between ethno nationalism social exclusion and mirescu... · between ethno nationalism, social...
TRANSCRIPT
BETWEENETHNONATIONALISM,SOCIALEXCLUSIONAND
MULTICULTURALPOLICIES
THECASEOFROMAINROMANIA
GABRIELAMIRESCU
01‐216‐449AVENUEJEANBOURGKNECHT6
1700FRIBOURG
O
01‐
0
01
PROF.NICOLASHAYOZ
Lizentiatsarbeit im Fachbereich Politikwissenschaft der Universität Freiburg (Schweiz) 2010
2
Părinţilor mei, Lucia şi Ioan, cu dragoste şi profundă recunoştinţă pentru felul în care
m-au învăţat sa privesc lumea.
3
List of Figures Fig. 1: Hypotheses: The Romanian concept of nationhood and the roots of social exclusion of the Roma can
explain the unsuccessful process aiming at Roma integration. .............................................................. 15Fig. 2: Methodology: Data Collection.............................................................................................................. 17Fig. 3: Risk of Being Poor, 2006 (World Bank, 2007)..................................................................................... 24Fig, 4: The History of the National Agency for Roma (1997-2010)................................................................ 37Fig. 5: Main Functions of the National Agency for Roma............................................................................... 38Fig. 6: Civic Nationalism in France ................................................................................................................. 47Fig. 7: Ethnic Nationalism in Germany............................................................................................................ 48Fig. 8: Civic and Ethnic Understanding of Nationhood and National Self-Understanding (Brubaker).......... 50Fig. 9: Transylvania, Moldavia and Walachia in the first half of the 19th century.......................................... 51Fig. 10: The Great Romania in 1919 ................................................................................................................ 58Fig. 11: Social Exclusion Based on Racial and Ethnic Differences................................................................. 69Fig.12: Outcomes: The Concept of Romanian Nation ..................................................................................... 80Fig. 13: Outcomes: The Social Exclusion of Roma ......................................................................................... 81Fig. 14: Verification of Hypotheses: The Concept of Romanian Nationhood and the History of Social
Exclusion of Roma as Barriers in Implementing Strategies of Integration ............................................ 84
List of Abbreviations ARU The Alliance of Roma Unity CEDIME Center for Documentation and Information on Minorities in Europe CNM The Council for National Minorities COE Council of Europe CSCE Conference for Security and Co-operation in Europe DIR Department of Interethnic Relations DPNM Department for the Protection of National Minorities DPNM The Department of the Protection of National Minorities EC European Community ECHR The European Convention on Human Rights ECRML The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages ERRC European Roma Rights Centre ESC The European Social Charter EU European Union FCNM Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities GSG The General Secretariat of the Government IRU International Roma Union MPI The Ministry for Public Information NAR National Agency for Roma NGO Non-governmental organisation NOR National Office of Roma ONIR Office for National Integration of Roma ORP The Office for Roma Problems OSCE The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe OSI The Open Society Institute Romani Criss Roma Center for Social Intervention and Studies UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights UN United Nations WB The World Bank
4
Contents
EXECUTIVESUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 6
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 7
STATEOFTHEART ..................................................................................................................... 8
STATEMENTOFTHEPROBLEMANDRESEARCHQUESTION ............................................................... 12
HYPOTHESES .......................................................................................................................... 14
METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................... 16 TheIssue ........................................................................................................................................................... 16 DataCollection ............................................................................................................................................... 16
OUTLINEOFTHESTUDY ............................................................................................................ 18
I.SETTINGTHECONTEXT:THECASEOFROMAMINORITYINROMANIA
CHAPTER1:THEPOST‐COMMUNISTPERIOD‐POLITICALMOBILIZATIONANDRECOGNITIONINEUROPE... 20
CHAPTER2:CURRENTCHALLENGESFORTHEROMANIANROMA ....................................................... 232.1.PovertyandGeneralSocialStatus ....................................................................................................... 232.2.Education ........................................................................................................................................................ 242.3.LabourMarket .............................................................................................................................................. 262.4.Migration......................................................................................................................................................... 282.5.Discriminationandsocialexclusion ................................................................................................... 29
CHAPTER3:THEGOVERNMENTALPROJECTOFROMAINTEGRATION ................................................. 333.1.InternationalandNationalActors ....................................................................................................... 33
3.1.1.TheInternationalLevel‐ActorsandLegalTools ............................................................ 333.1.2.TheNationalLevel:TheRomanianGovernment,itsStrategiesanditsInteractionswithRomaCivilSociety................................................................................................. 35
CHAPTER4:MAINGOVERNMENTALACTIONSFORROMAINTEGRATION–STRATEGIES,KEYACTORSANDTHEIRINTERACTION ................................................................................................................. 374.1.TheNationalAgencyforRoma.............................................................................................................. 374.2.TheNationalStrategyforImprovingtheSituationofRoma.................................................... 404.3.TheDecadeofRomaInclusion2005‐2015....................................................................................... 41
II.THEORETICALFRAMEWORKANDCASESTUDY
THEORY1‐CONCEPTSOFNATIONHOOD..................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER5:DEFINITIONSANDPATTERNSOFNATIONALSELF‐UNDERSTANDING................................... 435.1.NationsandNationalism.......................................................................................................................... 435.2.TwoConceptsofNationsandofNationalMovements ............................................................... 46
CASESTUDY1:THEROMANIANCONCEPTOFNATIONHOOD .......................................................... 50
CHAPTER6:NATIONBUILDINGANDNATIONALSELF‐UNDERSTANDINGINROMANIA ............................ 516.1.TheSocio‐PoliticalContextinthe18thCentury............................................................................ 526.2.TheLanguageasPatternofNationalIdentity ................................................................................ 53
5
6.3.Acommonpast,thesamepeople......................................................................................................... 546.4.LookingtotheWest‐TheFrenchMythandtheGermanCountermyth ............................. 556.5.TheReligionasPatternofNationalIdentity ................................................................................... 576.6.TheUnitaryCharacteroftheRomanianNation‐State ................................................................ 58
THEORY2–THECONCEPTOFSOCIALEXCLUSION ........................................................................ 61
CHAPTER7:THEROLEOFTHESTATEINPROCESSESOFSOCIALEXCLUSION ......................................... 627.1.TheTheoryofSocialClosure.................................................................................................................. 627.1.StrategiesofSocialExclusion................................................................................................................ 63 7.1.1.RaceandEthnicityasTargetsinSocialExclusion........................................................... 637.2.TheRoleoftheStateintheProcessofSocialExclusion ............................................................ 64 7.2.1.TheState’sMechanismsinExploitationthroughRacializedRelations ................. 65 7.2.2.TheState’sMechanismsinInducingEthnicViolence.................................................... 667.3.ReproducingPatternsofSocialExclusion........................................................................................ 67
CASESTUDY2:THESOCIALEXCLUSIONOFROMA ........................................................................ 70
CHAPTER8:THEROLEOFTHESTATEINTHESOCIALEXCLUSIONOFROMA ......................................... 718.1.RacializingtheRomaMinority‐Slavery ........................................................................................... 718.2.FromSlavestoSecond‐ClassCitizens ................................................................................................ 738.3.InstitutionalizedMeasuresofAcculturation................................................................................... 738.4.FirsttendenciesofRomaEthnicSelf‐AwarenessinRomania ................................................. 758.5.TheRomaGenocide.................................................................................................................................... 758.6.HowtodealwiththePast?...................................................................................................................... 768.7.TheViciousCycleofRomaSocialExclusion.................................................................................... 77
III.OUTCOMESANDVERIFICATIONOFTHEHYPOTHESES
CHAPTER9:DISCUSSIONOFOUTCOMES ...................................................................................... 799.1.TheConceptofRomanianNationhoodandtheNationalSelf‐Understanding ................. 799.2.UnderstandingtheTraditionofSocialExclusionoftheRomainRomania ....................... 81
CHAPTER10:VERIFICATIONOFTHEHYPOTHESES .......................................................................... 8210.1.TowhatextentdoestheconceptoftheRomaniannation‐statechallengetheattemptsofRomaintegration?.......................................................................................................................................... 8210.2TowhatextentdoesthehistoricalevolutionoftherelationsbetweentheRomaandthemajoritysocietyhindertheprocessofRomaintegration?........................................................ 83
IV.CONCLUSION........................................................................................................... 85
V.BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................... 89 Vita ................................................................................................................................................................................... 98DeclarationofAuthorship .....................................................................................................................................100
6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Policies towards minorities are currently evaluated within a global context, in which global criticism relies on standards of liberal multiculturalism. Post-communist Romania was sharply criticized for how it treated its minorities, while in particular the Roma problem has achieved more visibility in the context of Romania’s accession to the European structures.
Under international pressure, the Romanian Government set special institutions and adopted particular strategies in recent years in order to address Roma integration. Today, offically, Romania fulfils the EU standards on human and minority rights, employment, housing and education. Nevertheless, until now all these actions have not led to any significant results concerning Roma integration, nor have they improved the social conditions in which Roma live.
Seeking to understand why the integration efforts of Roma minority pose such a challenge in Romania, the research reveals a complex connection between the failure of the integration project and two domestic aspects of the Romanian context:
The exclusionary concept of Romanian nationhood that sees the culturally distinct
Roma as citizens of the state, but not as legitimate members of the Romanian nation;
The history of social closure of Roma on the Romanian territory, which is rooted in centuries of institutionalized slavery, in constant state measures of forced acculturation and even mass-extermination. Old strategies of exclusion drawn by the state continue to be informally reproduced and provide ongoing mechanisms for social exclusion of Roma.
Both these particularities of the Romanian context are to be understand as intrinsic generators of exclusion, that hold back any attempts of Roma minority to integrate. Besides their exclusionary character, these aspects disclose a deep lack of trust and acceptance that dramatically defines the relations between Roma and the State and between Roma and mainstream society.
Recommending a suis generis approach in addressing the issue of Roma integration, this study underlines the challenges of “importing” values and policies without adequately addressing certain local specificities and case-particular priorities.
The question is not whether multicultural approaches are suitable for drafting strategies for integration of the Roma minority, but rather whether the multicultural discourse can address such deep rooted causes for lack of trust and acceptance, that the particular case of the Roma in Romania reveals. And if yes, what are the appropriate steps that need to be taken?
7
INTRODUCTION
The presence of Roma on the Romanian territory has been attested for more than 600 years
- centuries before the Romanian nation-state was established. Nevertheless, their co-
nationals generally do not perceive Roma as being Romanians, even if they are Romanian
citizens. Referring to this aspect, the historian Lucian Boia explains: “Romania is a country that has little success in assimilating, or even integrating its minorities,
and indeed it has hardly had the time and the means to do so. (…) How could it assimilate the
Gypsies, who live in a world of their own? Romania is not France!1” This perspective summarizes the nature of the relationship between Roma and the majority
population in terms of Roma social status and the participation of Roma in Romanian
society.
