&w=3840&q=100)
Who is Nicușor Dan, the quiet reformer who won Romania's presidential election?
In a stunning political turnaround, Nicușor Dan, a quiet mathematician-turned-reformer, has defeated far-right populist George Simion to become Romania's next president. Dan's victory affirms the country's commitment to the EU and Nato, following a re-run of the annulled 2024 election read more
Presidential candidate Nicusor Dan reacts on the day of Romania's second round of the presidential election, in Bucharest, Romania, May 18, 2025. Reuters
Nicușor Dan, the reserved mathematician-turned-reformer, has been elected Romania's next president, defeating hard-right nationalist George Simion in a high-stakes runoff election on Sunday.
The result, shaped by a dramatic surge in voter turnout, is widely seen as a decisive endorsement of Romania's pro-European Union path and a rejection of isolationist, far-right politics. Dan's win marks a significant turn in Romania's turbulent political landscape in the region.
How Nicușor Dan was elected president
Nicușor Dan, currently serving as the mayor of Bucharest, held on May 18, 2025, surpassing nationalist challenger George Simion, who received 46 per cent.
This outcome came despite Simion's commanding performance in the first round of voting on May 4 , where he led with nearly twice the votes Dan received.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The presidential race took place under exceptional circumstances. The 2024 election had been annulled by Romania's Constitutional Court after allegations of foreign interference — namely, suspected Russian involvement — and online campaigning favouring a far-right candidate.
Presidential candidate Nicusor Dan, centre, waves to supporters next to his partner Mirabela Gradinaru after winning the second round of the country's presidential election redo in Bucharest, Romania, May 19, 2025. AP
Although Moscow denied any role, the ruling invalidated the previous results and set the stage for the current political contest.
Dan's candidacy was launched in the wake of this annulment. He presented himself as a figure of change and institutional reform, campaigning on the need to rebuild Romania's democratic and civic foundations.
'In today's elections a community of Romanians who want a profound change in Romania won,' Dan declared in a speech to supporters gathered in a Bucharest park. 'Our full respect for those who had a different choice today, and for those who made a different choice in the first round. We have a Romania to build together, regardless of political choices.'
Who is Nicușor Dan
Nicușor Daniel Dan, born on December 20, 1969 in Făgăraș, Brașov County, is widely recognised for his exceptional academic background.
In his youth, he twice achieved perfect scores at the International Mathematical Olympiad, earning Romania global recognition. He later obtained a PhD in mathematics from the prestigious École normale supérieure in Paris.
His academic brilliance carried over into civic life. Upon returning to Romania, Dan founded an academic institution aimed at nurturing top scientific talent and became a vocal activist against illegal real estate developments in Bucharest. His work focused on preserving architectural heritage and challenging urban corruption.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Supporters of Presidential candidate Nicusor Dan react to exit polls of Romania's second round of the presidential election, in Bucharest, Romania, May 18, 2025. Reuters
In 2015, he founded the Save Bucharest Union, which evolved into the Save Romania Union (USR) a year later. USR positioned itself as a pro-reform, anti-corruption political force.
Dan was elected to the Romanian Parliament in 2016 but later resigned from the party in 2017 over ideological disagreements, notably on whether the party should prioritise anti-corruption over liberal social causes such as LGBTQ+ rights.
Despite criticism over bureaucratic delays and his subdued public persona, Dan earned praise for revamping Bucharest's infrastructure during his two terms as mayor.
He was credited with modernising the city's heating systems and sports facilities, and for navigating the municipality out of bankruptcy. His technocratic, management-first approach made him stand out in an increasingly polarised political environment.
'He is more the managerial, administrative type but he is a very decent, honest guy,' political analyst Sorin Cucerai told AFP.
Dan's reserved demeanour, once seen as a liability, became an advantage when compared to the aggressive and often incendiary style of Simion, whose background includes time as a football hooligan.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
What Dan's win means for Romania & EU
The 2025 presidential election was widely interpreted as a clash between pro-European liberalism and conservative nationalism .
