A few months ago, at the Annual Reunion of the Romanian Diplomacy, President Iohannis talked about the country’s „golden triangle”: the membership in the EU and NATO and the partnership with the US.
Obviously, the triangle is highly important for Romania, as it covers different key dimensions: 1) NATO’s security guarantees are essential, especially in the context of the Ukrainian war; 2) the EU membership has proven to be decisive for our prosperity; and 3) the strategic partnership with the US, which involves enhanced military cooperation, has a lot of untapped potential, especially related to economic cooperation (the good news is that we starting to catch up, as the recent visit of the AMRO delegation shows, together with the increased interest of the American financial sector to fund Romania’s development).
But the strategic reality is now different than the one last year. We need not only adjustments in communications but also in terms of statecraft. Consequently, this op-ed is equally diplomatic and straightforward. The conflict in Ukraine enhances the perception of accelerated and disruptive change in global politics, a reality that has to be acknowledged and dealt with. Simply said, we, as a country, need statecraft for a turbulent decade. Less bla bla, less wooden language, more inspiration, more aspiration, more determination. An upgrade in our national realities and perceptions as well as an upgrade in our worldview.
Beyond continued great power competition, beyond unacceptable great power actions such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Romania has to realize that the most important lesson of the troubled regional security situation is the need for having skin in the game. Simply put: we need enhanced cooperation with those who could substantively contribute to our security and prosperity at the same time, this should be the cornerstone of our strategy in the coming years. In this context, I want to put forward the idea of a European pentagon, a set of increasingly close partnerships for Romania’s next ten years. Here are the countries that should be our main partners.
1. France, probably the first choice, given its ability to deliver both prosperity and security. Let’s not forget, Paris is our third most important foreign investor and could become the second, taking the place of Austria. Currently, France is the most significant military player in continental Europe. Even more relevant, the country has recently renewed its commitments to Romania, with multiple economic contacts in the past month and the decision to spearhead the deployment of additional military forces to Romania under the NATO banner. It also carries at the moment the EU flag for 6 months.
2. Germany is our main economic partner and investor. As Germany has announced a massive change in its security and foreign policy strategy, new avenues for cooperation open up for the future, so the security dimension of the relationship has also a lot to offer. Concretely not just in terms of this overused term in Romania, „potential”.
3. Poland. It makes a lot of sense for Romania to aim for regional leadership in South-East Europe, although more substance and dynamism are required to match our goal. However, in central and easter Europe, the Polish leadership and preeminence are uncontested. We have to pay more attention to Poland and learn from its economic strategy, especially in terms of balancing our trade deficit. At the same time, we share many complementarities with Poland in relation to our regional interests and partnerships (consider, for example, these two dyads: Poland – Ukraine and Romania – Moldova). Moreover, we have a competitive advantage in the process of catching up politically and economically with Western Europe, because a Euro-positive, Euro-constructive Romania is better positioned to bank on its relations with France, Germany, and other European partners.
4. Sweden. Within the group of Nordic and Baltic countries that seek to coordinate more and more in different formats, Sweden should be our privileged partner in the region. Benefiting from a reputed diplomatic and military tradition (although not a NATO member), this country could be our best example in terms of international development assistance. Specifically, we could easily work together on these issues in the Eastern Partnership and Western Balkans countries, thus strengthening our national desire to project leadership in South-East Europe.
5. The United Kingdom. The Ukrainian war has demonstrated once again the strategic relevance and courage of the United Kingdom. Global Britain had the guts to be present at a local level when other great powers preferred to lead from behind. Not only do we have almost one million Romanians living in the UK, but, given the close cooperation with the Americans, the British are potentially the first to intervene if the regional security situation deteriorates. Moreover, even after Brexit, the City has remained the most important financial hub of Europe. We have to learn more from Global Britain if we are to make the idea of a Global Romania truly working for us.
Of course one could expand the list to Italy, Spain, Bulgaria, Greece and others. But we need to understand that nice but nit advanced, deepened relations and partnerships do not raise the „skin in the game”. This is the lesson of the Ukrainian conflict: Poland and UK had skin in the game and acted swiftly. Romania has many strategic partnerships and privileged relations (they are listed here: https://www.mae.ro/node/1861) and this is good news. However, when you have so many, prioritization naturally occurs and progress is not equally distributed. My key point is that, in addition to our focus on the golden triangle (NATO, EU, the US), we should invest more in this pentagon of security and prosperity for Romania.
The main take-away of the Ukrainian war is that Romania needs middle powers and neighbours to have skin in the game, to intervene and be there for us in the darkest hour. Or to capitalize together in moments of joint opportunity. We should definetely deepen our partnership with the US but we need to learn more from our Israeli partners in doing so: to understand well our interests, to better lobby them, and know when to talk and when to do things under the radar. Periodically its important not just to be a reliable partner and rest upon your own -not always- soundbites but also to be seen in the global media and at home as such, as an actor not as a follower. A player, a regional leader, like we claim sometimes we are, needs to align reality and perception at home and abroad. And also needs an unshakable economic and security network of deepened partnerships, hence this European Pentagon proposal.
