Introduction

Until the November 1996 presidential and parliamentary elections, postcommunist Romania presented scholars of the transition with a striking paradox: the most abrupt break with the old order seemed to have resulted in its least radical transformation. Many old faces remained in power while skillfully putting on new masks. Romania-watchers are thus divided between those who highlight the failure of the revolution, and those who think that former President Ion Iliescu did his utmost under the existing circumstances to turn his country into a functioning democracy. The major themes addressed in this paper are therefore linked to the widely perceived “exceptional” nature of Romania's transition from state socialism. In the concluding pages I will address the meaning of the 1996 elections which resulted in Iliescu's defeat and a major victory of his opponents, including Emil Constantinescu's election as Romania's president.

No other East European Leninist regime was overthrown by a violent popular uprising from below. In no other country of the region did the communist governments resort to ruthless forms of repression against peaceful demonstrators during the dramatic events of 1989. Yet the continuities with the old regime are in many respects more marked in Romania than in other East European countries (except perhaps the former Yugoslavia and Slovakia). I argue that some of these features are linked to the traditions of the country's political culture, but they do not make Romania a completely unique case.