Dan campaigned as a staunch supporter of Romania's Western alliances. He reaffirmed his commitment to the European Union, Nato, and Romania's assistance to Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression.
'Our full commitment remains with the West,' Dan had said throughout the campaign. His criticism of US President Donald Trump's approach to Ukraine highlighted his nuanced view of transatlantic affairs.
He cautioned against offering concessions to Russia under the guise of peace, suggesting such moves might undermine Ukraine's sovereignty and embolden further destabilisation in Eastern Europe.
Simion, on the other hand, led a campaign inspired by populist, anti-establishment politics. He modelled his rhetoric on Donald Trump's nationalist platform , raising doubts about Romania's EU obligations and advocating a domestic-first approach.
After the previous election was annulled, Simion allied with and surged to the top of the May 4 polls.
Simion's campaign raised fears that he might not respect democratic outcomes. On election day, he cast suspicion on Romanian citizens voting in Moldova and suggested that his party would conduct a parallel ballot count.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
But following the final results, he acknowledged defeat, stating on social media: 'We cannot accuse significant tampering with the ballots.'
🇷🇴We will continue our fight for freedom and our great values along with other patriots, sovereignists and conservatives all over the world.
We may have lost a battle, but we will certainly not lose the war.
God bless you all ❤️! pic.twitter.com/rMYeRc2JXj — 🇷🇴 George Simion 🇲🇩 (@georgesimion) May 18, 2025
He added, 'We'll continue to represent the sovereignist, patriotic, conservative movement in Romania, and we'll continue to fight … for freedom, for God, for family and for our common ideas.'
Romania's presidency carries notable influence over national security and foreign policy, with responsibilities including the nomination of the prime minister.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Following the defeat of the ruling coalition's candidate and the resignation of Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu, Dan is now expected to oversee the appointment of a new head of government.
Presidential candidate George Simion reacts to exit polls of Romania's second round of the presidential election, in front of the parliament in Bucharest, Romania, May 18, 2025. Reuters
Romania remains one of the poorest countries in the European Union, with long-standing concerns over corruption, income inequality, and trust in institutions.
Transparency International consistently ranks it among the EU's most corruption-prone states. Addressing these challenges while maintaining political stability and resisting far-right pressures will likely define Dan's term.
How Romania reacted to Dan's victory
The final round of voting saw a 64 per cent voter turnout, substantially higher than the 53 per cent recorded in the first round.
More than 1.64 million Romanians abroad participated — an increase of approximately 660,000 compared to the earlier vote. Analysts suggest this surge, particularly from the diaspora, contributed significantly to Dan's win.
At Dan's campaign headquarters in central Bucharest, thousands of supporters erupted in celebration as results rolled in. Waving Romanian and EU flags, the crowd chanted 'Nicușor!' and later cheered his appearance on the balcony.
In his speech, Dan highlighted national unity and civic renewal: 'What you have done as a society in these past weeks has been extraordinary.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
A fost o mobilizare fără precedent și, de aceea, victoria este a fiecăruia dintre voi. A fiecărui român care a ieșit la vot, și-a făcut vocea auzită și a luptat astfel pentru ceea ce crede, pentru țara pe care o vrea și în care își dorește să trăiască. De mâine, începem… pic.twitter.com/Fuyz87DIlQ — Nicușor Dan (@NicusorDanRO) May 18, 2025
His win was welcomed in Brussels. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen offered her congratulations, stating: 'Romanians turned out massively to vote. They have chosen the promise of an open, prosperous Romania in a strong Europe. Together let's deliver on that promise.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
My warmest congratulations to @NicusorDanRO on his victory tonight!
The Romanian people have turned out massively to the polls.
They have chosen the promise of an open, prosperous Romania in a strong Europe.
Together let's deliver on that promise.
Looking forward to working… — Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen) May 18, 2025
As Dan put it on the night of his victory, 'Romania's reconstruction begins now.'