After centuries of slavery, systematic ethnic cleansing during the Second World War,
and coercive assimilation policies during the communist regime, the Roma community of
Romania found itself facing a new threat: integration.
The collapse of communism in 1989 was followed by a phenomenon without precedent
in Romania: the Roma community was recognized as a national minority, and a Roma
political mobilization took place. Paradoxically, during the last two decades, several
international reports revealed that a large percentage of Roma living in Romania are
confronted with living conditions characteristic to those of the Third World: severe
poverty, lack of access to education, to the labour market, to health care, to housing, as
well as discrimination, and finally, social exclusion.2 Twenty years after the fall of
Ceausescu’s regime, the interethnic tensions and the marginalization of Roma even
intensified, while post-communist politicians and society have not paid enough attention to
the Roma commensurate with the magnitude of what generally is known as “the Roma
problem”3.
Therefore, the past twenty years have witnessed not only an achievement of democratic
values in post-communist Romania, but have also drawn attention to the difficulty of the
regime and society in maintaining and developing harmonious relations with the ethnic 1 Boia, Lucian (2001): Romania. Borderland of Europe; Reaktion Books, London: 193. 2 World Bank (2007): Romania: Poverty Assessment. Analytical and Advisory Assistance Program: First Phase Report, fiscal year 2007: http://web.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=51083066&piPK=51083078&theSitePK=258599&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=311712&theSitePK=258599&entityID=000020439_20071204114818&searchMenuPK=311712&theSitePK=258599 3 Barany, Zoltan D (1994): Nobody’s Children: The Resurgence of Nationalism and the Status of Gypsies in Post-Communist Eastern Europe: 235; in Serafin, Joan (ed.): East-Central Europe in the 1990´s; Westview Press, Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford.
8
minorities sharing the same territory. In place of communist propaganda attempting to
educate all Romanian citizens to be proud of their glorious common past, the questions of
who belongs here, and of who is a Romanian and who is not, became well known rhetoric
in the last two decades.
STATE OF THE ART
Literature about Roma is scarce. The oldest documents attesting their presence in Europe
often refers to this group as to a mysterious one, with unconventional habits and an exotic
culture. Centuries long, written documents on Roma referred mostly to their culture,
language and history. These topics were and still are of relevance since even today the
Roma appear as a less known group for many Europeans. But unfortunately, many
historical documents often illustrate an unrealistic image of Roma, based on subjective
interpretations and leading to a large palette of stereotypes and prejudices. It has been
noted that “Gypsies are much more popular subjects of fictional literature than of
academic studies”4 and as consequence, it is not easy to find good and accurate historical
references about Roma.
Misinterpretations, and even pejorative formulations in defining the Roma
communities, could primarily find their first explanation in the lack of an official Roma
history and the generally poor quality of information about this group. Secondly, the
absence of a written language and culture, but also the omission of Roma from the
national histories could be another explanation of the not very ambitious efforts in writing
a history of the Roma. Another reason could be the heterogeneity of the Roma. They are
not organized in a homogeneous ethnic community, but spread all over the world and
divided in numerous different groups and subgroups.5 Disregard for the diversity of this
ethnic group (which results in a variety of professions, traditions, lifestyles and dialects of
Romanes6) has frequently lead to broad generalizations about all Roma based on restrictive
4 Crowe, David M. (1994): A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia; Taurus Publisher, London; cited in Gaarde, Signe (2006): Recreating the Roma. Policies and Activism; Department for Minority Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen: 8. 5 There were identified in Europe about 50 different Roma groups. For details, see the complex study of Tcherencov, Lev and Laederich Stéphane (2004): The Rroma. Otherwise Known as Gypsies, Gitanos, Gyphtoi, Tsiganes, Tigani, Cingene, Zigeuner, Bohemiens, Travellers, Fahrende etc; Schwabe Verlag, Basel: Vol. 1: 275-517. 6 Romanes designates the Roma language. Romanes has a grammar mainly based on Sanskrit (its Indian origins), and a large vocabulary consisting in many terms of Armenian, Persian, Slavonic and Greek provenience. Since the language alone allows a partial reconstruction of the itinerary followed by the group
9
studies of a Roma subgroup.7 All these difficulties of objectively documenting the Roma
are reflected in most available studies, which are often based on inexact dates, filled with
spurious generalizations and fallacious interpretations, or simply myths. Modest research
was undertaken in the Balkans, while a few studies are available from Russia, Poland and
the Baltic states.
In Romania, the first representative articles and studies concerning the Roma were
published primarily by supporters of the Enlightenment8 in the 19th century. Their
discussions concentrated on transactions involving Roma slaves, their treatment, and later
within the context of Roma enslavements in Moldavia and Walachia (today provinces of
Romania). Nevertheless, due to several reasons, even well intentioned studies have often
contributed to many of the current misconceptions regarding this minority group.
On Romanian territory, where it is estimated that about one to two million Roma
currently live,9 prior to 1990 the Roma community was not recognized as a national
minority and the Roma issue was a taboo subject, especially during the communist regime.
Even the school history books avoided mentioning the Roma as an historical part of
mainstream society. During this period, this ethnic group was practically non-existent for
the authors and historians in this part of the world.
Later, after the breakdown of communism in Europe, together with the emergence of a
new wave of Roma intelligentsia, more publications on Roma appeared. Notably, this time,
they were often written by Roma themselves. These developments occurred
simultaneously with the official acknowledgement of Roma as a national minority in post-
communist Romania and as Europe’s largest transnational minority10. From this moment
in the age of migration, but also due to the fact that the whole Roma culture is an oral one, Tcherencov and Laederich see Romanes not only as instrument for communicating thoughts, but as a veritable “vehicle of culture”. The language is shared in several dialects, depending on groups, subgroups, but also on the language of surrounding society. Therefore, Romanes spoken by a Kalderaša Rom from Romania may vary from the dialect of a Sinti Rom from Germany. Nevertheless, there is not a problem of communication between these in Romanes. For detailed information on Romanes, see the extended study of Tcherencov, Lev and Laederich Stéphane (2004): The Rroma. Otherwise known as Gypsies, Gitanos, Gyphtoi, Tsiganes, Tigani, Cingene, Zigeuner, Bohemiens, Travellers, Fahrende etc; Schwabe Verlag, Basel, Vol. 1: 237-275. 7 See Stewart, Michael (1997): The Time of the Gypsies; Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado. 8 See Cezar Bolliac, Alecu Russo, Ion Heliade Radulescu, Vasile Alecsandri, Alexandru Ghica, Gheorghe Asachi, or Mihail Kogalniceanu. The last is known as the most prominent struggler for Roma’s emancipation. 9 The exact number of Roma in Romania is a subject to speculation. National an international institutions estimate the number of Roma in Romania to be somewhere inbetween 1 and 1.2 million persons, while Roma activists agree on a figure of 2 million people. Official data put it in the last census (2002) at 535.140 (2.5% of the total population). In all assessments, independent from the exact number of its Roma ethnics, Romania is considered to be the country with the highest number of Roma members in Europe. See Romania’s National Statistics Institute: http://www.insse.ro/cms/rw/pages/index.ro.do or Minority at Risk Project, Assessment for Roma in Romania: http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/mar/assessment.asp?groupId=36003. 10 See European Commission (2004): The Situation of Roma in an Enlarged European Union; European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC), Luxemburg: http://www.errc.org/cikk.php?cikk=2119.
10
on we can identify two main strands in the literature on Roma: the continued publication of
works covering cultural and historical aspects of Roma and a new series of works dealing
with socio-political matters.
The topics linked to Roma culture and history are still in trend, and are also necessary,
because often, through rigorous data collection and analysis they deconstruct the cultural
interpretations and stereotypes cultivated over centuries by many (non-Roma) authors. On
the other hand, most authors continue to write about Roma from a historical-cultural
perspective, since this minority continues to face serious prejudices and many Europeans
still do not know who the Roma are.
At the same time a new strand of literature developed: new documentation on the Roma
gained a socio-political character, referring to topics linked to social issues, minority rights
and political participation. Recent and relevant work has been done by Günter Grass, one
of the first non-Roma to write, in 2000, about Roma political participation at the European
level.11 Jean Pierre Liegeois and Nicolae, Gheorghe, with their perspective on Roma as a
neglected minority group, call for partnerships in protecting their rights.12 Other authors in
this strand include Martin Kovats13and Istvan Pogany,14 who refer to the politics of Roma
identity, Rajko Djuric, who sees a precondition for creating a national and cultural identity
of Roma in the standardization of the Romany language,15 Zoltan Baranny,16 who
investigates the situation of Roma after the end of the Cold War, and Peter Thelen, who
writes for the non-Roma, in order to deconstruct prejudices, and for the Roma, in order to
empower them to participate at the local, regional or European decision-making levels.17
This is not a comprehensive list, only a reference to a few relevant authors.
In Romania, few sociological studies and statistics have been compiled, especially in
the last decade. A notable beginning in this field is the sociological study of Catalin and 11 Grass, Günter (2000): Without a Voice, Excerpt from a Speech to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, Oct. 11, 2000 and published in Günter Grass: “Ohne Stimme – Reden zugunsten des Volkes der Roma und Sinti”; Steidl Verlag, Göttingen. 12 Liégeois, Jean-Pierre and Gheorghe, Nicolae (1995): Roma/Gypsies: A European Minority; Minority Rights Group International Report: http://www.minorityrights.org/1010/reports/romagypsies-a-european-minority.html 13 Kovats, Martin (2003): The Politics of Roma Identity: Between Nationalism and Destitution; Open Democracy, Budapest. 14 Pogany, Istvan (1999): Accommodating an Emergent National Identity: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe; International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, 6, pp. 149-167. 15 Djurik Rajko (2005): A Standard Romany Language – A Pre-Condition and Basis for a National and Cultural Identity for the Roma; in Thelen, Peter (ed.): Roma in Europe. From Social Exclusion to Active Participation; Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Skopje. 16 Barany, Zoltan D. (1994): Nobody’s Children. The Resurgence of Nationalism and the Status of Gypsies; in Post-Communist Eastern Europe, Serafin, Juan (ed.): East-Central Europe in the 1990s; Westview Press, Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford. 17 Thelen, Peter (2005): Roma in Europe. From Social Exclusion to Active Participation, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Skopje.
11
Elena Zamfir, which appeared in 1993: “The Gypsies between ignorance and worries.”
Later, important studies appeared as a result of newly established research institutions, but
nevertheless research in Romania suffers from the lack of significant data, starting with the
very fact that the total number of Roma in Romania is still unknown and speculations vary
from 500 to 2,500,000 or even three million persons.
In conclusion, we can state that until 1990, the contributions of literature on Roma were
modest, both in quantity and quality. The editorial apparitions were inconstant, often
reflecting many unbalanced perspectives. After the collapse of communism in Eastern
Europe we note a proliferation of the Roma documentation in general, but also a
diversification, marked in particular by the new socio-political literature.
