ROMANIA 2002-3

 

 

There was no marked change in the pattern of antisemitic incidents in Romania in 2002/3 and their number remained low. A Center for Monitoring and Combating Antisemitism in Romania was founded in 2002. Features associated with the ‘new antisemitism’ evidenced in western Europe were not manifested in Romania. The debate in Romanian society on the nation’s role in the Holocaust intensified, especially following President Ion Iliescu’s remarks that there was “no Holocaust on Romanian territory.” One outcome of the ensuing diplomatic furor was the formation of an International Commission of Historians on the Holocaust in Romania.

 

THE JEWISH COMMUNITY

According to the results of the Romanian census published in July 2002, the Jewish community in Romania has dwindled to less than 6,000 out of a total population of 21.5 million. Several thousand more, mostly in mixed marriages, are thought not to have declared themselves as Jews. The major Jewish centers are in Bucharest, Iasi, Cluj and Oradea, where the local communities are well organized. Religious services, especially during Jewish holidays, are well attended and especially rally the younger generation.

The Federation of Jewish Communities of Romania promotes and coordinates communal activities. Besides publishing a monthly journal, Realitatea Evreiasca, the Federation documents the history of Jewish life in Romania and its publications and symposia are well covered by the Romanian media. Hasefer publishing house issues dozens of titles on Jewish topics, including works by the community’s historical center. The Lauder Foundation operates a Jewish primary school in Bucharest. The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee has been especially active in fostering welfare work among Romania’s impoverished elderly Jews. The University of Cluj and the University of Bucharest have academic centers for Jewish studies, and hold conferences on Jewish topics and on Romania’s Jewish past (see below).

The issue of restitution of private and communal property has still to be resolved in Romania, although the community has secured the return of several individual items. The community’s task of maintaining the vast number of synagogues and cemeteries, a reminder of the large Jewish population that existed in Romania before the war, has been alleviated by a government decree of March 2002 ordering the protection of Jewish sites as part of the national heritage (see below).

 

POLITICAL PARTIES AND EXTRA-PARLIAMENTARY GROUPS

The nationalist and antisemitic Greater Romania Party (PRM), led by Corneliu Vadim Tudor, became the second largest party in the Romanian parliament after it won 21 percent of the vote in the November 2000 elections. In its ongoing slander campaign against former Jewish communists and against Israeli and Jewish businessmen in Romania, the PRM focused less than in previous years on alleged Israeli-Jewish-US hegemonic policies in the global arena. However, it continued and even intensified its denial of the Holocaust of Romanian Jews (see below).

Small nationalist, xenophobic and antisemitic Iron Guard, or Legionnaire, groups (derived from the wartime fascist movement) form the extra-parliamentary extreme right wing in Romania. “Nests” (the original name of local branches of the movement) of such groups exist in various localities. The Bucharest “nest” of the Legionnaire movement owns the Majadahonda publishing house, which issues works by Iron Guard founder Corneliu Zelea Codreanu and books about the movement. There were several attempts during 2002/3 to organize meetings and public discussions over the fate of the Legionnaire movement. Thousands of posters with pictures of Codreanu that appeared in central Bucharest in summer 2001 to commemorate “75 years of suffering and sacrifice” were still visible in 2002/3. Pro-Iron Guard publications, as well as various antisemitic and Holocaust denial texts, are openly displayed in book stalls in the major cities.

A new publication linked to the Iron Guard legacy, Obiectiv Legionar, appeared in summer 2003. Denying that the Iron Guard is a fascist movement, the first issues attempted to legitimize Legionnaire ideas by stressing that they did not contradict the spirit and letter of the Romanian constitution. The editor, Grigore Oprita, who has been charged with publishing fascist and racist material, has been trying through the new publication to whitewash the legacy of the Iron Guard using the argument of the right to free speech.

 

ANTISEMITIC ACTIVITIES

In general, manifestations of the ‘new antisemitism’, namely, the attacks in western Europe associated with the identification of Israel/Zionism/Jews as a single evil entity, were not evidenced in Romania. In fact, there has been no marked change since 2000 in the antisemitic positions of nationalist and extreme right elements. As in the past, criticism of Israel clearly reflecting antisemitic positions was evident in several publications. The well known Romanian author and dissident from the Ceausescu period, Paul Goma, who lives in Paris, published two essays in 2002 in the nationalist review Vatra (nos. 3–4, 5–6). Goma wrote, inter alia: “Even more difficult for the Jews to admit that they were executioners for other communities is the fact that they continue to be so today in Palestine.”

There was no noticeable change in the pattern of antisemitic incidents, and their number remained low. The Center for Monitoring and Combating Antisemitism in Romania, founded in 2002, reported antisemitic graffiti on the walls of the Bucharest Jewish Theatre and of condominiums in Cluk in October 2002. In addition, two synagogues were desecrated in April and June 2002 (see ASW 2001/2). It should be noted that the law passed in March 2002 (see below) makes fascist and xenophobic organizations and symbols illegal and those responsible subject to prison sentences.

