I don’t believe that Mircea Geoană is a Moscow agent, which doesn’t mean that “Mănescu-gate” is irrelevant. It is actually very relevant, but not from the perspective of his sincere Euro-Atlanticism, but rather from the standpoint of superficiality, discernment, and self-control of someone who intensely desires, for the second time, to be the President of Romania.
Why don’t I believe?
In short, because it is extremely improbable that the Americans would have placed and supported, for the extension of the mandate of the NATO Deputy Secretary General, especially in times of war with Russia, an individual who they have not thoroughly scrutinized regarding their relationship with Moscow.
Of course, the initial formal verification was in Romania. Do we believe that this was all for the number 2 at NATO? From my information, all those who have access to sensitive NATO data have an internal security clearance and one from the alliance. And throughout their mandates, it would be hard to accept that none of the intelligence services of the allies would have detected, in times of war, I repeat, what a civilian investigation unearthed?
If, in reality, the largest military alliance on the planet, upon which Romania's security depends, could have made such an evaluation error and such a security breach, the issue would be far beyond Mircea Geoană.
So what is the relevance then?
One of Mircea Geoană's weaknesses has always been his association with dubious characters from whom he sought, with a certain type of greed, various political advantages, various shortcuts. Vanghelie, Rizea, Cătălin Voicu are just a few notorious examples.
When he entered the presidential race, Mr. Geoană stated that he takes responsibility for past mistakes, that he has learned his lessons, but has entered a higher stage, following the realm of high politics in which he has been active. In other words, he is a different politician now. He was supposed to prove it.
And here he falls into a past error, associating, even temporarily, with a character as controversial as Rareș Mănescu, whose financial partnerships with Putin's people are now blowing up in Mr. Geoană's face. And more such problems may arise because a campaign costs a lot, and Mr. Geoană, who does not benefit from public funding like candidates from parties, has conducted an intense fundraising.
Repeatedly asked about the money funding his campaign, Mr. Geoană said it comes from donations. And the most generous ones always come from business people, who, along with the money, bring their interests and connections into the candidate's campaign. If not meticulously screened, they generate huge damages.
Mr. Geoană was at least very superficial, if not irresponsible, in evaluating his supporters. The same superficiality that cost him in the first presidential campaign and led him to Vântu's house late at night. A lesson he seems not to have understood.
It is therefore a chronic weakness that questions precisely the distinctive difference that Mr. Geoană's candidacy proposes in this year's competition.
How will he be in the essential elections he is about to face in office? If he exposes himself in this way now, and implicitly exposes the alliance he represented, how much will he expose the Romanian presidency? If he is so easily manipulated and ensnared by dubious characters, how manipulable will he be as president?
Disastrous crisis management
Then, it's about the completely wrong, at times arrogant, but certainly suicidal way in which he and his team handled this scandal. Victimizing oneself as the target of a compromise operation is effective and credible only to the extent that you have complete and respectful answers for the public to any question.
But when your communicators, led by the absolutely catastrophic Mrs. Alina Achim, evasively avoid fundamental questions about the details of the relationship with the Mănescu family, it doesn't mean that they disappear, but they become even more relevant.
Even the answers given were incomplete and contradictory. For example:
- Alina Achim: Rareș Mănescu was the coordinator of the book promotion campaign
- Mircea Geoană: Mănescu was one of the 7,000 people at the foundation.
- Sanda Nicola: Mănescu was the campaign coordinator in Bucharest.
Mircea Geoană's attempted minimization is all the more embarrassing given that the relationship with the Mănescu family is old and significant. For example, Mrs. Mănescu was the Minister of Foreign Affairs when Romania sent the memorandum proposing him formally for the NATO position. And now Rareș Mănescu was tasked with recruiting dissatisfied individuals, especially from the PNL.
Fatal error
To top it off, Mr. Geoană himself made the fatal error of trying to combat what he called a compromise with an already proven compromise against a journalist.
Attacking Attila Biro using the fantastical and already debunked lie that he was part of an attempt to assassinate the Bulgarian Prosecutor General puts into question even more Mr. Geoană's judgment and self-control in moments of crisis.
If he goes off the rails in a delicate campaign moment like this, how would he act in a real national crisis? If he is willing to give credence to such absurdities, what are the criteria for his evaluation? If he is willing to spread information he knows to be lies, what is his moral compass?
Therefore, I don't believe that this scandal reveals the existence of a pro-Putin mole at the top of NATO and among the presidential candidates. It shows that Mr. Geoană has not changed since 2009.
It would have been ideal for him to be able to say, without being contradicted by facts and documents, that he has no connection to the controversial Mănescu family, that he has not taken any money from them. Obviously, he cannot.
But even in this case, he could have had a decent reaction, expressing regret for the evaluation error, explained by the pressure on an independent candidacy, and could have asked to be verified himself to clarify any suspicions. Only such an attitude would have shown that he is a different politician.
He defends himself with the NATO brand, but this brand actually exacerbates the situation. It is embarrassing for both the organization and the allies that a former high official offers such a spectacle, so the way he reacted probably seriously damaged Mr. Geoană and his external credibility.
Since the decision to run became evident, I wrote that Mr. Geoană is threatened by two major dangers.
On one hand, campaign financing: “From whose money? He is not a poor man, but it cannot be just about his own money. And the large sums invested in the campaign do not generate obligations afterwards? Full transparency of funding down to the last penny will be a key test for Mr. Geoană.”
On the other hand, Mr. Geoană can be defeated by his own arrogance. (...) A bit of humility would help him a lot, otherwise he would not be the first politician brought down by his own arrogance, and it wouldn't be the first time.”
Mircea Geoană is on the verge of being defeated by his most terrible opponent – Mircea Geoană.
But, to be fair, PSD has not learned anything from the past lesson either. They have prepared sophisticated anti-Geoană strategies, including a vehement independent candidacy for which they diligently collected signatures. In fact, as an experienced and mischievous interlocutor told me, you can rely on Geoană, he just needs the opportunity and he'll solve it himself.