Nevertheless, there is still a lack of several political perspectives on this group. Due to
observations concerning a different degree of inclusion and participation of Roma in
different states, there is a need for comparative studies concerning integration policies and
different views on accommodation of minorities. Furthermore, what role does the
democratic transition in Eastern Europe play in Roma integration in respect to their
marginalization? There are less extensive studies concerning the impact of two
contradictory phenomena in post-communist Europe on the Roma: democracy and ethno-
nationalism. Additionally, more research needs to be undertaken in the field of conflict
transformation. For reasons unclear, the Roma are not mentioned in any conflict study or
conflict barometer. Paradoxically, most written or non-written reports on Roma emphasize
conflictual relationships between Roma and non-Roma populations (Gadže18), while Roma
are daily victims of organized violence in several European countries. Therefore, a
standpoint regarding the conflict dynamics in the case of Roma and the surrounding
societies, and eventually a conflict transformation outlook, involving approaches such as
dealing with the past,19 reconciliation and trust building, remain some of uncovered issues
in the literature on Roma.
18 “Gadže” designates the non-Roma population in Romanes language. 19 Dealing with the past is a newly established concept that designates a political process with complex social dimensions. Used in the context of transitional justice and rule of law in post-conflict societies, the process of dealing with the past purposes to end the cycle of violence, to confront impunity, to investigate and to make public the truth about previous human rights abuses, and to rehabilitate victims. The approach implies the involvement of a large part of society in a multifaceted process of conflict transformation, sustaining a more equitable redefinition of power relation within society. For details see Sisson, Jonathan (ed.) (2007): Dealing with the Past in Post-Conflict Societies: Ten Years after the Peace Accords in Guatemala and Bosnia – Herzegovina; Conference Paper 1, Swisspeace Annual Conference 2006: 2 http://www.swisspeace.ch/typo3/en/peacebuilding-activities/koff/topics/dealing-with-the-past/index.html
12
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND RESEARCH QUESTION
Time and again we are witnessing how states around the world are judged and condemned
for their actions toward minorities. Global criticism relies today on standards of liberal
multiculturalism and the states in question commonly have two reactions: they may simply
adopt the international rhetoric, transforming it into an alibi for their continuous exclusion
of minorities from the social and political arena, or they may underline the fact that
international observers do not understand certain local specificities and are not able to truly
understand the situation.20
Post-communist Romania was also sharply criticized for how it treated its minorities,
and especially the Roma problem has achieved more visibility in the context of Romania’s
accession to the European structures.
Before joining the EU, the European Commission urged Romania to develop policies
for combating discrimination of Roma and for including the minority in the mainstream
society. The Romanian Government responded to these requirements and set up new
institutions, such as the National Agency for Roma, and the National Council for
Combating Discrimination, and adopted strategies implying affirmative action in certain
sectors of public life in order to address Roma integration.21 Today, offically, Romania
fulfils the EU standards on human rights, employment, housing and education.
Nevertheless, until now all these actions have not led to significant results concerning
Roma inclusion or to the improvement of Roma social conditions.22
Seeking to understand the reason for today’s situation for Roma, especially why the
integration efforts of this ethnic group pose such a challenge, we are confronted with a
large palette of actors and explanations. There are the international observers that
frequently condemn the passivity of Romanian authorities in addressing the social
exclusion of Roma community. There is the Government that admits to, as President
20 For details concerning the debate on internationalization of multiculturalism and minority rights, see: Kymlicka, Will: Liberal Multiculturalism: Western Models, Global Trends, and Asian Debates; in Baogang He and Kymilcka, Will (eds.) (2005): Multiculturalism in Asia, OUO, Oxford: 22-56. 21 The National Agency for Roma and the two major governmental strategies - The National Strategy for Improving the Situation of Roma and the Decade of Roma Inclusion - will be explicit discussed in chapter 4. 22 Balkan Investigative Reporting Network, 15/11/2007: Jobs Boom in Bulgaria Leaves Roma Behind: //209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:8sHOWfnSSVkJ:birn.eu.com/en/113/10/5823/+roma+integration,+eu+precondition+for+romania&cd=3&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=firefox-a
13
Băsescu has declared, “our partial failure concerning Roma integration”.23 There are the
Roma, represented by their leaders that condemn the widespread discrimination of Roma
and the insufficient support from the authorities. And finally, there is a large part of
Romanian society that continues to reproduce old stereotypes concerning the Roma
culture, understood as a culture of poverty.24 The centuries long established statement “the
Ţigan remain a Ţigan”25 continues to be the most popular explanation, omnipresent in
more or less politically correct formulations, in more or less official statements. It
underlines the fundamental incompatibility of Roma culture with any civilization rule: in
other words, Roma’s very unwillingness to integrate.
What are the appropriate explanations for this situation? Are the Romanian authorities
to blame for the unsuccessful integration of Roma, or the Roma themselves, or the
international community, or the Romanian society as a whole?
For sure, all these actors play an important role in the process of Roma integration, and
an explanation can be presented by each of them, but how does one draw a comprehensive
explanation for the vicious circle with which many Roma are confronted, and for the
difficulty of breaking out of it?
The issue of controversy that needs to be resolved here is:
Why have the national and international strategies for improving the living conditions
of Roma in Romania, and finally for including them into Romanian society remained a
“pleasant fiction”?26
23 Mediafax, 1/8/2008: We Recognize our Part in the Failure of Roma Integration: http://www.mediafax.ro/politic/basescu-recunoastem-esecul-nostru-partial-privind-integrarea-romilor-galerie-foto-2839724 24 “The culture of poverty” is a concept that explains the cycles of poverty, arguing that the poor remain poor due to their unique value system and due to their adaptation to the burdens of poverty. For details see Lewis, Oscar (1961): The Culture of Poverty; in Moynnihan, Daniel (ed.): On Understanding Poverty: Perspectives from the Social Sciences; Basic Books, New York. 25 “Ţigan” is the Romanian pejorative term for Roma. 26 The term “pleasant fiction” was used in 1998 by the European Roma Rights Center, for describing the human rights situation of Roma in Macedonia. For details see European Roma Rights Center (1998): A Pleasant Fiction. The Human Rights Situation of Roma in Macedonia; The Country Reports Series No. 7: http://romawomeninfo.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=251%3A2009-09-01-09-56-16&catid=107%3A2009-09-01-09-52-41&Itemid=249&lang=en
14
HYPOTHESES
The case of Roma in Romania highlights two relevant aspects in the minority debate
inherent to Eastern Europe:27 the crucial interethnic relations, generally marked by
historical rooted lack of trust and tolerance on the one hand, and the ethnic understanding
of the nation state and the nature of local nationalism on the other hand.
In search of understanding the challenges regarding the process of Roma integration,
the research hypothesizes a complex connection between the failure of inclusion project
and the two above mentioned socio-political aspects.
Starting from the premise that every problem has its own unique history and
circumstances which need to be taken into account when formulating a fair and workable
solution, the general assumption is that the issue of Roma integration cannot be studied as
an isolated “Roma problem”, but in correlation with the domestic particularities of the
Romanian context.
In the following, the study relies on two working hypotheses:
1. We first argue that one of the main factors hindering a successful integration of
Roma is the Romanian conception of the nation state. The interests of the Romanian state
influence definitions of who does and who does not belong to the nation. Hence, for
understanding the possible degree of accommodation of the Roma as a distinct cultural
group within the nation, we should first look at the conception of Romanian nationhood
and its repercussions.
2. The second hypothesis asserts that another major factor posing considerable
barriers to the integration process is found in the specific historical evolution of the
relations between the Roma and the majority society. Over time, these relations came to be
defined by important ethnic tensions and high degrees of social exclusion.
Combining the two hypotheses, the study argues that:
The Romanian concept of nationhood and the roots of social exclusion of the Roma
are two of the key aspects that challenge the current efforts to integrate the Roma.
27 More on minority debate in Eastern Europe in Kymlicka, Will (2004): Justice and Security in the Accommodation of Minority Nationalism; in May, Stephen; Modood, Tariq, and Squires, Judith (2004): Ethnicity, Nationalism and Minority Rights; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
15
The examination and interpretation of the Romanian national self-understanding on the
one side, and the nature of the social relations between the Roma and the majority society
on the other, are therefore the primary issues to debate upon which the research relies. (see
Figure 1)
Fig. 1: Hypotheses: The Romanian concept of nationhood and the roots of social exclusion of the Roma can
explain the unsuccessful process aiming at Roma integration.
BarriersintheProcessofRomaIntegration
HistoryofSocial
Exclusion
ConceptofNationhood
16
METHODOLOGY
The Issue
This thesis concentrates on the problems faced by the Roma community in Romania, and
on the challenge of addressing the social inclusion of the Roma, which is faced by
Bucharest’s regime and the international community. The focus is on a single-country
study – Romania, while the subjects of analysis are the Roma and the Romanian state in
the context of current integration policies.
Following the issue of Roma inclusion in the Romanian mainstream society, the study
outlines a socio-political approach to this problem. We first look at the current debate on
Roma in Romania, underlining actions and interactions of national and international actors
involved in the project of integration. Then we build a theoretical framework around
concepts of nationhood and social exclusion, and finally we turn to the study case for
operating the theoretical outcomes and for assessing them.
Aiming to step back and to present a more general view of the theoretical and empirical
landscape, the study proposes a qualitative discussion, mainly sustained by an analytical
approach.
The single country study provides space to visualize the situation of Roma in Romania
in detail and to discuss two of the relevant points in addressing the Romanian
accommodation of the Roma.
Data Collection For the Part I of the study, that aims to provide context for the current situation of the
Roma, literature on Roma and Romania is used. The general picture is anchored to the
purpose of the study by conveying, comparing and interpreting the most recent national
and international surveys addressing the Roma issue in Romania. In addition, official
declarations and political discourses selected from various Romanian media articles are
added to enhance the picture of Roma in the actual Romanian context.
In the Part II, for the theoretical framework on nationhood and social exclusion,
literature elucidating political science concepts, general theory of the state and sociology
are primarily utilized. As in the Part I of the study, the sections, which address the case
17
study, rely on literature on the Roma and Romania, and on the interpretation of the
achieved theoretical outcomes (see Figure 2).
Fig. 2: Methodology: Data Collection
SettingtheContext
LiteraturereviewonRoma
LiteraturereviewonRomania
Romanian/internationalsurveys
O`icialdiscoursesanddeclarations
RelevantRomanian
mediaarticles
Homepagesofrelevant
institutions
TheoreticalFramework
Literatureonnationhoodandnationalism
Literatureonethnicity
Literatureonethniccon`lict
Literatureonethnic
minorities
Literatureonethnicpluralism
Literatureonsocialexclusion
StudyCase
LiteratureonRoma
LiteratureonRomania
Interpretationofavailableinformation
Comparasionofavailableinformation
18
OUTLINE OF THE STUDY
By accentuating the relevance of distinct perspectives in the current debate over Roma
integration - the understanding of the Romanian nationhood, and the historical relations
between Roma, the state and the mainstream society - this study aims to offer two suitable
explanations for the challenging project of Roma integration.
