The first thought that came to my mind after reading the report „National Identity, European Identity, and the Challenge of Populism,” conducted under the auspices of the Cotroceni Palace by the Strategic Reflection Group „Romania in the EU,” is that Nicușor Dan needed a clarification of the tension between the two terms pro-European and pro-Occidental, and the document does not solve his problem.
The second thought was that the president will not agree with the report, nor will those advising him on internal and international political issues, because it does not validate his political decisions so far.
It is a conceptual presentation of a strong tension that manifests in Romanian society, defined simply by the struggle between national identity and European identity.
Both are strongly used in political confrontation, public debates, and in how parties and their leaders choose to relate to "national patriotism and European patriotism."
The report, coordinated by university professors Sergiu Mișcoiu and Silviu Rogobete, concludes that both identities, national and European, must coexist and complement each other.
"...national identity and European identity are not mutually exclusive, but can reinforce each other. Far from being antagonistic, the affiliations are concentric, and the main stake is not the choice between tradition and modernity, between national and European, but the quality of democracy, which can harmonize them...," is stated in the document published on the presidential administration's website.
But the document cannot hide the huge tension that exists between the two identities and how they are used as weapons in political struggle.
Change
It is observed the "rejection of a zero-sum game between the nation and Europe, with a preference for a negotiation nationalism rather than a rupture nationalism. This is directly reflected in numbers: 69.1% of Romanians want the renegotiation of more favorable conditions within the EU, and only 11.2% support exit, while 54.9% believe that life would be harder if the EU were dissolved (compared to 22.4% who believe the opposite)," as stated in the document.
The data used are obtained from a sociological study conducted by INSCOP and exactly reflect the result of the actions of political formations after joining the European Union in 2007.
Even before accession, but especially after, the main message of the executive power leaders was: we need European Union money to develop, but at an individual level, no change is needed.
Simply put, we take money from European fools, pretend we are integrated and understand the new world we have entered, but mind our own business.
This principle was initially used by political leaders to convince a part of the population that nothing would change after accession and that things would be much better for everyone.
Many may have forgotten, but a strong anti-accession campaign to the European Union was conducted in our country, mainly funded by local moguls who emerged after 1990, who had seized part of the public resources, developed various businesses, and feared the rigors of belonging to the common market.
The Money Box
The spirit of fooling the EU has perpetuated and spread throughout society, from the classrooms of elementary schools to the Cotroceni Palace.
Fooling Brussels has become a national sport. It has always been seen as a "cash cow" so that we can take money from there, do some projects with it, but also keep something for ourselves, the politicians - a commission, votes, a job, a trip abroad.
Romania is European not despite its identity, but by the way it has been built at the intersection between tradition and modernity, between diversity and unity. The ultimate stake is not the choice between national and European, but the quality of democracy capable of harmonizing them — a democracy that demonstrates that solidarity, pluralism, and cooperation are sources of power, not weakness, in an increasingly fragmented world.
Report National Identity, European Identity, and the Challenge of Populism, Cotroceni Palace
Even a large part of pro-Europeans in Romania see the Union as an exclusive material benefit, not as a space of common aspirations, as a democratic guarantee and protection of humanity.
For most of us, Europe represents only material prosperity and not a zone of freedom, equal opportunities, and various opportunities.
These are facts, as if there is no daily struggle for them, a struggle in which thousands of people die to stop those who want to destroy Europe.
And here, in my opinion, is the biggest failure of the education system. We have, generation after generation, students who, in the last two decades, have learned very little about the profound impact of joining the European Union and how it has transformed Romania fundamentally.
Disappointment
With the increase in living standards, quality of life, with economic development, the material gap compared to Western EU states has decreased, and the mirage of prosperity began to fade because survival from day to day was no longer a problem for most Romanians.
Those who left the country found that, there in the West, things are not easy, and money is earned through hard work, and if you have a profession, you know how to do something.
Many of them were disappointed because they expected rapid enrichment, a life without problems and obstacles, but too few experienced such things in a short time.
And in recent years, in the context of the war in Ukraine, of the hybrid war waged by Russia against the entire West, this tension between expectations (imagination) and reality has turned into frustration that fuels nationalist, populist, and extremist political currents.
The Closet
In my opinion, the identity report, conducted at the Cotroceni Palace, is a correct one, devoid of ambiguities, and provides a diagnosis.
The major issue will be how it is used. What will the president understand from it and what other political demons will it unleash.
The described fear here is not random but based on the experience of the last year when the head of state failed at everything, not due to a lack of theoretical foundation, but because of personal ambitions.
I have a vague feeling that the identity document will end up in the same closet where it will gather dust, alongside solidarity independence from the national defense strategy.