Raoul Weiss My expulsion, a good example of the re-transformation of Romania into a police state

Raoul Weiss My expulsion, a good example of the re-transformation of Romania into a police state

Hungary Distance interview with Raoul Weiss, graduate of LENS-Ulm, linguist, translator, author, publicist and author on the Visegrád Post and elsewhere under the name of Modeste Schwartz: My expulsion, a good example of re-transformation from Romania into a police state.

At the end of October, coming back from the West by plane, Raoul Weiss was notified when he arrived in Cluj-Napoca in Romania a city where he lived most of the time during the last fifteen years a five years inadmissibility. Reason? State secret. Known by our readers by the pen name of Modeste Schwartz, the bohemian and troublemaker of the editorial staff of the Visegrád Post answered questions from the editor-in-chief Ferenc Almássy.

Ferenc Almássy: This interview is a bit special. First of all because we know each other well; our readers also already know you, but under your pen name: Modeste Schwartz. And then, this is a private interview because you have just been banished from Romania Can you sum up in a few words the Weiss affair?

Raoul Weiss: Last week, I had the sad privilege of making headlines in the Romanian press (including the press of the Hungarian minority in Transylvania, which I am emotionally close to by my private life) and Hungarian, due to the decision to ban entry into Romanian territory for a period of five years which was notified to me last October 24 at Cluj / Kolozsvár airport by the Romanian border police.

The charges against me are certainly very aptly classified as national security (a good way to conceal the fragility of fabricated evidence and questionable testimony which the deep Romanian state often uses), but the articles of law cited in the prohibition decision (dated 13 September 2018) leaves little doubt as to the nature of the pretexts that have been chosen to justify this surface abuse on the surface: it is notably a question of endangering the unitary character of the Romanian State transparent allusion to an underlying reproach of irredentist activities.

From the point of view of administrative law, the modus operandi adopted moreover resembles that of the case of the Hungarian nationalist Attila Dabis case inadmissible last March. Let us recall here that the scarecrow of Hungarian irredentism is the favorite self-legitimization strategy of the Romanian deep state since it was confronted with the problems posed by this kind of structure by a formally free press and a formally democratic regime. Dissolved during the fall of the communist regime, the Securitate of stat, of sad memory, which probably did not cease for a single moment to function obtained its re-officialization (under new names) at the beginning of the 1990s following the interethnic riots of Târgu-Mureș / Marosvásárhely (the beginning of the ethnic cleansing of the Hungarians in this siculous city, which some accuse the said Securitate of having provoked behind the scenes). Since then, most of the (numerous) violations of European protocol order which Romania is guilty of (in the midst of a heavy silence from the Western press) have been victimized by Hungarian officials of various ranks, going as far as the head of state .

Ferenc Almássy: You seem to be saying that the (semi) official reasons for the decision are not the real reasons. What are the real reasons for your expulsion in this case?

Raoul Weiss: Obviously, the Romanian deep state has decided to react brutally to my journalistic activity for the past two years, during which above all in the columns of the Visegrád Post I denounced a number of its interferences anti-democratic in national political life, while throwing a harsh light on the influence of transnational networks (above all Euro-globalists, like the Open Society) which orient and cover these interferences internationally. Note in passing that despite my geographic location (in Cluj / Kolozsvár), Transylvania was rarely the subject of my editorials, which on the contrary often revealed the relationships of objective complicity existing between certain liberal Hungarian circles of Transylvania and the deep Romanian state which makes the accusation of Hungarian propaganda implicitly contained in the text of the decision even more curious.

Ferenc Almássy: We have understood that you are not what some Romanians accuse you in half-words of being. But that still forces us to ask you the question: what is your position on Transylvania?

