logo
Far-right first-round win of Romanian presidential election raises prospect of EU disruption

Far-right first-round win of Romanian presidential election raises prospect of EU disruption

Yahoo05-05-2025

A far-right Trump admirer who opposes military aid to Ukraine has decisively won the first round of Romania's presidential election rerun, near-final results show, raising the prospect of another disruptive nationalist joining the EU leaders' club.
With 99.99% of votes counted on Monday, George Simion, 38, who sports Maga caps, pushes a sovereignist, socially conservative agenda and has called for the 'Melonisation' – referring to Italy's far-right prime minister – of Europe, scored 40.96%.
That was almost double the score of the second-placed candidate, Nicușor Dan, the centrist mayor of Bucharest, and higher than pre-election polls had predicted. The two will face each other in a second-round runoff due on 18 May.
Dan squeaked into the second round with 20.99%, less than a percentage point more than Crin Antonescu, a pro-European former senator backed by the ruling Social Democratic party (PSD) and the centre-right National Liberal party (PNL).
'This is not just an electoral victory, it is a victory of Romanian dignity. It is the victory of those who have not lost hope, of those who still believe in Romania, a free, respected, sovereign country,' Simion said after the result became clear.
'I am here to serve Romanians, not the other way around,' he said in a statement early on Monday, insisting he believed in an EU 'that thrives as a nest for its diverse and sovereign nations – not as a rigid system enforcing one-size-fits-all policies'.
The far-right candidate, whose Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR) has grown from an anti-vax movement into the country's second-largest party, finished first in 36 of Romania's 47 electoral districts and secured 61% of the large overseas vote.
Dan, a 55-year-old mathematician who founded the Save Romania Union party (USR) and campaigned as a pro-EU, anti-corruption independent, called the runoff a battle 'to convince Romanians that Romania needs its pro-western direction'.
He said the two weeks leading up to the runoff would be 'difficult against this isolationist candidate … It will not be a debate between individuals, it will be a debate between a pro-western direction for Romania and an anti-western direction'.
Experts have said Dan may struggle to beat Simion in the runoff because of tensions between the independent candidate and the country's two big centre-left and centre-right mainstream parties that might deter their voters from switching allegiance.
'Simion has a bigger pool of votes than Dan at the moment,' said Cristian Pîrvulescu, a political scientist. The votes of the fourth-placed finisher, Victor Ponta, a former prime minister, could be critical, potentially making him a kingmaker.
Romania's president has a semi-executive role with considerable powers over foreign policy, national security, defence spending and judicial appointments. They also represent the country on the international stage and can veto important EU votes.
A Simion victory could lead to Romania – which shares a border with Ukraine and is a member of both the EU and Nato – veering away from the mainstream path and becoming another disruptive force within the EU alongside Hungary and Slovakia.
It would also be welcomed by conservative nationalists in Europe and beyond – including senior Trump administration figures such as the US vice-president JD Vance – who accused Bucharest of denying democracy after the original ballot was cancelled.
That vote last November was won by Călin Georgescu, a far-right, Moscow-friendly independent, but was annulled by Romania's top court after declassified intelligence documents revealed an alleged Russian influence operation.
Georgescu, who denies any wrongdoing, was later placed under investigation on counts including misreporting campaign finances, misuse of digital technology and promoting fascist groups. In March, he was barred from standing in the rerun.
Simion promised on Sunday to make Georgescu prime minister, either through a referendum, early elections or forming a new government coalition, if he won. Far-right groups have 35% of parliamentary seats after elections held in December.
Georgescu, 63, called the vote rerun 'a fraud orchestrated by those who have made deceit the only state policy', but said he voted on Sunday to 'acknowledge the power of democracy, the power of the vote that frightens and terrifies the system'.
Simion denies his policies are far-right but has described his party as 'natural allies' of Trump and promised an alliance of EU countries 'in the spirit of Maga'. He has frequently criticised Russia, but consistently opposed military aid to Ukraine.
To date, Romania has donated a Patriot air defence battery to Kyiv, is training Ukrainian fighter pilots and has enabled the export of 30m tonnes of Ukrainian grain through its Black Sea port of Constanta since Russia's invasion.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Donald Trump soured on some of his own judges
Why Donald Trump soured on some of his own judges