The subject is addressed in four main parts, consisting in distinct chapters.
Part I has a descriptive-explicative character and, after an overview on the Roma political
mobilization that emerged after the collapse of communism, concentrates on the Romanian
debate on Roma integration.
Chapter 1 introduces the new Roma rhetoric and the emergence of Roma political
activism after the fall of communism in Eastern Europe. These developments mark the
moment when Roma mobilization first interacted and even influenced the European
policies.
Chapter 2 allows an overview of the main challenges a large part of Roma face
nowadays, two decades after the fall of communism. A summary presentation of key
problems like poverty, precarious education, or the status of Roma in the labour market
will be provided, while light will be also shed on aspects of discrimination and migration
of Roma to other countries of Europe.
Chapter 3 maps out the most important national and international actors, and looks at
legal tools that address Roma integration. This perspective creates a window into the main
international structures dealing with minority issues in general and Roma issues in specific
on the one side, and important national structures addressing Roma matters at national
level on the other one. The section offers a comprehensive picture of key actors involved
in the projects of Roma integration and of basic documents supporting this project.
Chapter 4 focuses on Romania’s policies addressing inclusion of Roma. The activity
of a relevant governmental institution - The National Agency for Roma - and its interaction
with Roma civil society may deliver explanations regarding the challenges that the social
inclusion of Roma poses. Two main policies addressing Roma issues - the National
Strategy for Improving the Situation of Roma and the Decade of Roma Inclusion–will be
given special focus.
19
Part II consists of 4 intertwined chapters: two theoretical and othertwo related to the
case study.
Chapter 5 has a theoretical character and addresses working concepts of nationhood
drawing patterns of nationalism according to Brubaker’s model of inclusionary civic and
exclusionary ethnic national understanding. It aims to explore the connection between
these patterns of nationalism and the treatment of minorities by the nation state
Chapter 6 turns to the Romanian context, considering the process of nation building,
and tracing the influence of the Romanian national self-understanding on accommodation
of national minorities in general and the Roma in particular. The aim is to identify whether
the particular nature of Romanian nationhood has an inclusionary or an exclusionary
character. This aspect may deliver explanations for the current marginalization of the
culturally distinct Roma, and for the complicated process aiming at their integration.
Chapter 7 is the second theoretical chapter and attempts to determine the track along
which distinct cultural groups are excluded. Here we adapt Weber’s and Parkin’s Theory of
Social Closure that emphasizes the action of the state in the hierarchical stratification of
cultural groups. In all its temporal and spatial configurations, the state facilitates
exclusionary practices of certain groups, and the chapter discloses that strategies of social
closure and ethnic subordination are, therefore, not arbitrarily chosen.
Chapter 8 turns to the case of Roma, exploring the connections between the historical
stages of social exclusion they faced on the Romanian territory, and their current social
and stigmatization. The chapter visualizes key aspects of institutionalized slavery or ethnic
cleansing - pivotal moments when as a group the Roma were put in a context of exclusion
created by the state. Aiming to clarify the historical dynamics of social exclusion of the
Roma, this chapter underlines the crucial role of the state in facilitating exclusionary
practices of Roma The chapter traces the influence of structural discrimination on the
current attempts to integrate this minority.
Part III consists of Chapter 9 – a discussion of the outcomes and of Chapter 10 that
operates the verifications of hypotheses. This part highlights the idea that integration is not
possible unless efforts are taken for addressing manifestations of exclusory ethno-
nationalism and the institutionally rooted discrimination of Roma.
Finally, the Conclusion emphasizes the acute need for a suis generis approach in
addressing the Roma integration, underlining the deep lack of trust and acceptance that
dramatically defines the relations between Roma and the State and between Roma and
mainstream society.
20
I. SETTING THE CONTEXT: THE CASE OF ROMA MINORITY IN ROMANIA
CHAPTER 1: THE POST-COMMUNIST PERIOD - POLITICAL MOBILIZATION
AND RECOGNITION IN EUROPE
The democratization processes of the former communist states opened a new debate on
multicultural policies and minority rights, and the Roma minority used the new
opportunities to take its place on the political stage, and for the first time, to deal with its
own destiny.28
The beginning of the 1990s marked an important moment of Roma political
mobilization. The intelligentsia started to design a Roma view of their identity. The
centuries of stereotypes, myths and fantasy, but also exclusion and discrimination began to
be curtailed, and the new activists claimed, in an official framework, the recognition of
Roma as an ethnic group, as a people that despite their dispersed presence all over Europe
(and the world), shared a common heritage and a common culture.29
Supported by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the
Council of Europe, Roma leaders stressed the particular problems of the Roma and
claimed special attention of this minority. In the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference
on the Human Rights Dimension of the CSCE in 1990, these particular problems of the
Roma minority signalled the beginning of an approach that recognized the Roma as a
transnational minority without a motherland facing different problems than “normal”
national minorities – a milestone in gaining recognition of the special situation of the
Roma.30
With the Recommendation 1203 adopted by the Council of Europe in 1993, the
situation of the Roma was placed in a European context. The official recognition as a
28 Cooper, Belinda (2001): We have no Martin Luther King; in World Policy Journal, 18/4: 77. 29 Gaarde, Signe (2006): Recreating the Roma. Policies and Activism; Department for Minority Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen: 4. 30 Ibid: 23.
21
minority living scattered all over Europe, not having a country to call their own, lead to
the status of True European Minority.31
The importance of the EU enlargement for Roma integration and their identity building
process cannot be overstated. In 2007, with the integration of Romania and Bulgaria in the
European structures, approximately three million Roma became European citizens and
increased the number of the total Roma living in the European Union to circa 12 million
citizens. The Roma were recognized as Europe’s largest transnational minority32.
From an international perspective the two most important organizations representing
Roma interests are: the International Romani Union (IRU), and the Roma National
Congress (RNC).33 Both organizations represent hundreds of national Roma organizations
and have had some success in attracting the attention of international bodies such as the
Council of Europe, OSCE and the European Union. In 2000 IRU adopted a declaration
named We, the Roma Nation, stating that “We ask for being recognized as a Nation for the
sake of the Roma and of non-Roma individuals, who share the need to deal with the new
challenges nowadays.”34 Roma authors such as Ian Hancock, Nicolae Gheorghe, or
Andrzej Mirga outlined in their papers and books the elements of Roma mobilization35.
Some of them went further and emphasized even common elements favourable for the
process of nation building. Values such as a shared history of persecution, a common
culture of travelling and living in the moment, and a Romani cooking tradition36 were used
as arguments for a shared culture, as preconditions for a potential nation-building
process37.
31 Recommendation 1203 on Gypsies in Europe, adopted by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly in February 1993: http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta93/EREC1203.htm 32 Gaarde, Signe (2006): Recreating the Roma. Policies and Activism; Department for Minority Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen: 67. 33 Thelen, Peter (2005): Roma Policy: The Long Walk Towards Political Participation; in Roma in Europe. From Social Exclusion to Active Participation. Skopje: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung: 40. 34 IRU (2000), cited in Thelen, Peter (2005): Roma Policy: The Long Walk Towards Political Participation, in: Roma in Europe. From Social Exclusion to Active Participation; Skopje: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung: 42. 35 See: Hancock Ian (2000): Roma: Genocide of in the Holocaust; in: Israel W. Charny (ed.) Encyclopedia of Genocide, CA: ABC-Clio, Santa Barbara; Liégeois, Jean-Pierre & Gheorghe, Nicolae (1995): Roma/Gypsies: A European Minority; Minority Rights Group International Report, or Mirga, Andrzej (2005): Roma and EU Accession: Elected and Appointed Romani Representatives in an Enlarged Europe; in: Roma in Europe. From Social Exclusion to Active Participation. Skopje, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. 36 Gaarde, Signe (2006): Recreating the Roma. Policies and Activism; Department for Minority Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen: 22. 37 As we will see in the theoretical Chapter 5, the scientific debate around nationalism underlines that distinct shared values are significant in building a nation. Smith’s definition reflects this view. He describes the nation as a human population occupying an historic territory, sharing common myths and memories, distinctive public culture, a common economy, and common laws and customs. See Smith, Anthony D. (2003): The Poverty of Anti-Nationalist Modernism; in Nations and Nationalism: 359; Vol 9, Issue 3.
22
In 2004 the Roma organizations established the European Roma and Travellers Forum
(ERTF), which has advisory status to the Council of Europe, thus formalising a
cooperation that had already begun in 1994. The OSCE is another major international actor
that comprises a specific Roma office - the ODIHR’s Contact Point for Roma and Sinti
Issues.
The activities of all these bodies are mostly directed at an international level, and their
efforts are mainly concentrated on combating discrimination and fostering social inclusion
for a large number of European Roma.
As we will see in the next chapters a conceptual and legal framework covering these
aims has been developed, but in spite of all these positive developments, the reality
provides a tragic dimension: “the true European minority” confronts increasing
marginalization and substandard living conditions.
23
CHAPTER 2: CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR THE ROMANIAN ROMA
Severe poverty, unemployment, low education, discriminatory treatments, precarious
housing and health care conditions: These are core features persistently addressed in all
recent sociological surveys, or media contents referring to Roma in Romania. There are
also significant international bodies addressing the deploring conditions that Roma live in.
Among the most relevant are: the Center for Documentation and Information on
Minorities in Europe – Southeast Europe (CEDIME-SE), The Advisory Committee (AC)
on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (Council of
Europe), as well as international NGO’s like the Open Society Institute or the European
Roma Rights Centre (ERRC).
In the following we shall present some of the main challenges that are present in
current Romania when speaking about the Roma minority. These are linked to poverty,
education, labour market, discrimination and migration, and shall be addressed in turn.
2.1. Poverty and General Social Status
Compared to the mainstream society and to other national minorities settled in Romania,
the Roma are separated from the rest of the population especially by their social
condition.38 A poverty assessment recognized by the World Bank in 2007 reveals that there
are no significant differences between the level of welfare of the ethnic Hungarians (5.9%)
or Germans (0.5%) and the Romanian majority population. Referring to Roma, the study
shows very wide differences between them and all other groups.39 In 2006, statistics
indicated that the gap between the Roma and average Romanians increased: “if in 2003 the
Roma poverty risk was three times higher than the national average, in 2006 it was more
than four times higher”, the World Bank noted40 (see Figure 3).
38 Boia, Lucian (2001); Romania. Borderland of Europe; Reaktion Books, London: 215-216, and World Bank (2007): Romania: Poverty Assessment. Analytical and Advisory assistance Program: First Phase Report, Fiscal Year 2007. 39 World Bank (2007): Romania: Poverty Assessment. Analytical and Advisory Assistance Program: First Phase Report, Fiscal Year 2007: 10. 40 Ibid: 23.
24
Fig. 3: Risk of Being Poor, 2006 (World Bank, 2007)
Romania has known important economical growth in this period, and this situation can
lead to the conclusion that most Roma did not take advantage of this progress.