As in previous years, antisemitic propaganda accompanied the continuing campaign to rehabilitate the legacy of wartime fascist ruler Ion Antonescu and to cleanse historical memory of the fate of Romanian Jewry during the Holocaust (see below).

Extremist sites on the Internet in Romania, including some related to the legacy of the Iron Guard, appear to be expanding their content. The material on the pro-Legionnaire sites attempts to introduce the doctrines of Codreanu to new generations through historical revisionism, including whitewashing the Iron Guard’s murderous activities, such as the January 1941 pogrom in Iasi, which it attributed to “Jewish behavior.”

 

ATTTITUDES TOWARD THE HOLOCAUST AND THE NAZI ERA

The debate in Romanian society on the nation’s role in the Holocaust intensified in 2002/3, with arguments for and against the rehabilitation of Ion Antonescu and linkage being made between the need for Romania to face its role in the Holocaust and its attempts to enter NATO, the EU and other structures of European integration.

A surprising development for western observers of Romania and Jewish organizations, as well as for some sectors of Romanian civil society, was the declaration by President Ion Iliescu, in an interview to the Israeli daily Ha’aretz, that there was no Holocaust on “Romanian territory” (Ha'aretz, 24 July 2003; follow up, Ha'aretz, 26 Aug. 2003). Iliescu placed the suffering of the Jews in the wider context of suffering during World War II, including that of his own father, a communist. On the other hand, he came out strongly on the issue of Jewish demands for compensation, a sensitive issue often used by antisemites to minimize the Holocaust. The president’s remarks caused a diplomatic storm between Romania and Israel, and between Romania and the Jewish world, as well as between the Romanian presidential office and Ha'aretz over Iliescu’s exact words and intentions (see also Divers, 14 Aug. 2003, RFE Newsline, 26 Aug. 2003; on Romanian media reactions, see “At the Age of 73, Iliescu Is lying,” Evenimentul Zilei, 26 Aug. 2003). Efforts were made by both sides to limit the damage, and one outcome was the formation in October 2003 of an International Commission of Historians on the Holocaust in Romania, chaired by Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel and with the participation of prominent historians and experts from Romania, Israel and the US. The findings of the Commission are due to be presented before the presidential elections in November 2004 and are expected to serve as a guide in Romania's treatment of the Holocaust.

Following Iliescu's remarks, the Center for Independent Journalism organized a public debate on the “Problem of the Holocaust in the Romanian media” in which noted author and academic Andrei Oisteanu analyzed Iliescu's views not as a “mistake” but as a calculated gesture to draw voters away from the Greater Romania Party in the forthcoming general elections (Divers, 14 Aug. 2003). Similar views were voiced by other commentators who linked Iliescu's pronouncements to the intensification of the ruling Social Democratic Party’s electoral campaign and its efforts to attract nationalist elements.

During Elie Wiesel's visit to Romania in July 2002 at the height of Romania's campaign to join NATO he surprised many Romanians by attacking not only the suffering of the Jews and their destruction in the Holocaust by the Hungarian authorities in his native Sighet-Marmarita, but also the Holocaust in Romania during which the “Romanians killed, killed and killed” (on Wiesel's visit see also below). His remarks were strongly condemned by the PRM organ Romania Mare which also criticized President Iliescu for having invited him to Romania. Denouncing Elie Wiesel, world Jewry and Zionism on several occasions, Corneliu Vadim Tudor warned that “we are not at their mercy, and we are not one of their colonies, of the worldwide Zionist mafia” (OTV, 31 July 2002, as reported by the Center for Reporting and Combating Antisemitism in Romania [CRCAR], 2002).

On 12 September 2002 the Romanian authorities revoked the license of OTV, which had been transmitting Vadim Tudor' s speeches before the Romanian Senate as well as his other public addresses, because it had repeatedly broken the audio-visual law which prohibits incitement on racial, religious or ethnic grounds. During his appearances Vadim Tudor proved that he is a Holocaust denier, not only in reference to Romania, but as part of his worldview. In a speech aired on OTV before the Romanian Senate on 9 Sept. 2002 (CRCAR Report, 2002) he declared: “Between you and me, the Holocaust has gotten to be more important than a religion; if somebody denies God, nothing happens to him; if he denies the Holocaust, he risks suffering a criminal conviction like the great French philosopher Roger Garaudy, or is even sent to prison. This is too much. No normal person can deny the Holocaust, which was a tragic reality of humanity, but, for God's sake, we’re already in the third millennium, let's start thinking of the future, let's get out of the prison of the past darkness.” Referring to Norman Finkelstein's book The Holocaust Industry, Vadim Tudor said: “Allow me to doubt the number of 6 million Jews, who some people claim would have been the victims of the Holocaust. There were victims, but not 6 million.”