Vox

time7 minutes ago

  • Vox

Why Donald Trump soured on some of his own judges

Late last month, approximately 1 billion news cycles ago, an obscure federal court made President Donald Trump very, very mad. The US Court of International Trade ruled unanimously on May 28 that the massive tariffs Trump imposed after taking office again are illegal. That ruling was suspended the next day by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and the tariffs will be allowed to remain in effect pending a ruling (arguments are scheduled for late July). But the appellate court's decision didn't soothe Trump. He took to Truth Social on May 29 to post a 510-word screed attacking the judges on the Court of International Trade, before turning his ire toward a more surprising candidate — Leonard Leo, the most important person in the conservative legal movement. 'I was new to Washington, and it was suggested that I use The Federalist Society as a recommending source on Judges,' Trump wrote, reminiscing about his first term. 'I did so, openly and freely, but then realized that they were under the thumb of a real 'sleazebag' named Leonard Leo, a bad person who, in his own way, probably hates America, and obviously has his own separate ambitions.' This breakup surprised many commentators. But not David French. 'If you're familiar with how the conservative legal movement has interacted with MAGA, you have seen this coming for a while,' French, a New York Times columnist, lawyer, and onetime member of the Federalist Society, told Today, Explained co-host Sean Rameswaram. 'You knew this was coming after 2020. Because in 2020, after Trump had really stocked the federal judiciary with an awful lot of FedSoc judges and justices…none of them, zero of them, helped him try to steal the election.' French spoke with Today, Explained about the origins of the (other) big, beautiful breakup and what it means for the Trump administration and the future of the federal judiciary. Below is an excerpt of the conversation, edited for length and clarity. There's much more in the full podcast, so listen to Today, Explained wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts, Pandora, and Spotify. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Federalist Society? I am not now, but I have been a member of the Federalist Society. I was a member of the Federalist Society either all three years of law school or the first two years of law school. But it was also a very different time. I think the Federalist Society at the law school at that time, when we would have meetings, maybe 10 or 12 people would show up. Things have changed. One of the most conspicuous changes is that FedSoc has become an enemy of the president of the United States. From [2020] forward, you began to see this drifting apart between FedSoc and MAGA. When Trump comes back into office and he doubles down on being Donald Trump, all of this became very, very predictable. Because if the Trump administration's argument dovetailed with their originalist legal philosophy, they would rule for it. But if it was just simply Trump's lawless demands, they were going to reject it. And Trump is baffled by this distinction. He's baffled by it because congressional Republicans haven't drawn this line at all. When Trump's demands conflict with conservative principles, they will yield to Trump's demands every time. And the judges and justices have taken the opposite tack to such an extent that Republican-nominated judges have ruled against Trump about 72 percent of the time, which is remarkably close to about the 80 percent or so of the time that Democratic-appointed judges have ruled against Trump. You mentioned a whole host of issues where FedSoc judges have perhaps not given Trump what he wanted. Does the one that finally tips Trump off to go for it on Truth Social surprise you? It doesn't, because what really set him off was striking down tariffs. To the extent that Trump loves a policy, he loves tariffs. The Court of International Trade struck it down, and it was pointed out to him that one of the judges on the Court of International Trade that struck down the tariffs was appointed by him. He had been ranting about judges in general. Now he got specific with Leonard Leo; he got specific with the FedSoc. People like me who'd been watching this for a very long time were not wondering if this was going to happen. We were just wondering what was going to be the tipping point: Was it going to be a Supreme Court case? Was it going to be an appellate court? It turns out it was the Court of International Trade that brought us to this moment. Leonard Leo did not author a decision from this court. Why is he mad at Leonard Leo? Leonard Leo has long been a key figure in the Federalist Society and was very much a part of the first Trump administration, working closely with the administration to put forward judges. For a long time, Trump looked at his judicial nominations and waved them like a flag to the American conservative public saying, look what I did. But the more the American conservative public started loving Trump as Trump, versus Trump as what policy wins he could deliver, the less he started waving these other ideological flags, and the more it became all about him. And so this meant that this marriage was going to be temporary almost from the beginning, unless FedSoc capitulated. And if you know anything about FedSoc and the people who belong to it, and the people who've come up as judges, I knew they weren't going to capitulate. It's a very different culture from political conservatism. Do you think Donald Trump didn't realize that? I don't think he realized that at all. He's had this entire history politically of when Republicans disagree with him, they either fall in line or they're steamrolled. And so it's so interesting to me that he actually began that Truth Social rant that lacerated Leonard Leo and the FedSoc with this question: What's going on? Why is this happening? And I totally understand his bafflement. Because all of the political people had surrendered, or almost all of them. And so when he turns around and these judges and justices just keep ruling against him, you can understand why he would take that as, 'What's going on here? I don't get this. I don't understand this. I've been assured that these were good judges.' And so that's where you get to that real tension. Do you think this rift with the Federalist Society will affect how he appoints judges going forward? The short answer to that question is yes. The longer answer to that question is heck yes. A lot of people were worried about this because they were thinking, Okay, Trump 1.0: He has General Mattis as his secretary of defense. Trump 2.0: He has Pete Hegseth. You can do this all day long. The Trump 1.0 early nominations — sound, serious, establishment conservatives. Trump 2.0 — often MAGA crazies. The question was, 'Is this same pattern going to establish itself in Trump 2.0 on judges?' And then he appointed to the Third Circuit Emil Bove, this DOJ enforcer of his who was responsible for the effort to dismiss the Eric Adams case. He's nominated him for the Third Circuit, and a lot of people are now saying, 'Oh, now that's your harbinger right there.'