Raoul Weiss: Historically, none. For me, this whole affair is above all history. I do not campaign more for or against the Trianon Treaty than for or against the Edict of Nantes, because I believe that it does not make sense. Politically, it must be seen first of all that, nowadays, the Magyarophone population represents (at most) 20% of the Transylvania population, the rest being almost entirely made up of Romanians. In these conditions, it is not clear how the Hungarians of Transylvania could call into question the Romanian constitutional and territorial order. There is certainly a Romanian separatism in Transylvania, whose main inspiration is the Romanian Sabin Gherman, a journalist visibly charged by certain spheres of Western European interest to pose the threat of Bucharest of a partition (a bit like the Scottish model ) in the event that the Romanian political class is tempted by sovereignism. There is no indication that he would enjoy strong popular support from Romania and Transylvania, and most Hungarians (loyal to their ethnic party RMDSZ / UDMR, now allied with the FIDESZ of Hungary) also stay away from his demagogue rhetoric. < / p>

On the other hand, there is, in the East of Transylvania, a region of two and a half departments (the Sicule Country), massively populated by Magyarophones, for the majority of the Sicule ethnic group. Despite the media bludgeoning organized in this sense by the press agents of the Romanian deep state, asking for the autonomy of this region within the Romanian state is not in itself separatism, and does not necessarily imply a revisionist vision of the transylvanian question. This small sub-region being in the geographical center of Romania, at the points of Transylvania furthest from the Hungarian border, it is also difficult to see how its autonomy could naturally degenerate into a connection with Hungary. For my part, without deploying militant activity in this sense, I personally believe that this desire for autonomy is justified by the right of peoples to self-determination. I indeed consider with Alain de Benoist that one cannot be simultaneously traditionalist and Jacobin very frequent contradiction among the Romanian nationalists, who, for many, think of perpetuating a quest for millennial unity at the moment when they simply regurgitate the chauvinistic slogans of the time Ceaușescu.

Ferenc Almássy: Let's go back to your expulsion and inadmissibility. What distinguishes this case from other similar cases in recent years in Romania? How would it be special, or remarkable?

Raoul Weiss: Most of the restraining measures against Hungarians have so far concerned activists and politicians from the Hungarian far-right whose speech effectively includes questioning the merits of the peace treaties which ended the First World War, and in particular of the famous Treaty of Trianon, which cut the Kingdom of Hungary from two thirds of its territory. Even in their case, frankly, these exceptional measures are based on a lato sensu, probably biased interpretation of Romanian law, which certainly makes any plan aimed at calling into question the country's territorial integrity punishable, but even in Romanian, the extension from the concept of plan to that of opinion is not obvious. Only this time, by hitting a French journalist who never adopted any revisionist position (neither pro, nor contra) and who does not belong to any Hungarian irredentist organization, the clique at the controls of the Romanian deep state clearly took the risk of a jump. qualitative in the trajectory which, for several years, has visibly moved this country away from European standards of legality and freedom of expression.

Ferenc Almássy: Your editorials published on the Visegrád Post in recent months seemed, on the whole, favorable to the government of the parliamentary majority currently in power. It is therefore surprising that such a decision is, in principle, a matter for the executive. How do you read the respective responsibilities of what you call the deep state and the Romanian government in your case?

Raoul Weiss: At the start of what must now be called the Weiss affair, the government of Viorica Dăncilă had just been involved in yet another scandal, another scandal which, too by chance jeopardized the peaceful coexistence of the ethnic groups of the country: by suddenly making it compulsory, for the teaching of Romanian in the schools of the country (including primary schools, without excluding those of the Hungarian minority), a level of training in Romanian philology by few teachers from the Hungarian minority, the order complained of obliged the replacement of experienced Hungarian teachers, capable of welcoming children in their mother tongue, by beginners of Romanian ethnicity, speaking mostly only Romanian.

