Romania's new president Nicosur Dan finally looks like he's enjoying life after a campaign full of rancour and division
The roads in the heart of Bucharest were swaying. People were singing, laughing, and looking up at a balcony, waiting for the next president to appear.
In the end, he took to the street, walking along the pavement, high-fiving everyone within reach.
After a campaign full of rancour and division, Nicosur Dan, a 55-year-old mathematician, finally looked like he was enjoying life.
His victory was more comprehensive than most had predicted. A week ago, the favourite to win this election was his rival, the populist George Simion, but Dan gradually rose in the polls.
3:17
Among the crowd, there was a sense that some had voted because they wanted him to win, and others had backed him because they didn't like Mr Simion's Donald Trump -inspired brand of strongman leadership. Some even felt it brought back memories of the brutal communist past that once cowed this country.
"I have felt overwhelmed and scared," said Nicoletta. "For the last couple of weeks we lived in terror of returning to something we had to live with for 45 years."
Alongside her was Ada - one of many, many young voters I met in the crowd. She told me she felt like she was "dreaming", after waking up in the morning "worried that the nightmare would not finish".
But now, she was thrilled - convinced that Mr Dan can reinvigorate his country: "We put our trust in him because we don't want to leave the country - we are Romanians by home, we feel Romanian, we think Romanian."
There were many flags here with the blue and yellow of the European Union - few doubt that Mr Dan had more affection for the EU than Mr Simion.
I met a couple who had both draped themselves in EU flags and told me that "we hope we will be going the European way".
Another couple told me they had been terrified that Mr Simion would take Romania out of the EU - a claim he flatly denied when I met him the day before the election.
5:25
We had spoken to Mr Simion earlier in the day, when he seemed quietly confident of victory.
"People are fed up with normal politicians," he told me in the shadow of Bucharest's enormous parliament - the biggest building in Europe.
A landslide, he felt sure, was on the way.
Around him were populist politicians and activists from around the world - including Britain, America, Italy, France, Poland and the Netherlands.
They cheered him, and agreed that victory was within sight. And then came the exit poll, and the realisation that the momentum of his dominant triumph in the first round of this election had faded.
Still, Mr Simion insisted he would win, naming himself as the Romanian president on Facebook.
It was only in the small hours that Mr Simion admitted that he had been beaten by a million votes, emerging to declare that he would keep fighting.
"I will be there in all of the battles we have ahead of us - this work is just starting and I will be there with every one of you," he said, punching the air before walking off.
He wants to remain the leader for, as he puts it, "patriots, sovereignists and conservatives" who want to return to "democracy and common sense".
Romania has had a turbulent six months, starting with the decision to cancel the last presidential election because of suspected Russian interference, and then to ban Calin Georgescu, the man who allegedly benefited from that Moscow master plan.
Even some of Mr Georgescu's most avowed opponents felt uneasy that an election had been cancelled in that way.
Then the schism between the politics of Mr Simion and Mr Dan split the country, as did the lingering sense that Romanian democracy was under scrutiny.
So now the challenge is to unite and heal this nation - a strategically crucial member of both the EU and NATO.
And that is Mr Dan's most immediate challenge. As he was soaking up the cacophony and affection last night, a group of his supporters were opening champagne and pouring out glasses in the street, toasting their new president.
To win is one thing; to prosper is quite another.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Russia is about to suffer its millionth casualty. For Putin, that's a price worth paying
Almost two centuries ago, the Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz cautioned against the temptation to 'shut one's eyes to what war really is from sheer distress at its brutality.' One milestone betrays the sheer scale of the butchery in Ukraine: by the end of June, Russian forces will, in all probability, have suffered their millionth casualty in this war. When Vladimir Putin sent some 200,000 Russian soldiers into Ukraine in February 2022, he expected to seize Kyiv by the third day of a lightning offensive. Today, his troops remain hundreds of miles from the capital, while the number of Russian dead and wounded has grown to nearly five times the size of that initial invasion force. 