With inputs from agencies
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
21 minutes ago
- Mint
South African macadamia farmers eye new markets after US tariff jolt
Top macadamia producer South Africa exploring Asian markets Trump announced 31% tariff on US imports from South Africa The US is South Africa's second largest macadamia market LIMPOPO, - Gene Likhanya's macadamia nut farm, started with personal savings and built up over two decades in South Africa's picturesque Madimbo valley, faces a sudden challenge from U.S. import tariffs that is causing him to look for other markets. South Africa is the world's top producer of macadamia nuts, known for their distinctive buttery flavour and cherished by some for their perceived health benefits, and the U.S. is its second largest market behind China. Likhanya has big ambitions for a business he has already grown to employ 78 people and that has just produced 25 tonnes of nuts this year. He aims to triple output over the next four years. But U.S. President Donald Trump's drive to impose higher tariffs could disrupt that. Although the "reciprocal" levies announced by Trump on April 2 - set at 31% for South Africa - have been paused to allow for negotiations, Likhanya said he and fellow macadamia nut farmers were already looking for alternative markets. "I feel that there's so much more we can do internationally to explore other markets. There are markets we are busy talking to. We're talking to India," Likhanya, 40, told Reuters in an interview at his farm. "India has 1.5 billion people that are also looking for macadamia. So there's always an alternative plan." Other South African farmer groups have warned of potential devastation from the U.S. tariffs. Citrus growers, whose annual exports to the U.S. average $100 million, have said that tariffs could potentially hit 35,000 jobs in their industry. Likhanya, a board member at Macadamias South Africa, the main industry body for growers, described the tariff stand-off as a "lose-lose" situation and hopes it can be resolved. "America imports kernels, which they further process. Those jobs are threatened. So it's a win-win or lose-lose kind of a situation, which I feel we do not want to get into," he said. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
NDTV
22 minutes ago
- NDTV
Is America Still Worth It?
What do Sundar Pichai, Amartya Sen, Indra Nooyi, Raghuram Rajan and Arvind Krishna have in common? Apart from being global icons of Indian stock, they all polished their brains at top American universities. A PhD from MIT launched Raghuram Rajan into the upper echelons of global economic thinking, from the IMF to the RBI. Sundar Pichai's Stanford and Wharton degrees were stepping stones to becoming Google's boss. Indra Nooyi earned her MBA from Yale before reshaping PepsiCo. Arvind Krishna, who heads IBM, trained at the University of Illinois, while Nobel laureate Amartya Sen's ideas on justice and welfare economics were sharpened at Harvard. Each one is a testament to how American classrooms have shaped Indian minds that now influence the world. And it doesn't stop there. Walk through the halls of Harvard or UC San Diego, and you will find Indian names carved into the very architecture of academia. There's the Lakshmi Mittal South Asia Institute at Harvard, funding cutting-edge research on the subcontinent. Or the Narayana Murthy Fellowship at Wharton, encouraging the next generation of entrepreneurial leaders. And in sunny California, the Tata Institute for Genetics and Society is helping scientists rethink the future of human biology. Indian students and philanthropists aren't just attending US universities - they are investing in them, expanding them, and in many ways, helping define their future. But the question is what do aspiring Indian students do now in the face of American universities being under siege - not just by budget cuts or what some might call culture wars, but by a calculated political offensive? The Trump administration insists it is punishing campuses for alleged antisemitism (read pro-Gaza demonstrations) and so-called "anti-white racism" (a swipe at diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives). But at its core, this is an attack on academic freedom and free expression - two pillars of higher learning that have long defined American intellectual life, no matter which of the two main parties the previous presidents belonged to or which ideological belief they subscribed to. But Trump is being Trump. He isn't making history, he's reversing it. His actions are damaging the very institutions that have been central to America's global prestige: its diplomacy, its alliances, its prestigious campuses, its free press and its cultural and scientific soft power. He isn't rebuilding a fallen empire; he's dismantling the decades-old edifice of high learning. Indian Students To Suffer And nowhere is the collateral damage felt more acutely than in the homes of Indian families who once viewed a US degree as the surest ticket to global success. President Trump's strategy is clear. By targeting elite institutions like Harvard and Columbia - places symbolic of intellectual independence and academic brilliance - the administration is striking fear into the wider academic ecosystem. Going after big names guarantees headlines while sending a chilling message to smaller, less protected universities: fall in line or face the consequences. The effects of this political theatre are already being felt on the ground. In a move