The case echoed numerous similar incidents (concerning the design of textbooks, etc.), the common denominator of which is the refusal to admit that, for members of the Hungarian minority, Romanian is technically a foreign language more important than others, of course, because of its official status, but without this difference having a profound effect on the related educational requirements. This denial of evidence may, in some cases, be based on stupidity or ignorance, but it is, on the whole, too frequent not to translate also a politically motivated ill will. But what exactly is meant by political motivation? In this case (in the case of the ordinance on the training of teachers), it could in no case be a government orientation: although he did not join the government, the Hungarian minority party (UDMR / RMDSZ ) has been an external ally of the ruling coalition for months, and could even become the life jacket of Liviu Dragnea, in the event that his current government partner (the small ALDE party, ideologically unstable and too sensitive to various influences in from the business world) came to fail him. The adoption of the ordinance in question therefore clearly constituted a sabotage maneuver, the authors of which within the Ministry of Education (or even their minister himself) could well be undercover agents of the deep state. In this case, the government reaction, following a massive outcry from the UDMR / RMDSZ, was not long in coming: revocation of the order, resignation of the minister.

Raoul Weiss: Probably not. Indeed, this extraordinary case illustrates another very disturbing aspect of the almost unlimited power of a deep, uncontrolled state over the democratically elected bodies of Romanian power: by classifying the facts of which I am accused of national security, the authors of this abuse of power to a large extent also tie the hands of government. It is easy to imagine that no member of the parliamentary PSD or minister would take the risk of speaking out without first checking the merits of these accusations. How can we verify the solidity of a file which is likely (if it is not completely empty) to be based on fabricated evidence and purchased or extorted testimony? In practice, such an approach involves the organization of a counter-investigation, with specific means and skills relating to counter-espionage. In other words: in this kind of case, the Romanian deep state is judge and jury, and the democratically elected bodies, terrorized by its blackmail to patriotism, assist powerless to the establishment of a police state of South American invoice.

Unfortunately, the ability of the Romanian political class (or at least of its less subservient sectors) to resist such blackmail is also limited by fairly unfavorable historical precedents. Widely favored in the 19th century by the secret Habsburg diplomacy, the emergence of Romanian nationalism in Austro-Hungarian Transylvania took place against the Hungarian nation, designated (at the cost of a certain historical revisionism) as the hereditary enemy. The first steps of democratic Romania after 1989 confirmed this dangerous trend: adoption to replace the communist hymns of a national anthem whose text contains magyarophobic elements, and choice, for the date of the national holiday, of December 1 , which commemorates the annexation of Transylvania to the young Romanian state at the time of the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Trend exacerbated by the commemorations, in progress, of the centenary of the reunification of the nation a series of festivities which nobody in this poorest State of the Union dares to criticize the very big budget, and which seems to include my banishment (the logo of the centenary celebrations appearing in the header of the entry ban decision notified to me on October 24 in the transit area of ​​Cluj airport). That same year saw the election, at the head of the Romanian Academy, of the historian Ion Aurel Pop, rector of the Babeș-Bolyai University of Cluj university created by the post-war communist regime, by the forced annexation of the old and prestigious Hungarian university Bolyai at the young Babeș university of the same city (it is this same university which invites from time to time the American philanthropist Don Lothrop to hold talks, during which he explains to Romanian students that I quote Viktor Orbán wants you resume Transylvania). Former director of the Romanian Cultural Institute of New York, Ion Aurel Pop, whose notorious magyarophobia, grew up in Brașov, in one of the areas most marked by the forced march Romanianization policies of the transylvanian cities which marked the regime by Nicolas Ceaușescu.

Ferenc Almássy: But all the events that you recall date from a century or more or, for the most recent, from the last decades of the communist regime. Since then, Romania has notably joined the EU in 2007. How can they continue to influence the country's political life so decisively in 2018?

