Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T02:05:49.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Romanian Reform Movement in the 1980s: Fundamental Changes in the Making?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Trond Gilberg
Trond Gilberg*
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The concepts of “reform” and “revision” need considerable elaboration before a systematic study of their political ramifications can be undertaken. Common usage in the West seems to indicate that “reform” in communist systems means change towards political pluralism, less ideology, and greater participation by the citizenry in political communication, aggregation, and decision-making. “Revision” and “revisionism,” which are essentially communist concepts, are also interpreted to indicate a process of “loosening up” the autocratic, bureaucratic, and ideological nature of contemporary political and socio-economic systems in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union.

Type
Articles
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , Spring 1983 , pp. 41 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 by the Association for the Study of the Nationalities (USSR and East Europe) Inc. 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. The discussion of political reform in Poland, for example, has had such overtones; see, New York Times, Sept. 11, 1981 (discussing a conference of Solidarity).Google Scholar

2. For a thorough discussion of attitudes on this in the party apparat, see, for example, Hough, Jerry F., “The Party Apparatchiki,” in H. Gordon Skilling and Franklyn Griffiths (eds.), Interest Groups in Soviet Politics (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1971), pp. 47–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. E.g., deWeydenthal, Jan B., “Workers and Party in Poland,” Problems of Communism, Nov.-Dec. 1980, pp. 1–23.Google Scholar

4. This summary is based upon a number of sources, e.g., Gabanyi, Anneli Ute, “Auch für Bukarest ein ‘Besonders Heikles Problem,’” Osteuropa (Aachen), Jan. 1981, pp. 56–61.Google Scholar

5. I have discussed the nationality problem in Romania in my Modernization in Romania Since World War II (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1975), esp. ch. 8.Google Scholar

6. The increasing influence of the Ceausescu family can be seen in the staffing of crucial positions of the Romanian Party, e.g., Elena Ceausescu's position as cadre chief. The first reference to Mrs. Ceausescu's position in the cadres section came in the weekly Saptamina (Bucharest), Jan. 5, 1979 and also Flacara (Bucharest), Jan. 4, 1979.Google Scholar

7. The height of this cultural policy may have been reached during the Congress on Political Education and Socialist Culture, held in Bucharest in early June 1976. Nicolae Ceausescu's speech to that congress contains all the basic premises of current policies as well. The General Secretary's speech can be found in Scinteia, June 3, 1976.Google Scholar

8. One example of Ceausescu's maverick position is Bucharest's stand on Vietnam's invasion of Cambodia (Kampuchea). See, for example, Ibid., Jan. 10, 1979.Google Scholar

9. The Romanian historical tradition has been brilliantly described by Seton-Watson, R. W., A History of the Roumanians (Cambridge: The University Press, 1934).Google Scholar

10. E.g., his speech to the Congress on Political Education and Socialist Culture, in Scinteia, June 3, 1976.Google Scholar

11. Kiraly's latest letter, which discussed legal and linguistic discrimination as well as economic problems, was analyzed in a report by Radio Free Europe Research, Romania/10, 22 July 1980.Google Scholar

12. Ceausescu has in fact reaffirmed the basic aspects of Romania's nationality policy recently, claiming that there is no discrimination in Romania. But the excessive claims of Romanian achievements in all fields certainly raise questions about the alleged evenhandedness in this matter. The latest claim of Romanian advancement relates to the archaeological find of the remains of an ancient hominid in Oltenia, which has prompted claims that Romania is, indeed, the cradle of human civilization. See, for example, Contemporanul (Bucharest), March 20, 1981.Google Scholar

13. The controversy referred to developed in the Hungarian and Romanian news media during the summer of 1971. In Scinteia, July 9, 1971, the Romanians scathingly refuted the Hungarian criticism. Ceausescu's views on current cultural policies can be found in Scinteia, Oct. 14, 1980.Google Scholar

14. Many of these changes are contained in the Kiraly letters; see Radio Free Europe Research, Romania/10, 22 July 1980.Google Scholar

15. Paul Goma was viciously attacked in Saptamina, April 8, 1977. During the spring of 1977, when dissidents in Romania were particularly active, Western news media reported numerous arrests, e.g., The Times, April 14, 1977. Ceausescu himself castigated ethnic Germans who want to emigrate, in Scinteia, March 29, 1977.Google Scholar

16. Criticism of agricultural organization and performance has come from Ceausescu on numerous occasions; agricultural experts have indirectly criticized certain aspects of agricultural policy; e.g., the working group on agriculture, forestry, the food industry, and husbandry of waters at the recent People's Councils' Congress on Agriculture. The working group's report can be found in Agricultura Socialista (Bucharest), Sept. 13, 1980.Google Scholar

17. A typical example of this kind of leadership approach is Ceausescu's visit to the steel combine at Hunedoara in November, 1977, reported in Scinteia, Nov. 11, 1977.Google Scholar

18. This policy was outlined in an article in Romania Literara (Bucharest), Feb. 12, 1976.Google Scholar

19. A surprisingly frank criticism of Romanian cultural policy can be found in an article by Valentin Silvestru in Era Socialista (Bucharest) Feb. 1980.Google Scholar

20. A series of articles in Scinteia have debated the question of creativity and party control; see, for example, Pompiliu Marcea, in the Dec. 4, 1980 issue; Ion Dodu Balan, Ibid., Jan. 11, 1981; and Paul Anghel, Ibid., Dec. 14, 1980.Google Scholar

21. Ceausescu in a speech to Romanian writers, published in Ibid., Oct. 14, 1980.Google Scholar

22. Ceausescu's visit was reported in Ibid., Aug. 4, 1977.Google Scholar

23. Ibid. Google Scholar

24. Radio Free Europe Research, Romania/32, 26 October 1977 (quoting various Western news media).Google Scholar

25. E.g., Linden, Ronald H., “Romanian Foreign Policy in the 1980's,” in Nelson, Daniel N. (ed.), Romania in the 1980s (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1981), pp. 219–254.Google Scholar

26. For the regime's version of these policies, see, for example, Documente ale Pertidului Comunist Roman. Culegere Sintetica. Politica Externa a Romaniei Socialiste (Bucharest: Editura Politica, 1972).Google Scholar

27. This controversy was touched off by a statement made by Zoltan Komoczin to the Hungarian Parliament, in which the speaker (a leading Hungarian party official) criticized Romanian nationality policy. These statements were published in Nepszabadsag (Budapest), June 25, 1971.Google Scholar

28. I have discussed this purge in “Ceausescus ‘Kleine Kulturrevolution’ in Rumanien,” Osteuropa, October 1972, pp. 717–728.Google Scholar

29. The armed forces were also affected by these developments; in January 1975, for example, the top leadership of the PCR removed the political director of the army. Scinteia, Jan. 23, 1975, indirectly criticized faulty ideological work in this branch of the services and hinted that the problem was even more widespread.Google Scholar

30. The Serb case was reported in a number of Western news media, e.g., Le Monde (Paris), Feb. 15 and 16, 1972.Google Scholar

31. The Pacepa case was widely publicized in the West; see, for example, Die Welt (Hamburg) Aug. 8, 1978. Another Romanian with access to secret information defected to the West in November 1980. The incident was reported in Stuttgarter Zietung (Stuttgart) Jan. 29, 1981.Google Scholar

32. The Pirvilescu incident was shown on West German television and reported in other Western news media. For a thorough discussion, see Patrick Moore, “The Romanian Communist Party's 12th Congress: A Preliminary Review,” Radio Free Europe Research, RAD Background Report/263 (Romania) 28 November 1977, pp. 10–13.Google Scholar