A considerable portion of Romanian Roma habitually occupy the lowest stage on
the socio-economical hierarchy, are socially despised, politically powerless, often
undereducated, and confined to marginal occupations.41 Almost all crimes are attributed to
Roma, while the Roma culture is generally treated with disapproval and disrespect.42
Therefore, the Roma of Romania continue to be considered as the others, the aliens, but at
the same time also as second-hand citizens. For a large majority of Romanians, to be a
Roma means more than belonging to an ethnic group. The concept of Roma embodies the
conjunction of ethnicity and class, and, as Lucian Boia points, the members of the Roma
community are found “guilty of most troubles that have befallen the Romanians”.43
2.2. Education
The available data concerning participation in schools shows a highly difficult situation for
Roma children in Romania. The Romanian Ministry of Education indicates that currently,
12 to 20% of Roma pupils drop-out of primary and secondary schools, while 20% are not
enrolled at all. 44 The tendencies concerning education of Roma are alarming, since
statistics indicate an increased percentage of Roma who have no graduation certificate
41 Esman, Milton J. (2004) An Introduction to Ethnic Conflict, Polity Press; Cambridge: 12. 42 Ibid. 43 Boia, Lucian (2001): Romania. Borderland of Europe; Reaktion Books, London: 192. 44 Ministry of Education and Research (2008): Education Development National Report on Romania: 30-31.
25
(from 25.1% in 1997 to 34.3% in 2007), while the illiteracy rate among Roma has risen,
especially in the post communist period, to 40%.45 (According to Save the Children Romania, in
only the decade 1997-2007 the number of illiterate Roma rose from 57,100 to 104,737).46
Initial post-communist studies of Zamfir and Zamfir indicated in 1993 that there was a
correlation between children’s participation in education and the participation of their
parents in the labour market, their degree of education and the living conditions.47
Therefore, the children are more likely to regularly attend school if their fathers are
employed, if their mothers had attended school more than eight years, and if they lived in
mixed (not ethnically segregated) communities.48
Segregation in schools appears as a relevant factor in the quality of schools, since in the
segregated classes every seventh teacher is unqualified, 57% of segregated schools are not
provided with heating possibilities, 56% have no laboratory, and 87% have no medical
assistance.49
The socialist legacy of defectology, which, by ignoring the environmental conditions,
assumes that differences between pupils are results of disabilities, has prevailed many
years after the break of communism. In Romania, legal steps in prohibiting school
segregation were first taken in 2007.50 Nevertheless, a year later, a study realized by
UNICEF and Romani Criss (a Roma NGO) indicated that the legislation against school
segregation was not applied in 63% of the surveyed schools, while the legislation was
generally unknown to the schools’ personnel, including school directors.51 The Ministry of
Education and Research notes in a 2008 report that “the Romani students have access to an
educational system of lower quality, which is also revealed by the significantly lower ratio
45 Ministry of Education and Research, The Institute of Educational Sciences, The Research Institute for Quality of Life, and UNICEF (2002) Roma Children Participation in Education – Problems, Solutions and Actors: 8, Bucharest. 46 Save the Children Romania, Roma Children’s Rights Protection: The Right To Equal Chances – Non Discrimination, http://www.savethechildren.net/romania_en/ce_facem/programe/rromi.html and Educational System, http://www.savethechildren.net/romania_en/copiii_romania/sistemul_invatamant.html#content 47 Zamfir, Elena and Zamfir, Catalin (1993): Gypsies: Between Ignoring Them and Worrying About Them, Alternative, Bucharest, cited in Ringold, Dena; Orenstein; A. Mitchell and Wilkens, Erika (2002): Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; The World Bank (Conference Edition), Washington: 99. 48 Zamfir, Elena and Zamfir, Catalin (1993): Gypsies: Between Ignoring Them and Worrying About Them, Alternative, Bucharest, cited in Ringold, Dena; Orenstein, A. Mitchell and Wilkens, Erika (2002): Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; The World Bank (Conference Edition), Washington: 99. 49 Romani Criss (Roma Center for Social Intervention) and UNICEF Romania (2008): Monitoring the Application of Measures against School Segregation in Romania; MarLink, Bucharest: 3. 50 The Law MECT 1540 from 19.07.2007. See Romani Criss (Roma Center for Social Intervention) and UNICEF Romania (2008): Monitoring the Application of Measures against School Segregation in Romania, MarLink, Bucharest. 51 Romani Criss (Roma Center for Social Intervention) and UNICEF Romania (2008): Monitoring the Application of Measures against School Segregation in Romania, MarLink, Bucharest: 3.
26
of the students who pass the exam at the end of grade VIII”52 and that 4.3% of Roma
students graduate high school, while only 0.4% graduate from a higher education unit.53
Even if the low level of Roma participation in national education is evident, it is
important to note that the increasing school drop-out rate and the degree of illiteracy are
general tendencies for Romanian society as whole. In this field Romania has displayed, in
recent years, worrying developments with high school drop-out rates and difficulties with
literacy overall.54
Nevertheless, several studies revealed that Roma children are even more likely to
abandon school, with early drop out or non-enrolment scoring three times higher compared
to children belonging to mainstream society55.
2.3. Labour Market
Perhaps a tragic result of the post-communist transition for Roma was their status in the
labour market. Through active assimilation campaigns, the socialist system had moved
many Roma (but also non-Roma) from the informal and self-employed sector to full-time,
formal jobs.56 The full employment, the job security, resulting in guarantees of a minimal
income, and correlated with housing, childcare and health assistance were determinant
characteristics of Romanian socialist regimes. The famous Order 153 implemented in 1970
by the Ceausescu regime defined unemployment as “social parasitism”, a phenomenon
punishable with prison and forced labour.57 Even if often placed at the lowest level of
social hierarchy in the Socialist Republic of Romania, Roma, along with the rest of the
population, were assimilated into the industrialization process and the collectivization of
agriculture. Thus their unemployment rate was not different from that of non-Roma.
Following the revolution in 1989, many Roma, as well as other members of mainstream
society, were laid off, since several factories and kolkhoz were closed. The developments 52 Ministry of Education and Research (2008): Education Development National Report on Romania: 31. 53 Ibid: 30 54 In 2007, a European Union study rated Romania among the first five European countries in terms of school drop-out rates, with a rate of 19.2%, while in the context of alphabetization Romania occupied the last place in the European Union. At the 2006 PISA assessments, Romanian students obtained scores lower than those of 2001 for all tested subjects. For details see Ministry of Education and Research (2008): Education Development National Report on Romania. 55 Romani Criss (Roma Center for Social Intervention), Ministry of Education, Research and Youth and Roma Center “Amare Rromentza”(2008): The Project “Need for Quality and Equality in Education” (2006-2008), Romani Criss, Bucharest. 56 Ringold, Dena; Orenstein; A. Mitchell and Wilkens, Erika (2002): Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; The World Bank (Conference Edition), Washington: 38-40. 57 Ibid: 38-39.
27
after this event indicate an increasing absence of the Roma in the labour market.58
Communism brought Roma advantages and disadvantages. Nevertheless, because the
Roma were incorporated in the public work force, the communist assimilation policies
were perceived by many Roma as positive59. In a report of Helsinki Watch, several Roma
admitted that they felt nostalgic about the Ceausescu era.
In this context, Belinda Cooper suggests that the Roma, suffering from unemployment,
lack of basic education and discrimination, became the biggest losers following the demise
of communism in Eastern Europe, where they are mainly concentrated, and actually have
reasons to look back nostalgically to the days of communism.60
Though most authors agree that the unemployment rate among Roma is much higher
than that of the majority population, it is impossible to find concrete data. In 2003, the
Romanian study “the Access of Roma to the Labour Market” stated: “the occupational
degree of Roma population in Romania is much deeper than that of the population at the
national level (47% to 61%).“61 According to a 2007 study of the Open Society Institute,
“the unemployment rate among Roma is estimated as being between 24% and 56%,
although cases of 90% to 100% may be registered in some disadvantaged Roma
communities”.62
The unemployment rate of the Roma reflects both, low qualification and exclusion,
while Roma are generally “last hired and first fired”.63 Beside the low qualification, an
important exclusion factor is revealed by the total lack of identity documents for 3.1% of
the declared Roma population64. This very fact excludes appreciatively 47,000 persons
from every right guaranteed by Romanian citizenship.65 This is a typical situation that
favours negative chain reactions: the people who do not have identity documents have no
access to education, to the labour market, to social or health assistance, they are not able to
vote, to marry legally or to register their children.
58 See Ringold, Dena; Orenstein; A. Mitchell and Wilkens, Erika (2002): Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; The World Bank (Conference Edition), Washington: 96. 59 Gaarde, Signe (2006): Recreating the Roma. Policies and Activism, Department for Minority Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen: 4. 60 Cooper, Belinda (2001): We have no Martin Luther King; in World Policy Journal, 18/4: 69-70. 61 Duminica, Gelu and Preda, Marian – Agentia de Dezvoltare Comunitara “Împreuna” (2003): The Roma Access to the Labor Market, Editura Cartii de Agribusiness, Bucharest: 26. 62 Open Society Institute, Monitoring Report (2007): Equal Access to Quality Education For Roma. Romania. Vol. 1 - Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Serbia, OSI/EU Monitoring and Advocacy Program;Budapest, New York: 405. 63 Ringold, Dena; Orenstein, A. Mitchell and Wilkens, Erika (2002): Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; The World Bank (Conference Edition), Washington: 96. 64 Duminica, Gelu and Preda, Marian – Agentia de Dezvoltare Comunitara “Împreuna” (2003): The Roma Access to the Labour Market, Editura Cartii de Agribusiness, Bucharest: 27. 65 Ibid: 51.
28
The official statistics do not tell the whole story about the status of Roma in the labour
market, since their increasing absence here is counterweighted by an intense dynamism of
Roma members in the informal sector. A survey of 2003 indicates that 71.1% of the
declared Roma individuals are working in the black market66 (day labour, casual and self-
employment), having an instable income and no access to insurances or other social
services related to the legal work market. Studies repeatedly emphasize a more active
search for jobs on the part of Roma than is average among the total population67. This
phenomenon can be explained by the fact that since most of the declared Roma are
engaged in short-term informal work, frequently having more than one job, they
automatically may be more active in looking for work.
Official Romanian studies on Roma access to the labour market insistently draw
attention to the auto-exclusion of Roma from the labour market, mentioning only
marginally the possibility of discriminatory treatments against Roma68. Nevertheless, in
the last years, aspects of racism and discrimination in the labour market received notice in
the governmental studies, facilitating a more transparent view of the discriminatory social
structures and the impact of this phenomenon on the general desolate life condition of
many Roma.