'Overall, a high of 250,000 Russian soldiers have died in Ukraine, with over 950,000 total Russian casualties,' notes a study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), an American think tank based in Washington, DC. Those numbers conjure an image of Putin casting the entirety of his first invading army into a furnace, then gathering another and doing the same – over and over again. On an average day in April, about 1,200 Russians were killed or wounded on Ukraine's battlefields, where killer drones and heavy artillery have together created the most lethal expanse of territory on Earth. If this casualty rate is sustained, the CSIS study concludes, 'Russia will likely hit the 1 million casualty mark in the summer of 2025.' By way of comparison, the combined death toll in every Soviet or Russian conflict since 1945 – from the invasion of Hungary in 1956 to the Second Chechen war in 1999, including the Afghanistan campaign of 1979-89 – came to less than 50,000. Putin has sacrificed about five times that number in the space of three years and four months in Ukraine. Having been thrown back from Kyiv, Putin is now waging what the CSIS calls a 'grinding contest of attrition', in which Russia loses 'vast quantities' of men and materiel for 'mere metres of ground'. Since January 2024, Putin has captured about 1 per cent of Ukraine at the cost of between 800 and 1,600 Russian casualties per day. By comparison, 179 British military personnel were killed during six years of combat operations in Iraq. Yet Putin's frame of reference is almost certainly not the conflicts since 1945. He is steeped in the history of what Russians call the Great Patriotic War – the Soviet Union's epic struggle against Hitler's invasion between 1941 and 1945. That titanic confrontation claimed the lives of at least 24 million Soviet or Russian citizens, amounting to 12 per cent of the entire population of the Soviet Empire. The Battle of Stalingrad alone, lasting less than six months, killed almost 675,000 Russians. The siege of Leningrad – the city of Putin's birth – was even more deadly. His parents lived through those harrowing years from 1941 to 1944; his father fought in the city's defence, while his elder brother was among the children who died of hunger and privation. In total, over 1 million Russians gave their lives to save Leningrad from the Nazis. If that is your perspective, then 250,000 dead and a million casualties in Ukraine become far more acceptable. Putin will doubtless see these figures as just a fraction of the cost of preserving his home city from Hitler. And that is not even to consider earlier episodes of suffering. The Russian civil war that followed the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 claimed some 10 million lives, mainly from starvation, while Stalin's Great Purge, between 1936 and 1938, is estimated to have claimed between 700,000 and 1.2 million. If, like Putin, your historical memory is dominated by events before 1945, then you take a different view of a million Russian casualties in Ukraine. And the Kremlin's propaganda campaign is designed to ensure that the Russian people think like their leader. Not even the prospect of Putin soon having sacrificed a million of their sons in the country's bloodiest war in 80 years appears to be stirring popular discontent. In March, polling by the Levada Center, a Russian independent, nongovernmental research organisation, found that a 'majority of respondents support the actions of the Russian military and believe that the special military operation is progressing successfully.' For Western policy-makers, by contrast, Putin's cold indifference to suffering presents a strategic dilemma. Effective deterrence depends on an adversary believing that any act of aggression will incur an overwhelming and unacceptable cost. But what constitutes an unacceptable cost in Putin's eyes? Given that a million Russian casualties in the crucible of Ukraine seem to leave him unmoved, sustaining effective deterrence becomes far more difficult. Hence the continued importance of nuclear weapons – perhaps the only price even Putin would be unwilling to pay. Meanwhile, his dogged assault on Ukraine has forced his neighbour to defend itself with ever greater force, vindicating the bleak words of Clausewitz: 'If one side uses force without compunction, undeterred by the bloodshed it involves, while the other side refrains, the first will gain the upper hand. That side will force the other to follow suit; each will drive its opponent towards extremes.' Russia's extreme violence has killed between 60,000 and 100,000 Ukrainians, according to the CSIS, inflicting around 400,000 casualties in total – an astonishing toll reminiscent of the pre-war era. Given that Ukraine's population is less than a third of Russia's, the target of the invasion has endured a heavier toll per capita – a butcher's bill greater even than that of its aggressor. Ukrainian soldiers on the front line know better than anyone that the prospect of a million Russian casualties will not deter Putin. The only counterweight is still greater force.
