the party’s Scruton-quoting, British-educated senator, Mihail Neamțu, takes me onto the balcony to admire the huge new National Cathedral still under construction. “Romania is the only country, I think, today in Europe which is still able to build a cathedral like this,” he says. Like the new cathedral, AUR’s meteoric rise “speaks for all these people who felt that EU integration somehow left behind some important elements of the human soul. Just talking about economic resilience, just investing in infrastructure, that’s not good enough. And so there is a battle for the soul of the nation. There’s nothing fascist about saying, we have a country, we have a nation, we have a people with a certain type of values, and we want to preserve that.” That’s why, Neamțu claims, the Romanian diaspora has swung so solidly behind Simion. Imagine yourself in the place of a Romanian emigrant in “the Tower of Babel”. That is London, Neamțu says: “You ask yourself, Wow, was it worth it? I mean, my kid is now trans, my wife divorced me, I am not fulfilled spiritually, I have some money, but where is the sense of purpose and belonging? And so these people seriously question whether they should stay in the West or come back to Romania. And when they saw George with a very specific message, ‘Come back and we will rebuild this country’, they started to see life.”
Neamțu scoffs at the PSD’s hope that Simion won’t be able to form a functioning government. All he needs to do as president, he says, is refuse the first two attempts to form an opposition coalition, and then call snap elections, as the constitution permits. “And then what happens? You have a very popular president with a very popular party, and we could win. If next Sunday we would have snap elections, I’m sure we would win 40%. So George will be in a very powerful position.” He can appoint new heads of the security services, change the make-up of the constitutional court, Neamțu adds, “and he will be able to talk individually to lots of politicians who will understand that he is the future.”
Overlooking the English-style lawns of a plush country club in leafy, affluent north Bucharest, I have lunch with Romania’s ultimate political insider, Anton Pisaroglu. The urbane, Paris-based, professional rugby player-turned-political consultant, briefly stood as a presidential candidate — “Georgescu II” he says — after the December annulment, before withdrawing for personal reasons. “I cannot accept the fact that they cancelled the elections, because at the end of the day, no Russians entered in the voting cabins with the Romanians. They saw Călin Georgescu, they voted Călin Georgescu. This is the will of the people, and we should respect it, whether the system likes it or not. So yes, the Romanians, they are right to vote anti-system, because the system, it took from them their vote.” In Pisaroglu’s view, the remaining phase of the election will see Simion running off the back of Georgescu’s popularity, promising to enthrone him as Prime Minister and reaping the benefits. Yet at the same time, he adds, while the voters demand change, “the system never dies”, whether in Romania or in the EU as a whole. Romania is undergoing a transition from an old form of politics to something new, but the elites in both Brussels and Bucharest will adapt themselves to the new order. “At the end of the day, if Simion is going to win, they’re going to stay with him on the table. What can they do? The king died, long live the king.”
Simion’s messaging places him as both the upstart outsider candidate against Romania’s failing elites, but also at the heart of an emergent European Right-wing mainstream. Less radical in his rhetoric than Georgescu, Simion’s strong pro-Nato and pro-US stance aims to both endear him to the Trump administration and cement his place as Europe’s “new Meloni”, a phrase he often uses. “He loves the framing of MAGA guy. He prefers to be America’s guy or MAGA guy, rather than be Russia’s guy,” the well-connected political analyst Radu Magdin tells me over a lunch of lamb and Negronis. “I honestly believe he’s not Russia’s guy, but I don’t think he’s a MAGA guy either. I think he’s a very pragmatic, semi-populist guy who is very hungry for power.”
In Magdin’s view, Romania’s worldly, well-heeled political elites are unruffled by Simion’s populist rhetoric, confident that the old order had run out of road in Romania as in the rest of Europe, and that the new order offers them a comfortable billet. “Simion is informally courting a lot of smart people, and a lot of the older, intelligent ones who are very centre-right and very reformist in mind were surprised to see that AUR and Simion know how to play their cards,” Magdin says. “You can be middle class and frustrated. You can be rich and you can vote radical. So for example, I also know rich people of Bucharest who vote Simion because they have a feeling they could be even stronger. The rich Romanian entrepreneurs, they have a problem now with some of the multinationals with whom they compete, they have the feeling that we need a more patriotic presence.”
Despite Romania’s disputes with its historic rival Hungary, Magdin adds, many among Romania’s ruling class, as with its working class, observe Budapest’s self-aggrandising presence on the European stage and desire an Orbán of their own: “There is a feeling in Romanian society that our leaders, they don’t really stand up for our rights, and they really aren’t present, or defend national interests.” For Magdin, Romania’s populist wave is merely a natural stage of the country’s political development. “What happened in the Visegrad [countries] will eventually happen with us as well, discovering culture wars, discovering ideology, becoming more conservative, more patriotic or now nationalist. It was only normal for us to also become more patriotic.” Yet, for all the nationalist rhetoric, Brussels’ concern is overblown: “When different analysts ask me, Do you think somebody can take over the Romanian state the Hungarian way?’ I always say, No worries, we’re not that competent. Romanians are great people, but we’re very disorganised. I don’t think that Simion will have a problem assembling people who can give him ideas, but he will spend some critical months in initially wiping out his image and trying to explain to the world that he’s actually Meloni-ising, and everything is going to be fine.”