Letters to the Editor: Amid ICE raids, it looks like Trump wasn't the farmers' hero after all
Letters to the Editor: Amid ICE raids, it looks like Trump wasn't the farmers' hero after all

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Letters to the Editor: Amid ICE raids, it looks like Trump wasn't the farmers' hero after all

To the editor: Anyone who has driven north on the 5 Freeway through miles and miles of farmland has seen all of the anti-Gov. Gavin Newsom signs and banners, holding him solely responsible for the lack of water needed to irrigate their crops, along with banners touting "Trump/Vance 2024.' Somewhat ironic, isn't it? They got the president they wanted, the one who said the military "turned on the water" during this year's wildfires. Now, the same hero who turned on the water is deporting the hard-working people who pick and process their crops ('ICE expands immigration raids into California's agricultural heartland,' June 10). With no one to tend to them, crops will ultimately rot on the vines, bankrupting farmers and forcing Americans to pay tariffs for imported fruits and vegetables. I wonder what the signs will say the next time I drive north on the 5. Christy Edwards, Woodland Hills .. To the editor: At last, President Trump is ridding the country of people who are viciously picking our crops, sewing our clothes, building our houses and caring for our sick and elderly. Where can MAGA supporters sign up to replace them? Robert Silberg, Los Angeles This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

German defense chief pledges $10 billion in Ukraine aid for 2025
German defense chief pledges $10 billion in Ukraine aid for 2025

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

German defense chief pledges $10 billion in Ukraine aid for 2025

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — Germany is on track to give €9 billion ($10.4 billion) in aid to Ukraine in 2025, maintaining the country's position as one of Kyiv's key backers. The amount was announced by Berlin's defense minister, Boris Pistorius, during his visit to Ukraine on June 12. It marks the fifth time that Pistorius has visited Kyiv since the outbreak of the war when Russia invaded its neighbor in February 2022. Some of the forthcoming assistance will take the form of joint ventures between the German and Ukrainian military-industrial complexes, an idea that was presented earlier this year and has been pushed by Germany's new conservative leadership. Joint defense production projects are in line to get €1.9 billion ($2.2 billion) of the overall funding. Part of the amount will be dedicated to financing long-range weapon systems that will be manufactured in Ukraine. Under the arrangement, Germany will provide funding while Ukraine will contribute its battlefield-tested technological know-how. 'The first systems should be available in the next few months,' Pistorius said during a joint press conference with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, who in turn said that the joint venture was an expression of deep trust in Berlin. Pistorius noted that 'the picture of war has changed' from traditional tanks and jets to electromagnetic warfare and drone combat, making this technological exchange valuable for both countries. The Social Democratic defense minister, who has often been at odds with his own party, has pushed forcefully for German rearmament and a more prominent military posture on the world stage. Also in Kyiv, Pistorius addressed a longstanding elephant in the room by saying that Germany was not planning to transfer its Taurus cruise missiles, widely considered one of the most advanced available, to Kyiv. 'Since you asked me whether we are considering this, my answer is no,' Pistorius told a journalist. The government of Chancellor Friedrich Merz had previously maintained a purposely ambiguous posture on the matter. However, Germany will deliver more IRIS-T air defense systems to Ukraine. Zelenskyy stated that the assistance would be provided under a three-year plan, but said he would not provide further details. The Ukrainian president did, however, let slip that he expects Ukraine to localize the production of 'very high-quality' German air defense systems, which may suggest a plan to produce the systems inside the country. Currently, IRIS-T air defense systems are made in Germany. The supply plan builds on substantial existing contracts. In May, Ukraine and Germany signed a €2.2 billion ($2.54 billion) contract for IRIS-T systems and missiles, covering four complete surface-launched units with mobile launchers, radars, command centers, and missiles. Air defense has been identified as one of the key priorities for Ukraine in light of relentless Russian strikes on Ukrainian cities using cruise missiles and drones. Germany's total aid in support of Ukraine amounts to €48 billion ($55.5 billion) since the start of the war, as of April 30, the government said in response to a parliamentary inquiry. Of that, €15.6 billion ($18 billion) was military assistance. Germany remains the largest supporter of Ukraine aside from the United States. Under Merz's chancellorship, Berlin has stopped releasing detailed tallies of its military support to Kyiv, citing operational security.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store