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Fury as Labour peer accuses 'out of control' Ukrainian president Zelensky of 'scuppering' Russia peace deal with drone strikes on Kremlin airfields
A Labour peer triggered outrage today by suggesting Ukraine's president Volodymyr Zelensky was 'out of control' and jeopardising efforts to end the war with Russia by approving a major drone strike. Octogenarian Lord Dale Campbell-Savours stunned the House of Lords by suggesting Mr Zelensky had been 'allowed to run amok' with his country's celebrated weekend attack on Russian airfields. The former MP suggested the embattled war leader had 'scuppered' the chances of reaching a truce in the deadly conflict being sought by US president Trump. Ukraine's Security Service claim the attack, dubbed operation Spider Web, destroyed or damaged 41 Russian aircraft, including strategic bombers. At the same time, Russia has continued to carry out strikes across Ukraine, including the targeting of residential areas. Lord Campbell-Savours, whose son is a Labour MP, was swiftly rebuked in the Lords by figures on all sides, including foreign minister Baroness Chapman of Darlington. Former defence chief Lord Stirrup, who led the Armed Forces from 2006 to 2010, icily said: 'Has the minister noticed any reticence or reluctance on the part of President Putin to killing Ukrainian civilians while so-called peace talks continue? 'And has she identified any actions at all on the part of the American administration to try and compel President Putin down that path of reticence?' US President Donald Trump said this week Mr Putin had told him 'very strongly' in a phone call that he would respond to Ukraine's daring drone attack on Russian air bases. Mr Zelensky, who has accepted a US ceasefire proposal and offered to meet Mr Putin in an attempt to break the stalemate in negotiations, wants more international sanctions on Russia to force it to accept a settlement. But Mr Putin has shown no willingness to meet Mr Zelensky and has indicated no readiness to compromise. US-led diplomatic efforts to end the long-running war have so far failed to make any significant progress. Raising the issue in Parliament, Lord Campbell-Savours said: 'Whilst recognising the sheer bravado of those who executed operation Spider Web, we have to accept that action has undermined Trump's wider initiative, jeopardised his offer on the provision of security guarantees, and hardened Russia's attitude on conflict resolution. 'How can we ever secure a settlement and avoid substantial defence costs being imposed on European taxpayers, if Zelensky is allowed to run amok with unilateral actions, therefore scuppering any prospect of an early settlement. 'Why can't we, with our long experience in diplomacy, think out of the box and engage with Trump's people in discussions with Russia over measures to end this war. 'We can't rely on Zelensky. He's out of control.' However, the peer's controversial view was rejected outright by Baroness Chapman, who said she 'profoundly' disagreed and repeated the UK Government's staunch support for Kyiv. She pointed out it was Russia's leader Vladimir Putin who could end the war, which he had triggered by his full-scale invasion in 2022. She added: 'President Trump wants to see peace. We want to see peace. President Zelensky has agreed to a ceasefire. 'The person who could achieve that ceasefire, who could bring peace to Ukraine, who could see the children return to their homes, is President Putin.' Her Tory counterpart Lord Callanan said: 'I completely agree with the minister's sentiments. 'I think Lord Campbell-Savours is absolutely wrong, and all of us who are strong supporters of Ukraine were greatly encouraged by the recent audacious attack on the Russian airfields, in which nobody was killed by the way, it was just equipment that was damaged. 'But to secure Ukrainian sovereignty in the longer term, it is vital that Ukraine possesses armed forces which have a strong strategic and tactical advantage in the region. 'So could the minister please update the House on the steps that the Government is taking to support the Ukrainian military, to ensure that it has troops which are well trained, well equipped in the longer term to our high standards to help deter further Russian aggression?' Lady Chapman pointed out the UK had committed £3 billion a year for as long as Ukraine needed it and also signed a '100-year' pact, which formalised economic and military support provided by Britain. She also highlighted UK efforts to establish a peacekeeping mission that would enforce a possible future ceasefire in Ukraine, a so-called coalition of the willing.
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
Trump thought Zelensky's Russian air base strikes were ‘badass'
Donald Trump was so impressed by Ukraine's audacious drone raids on Russian warplanes that he described them as 'badass' to aides. Mr Trump has kept unusually quiet about the Sunday attack on airfields deep inside Russia as he tries to keep both sides talking to each other. But a report published on Thursday revealed he thought the strikes were 'strong' even as he worried that it would make peace efforts more complicated. 'He thought it was badass,' a source told Axios. An adviser said: 'From an international perspective, you've got a chihuahua inflicting some real damage on a much bigger dog.' Kyiv's weekend strikes on airfields destroyed and damaged nuclear-capable aircraft and infuriated Moscow. 'Operation Spider's Web' was reportedly 18 months in the planning. But it leaves Mr Trump with a dilemma. Throughout his dealings with Moscow and Kyiv he has openly worried that the conflict could lead to a Third World War, and influential voices in his Maga coalition, such as Steve Bannon, have publicly warned Ukraine's strikes were 'escalatory' and likely to trigger a brutal Russian response. A third source told Axios: 'We want this war to end. We want it to de-escalate. So if Putin goes crazy in response, yeah, the president has concerns.' Mr Trump has shied from adding extra sanctions or heaping more pressure on Russia to force it to compromise. He spoke to Mr Putin by phone on Wednesday. He posted on social media afterwards: 'President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields.' The Russian president has repeatedly rejected calls for a 30-day ceasefire, insisting that it would simply allow Ukraine to rearm and reorganise. The result is an impasse for Mr Trump, who came to power promising to end the conflict on day one of his presidency. On Thursday, Moscow said it would decide 'how and when' to respond. When Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, was asked what Russia's response would be, he said: 'As and when our military deems it appropriate.' The issue is reaching a crucial round of diplomacy. Mr Trump hosts Friedrich Merz, the new German chancellor, at the White House on Thursday. Germany is the second biggest backer of Ukraine after the US. Then he flies to Canada for a G7 summit followed by a Nato meeting in the Netherlands before the end of the month.
