Economics and Business April 2005

Regulars
ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS
National security: misguided strategies, misguided fears

by Matei Paun
April 2005

The Alliance’s electoral victory in December 2004 brought with it not only a change in economic policies, best exemplified through the implementation of the much-vaunted flat tax, but it also put to the forefront a newly activist foreign policy. Romania now speaks of its “strategic interest” and role in “securing” and “stabilising” the Black Sea region. At the same time, President Basescu has made a lot of noise with his Washington-London-Bucharest “Axis.”

One would think that Romania’s position on the world’s geo-strategic map would warrant a little less noise, considering its economic, and not to even mention, its military weight. Geographically, it is again difficult to see what critical role Romania might play. It does not border any particularly sensitive regions, does not control any major transport arteries, bodies of water or other such key strategic points. In 2005, one might argue that Romania’s “strategic interests” are not too dissimilar to those of Bulgaria, Slovakia or, for that matter, Denmark.

The one area where Romania indeed has a legitimate strategic interest is in Moldova, and further east, towards Transnistria. Moldova has historically been part of Romania and most of its citizens speak and write Romanian, thought admittedly, the Russians have had some success with an aggressive policy of “Russification.” Furthermore, there is a considerable Russian minority, particularly in the neighbouring, illegal (i.e. unrecognised) Republic of Transnistria, which, amongst the many dubious criminal elements it shelters, is also host to one of the largest depots of Russian armaments left over from the days of the Soviet Union.

Granted, Romania should do all it can to combat increased Russification and ensure that a legitimate, pro-EU government rules in Chisinau, Moldova’s capital. But that is a far cry from its Black Sea aspirations and the odd Anglo-American axis.

Romania’s new leadership argues that the Black Sea is awash with drug and arms smugglers, and most alarmingly, is a potential route into Europe for Islamic extremist terrorist groups. Frankly speaking, it is difficult to accept this as anything more than fear-mongering. Ukraine and Georgia - Romania’s Black Sea neighbours to the east, both have new pro-Western reform-minded regimes, which undoubtedly should calm the nerves of Romania’s foreign and defence policy planners. Immediately to the south, Bulgaria is set on course to EU accession and is hardly a strategic threat to Romania. Further to the south, Turkey, a long time staunch Nato member, stands guard, and it too is looking at Brussels in the hope of one day joining the EU.

Some maintain that giant energy related infrastructure projects justify Romania’s resurgent foreign policy. Indeed, plans for large gas and oil pipelines have been drawn – but they alone fail to justify such grand regional ambitions. And Romania’s contested claim to Serpent’s Island, suspected of harbouring important underwater oil and gas reserves is being addressed, as it should be, by an international arbitration tribunal.

Others point to the long-awaited US decision to move some of its bases eastwards, possibly to Romania, as a reason for Romania’s recent repositioning. Yet, it is unlikely that Pentagon planners will be swayed by talk of a Washington-London-Bucharest Axis – if anything, it may bedazzle and confuse them. Generally speaking, Americans perceive anything having an “axis” in a negative light (viz “Axis of Evil,” “Axis Forces, aka Nazi” etc).
Unfortunately though, talk of such an axis spawns confusion and concern, if not distaste, in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. Romania is already hardly the darling of France and Germany. And if for no other reason than their economic and political weight in the EU, Romania should make it its strategic priority to endear itself to the countries that will, for better or worse, control tens of billions of euros in investments and grants over the coming decades.

Today, Romania’s strategic interests should lie in having a competitive economy, ensuring the rule of law, investing in its people and rebuilding itself. It should secure its borders by all means, but projecting power it does not have towards the Caucasus and the Ukraine will get it little in the form of material rewards. Romania has little to show for two years of allying with the United States in the Iraq war. If there are good reasons - and one should accept that there may well be - for which Romania should indeed form a special axis with particular allies, or for claiming some sort of regional leadership role, it should clearly explain the reasons behind such decisions or aspirations. As it stands, Romania has left some of its neighbours and traditional allies perplexed, while its citizens wonder when waves of turbaned gun and drug running pirates will come ashore.

Matei Paun is a founding member of the Romania Think Tank and a managing partner with the specialist investment bank BAC Romania. He may be contacted at matei@bac-romania.com