that seemed bureaucratic on the surface but has far deeper implications the Trump administration has quietly instructed US embassies worldwide - including in India - to halt all student visa interview appointments. Officially, the freeze is linked to enhanced social media vetting. Embassies are now required to comb through years of online activity before granting a visa. Applicants must submit their handles dating back to 2019, with the State Department stating it will 'use all available information' in its assessments. What kind of content might raise a red flag? No one knows. But in an age where political expression and youth activism are often lived online, the message is clear: be careful what you post or risk your academic future. For thousands of Indian students, many of whom spend lakhs of rupees preparing for admission exams, shortlisting universities and securing funding, the disruption is more than an inconvenience. It is a psychological blow. Indian families plan years in advance for these opportunities. When visa appointments disappear and bureaucratic fog descends, it isn't just a delay - it is a dream deferred. The Pivot Away From The US In 2023, Indian students overtook Chinese nationals to become the largest international student group in the US, with more than 3.3 lakh enrolments. They are widely seen, even by US officials, as a pillar of the international student community: academically rigorous, culturally adaptable and socially responsible. And they are not just participants; they are contributors. International students often pay higher tuition fees, making up a crucial slice of universities' operating budgets. They are also overrepresented in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, often staying on to fuel the US innovation economy. And yet, their value is being dangerously overlooked. Harvard, in particular, has become a lightning rod. The Trump administration's attempt to block it from enrolling international students - now temporarily halted by court order - has caused widespread alarm. In Indian living rooms and WhatsApp groups, parents and students alike are beginning to ask the unthinkable: is the US still worth it? Many are already pivoting. A recent analysis in the Indian media estimated a 28% drop in Indian enrolments in the US for 2025, with students increasingly turning to the UK, Europe, Australia, and Canada. These countries may not offer the same cultural dominance or depth of alumni networks, but at least for now, they don't appear to be waging war on their own universities. Understand The Nuance What makes this all the more worrying is the broader ignorance outside the US about what's really happening within its academic institutions. International policymakers and even journalists often fail to grasp the nuance of the crisis. Few have sought the views of the faculty themselves - the professors and researchers who navigate complex institutional politics, face differing levels of protection based on gender, race or visa status and are now working under a cloud of fear and uncertainty. Trump's assault on higher education is not just a domestic issue. It's a global disruption. By weaponising immigration policy and framing liberal education as a threat to national identity, the US risks alienating the very people who once upheld its intellectual dominance. It is no longer just about visas and protests - it is about whether the American classroom remains a space for free thinking and global talent. And if it isn't, others are ready to fill the void. China, for all its surveillance and control, is investing heavily in its research universities. The UK is relaxing visa rules to court more Indian and African students. Even countries like Germany and the Netherlands are angling to offer English-language programmes and attract top talent from Asia. America's loss may well be their gain. The Shift Is Already Underway In the years to come, the world may see fewer Sundar Pichais, Indra Nooyis, Raghuram Rajans and Arvind Krishnas emerging from America's famed campuses. But perhaps we will see more Dr. Manmohan Singhs, Shashi Tharoors, and Rahul Bajajs - exceptional minds shaped by the equally esteemed institutions of the UK. Ultimately, Donald Trump's most lasting legacy may not be a law or a border wall, but the slow, silent exodus of brilliant young talent - students who once saw America as the ultimate destination, and are now looking elsewhere. That shift is already underway. An Opportunity For India As elite American universities come under political siege, India should seize the moment at home. With US campuses facing clampdowns on academic freedom, student expression and international mobility, India has a chance to position itself as a credible alternative. By investing heavily in research ecosystems, innovative education models and globally competitive institutions, India can attract not only its own aspiring scholars but also foreign talent disillusioned with the West's shifting academic climate. This isn't a far-fetched dream. India already boasts an expanding network of top-tier institutions - from the IITs and IIMs to the Indian Institute of Science and Ashoka University - and a vast pool of English-speaking faculty and students. What's needed now is visionary policy, generous research funding and a reimagining of education as a pillar of soft power. If the US is seen as closing its gates to ideas and talent, India can be the country that opens them, not just for Indians, but for the world.
