Alexandru Drăgulin: President Nicușor Dan’s priorities will be economic recovery and democratic resilience

Vladimir Mitev

Alexandru-Ionuț Drăgulin is a researcher and expert in political science at the Romanian Diplomatic Institute. He offers expertise in areas such as good governance, democracy and the rule of law in Europe, contemporary politics and history of Romania and its neighbourhood.

In this interview, Alexandru Drăgulin offers his perspective and expectations regarding the foreign policy of Romania’s new president, Nicușor Dan.

He gave this interview to the Romanian-Bulgarian blog The Bridge of Friendship on 21 May 2025.

What are your expectations of President Nicușor Dan?

The expectations of civil society in general are very high. I hope that by the end of this year, some of these very high expectations will be met. As a foreign policy analyst, I have expectations regarding Nicușor Dan’s ability to confirm to Europe that Romania is on the path to democracy, first and foremost.

I am basing this on the many positive signals that Romania has already received from European Union member states with a tradition of democracy, such as France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy and so on. Unsurprisingly, positive signals and congratulations have also been received from the Republic of Moldova. But at the moment, the most important positive signal received by the newly elected president is the one sent by the United States through its embassy in Bucharest.

The United States has reconfirmed that the Strategic Partnership with Romania continues and that it is willing to continue cooperation in the main areas of the partnership: security, energy, trade and education. First of all, I am referring here to the cooperation between Romania and the United States in the field of security. Obviously, Romania’s expectations are the same as they were before the presidential elections.

How do you think Nicușor Dan will repair relations with the United States?

Firstly, he will put together a team of foreign policy advisers. There are signs that this team will include experts with a background in American foreign policy, as well as experts in strategic affairs. They are very familiar with how the United States acts in its relations with its strategic partners.

But what I mean is that Nicușor Dan has nothing to repair. Romania’s relationship with the United States is not in disagreement or tense. It is, I would say, unclear because the two sides have not understood the signals they have sent each other in the electoral context.

On the one hand, the United States was taken by surprise by what has happened so far with the presidential elections in Romania, because in all previous elections the scenario was the same. The two rounds of presidential elections were organised, the results were validated by the Constitutional Court, and that was it. Now things have changed.

This is the first time since the end of the Cold War that Romania has faced something different. I don’t think the Trump administration expected Romania to find itself in such a situation, but on the other hand, Bucharest did not expect the Trump administration to not send clear signals that it understood what was happening in Romanian democracy. But once the elections took place, the positive American perception of democracy in Romania was reconfirmed.

What is your opinion on Nicușor Dan’s foreign policy priorities?

Well, first of all, Nicușor Dan must confirm, and I believe he has already begun to do so, to reconfirm to his European and American partners that we are a functioning democracy.

A functional democracy, first and foremost at the electoral level, and then at other levels, such as the development of civil society, a democratic political structure, the functioning of the rule of law, the separation of powers within the state and the mutual control of institutions, the so-called checks and balances.

Secondly, one of Nicușor Dan’s priorities is to ensure Romania’s security on all fronts: territorial security, economic security and social security. Of course, territorial security is important because we have a war going on nearby that has been going on for three years and, unfortunately, there are no signs that there will be a ceasefire in the near future between Russia and Ukraine. Russia is maintaining its front line close to Odessa and has sent signals that it wants to reach the Danube, and Russia on the Danube would be an alarm bell for Romania. In fact, it would be a clear threat to Romania’s territorial security. This is not the first time in history that Russia has had this objective of advancing towards the mouth of the Danube.

Thirdly, Nicușor Dan’s next priority is economic security, rebuilding the country’s economy with the help of specialists, because the economy is the basis for the functioning of all other areas. We cannot have military security, for example, if we do not have the economic resources for it. Nicușor Dan must contribute to this by rebuilding the economy, and as far as our government is concerned, we need a prime minister who can coordinate the necessary measures. Once we have restored the economy, we will send signals of stability to other foreign investors, but also to other companies that are already in Romania.

This is the main objective for us, for this country, to continue to invest in it. We hope that the European Commission will continue to provide funds to Romania, because we are in an extremely difficult period. Once these figures, the budget deficit and inflation, have been adjusted to a more acceptable level, then we will be able to say that we have a market economy that is favourable for maintaining current investments and attracting new ones. Of course, these investments can be attracted through strategic partnerships between Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey and the United States, but also other countries.

What is your opinion on the regional policy in Central and South-Eastern Europe that will be led by Nicușor Dan and the future government? What kind of priorities and interests will Romania have in the region?

At the regional level, Romania wants to become a player, to have a voice that cannot be ignored. At this point, I cannot say that Romania has the necessary resources to become a regional power, but it can be an influential regional player.

An example I would like to give is the recent summit of the Three Seas Initiative, where connectivity projects between member countries were discussed. Added to this are the contributions to armament projects that Romania has already committed to. I would like to add that the inter-state development of the economy in a North-South direction is a priority for Romania.

We can see that, since 1990, Romania has focused exclusively on the economic development model of the former socialist states with the help of Western investment. Now we see that these former socialist states have reached a sufficiently advanced economic level to create their own regional inter-state projects and to complement the East-West direction with economic investments in the North-South corridor. Here I am referring primarily to connectivity. Connectivity in transport, energy, cyber infrastructure, trade, and so on.