2.4. Migration
After Romania’s integration into the European Union structures in 2007, new mobility
possibilities for the Romanian citizens were created. Their increasing mobility in the
European area and the growing number of Romanian migrants belonging to the Roma
community revealed not only an instable economical system in their homeland, but also
the weakness of the Romanian state in managing the minority integration. Therefore, the
challenges to Bucharest’s regime regarding Roma policies crossed the borders and became
well known themes throughout Europe.69
66 Ibid: 27. 67 Surveys in Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary indicated a more active behavior of unemployed Roma in looking for jobs compared to the total of unemployed population. For details see Ringold, Dena; Orenstein, A. Mitchell and Wilkens, Erika (2002): Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; The World Bank (Conference Edition), Washington: 41. 68 See Duminica, Gelu and Preda, Marian – Agentia de Dezvoltare Comunitara “Împreuna” (2003): The Roma Access to the Labour Market, Editura Cartii de Agribusiness, Bucharest. 69 In the perspective of Europeanization, not only the people were free to move in a borderless place, but also even nation state affaires were “exported” and became international problems.
29
The migration of Romanian Roma and an intense media coverage of criminal acts of
some of them, especially in Italy, alerted European public opinion and emphasized the
profound internal crisis regarding the minorities’ question in Romania. At the same time,
Romanian society became more racist in its reactions against the Roma minority,70 and
even if 20.6 % of respondents in a 2009 study did not agree that Roma are living in
Romania,71 in general, Romanians are not happy when the Roma leave the country. The
most often voiced argument of their concern is that Roma are making a laughing stock of
Romania and damaging the country’s image abroad.72 At the same time, many Romanians
are revolted that the Europeans generally do not perceive the Roma as ethnically and
culturally different from the Romanians (although according to their citizenship the Roma
are Romanians too). Therefore, even the name of the minority, Roma, is highly debated,
and in 2009 a national newspaper launched a public initiative for the recurrence of the term
Ţigani for designating the Roma population, in order to avoid the confusion between the
ethnic group and Romanians: “Our initiative is all the more legitimate because the
violations, carried out by the members of the Ţigani ethnic group in Italy or other
European countries, have led to the unfortunate confusion Roma/Romanian and the
anathema hits the entire Romanian people,”73 Jurnalul National states.
2.5. Discrimination and social exclusion
Discrimination remains one of the most acute problems that Roma of Romania must
confront. Even if still a taboo, recent Romanian studies74 refer to an old issue in Romanian
society: the structural discrimination of Roma.
The results of the Opinion Barometer concerning discrimination in Romania75 show
alarming results concerning discrimination in Romanian public life in 2004. Followed only
by AIDS-infected individuals and homosexuals, the Roma, and generally the categories 70 See for example the increasing public actions against Roma of the ultra nationalist movement “Noua Dreapta” (The New Right): http://www.nouadreapta.org/limbistraine.php?lmb=eng 71 The National Agency for Roma (2009): Project S.P.E.R. (Stop Prejudices about Roma Ethnicity) / The Barometer of Interethnic Relations (May-June 2009); realized by IMAS: 47: http://www.sper.org.ro/ 72 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 170. 73 Jurnalul National, 17/03/2009, Proiect de Lege Jurnalul National: “Tigan” in loc de “Rom” (Draft Proposal Jurnalul National: “Tigan” in Place of “Roma”) http://www.jurnalul.ro/stire-tigan-in-loc-de-rom/propunere-jurnalul-national-tigan-in-loc-de-rom-145427.html 74 See Metro Media Transylvania (2004): Opinion Barometer Concerning the Discrimination in Romania: http://www.mmt.ro/Engleza/portofoliu.htm or The National Agency for Roma (2009): Project S.P.E.R. (Stop Prejudices about Roma Ethnie): http://www.sper.org.ro/ 75 Metro Media Transylvania (2004): Opinion Barometer Concerning the Discrimination in Romania: http://www.mmt.ro/Engleza/portofoliu.htm
30
affected by poverty, appear as the most discriminated group in the labour market,
hospitals, schools, and in public places, as well as in their relations with public and judicial
institutions.76 Taking into consideration that in Romania, at the same time, a large
percentage of individuals belonging to the Roma minority are affected by extreme
poverty,77 poor Roma present the risk of multiple discriminations based not only on
ethnicity, but also on class or social position.
In 2009, a study of the National Agency for Roma78 presented a dramatic perception of
Roma in Romanian Society. Concerning the general image of Roma, most respondents
consider that Roma are lazy and thieves, 48.8% would not accept Roma as neighbours,
54.9% would not agree to have Roma friends, while 70% would not accept Roma into their
family. Only 1.2% trust the Roma people, 52% consider that minority protection in
Romania is sufficient; while 21% consider that ethnic minorities have too many rights in
Romania.
The study concludes that Roma are, as a group, victims of structural and systemic social
exclusion, marked by episodically organized violence. There have been bloody
confrontations between Romanians and entire Roma communities, especially in the 1990s,
but also recently, in 2007 and 2009.79
Discrimination is very prominent as well in media coverage and even in political
discourse.
The media plays an important role in discrimination and Romanian journalists seem to
have a clear agenda in presenting the Roma in a predominantly negative light. A media
analysis80 (December 2008-May 2009) calls attention to the four issues most promoted in
the TV news and in print media where Roma were contextualized: migration, infractions,
social issues, and acts of violence. The same survey generally observes an exchanged 76 Ibid: 35-50. 77 See World Bank (2007): Romania: Poverty Assessment. Analytical and Advisory assistance Program: First Phase report, fiscal year 2007. 78 The National Agency for Roma (2009): Project S.P.E.R. (Stop Prejudices about Roma Ethnicity). 79 In the 1990s, the Romanian society was troubled by several violent clashes between the local majority population (Romanians or Hungarians) and Roma. One of the most brutal conflicts was in 1993 in Hadareni (Mures county), and involved Romanians and Hungarians on one side, and members of local Roma community on the other one. As a result of the ethnic clash, on 20th of September 1993, 4 people died, 14 houses were burnt and other 4 houses were severely damaged. See National Agency for Roma. http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:czso8cywL3UJ:www.undp.ro/download/Hadareni%202007%20-%202008%20Project%20Document%20EN_1.pdf+conflict+between+romanians+and+roma,+hadareni&cd=2&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=firefox-a. Further tensions between the local majority population and local Roma community were recorded also in 2007 in Apata (Brasov county), in 2009, again in Hadareni (Mures county), in the village of Racos (Brasov county) and in the two villages Sanmartin si Sancraieni (Harghita county) with a Hungarian majority population. 80 For details see the National Agency for Roma (2009): Project S.P.E.R. (Stop Prejudices about Ethnicity of Roma): The Image of Roma Ethnics in the Print Media and the TV news. Media Analysis Report, December 2008-May 2009: http://www.sper.org.ro/
31
perspective in portraying Roma in Romanian media: “the Roma are not stealing children
anymore, but they damage the country’s image abroad”81. According to the study, most
Romanian journalists invest passionate efforts in clarifying the terms: “The Roma are not
Romanians. In fact they are Ţigani.”82
The discriminatory public media discourse is accompanied again and again by racist
statements from Romanian politicians, not including the usual xenophobe speeches of
extreme-right political movements.
Following an intensely publicized criminal act where Romanian Roma were presumed
to be involved, former Minister of Foreign Affairs Adrian Cioroianu said in a 2007
television interview that he had considered “buying a piece of land in the Egyptian desert
to send there all the people who tarnish the country’s image”.83 After critical public
reactions to his declaration, Cioroianu apologized publicly for his “human reaction”,
mentioning that he referred only to delinquents.84
Even the Romanian president was accused of discriminatory rhetoric against the Roma
community. In 2007 Traian Băsescu was recorded making an unfair statement while a
journalist was filming him shopping with his wife. Băsescu could be heard referring to the
journalist as a “stinky Gypsy”. After vehement public reactions from several national and
international organizations condemning the discriminatory phrase, the Presidency said in a
press release that Băsescu’s statement was due to “media and public pressure, and does
not represent the attitude of the President towards the Gypsy community in Romania.”85
Amnesty International condemned the Romanian authorities for failing to adopt effective
measures in combating discrimination against Roma, both by public officials and in society
at large, and underlined that: “the High Court of Cassation and Justice ruled that the
phrase ‘stinky gypsy’, used by President Traian Băsescu when referring to a journalist in
81 Ibid: 4. 82 Ibid: 5. 83 See Roma Rights Network (2009): Roma in Romania: http://www.romarights.net/content/roma-romania 84 See Gardianul, 6/11/2007: Lectia de Istorie: Cioroianu viseaza deportarea Romilor in desertul Egiptean (The History’ Lection: Cioroianu Dreams about Deportation of Roma in the Desert): http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:7_cPwgF__DYJ:www.gardianul.ro/2007/11/06/externe-c3/lectia_de_istorie_fascistul_cioroianu_viseaza_la_deportarea_rromilor_in_desert-s104097.html+cioroianu,+gluma,+desertul+egiptean&cd=3&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=firefox-a 85 Rroma Page, 27/5/2008: Romania Leader let off over Gypsy Slur: http://209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:9RSvQ2szayMJ:www.romapage.hu/europa/hircentrum/article/114278/191/page/5/+press+release+that+Basescu%E2%80%99s+statement+was+due+to+%E2%80%9Cmedia+and+public+pressure&cd=1&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=firefox-a
32
May 2007, was discriminatory.”86 Finally, the Court did not sanction Băsescu, giving the
reason that the remark had been made during a private conversation.
The position of Romanian authorities – official or not – versus Roma, contributes to the
marginalization of the Roma community, and to further social fissures capable of
generating dangerous circumstances and underlining tensions in Romania.87
86 Amnesty International Report (2009): State of the World’s Human Rights. Romania: http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:PeKDrLNVBTwJ:report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/europe-central-asia/romania+amnesty+international,+basescu&cd=7&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=firefox-a 87 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 170.
33
CHAPTER 3: THE GOVERNMENTAL PROJECT OF ROMA INTEGRATION
In recent years, several developments drew notable attention to difficulties faced by Roma:
the expansion of the European Union, the prioritization of the Roma issue by the Council
of Europe, the active policy of the Romanian Government and the various activities of
several non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The Governments of Central and South-
Eastern Europe and the civil society, together with the international community, initiated
and supported comprehensive programmes to not only overcome but also address the
social exclusion of Roma. For an understanding of these programmes and their promoters
it is necessary to sketch an overview on the various actors implied in supporting the
programs of Roma integration.
3.1. International and National Actors
3.1.1. The International Level - Actors and Legal Tools
Dealing with aspects that concern the protection of national minorities in general and with
the Roma issue in particular, a suitable legal tool is available. Especially after the collapse
of communist regimes, when extreme ethno-nationalism gained new salience and
interethnic hostilities took place in several European states,88 the protection of national
minorities acquired considerable importance.