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trust deficit is the stumbling block in the Russia-Ukraine peace talks
Written by Rajoli Siddharth Jayaprakash After multiple rounds of negotiations between Russia and the US, Russia and Ukraine began direct talks in May. These have led to prisoner exchanges so far, not a ceasefire. Despite Trump's commitment to bringing about a definitive resolution to the conflict, the chances in the near future aren't very high. A fundamental contradiction persists in how each side perceives its core security interests. Europe, on the other hand, has reiterated its commitment to defending Ukraine's sovereignty and subsequently enlarged its military budget. In the recent talks in June, Ukraine and Russia submitted a memorandum of their demands. Moscow's demands remain unchanged. It is calling for Ukrainian forces to withdraw from the regions of Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk, and Donetsk, and wants the recognition of the territory of Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014. Further, Russia demands Ukraine's neutrality — that it gives up its claims to joining the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), and maintains a limited armed force. Other demands included the lifting of martial law and elections in Ukraine within 100 days after an end to the conflict. Ukraine, on the other hand, cites its membership in NATO and the European Union as central for its security guarantees. It also seeks the frozen Russian assets to be used as reparations. In the past, both sides have vehemently rejected these demands, citing them as a non-starter in the talks. In an abandoned 2022 draft deal, one condition laid out was that Ukraine would maintain neutrality in return for security guarantees from five permanent members of the United Nations, as well as other countries like Belarus, Germany, Turkey, Israel, Poland, and Canada. The talks failed. Three years on, while the framework of the deal has remained the same, Ukraine's negotiating heft has considerably reduced, despite the conclusion of the US–Ukraine critical minerals agreement, giving the US privileged access to Ukraine's mineral extraction. With Russia regaining territory in the Kursk region, its forces have now entered Sumy, with the plan of creating a buffer zone. Ukraine, in response, has launched a salvo of drone attacks on Russia on critical infrastructure to slow down its advance. The Russian delegation not pulling out of the talks after the biggest Ukrainian drone attack of the war (Operation Spider's Web) on 1 June reflects a degree of pragmatism on Moscow's part. Both sides are aware of the complexity of bringing the conflict to an end. For Russia, seeking the neutrality of Ukraine remains its primary interest, and its demands for territory secondary. Sanctions relief also comes under secondary interests. Ukraine, on the other hand, sees security guarantees as the most important, and the status of territories on the right bank of the Dnipro River as secondary. Moscow controls more than 75 per cent of the territories of Donetsk and Kherson, and more than 90 per cent of Luhansk. Apart from reaching an agreement on these territorial and security factors, other concerns remain with respect to how both sides plan to administer a ceasefire, as it would require a huge number of troops to secure the demilitarised zone. Then there is the issue of funding such a force. One reason for Moscow's reticence in pushing for a ceasefire stems from the fear that Ukraine will regroup and launch a counterattack. Thus, both sides are aiming to build trust, which can be reflected in their stepping up efforts to release an equal number of POWs. Both sides are aware that bringing an end to the hostilities will take place in a piecemeal fashion, with long-drawn negotiations and the prospects of further escalation. History shows us how, in the Vietnam War, the US and the erstwhile North Vietnam began negotiations in the summer of 1968, and the conclusion of the peace accord took more than five years to culminate in 1973. If Ukraine capitulates, it will be a significant blow to NATO allies, as Russia's dominance can alter the European security architecture. Thus, with both Russian and Ukrainian positions being divergent, with Europe backing Ukraine, and with earlier attempts in resolving the conflict across the span of 11 years failing (Minsk and Istanbul), it is unlikely that peace will return anytime soon. The writer is a Research Assistant at the Observer Research Foundation