Raoul Weiss: For an external observer, indeed, the character of aggravated paranoia which marks especially on the Romanian side the Magyaro-Romanian relations during the last hundred years is astounding: the very idea that Hungary militarily the weakest of States in the region might seriously want to snatch Romania's second NATO army in post-communist Europe and re-annex Transylvania (whose territory is larger than its own, and the population, predominantly Romanian, is barely less) of a bad joke. In most European countries, a myth so far removed from reality could not survive, not even at the cost of media hype as intensive as that organized for decades by the very many infiltrators of the Romanian deep state (confession) same service charges) in the Romanian press. To understand the effectiveness of this intoxication, it is necessary to take into account the general mentality of the Romanians, who tend to perceive themselves in their own country whose borders have changed little in a century, and where they have an ethnic majority. at least 80% as a threatened minority. This oddity is the admission of a real weakness (that of modern national sentiment among Romanians), which is also the reverse of a real force, which has contributed in the past to arouse my interest and my affection for them: their anthropologically traditional character . Like the peoples of Africa and Central Asia, the Romanians have a collective conscience, above all family and religious: the extended family and orthodoxy (or, recently, the neo-Protestant churches which tend to replace it in the North of for them) are for them daily realities, much more significant than the weak and recent Romanian nation-state, built of odds and ends by imitation of poorly digested Western models, and which thanks to the neoliberal sacking of the State which characterized the Băsescu era involvement in the social fabric is one of the most superficial in Europe. In Romania, union activity not approved by employers is an almost official reason for dismissal, and many de facto unemployed people will never register, the amount of allowances paid barely justifies displacement and the bureaucratic marathon that implies the least administrative act in this country: this is the reality that are responsible for obscuring the great patriotic speeches of Ion Aurel Pop, the xenophobic marching bands of the Centenary and surprise episode of this Syldavian tragicomedy the expulsion of the Hungarian agent Raoul Weiss. The hysterical accentuation of the (moreover legitimate) criterion of territorial integrity is commensurate with the absence of state content and real sovereignty which characterizes the form-state Romania, and results directly from it.

Raoul Weiss: In the dematerialized world of the 21st century press, there is little chance that this vexatious measure will succeed in forcing me to remain silent. But after all, by formally violating press freedom, the deep state is gagging above all its main victims: the Romanian taxpayer, who will continue to finance the most expensive intelligence structures (read: political police) in Europe, all often working for a pittance in the service of companies owned by the submerged economic network of this same deep state; and the Romanian voter, who will continue, election after election, to be offered a rigged choice between various puppets from the deep state, subjected to all their blackmail from the very beginning of their political career. Incidentally, the event can, against my will, contribute to spoil the relationship between Budapest and Bucharest, that is to say the ongoing rapprochement between the V4 and Romania, thanks to the weakening of Brussels and a phobia of the diplomatic isolation which characterizes as a heavy trend the international behavior of the Romanian elites. This sabotage is an absolute strategic priority for the Romanian deep state, and above all for its Euro-globalist sponsors of the Brussels-Berlin axis. After all, was it not Jean-Claude Juncker himself who, these days, chose to maintain the Centennial hysteria by declaring that everything that is Romanian is also European? Given the lightness with which the Eurocracy adapts its own operating rules in the context of its punitive campaigns against Hungary and Poland, we can only agree with it: a rhetoric of the rule of law hiding an institutional crime, a territory / market with no real state and cultural content, a political life built on intoxication and manipulation, these are all values ​​which, at the present time, are as typically Romanian as European.

Tags: censorshipCluj-Napocastate of lawDeep Stateferenc almassyhongriekolozsvarliberté de la pressemodeste schwartzPSDRaoul WeissRomaniaSecuritateSRItransylvaniaEuropean Unionvisegrad post Ferenc Almassy

Franco-Hungarian, Ferenc Almássy is the founder and editor-in-chief of the Visegrád Post. Freelance journalist specializing in Central Europe, France and migration issues, he is also a correspondent in Central Europe for TV Libertés and publishes in the Hungarian weekly Magyar Demokrata.

See all articles To read Interviews Tomio Okamura: it is clear that the values ​​of Islam and Western democracy are fundamentally incompatible May 26, 2016 Interviews Gyula Thürmer: When Kádár left, Soros arrived February 17, 2020 - & gt; - & gt; Weekly newsletterFacebook

TwitterTweets by @Visegrad PostEN Latest publicationsNewsCovid-19 epidemic: situation on April 23 in V4 and in AustriaApril 23, 2020NewsSlovakia begins deconfinementApril 23, 2020NewsCoronavirus: Czech prevalence study started yesterdayApril 23, 2020 - & gt; - & gt; AboutAuthorsSupport usPartnersLegal notices PolandCzechSlovakiaHungary

Events in Cluj napoca