Outside a function dominated by Simion for the Romanian-American Business Council, in the echoing chandelier-lit marble halls of Ceaușescu’s white elephant palace, well-fed Americans with Southern accents mingle with sharp-suited young Romanians, discussing the profits to be made under the new order. “We here are at the eastern edge of Western civilisation,” an elegant young Romanian says to an American businessman, nodding over his goats cheese canapé, “We are the frontier.” Romania has boomed from EU membership, yet there is a feeling among the country’s political elites, as well as in Georgescu and Simion’s voter base, that the country’s growth has stalled, and that Romania is less powerful in Brussels and Europe than its educated population, bounteous resources and strategic position deserve. In Bucharest, a charming city of grand boulevards and crumbling, Belle Époque magnificence inherited from the Kingdom of Romania’s prewar oil wealth, there is a sense across society that the past few decades have seen the country fail to live up to its untapped potential.
Though not certain, a Simion victory in the second round on 18 May is now by far the likeliest outcome, and Romania’s political class are more relaxed about the prospect than a lot of the discourse might make it seem. For all that his campaign leverages the anger of those who failed to prosper from the country’s transition from communism, a sizeable chunk of Romania’s elites have adopted the idea that, perhaps, a populist victory here at the same time the rest of the Western world swings Right can make Romania great again — or at least, that profits can be made in the transition from the old order to the new.
In an age of geopolitical flux, there are lucrative prospects opening for Romania as a self-interested, well-situated middle-sized power hungry to enhance its own influence instead of submitting to a dying multilateral order. After decades of being financially subsidised, but looked down on by Europe’s Western elite, its frustrated business class sees a chance to grab a slice of power and influence, as other leaders buckle before a changing world. Instead of taking orders from Europe, they want to put their stamp on it.
Romania’s liberal centrists, increasingly viewed as narrow-minded provincials by Bucharest’s sophisticated power-brokers, may still look to Brussels for reassurance; but the elites, sniffing out a political change in the West as transformative as the country’s transition from Communism, increasingly see seductive opportunities. If not Georgescu or Simion, then someone else will fill this role, they say, which is now structural rather than personalist, driven by history and not the angry masses. Rather than turning against Europe, Simion’s rise shows Romania firmly embedded in a rapidly changing Western mainstream.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeA nuanced piece from AR. I started reading half-expecting to give up part way through, having not much interest in how Romanian politics is developing apart from a glance at the headline cancellation of the last election.
In addition, the Romanian diaspora in the UK doesn’t have a positive image, with criminality one of the first things that comes to mind. Is this fair? Having completed the article, i’m inclined to be less judgemental, which is i suppose the whole point.
What i’m left with is an impression of people who’ve played their part on the eastern flank of what we call The West and who’s lives and aspirations differ little from ours in the UK and whose political fortunes have been vastly more buffetted – that’s bound to have an effect. Further, they might have something to teach our own political aspirants in challenging the status quo.
Living life on the front line with the East is something UK citizens can barely imagine, cossetted far away, and yet the cultural tide washes over us with equal vigour. We need to learn to swim with it.
Is the author trying to say that as long as these ‘populists’ do not challenge globalism they can be as popular as they like? They will always have a seat at the table. They will even be allowed to be a full-on culture war as they like. Is this is the adaptation of the elites in Brussels?
Don’t think he’s saying that but you are and it’s a thought. Wouldn’t work though.
Is the negative image in the UK (criminality) fair ? Not entirely. As always there are different groups with different traits and priorities. There are many hard-working, very skilled Romanians here alongside some other groups we’d probably be better off without. There are more than enough from the first group that we shouldn’t ever lump them all together with the less scrupulous ones.
“You ask yourself, Wow, was it worth it? I mean, … I have some money, but where is the sense of purpose and belonging?”
The fundamental question of life in The West. Some people are fine with what has happened to our societies over the last decades, they are in situations where they can enjoy the wealth and other benefits they have. They don’t miss, or are perhaps unaware of, what has been lost. For them it was worth it.
Others, perhaps differently motivated or less able to adapt, or perhaps just too young to have been able to grasp the benefits, are unhappy with where we have ended up. This group is growing, though it is very varied in its reasons and outlook and in many ways has nothing to unify it except its disaffection. For them the world needs to change, but what will it be changed to?
Your second group is now a clear majority in several Western countries including England.
What is missing in this article is the flavour and smell of Romania. It is a country full of undeveloped natural resources, beautiful for tourism and quite a lot industry around Bucharest.
In Bucharest, there are thousands of Italians. It is almost like a home from home for Italians. Restaurants have menus in Romanian and Italian. Italian industry, wanting to go offshore for cheap labour, sets up factories in Romania. The relationship with Italy is probably more important than being part of Europe. On the other hand, there is a Hungarian enclave in the country, where the people speak Hungarian, vote in Hungarian elections and fly the flag.