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE),89 until 1995 the
Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), is the international institution
that first recognized the particular problems of the Roma, in the Document of the
Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, a
conference in which Romania also participated in 1990: The participating States clearly and unequivocally condemn totalitarianism, racial and ethnic
hatred, anti-semitism, xenophobia and discrimination against anyone as well as persecution on
88 See Diamond, Larry and Plattner, Mark F. (1994): Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict and Democracy; The Johns Hopkins University Press, London. 89 The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe OSCE is the world's largest security-oriented intergovernmental organization. Concerning its activity in the field of minority rights, the OSCE's approach is to seek early resolution of ethnic tensions, and to set standards for the rights of persons belonging to minority groups. For details see OSCE at: http://www.osce.org/
34
religious and ideological grounds. In this context, they also recognize the particular problems of
Roma (Gypsies).90 The 1990 Copenhagen Document is seen as a milestone in gaining acknowledgment for the
special situation of Roma, in that they were recognized therein as a “transnational minority
without a kin state, confronted with distinct problems than normal national minorities”.91
In the context of Roma protection, it is also important to mention here the sustained
efforts of the Council of Europe (CoE)92 in developing an ample range of activities on the
specific problems, with which Roma in Europe are confronted. As a member of the
Council of Europe since 1993, in the last two decades the Romanian government has
advocated several strategies for improving the social and political status of Roma by
ratifying a number of international covenants, concerning social, ethnic and racial
discrimination such as: the European Social Charter,93 the European Charter for Regional
or Minority Languages,94 the European Convention on Human Rights,95 or the Framework
Convention for the Protection of National Minorities.96
90 The Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, section IV, paragraph 40, p. 21: http://www.osce.org/ 91 Gaarde, Signe (2006): Recreating the Roma. Policies and Activism; Department for Minority Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen: 23. 92 The Council of Europe is an international institution, actively involved in the protection of national minorities. Concerning Roma issues, within the Council of Europe functions the Roma and Travellers Division. For details see: http://www.coe.int/aboutCoe/default.asp and http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/romatravellers/Default_en.asp 93 The European Social Charter (revised) entered into force in Romania in 1999 and guarantees the enjoyment, without discrimination, of fundamental social and economic rights of all individuals in their daily lives: right to protection against poverty and social exclusion; right to housing; right to protection in cases of termination of employment; right to equal opportunities and equal treatment, etc. For details see Council of Europe: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/163.htm 94 The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages entered into force in Romania in 2008 and aims to maintain and to develop the Europe's cultural traditions and heritage, and to respect an inalienable and commonly recognized right to use a regional or minority language in private and public life. For details see: European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, Strasbourg, 5.XI.1992, at: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/148.htm 95 The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, also called the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), entered into force in Romania in 1994. ECHR and its additional Protocols set forth a number of fundamental rights and freedoms like the right to life, prohibition of slavery and forced labour, right to liberty and security, right to a fair trial, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and association, prohibition of discrimination, etc. To ensure the observance of the engagements undertaken by the Parties, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has been set up. For details see The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Rome, 4.XI.1950, at: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/005.htm 96 The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM) entered into force in Romania in 1998. FCNM represents the first legally binding multilateral instrument concerned with the protection of national minorities and aims to protect the existence of national minorities within the respective territories of the Parties. The Convention promotes as key standard for minority protection the full and effective equality of national minorities by creating appropriate conditions enabling them to preserve and develop their culture and to retain their identity. For details see The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, Strasbourg, 1.II.1995, at: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/157.htm.
35
As a member of the United Nations (UN), Romania committed itself to the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, including the United Nations Declaration in the Rights of
Persons Belonging to National, Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities97.
3.1.2. The National Level: The Romanian Government, its Strategies and its
Interactions with Roma Civil Society
In 2000-2001, significant steps, such as enacting anti-discrimination legislation, and
allowing the use of minority languages in areas where minorities constitute at least 20% of
the population,98 were taken. Simultaneously, several institutions specialized in dealing
with minority issues were established. In essence, alongside a shift in governmental
policies regarding Roma, new institutions such as the Council for National Minorities, the
Department for the Protection of National Minorities and the Office for National
Integration of Roma were set up.99 Later they were concentrated in the Department of
Interethnic Relations and the National Agency for Roma. The National Agency for Roma
is currently the main actor implementing the government’s policies in fostering Roma
integration.
Beside governmental institutions, more than 150 NGO’s play a critical role in
supporting the inclusion of the Roma in Romanian society. One such notable NGO is the
Roma Center for Social Intervention and Studies (Romani Criss),100 which is a constant
partner of the Romanian Government in implementing policies concerning Roma.
There are also two political parties representing Roma on the central level: the Roma
Party (RP) and the Alliance of Roma Unity (ARU).101 But despite the concerted efforts of
the Romanian Government and various NGO’s at Roma integration, there is no strong
political representation for Roma in Romania. How many Roma are in the Parliament?
97 The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious or Linguistic Minorities indicates that States should accommodate their ethnically diverse populations through rule of law and democratic governance. The aim presented in the preamble is to strength the “friendship and cooperation among peoples and States”. For details see The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious or Linguistic Minorities, adopted by the UN Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 1992/16, 21 February 1992 and by the General Assembly in its resolution 47/135 on 18 December 1992, at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/minorities.htm. 98 Roma are not concerned by this law, since they don’t live concentrated in a single geographical area. 99 Ringold, Dena; Orenstein, A. Mitchell and Wilkens, Erika (2002): Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; The World Bank (Conference Edition), Washington: 118. 100 For details see: http://www.romanicriss.org/en.html 101 For details see National Democratic Institute for International Affaires (2003): Roma Political Participation in Romania; Open Society Institute, Washington D.C.
36
International actors such as the Open Society Institute, the World Bank, the European
Commission, the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe, and the Council of Europe play an influential role in supporting the government;
in addition, various local NGOs play a role in conducting several strategies for improving
Roma participation in society.
37
CHAPTER 4: MAIN GOVERNMENTAL ACTIONS FOR ROMA INTEGRATION –
STRATEGIES, KEY ACTORS AND THEIR INTERACTION
For an understanding of the recent national development in addressing the Roma issue, we
direct our attention to the National Agency for Roma (NAR), the main governmental actor
dealing with national and international projects on Roma. We concentrate on the functions
the NAR fulfils, its interaction with Roma civil society and at the two major governmental
strategies implying national and international partners: The National Strategy for
Improving the Situation of Roma and The Decade of Roma Inclusion.
4.1. The National Agency for Roma
The National Agency for Roma has been active since 2005 and was created as a result of
volatile actions on the part of different governments in addressing Roma related issues (see
Figure 4).
Fig, 4: The History of the National Agency for Roma (1997-2010)
A first government office for Roma affaires was first established in 1997 under the
name the National Office of Roma (NOR). The NOR was set up as a governmental section
dealing with Roma Issues within the Department of the Protection of National Minorities
(DPNM). In 2001 the DPNM was reorganized and became a division of the Ministry for
Public Information (MPI). At the same time the name of DPNM was changed into
• DepartmentforProtectionofNationalMinorities• (Government)
1997NationalOf/iceforRoma
• DepartmentforInterethnicRelations• (MinistryofPublicInformation)
2001NationalOf/iceforRoma • Departmentfor
InterethnicRelations• (Government)
2003TheOf/iceforRoma
Problems
• GeneralSecretariatoftheGovernment• (Government)
2004TheNationalAgency
forRoma
38
Department for Interethnic Relations (DIR), where the NOR continued to function. In
2003, DIR was transferred from MPI (no longer extant) back to the governmental
structures, while NOR, still functioning inside DIR, was renamed the Office for Roma
Problems (ORP). In 2004, ORP was renamed the National Agency for Roma (NAR) and
was subordinated to the General Secretariat of the Government (GSG).
Since 2005, the NAR functions as successor of the NOR and the ORP and is responsible
for the implementation of governmental objectives concerning Roma issues. Today, the
NAR fulfils four main functions:102 (see Figure 5)
Fig. 5: Main Functions of the National Agency for Roma
At the internal level, the NAR is responsible for coordinating the National Strategy for
Improving the Situation of Roma, a governmental ten-year project adopted in 2001.
The agency has a cooperation agreement with the National Agency for the Employment
of the Labour Force, and organizes joint initiatives with the purpose of improving the
employment rate among the Romanian Roma.
At the international level, NAR coordinates Romania’s involvement in the Decade of
Roma Inclusion, a ten-year cooperation between twelve European governments, aimed at
improving the social and economic condition of Roma.
102 National Agency for Roma http://www.anr.gov.ro/index.html
• elaborationofpublicpoliciesandprogramsforRoma;
STRATEGY
• offundsdestinedtoprogramsforimprovingRomacommunities;ADMINISTRATION
• oftheRomanianGovernmentinallinternalandexternaloccurrencesconcerningRomaissues
REPRESENTATION
• guaranteeingthecontroloverandimplementationofarrangementsconcerningRomapublicpolicies.
STATEAUTHORIZATION
39
The president of NAR has the rank of a State Secretary and is named by the prime
minister, upon the recommendation of the minister delegated for coordinating the General
Secretariat of the Government.
Concerning the interaction of governmental institutions and the Roma civil society,
there are several tensions related to communications problems, representation and
questionable will of cooperate.
For instance, the 2009 appointment of the new president of the National Agency for
Roma received a lot of dissent within Roma civil society. Several NGO’s, as well as the
Roma Party, accused the state institutions noting (…) the way Government appointed the new Chairman of the NAR illustrates a political
attitude in the absence of transparency, against the democratic principles, with no previous
consultancy with the representatives of Roma civil society.103 The protesters questioned the professional competencies of the new NAR chairman (a
former member of the Roma Party, who obtained his Bachelor Diploma only in 2009)104
and expressed their concern regarding “the actual government responsibility towards not
only Roma minority from Romania, but also towards the government representation in its
relation with the international partners”.105
The Romanian president, Traian Băsescu, who characterized himself as a player on the
political stage upholds the hostility between Government and the Roma civil societies with
his already notorious populist rhetoric. In a public statement he summed up that “we have
a behavioural problem in the Roma community”, and he put in question the activity of
Roma representatives: We have many institutions dealing with the Roma, many programs and strategies, we take part in
many symposia, but I don’t know how many representatives of this minority (…) took a Roma child
by the hand and got him to school. We must take down the mask and act where needed.106 He also accused the Roma civil society of developing propaganda programs and hiding the
reality about Roma: As long as, fearing some ladies or gentlemen from various foundations, we hide and, for instance,
deny that we have a big problem with the Roma community, nothing can be done to solve it.107
103 Divers Bulletin no. 96(339)/02/16/2009: Roma Organizations: We Want Transparency in Governmental Policies: http://www.divers.ro/eveniment_en?wid=37646&func=viewSubmission&sid=9659 104 Divers Bulletin no. 95(338)/02/09/2009: New Chairman at the National Agency for Roma: http://www.divers.ro/actualitate_en?wid=37647&func=viewSubmission&sid=9636 Site consulted in August 2009. 105 Divers Bulletin no. 96(339)/02/16/2009: Roma Organizations: We Want Transparency in Governmental Policies:http://www.divers.ro/eveniment_en?wid=37646&func=viewSubmission&sid=9659 106 Divers Bulletin no. 62(305)/05/12/2008: European Money for Roma Education. Critics from the President: http://www.divers.ro/opinii_en?wid=37649&func=viewSubmission&sid=8663 107 Ibid.