As to Antonescu, Vadim reiterated his belief that the “Jews should erect statues to Antonescu.... Marshall Antonescu saved the Jews and we shall continue to defend his legacy in the present” (CRCAR report, 2002).

Despite steps taken by the government, as well as by state and public institutions, to ban Holocaust denial and to clamp down on the Antonescu cult, especially in 2001/2, the overall picture remained complex and revisionist elements were far from being suppressed. Romania’s refusal to acknowledge its role during the Holocaust, including President Iliescu's statements on the issue, should also be placed in the wider context of various forms of Holocaust denial in the post-communist states (see ASW 2001/2).

In the public discourse, semantics and ad hoc attempts to define or redefine terms such as the “Holocaust” often lead to distortions and contradictions. Thus, at a conference organized by the Romanian Academy of Sciences in late June 2002, “The Holocaust and Its Implications for Romania,” Minister of Culture Razvan Theodorescu considered that “Romania had nothing to do with the Holocaust, but, under the Antonescu regime and following the occupation of territories beyond the River Dniestr, Romania participated in the Holocaust” (Rompress, 28 June, 2002). At the same conference, PRM Member of Parliament Gheorghe Buzatu shifted the debate on the nature, dimensions and role of Romania in the Holocaust to the “red Holocaust,” which produced millions of victims throughout the world” (see ASW 2001/2).

 

RESPONSES TO RACISM AND ANTISEMITISM

Two “emergency measures” were taken by the Romanian government on 21 March 2002: the first to ban racist, fascist, and xenophobic organizations, as well as monuments honoring people guilty of crimes against humanity, and the second to protect Jewish heritage sites and cemeteries. These ordinances, which aroused a lively discussion in the media, particularly as to the precise meaning of the ban on the cult of convicted war criminals, resulted in the removal of several busts of Antonescu and the re-naming of streets. However, observers also noted that the words and meaning of Ordinance no.31 may be manipulated to enable continuation of the pro-Antonescu campaign, which indeed was the case in 2002/3.

During 2002/3 there were numerous responses to antisemitism and discussions on the implications of the past for the present and future of the country. Following Iliescu's remarks the public discourse in the media generated a new wave of discussion on the Holocaust. There is still a wide gap between the various Romanian positions and that of the Jewish world which will certainly be reflected by the International Commission of Historians on the Holocaust in Romania. This discrepancy was highlighted during the visit to Romania in July 2002 of Elie Wiesel, who declared that while Romania’s President Ion Iliescu “had made noble efforts” to educate the Romanian people about the fate of the Jews in their country, he “ought to do more to admit his country’s role in the Holocaust” (Guardian, 31 July 2002; see also ASW 2001/2).

Indeed, education has become a major means for teaching new generations about the true dimensions of the Holocaust of Romanian Jewry. Academic conferences and programs, too, have played an important role in furthering interest in the fate of Romanian Jewry, as well as in combating antisemitism, for example, the conference, “The Holocaust and Romania: Contemporary Significance,” organized by the Institute for Political Studies of Defense and Military History, of the Ministry of National Defense, in July 2002, and the course on the Holocaust given at the National Defense College, as well as teachers’ seminars at Babes-Bolyai University in Cluj (see ASW 2001/2).

Two significant collections of studies were published in English in 2003. One, The Holocaust in Romania, contains the proceedings of the above-mentioned conference held at the Institute for Political Studies of Defense and Military History. The other, Studia Judaica (Vol. 3, 2003), published by the Goldstein-Goren Center for Hebrew Studies at Bucharest University, is a wide-ranging volume dealing with aspects of the history of antisemitism in Romania and the Holocaust, as well as with Romanian-Jewish relations and the history of Romanian Jewry.

Romanian participants continued to attend seminars at Yad Vashem. A group of young Romanian politicians from various political parties, for example, participated at a seminar in Yad Vashem's International School for the Study of the Holocaust in late 2003.

In 2002 the Goethe Institute organized an international conference in Bucharest on “Jewish Identity and Antisemitism in Central and Southeast Europe,” with the cooperation of the Federation of the Jewish Communities in Romania.

The Center for Combating and Monitoring Antisemitism in Romania which began operating in 2002, in affiliation with the ADL; and in conjunction with a website (www.antisemitism.ro), publishes its reports also on the site of the Romanian Jewish community and B'nai B’rith International, at www.romanianjewish.org.

The position of the Jewish community on matters concerning the Jewish past and present as well as related issues carries weight, since its views are sought and respected by the government. The community leadership’s attitude that “there is no antisemitism in Romania, but there are antisemites,” and its stand vis-à-vis the Antonescu cult were criticized by factors both inside and outside Romania as being too soft and timid. Community leaders reject this criticism, pointing to numerous activities they have initiated to combat and monitor all forms of antisemitism and Holocaust denial.