Projects in Romania have already begun to take shape. I am referring to the projects that former interim president Ilie Bolojan supported at the Three Seas Initiative summit held at the end of April. I would like to mention here, at the regional level, of course, the issue of the Black Sea region. This is a very sensitive issue because the Black Sea is claimed by Russia. Russia, which includes the Crimean Peninsula, exercises control over the entire Black Sea area.

I would also like to talk about an area in our country that is less well known, namely the democratisation of the Black Sea region. There are many steps to be taken here. There are countries in the Black Sea region that still have work to do in terms of democratisation. I am referring to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and, of course, Türkiye. Türkiye is the economic power of the Black Sea, with which Romania has a very advanced trade relationship. But when it comes to democratisation, I have to say that Türkiye is far from meeting even the minimum criteria for electoral democratisation.

As far as the Black Sea is concerned, I would like to summarise the current situation in the region in two words: conflict and democratisation. The Black Sea is an area where conflict has been almost permanent. The solution to the conflict, I would say, is democratisation, but this democratisation must, in turn, be organic. This democratisation must start from within and be achieved in each individual state, because it is quite difficult now to talk, for example, about the European Union’s ability to democratise the countries in the Black Sea region. Georgia, for example, has embarked on the path of authoritarianism. In Azerbaijan, there are also no positive signs that we are dealing with negative Russian influence. The only positive signs are in Armenia. In Türkiye, as far as the Erdogan regime is concerned, we do not know how long it will last and how it will end.

If I ask you to put a label or stamp on Nicușor Dan’s foreign policy, what would it be?

I don’t want to use the term ‘change’, which is overused in Romania, but first and foremost we need to restore the economy and then return to stability. And last but not least, the key word would actually be resilience on all levels: economic, democratic and societal resilience. Resilience means, in minimal terms, the ability of a system to recover after a shock, to return to its initial state after suffering a shock or going through a crisis. Well, since November, when the first round of the presidential elections took place, we have been in a prolonged political crisis. We must demonstrate that we have resilience in the political sphere. I believe we have already demonstrated this. The responsible institutions have done their job, and the democratic regime has maintained stability in the face of external aggression.

What role do you expect Romanian sovereignism to play in the future?

Romanian sovereignism suffered a shock after the pro-European forces won the elections. First, it needs to recover from this shock and then it needs to draw on new resources.

Romanian sovereignism has social resources. Firstly, there are significant social and economic disparities in Romania. Secondly, there is a lack of information culture. I repeat, Romanian sovereignism played a major role in destabilisation. 

When I refer to the social gap, I mean the gap between the middle class, which has reached a standard of living sufficient to ensure its daily comfort, and another significant part of the population, which is still at risk of poverty, has no clearly defined political options and no clear adherence to democratic values. Being at the bottom of the survival ladder, people in this segment of society are very easy prey for the propaganda of the sovereignists. 

The sovereignists use these nationalist ideas as a universal remedy for people’s frustrations and low living standards. So, to put it in more everyday language, sovereignist, far-right parties try to convince their electorate that nationalism is about hunger, that nationalism is a remedy in the daily struggle for survival. It is a strategy used by extremist leaders to keep their electorate around the core, to keep their supporters close. In this sense, I say right-wing extremists, as I consider this a much more appropriate term than sovereignism. Right-wing extremists, in fact, want to fuel social frustrations, as the socially frustrated often turn to extremism as their first political option. For now, the extremists need to recover from the shock of their defeat in the presidential elections, and they will return, but for the time being, they will not have the same resources and capacity to seduce the undecided as they have had until now. 

If social tensions and frustrations remain at the same level, the extremists will have resources. The first move by the far right to come back was to challenge the election results in the Constitutional Court. This is a strategy by George Simion and his party to keep voters close and, more importantly, to fuel people’s hatred and distrust of state institutions. In this case, the institutions must respond through communication. They must communicate intensively and continuously with citizens, telling them that they can trust democracy and the ability of institutions to keep Romania on the pro-European path, which has brought us the most benefits.

What are your expectations regarding relations between Romania and Bulgaria and the countries of South-Eastern Europe? Rumen Radev, for example, has already invited Nicușor Dan to Sofia. So, what do you think will happen in the near future in this relationship between Romania and South-Eastern Europe?

Yes, this invitation is a positive signal from Sofia. Sofia is sending clear signals that it wants to continue the relationship between Romania and Bulgaria at the same level as before and, why not, to move it to a higher level. I expect Romania to play the same role as a provider of know-how for EU candidate countries in the Balkan Peninsula that need assistance, because Romania has promoted democracy in a professional manner. I expect Romania to be an exporter of democratic values in the Balkan Peninsula and that the ongoing infrastructure projects will be successfully completed.

Photo: Alexandru Drăgulin (source: Alexandru Drăgulin)

Subscribe to the channel of the blog “The Bridge of Friendship” in YouTube, where a number of video and audio interviews are published! The blog can also be followed in Facebook and Twitter. Its Telegram channel is here. And here is its Substack account.

About Author