It is Eastern Europe in the countryside but it doesn’t feel like that in Bucharest.
Precisely.
Perhaps the Italians ‘feel at home’ because like themselves, the Romanians speak a Romance language, a legacy of their days as a Roman Province in the second and third centuries of the Christian era*.
*106 AD- circa 275AD, to use Christian chronology.
There are also around 1 million Romanians in both Italy and Spain (partly due to similar languages and Latin culture).
The article doesn’t mention the partly related population decline in Romania (since it doesn’t need to – though the expat vote in this election is huge and actually determined the candidate who came in second). Yet this is on a scale we can scarcely comprehend here. A huge percentage of the population has moved to other European countries over the last 15 years. And the birthrate in the country is extremely low. All these Eastern European countries are facing huge population decline and rural depopulation.
After suffering nearly forty five years of various Communist dictatorships one can hardly blame them.
The language is close – that helps
I am from the UK and have been living in Romania for almost 10 years. Thank you for a balanced read amidst much garbage propaganda purporting to be journalism throughout the Western press.
A few points to add.
1. The majority of Romanians are pro peace vs justice on Ukraine, conservative Christian vs progressive and want change. Put those in a Venn Diagram and it’s clear who wins.
2. Romanians should be proud of their family values. Aggregate the country with the highest happiest for under 30s and lowest divorce rate and Romania is top in the world. 4 of the top 5 are in the Balkans.
3. To fans, Georgescu appeared like a wise, calm and courageous leader, with experience at the UN. Simion is a wrecking ball. In one writer”s words: “Simion doesn’t enter politics. Simion kicks the door open, spits in his palm, and shouts at politicians I am going to build houses for 35k euros and screw you all!” That said, at aged 38 to be VP of the ECR party in Europe is impressive. He is a disruptor and and entertainer but trustworthy and Presidential, we will see.
4. Russian interference was a hoax. An investigation by Snoop, supported by tax documents shows that the party PNL actually promoted Georgescu on Tik Tok via influencers, hoping to divide the populist vote and sneak in second. It spectacularly backfired. Emily at Undercurrents covered this.
5. Romania is a beautiful country with untapped potential. Mountains, beaches, thermal waters, castles, winding roads, fertile soil, great wine. If the country got its act together it could be a jewel of Europe.
Agreed, it’s a very good article.
But this is also the truth about Romania (and addresses your point #5):
““When different analysts ask me, Do you think somebody can take over the Romanian state the Hungarian way?’ I always say, No worries, we’re not that competent. Romanians are great people, but we’re very disorganised.”
Neatly sums up my experience of the country and people.
Thanks!
So it’s not just about them there but about them and us here.
Thank you.
In December 2024, Mr. Theodoros Roussopoulos, President of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, notified the Venice Commission regarding the abusive annulment of the presidential elections, requesting an urgent report. Through its recommendations, the report confirmed that a series of abuses had been committed. It’s just that the Commission’s recommendations were ignored by those in charge in Bucharest and those in Brussels turned a blind eye…
“Romanian political figures speak more expansively off the record than on…”
I’m not a ‘grammar (or vocabulary) Nazi,’ but this is now two essays in a row (he did it in April as well): Aris mistakenly says ‘expansively’ when the meaning he clearly intends is ‘extensively.’ The meanings of these two concepts are not coextensive. If Aris has an expansive personality, we wouldn’t indicate this by saying he had a extensive one; and when people become more voluble in one circumstance than another, what they’re treating us to is a more extensive, not expansive, airing of their views.
Unless of course they actually were speaking more expansively. That is to say were willing to speak about other and more varied subjects…such as the “security services” and etc. That is how I read it.
You should simply read the article instead of pretending that you have some special insight into what the author is REALLY trying to say because you probably don’t know his mind.
Brussels and globalists hardest hit. Imagine Romanians daring to elect someone not handpicked by the EU cabal. I keep wondering when it might dawn on these people that, across Europe, voters are saying “no more of the same.”
This is one of the best articles on politics ive read – the relationship between politicians and the secret services/deep state is rarely so eloquently conveyed. And yes, of course, the canceling of elections is deeply troubling and the people are basically right to rebel. Finally, its not just london that is a tower of babel- its almost every small town in uk and ireland at this point. I dont know how we maintain our culture at this point. Young irish and brits are emigrating also as they cant compete with the social housing for immigrants scam. If romania can save itself it should. Too late for us id say
It’s hard to know just how much residual influence security services still have in Romania, but it is absolutely the case that most Romanians believe that much the same people are still in charge of the country as were doing so before 1990 and that the former communists were never fully purged from positions of power and influence – they simply popped up again trading under new flags of convenience and the governing culture (and its substantial corruption) continued largely uninterrupted.
Călin Georgescu (the TikTok product of the first, annulled electoral process) is coming from the same “residual influence security services. George Simion is not a stranger to them either.
The one thing an emotionally disordered person can’t do is accept the possibility they may be wrong. Such is the disorder of latter-day progressives and centrists. Hence the outcome. Not hard to comprehend.
The piece would be better if it was shorter.