40
The Romani Criss’ president ironically “saluted” the evolution in Băsescu’s attitude
toward Roma: “he shifted from ‘stinky gipsy’ to ‘Roma communities’.”108 (See the Chapter
2.5. Discrimination and Social Exclusion).
Summing up, the interaction between government and Roma NGOs appears tense,
while there is a noted lack of communication, absence of criteria for cooperation and poor
dialogue between state institutions and Roma civil society.109
Some of the results of this uneasy cooperation and of two main projects of the NAR are
the subject of the following paragraphs.
4.2. The National Strategy for Improving the Situation of Roma
In 2001, The National Strategy for Improving the Situation of Roma was adopted; a ten-
year plan (2001-2010), which drafted goals like: ensuring conditions for the Roma to have
equal opportunities; supporting the formation and promotion of a Roma intellectual and
economic elite; removing the stereotypes, prejudices and practices that limit the access of
Roma ethnics to public services; or stimulating Roma participation in economic, social
and political life.110
Elaborated with the participation of Government, Roma leaders and a variety of
representatives of civil society, the National Strategy is perceived as a milestone in the
official policy toward Roma. While significant progress has been made in establishing
relevant institutions for implementing the policy, a 2006 study of the Word Bank notes that
“there is considerable variation in the degree to which they are currently able to achieve
the goals laid out in the strategy”, and that “much work remains to be done in elaborating
and strengthening the institutional framework and implementation.”111 At the same time,
several ambiguities concerning the implementation of the strategy are emphasized: no
concordance due to varying degree of institutional activities, and no clear criteria
concerning the appointment of local representatives, their concrete roles and
108 Ibid. 109 Divers Bulletin no. 96(339), 02/16/2009: Roma Organizations: We Want Transparency in Governmental Policies: http://www.divers.ro/eveniment_en?wid=37646&func=viewSubmission&sid=9659 110 See Government of Romania - Ministry of Public Information (2001): Strategy of the Government of Romania for Improving the Condition of the Roma: http://www.anr.gov.ro/site/Programe.html or Romanian Official Monitory No. 252, 16 May 2001. 111 Ringold, Dena; Orenstein, A. Mitchell and Wilkens, Erika (2002): Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; The World Bank (Conference Edition), Washington: 119.
41
responsibilities. The project comes to an end in 2010, but due to a lack of monitoring and
evaluation, it is hard to measure the progress made in implementing the strategy.112
4.3.The Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005-2015
Another notable governmental program for dealing with Roma issues is The Decade of
Roma Inclusion 2005-2015, an international initiative that joins together numerous
governmental and nongovernmental actors and is meant to combat exclusion and
discrimination of Roma by (…) adopting, implementing and monitoring measures meant to promote the social inclusion and the
equal opportunities for Roma people and also to suppress the segregationists and discriminatory
tendencies and behaviours the Roma people are frequently facing.113
The Decade is mainly launched by national governments and designed within the ten-year
timeframe 2005-2015, with a concrete focus on ensuring Roma equal access to education,
housing, employment and health care.
This political commitment brings together twelve countries114 with large Roma
populations and several local and international Roma civil society actors. The founding
international organizations of the Decade are the World Bank, the Open Society Institute,
the United Nations Development Program, the Council of Europe, the Council of Europe
Development Bank, (the Contact Point for Roma and Sinti Issues of the Office for
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE), the European Roma Information
Office (COE), the European Roma and Traveller Forum, the European Roma Rights
Centre, the UN-HABITAT, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHC)
and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).115
The Decade Watch116 2005-2006, the first periodical assessment of outcomes of the
Decade of Roma Inclusion, noted that Romania was confronted with cooperation
112 Ibid: 121 113 The Government of Romania (2006): The National Agency for Roma, The Decade of Roma Inclusion. One Year of Romanian Presidency July 2005- June 2006, Bucharest: 8: www.anr.gov.ro 114 The twelve countries currently taking part in the Decade are Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Spain. For a detailed survey of The decade of Roma Inclusion 2005-2015. For details see http://www.romadecade.org/ 115 Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005-2015: http://www.romadecade.org/about and The World Bank: http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/ECAEXT/ROMANIAEXTN/0,,menuPK:275159~pagePK:141159~piPK:141110~theSitePK:275154,00.html 116 The Decade Watch is a periodical assessment of outcomes of the Decade of Roma Inclusion that identifies, monitories and compare government’ action across all countries. The Decade Watch is an
42
challenges between Roma NGOs and the Romanian Government, which avoided taking
into consideration inputs from the Roma civil society when developing The Decade Action
Plan.117 There were some tensions between Roma NGOs and the Romanian government
when representatives of the latter questioned the legitimacy of Roma civil society
participation.
Concerning the efficiency of the National Agency for Roma as main governmental
actor, a certain excessive demand was noted in the assessment, due to simultaneous
implementation of two major policies: The National Strategy for Improving the Situation
of Roma and The Decade of Roma Inclusion.
In a second Decade Watch (2007), Romania is reported to exhibit severe structural
problems, to pursue incoherent policies in relation to inclusion of Roma in mainstream
society and to display a general governmental passivity related to the implementation of
formulated strategies. The document also emphasizes the lack of programs promoting a
culture of tolerance as an important barrier in addressing policies concerning Roma118. The
overview suggests even deepened social exclusion and worrisome tendencies towards an
increased “ghettoization” of many Roma communities.119
Referring to general outcomes of this political commitment, the Open Society Institute,
a supporter of the Decade of Roma Inclusion, communicated in 2009: Several years have passed since governments in Central and Eastern Europe committed to the Decade
of Roma Inclusion. Since then, it has become clear that little progress had been made toward
eliminating discrimination and supporting the meaningful inclusion of Roma. Monitoring reports
show that governments and other stakeholders have not cooperated either effectively or efficiently to
carry out their commitments towards the Roma Decade, and major sources of funding have yet to
‘trickle down’ to ideal candidates.120 The ANR’s homepage offers a large palette of information on legislation, public policies,
statistics and strategies. There is an interesting option as well, called successful stories.
When accessing it, the following text appears: “în curând aici veti putea citi povesti de
success”121 –it will soon be possible to read success stories here.
initiative of a group of Roma activists and researchers supported by the Open Society Institute and the World Bank. 117 Each of the participating countries has developed a national Decade Action Plan that formulates goals and indicators in the Decade's priority issues. 118 See Decade Watch (2007): Country Report: Romania, available at: http://www.romadecade.org/decade_watch_report_20052006 119 Ibid. 120 Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005-2015: http://www.romadecade.org/ 121 The National Agency for Roma http://www.anr.gov.ro/site/Povesti.html
43
II. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND CASE STUDY
THEORY 1 - CONCEPTS OF NATIONHOOD
The Part I of the study indicated that there exists a contradiction between the governmental
rhetoric embodied in strategies and institutions aimed at integrating the Roma into
mainstream society and the outcome of such attempts. Furthermore, a line of demarcation
between Romanians and Roma, an informal perception of Roma as strangers, as non-
Romanians, can even be observed in the statements of high-ranking officials.
A general concern that Roma make a laughing stock of Romania and damage the
country’s image abroad,122 the discomfort felt when Roma are “confused” in the West with
Romanians, the feeling that the term Roma is too similar to Romanian and can easily lead
to confusion, are all indicators of a deep cleavage emphasizing the perception of Roma as
a danger for the Romanian national identity. It is of crucial importance, therefore, to
determine whether national discourse and the Romanian national self-understanding play
a role with respect to the marginalization of the Roma minority.
CHAPTER 5: DEFINITIONS AND PATTERNS OF NATIONAL SELF-
UNDERSTANDING
5.1. Nations and Nationalism
Topics related to the national self-understanding of communities within the territory of a
nation state are diverse and complex, they include ethnic identity, race and racism, fascism,
ethnic conflict, international law, minorities, immigration and genocide, to name but a
few.123 Concepts such as nations and nationalism cannot be integrated into a concrete
theoretical framework. The systematic study of these concepts began only recently and its
122 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 170. 123 Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 3.
44
interdisciplinary nature creates some confusion.124 Historians, political scientists,
anthropologists, sociologists, social psychologists, linguists, philosophers, lawyers,
economists, geographers, international relations scholars and many others formulate
distinct definitions, deliver rival scholarly ideas, and stress different perspectives on nation
and nationalism.125 The characteristic features of a nation are discussed in several debates,
but, as Joseph Stalin advises, “none of them taken separately is sufficient to define a
nation, and it is sufficient for a single one (…) to be lacking, and the nation ceases to be a
nation.” Some of these features include assumed blood ties, common race, language,
region, religion, customs, descent, destiny, territory, culture, economic life, and solidarity.
In spite of the difficulties in finding adequate, commonly accepted definitions, a
generally accepted perspective is that the idea of a nation and nationalism was first
designed on the principle of collective identities of a state. Using this as a starting point,
we follow some of the main theoretical debates, concentrating on key statements around
nations and nationalism. Etymologically, the Latin word nation means birth, race, people,
and designates a community of people who feel they belong together due to ethnical,
lingual, cultural or political reasons, and who perceive themselves as different from “the
others”.126
Abbé Sièyes, considered by some scholars to be the leader of the French Revolution,
defines the French nation in his liberal pamphlet, What is the Third Estate? (1789), as “a
body of associates, living under a common law, and represented by the same legislature
(…).”127 The nation is built here by the political aspiration and the ambition of the third
estate (the great majority of the people) to sovereignty in an already existing state. During
the Age of Revolution, the French people associated the concept of nation with the
principle of unité et indivisibilité, where a nation illustrates an inseparable mass, able to
build a state.
More than a century ago, a classic statement of Ernest Renan emphasized the dynamic
nature of nationhood, linking the past to the present and the future. In his opinion, the
nation is not a fait accompli, but un plébiscite de tous le jours,128 the result of a process of
124 Social scientific analyses are to find in the early 20th century, and only since 1960s the topic has begun to be investigated by different fields scholars. 125 Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony, D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 3. 126 Nohlen, Dieter (2001): Kleines Lexikon der Politik (Lexikon of Politics); Verlag C.H. Beck, München: 313. 127 Sièyes, Emmanuel Joseph (1789): Qu’est-ce que le Tiers État? (What is the Third Estate?); Paris, published online at: fordham.edu/halsall/mod/sieyes.html, or in Furet, François (1988), La Revolution I, Hachette Littératures, Paris: 87-96. 128 Renan, Ernest (1882): Qu est-ce qu’une nation? in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony, D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 17-18.
45
solidarity building.129 He sees the nation as a form of morality, sustained by a distinct
historical consciousness,130 while “l’essence d’une nation est que tous les individus aient
beaucoup de choses en commun, et aussi que touts aient oublié bien de choses.”131
Benedict Anderson discussed the essence of the nation in his well-known book,
Imagined Communities. He regards the nation as an artifact, an imagined political
community,132 and argues that the nation is imagined (…) because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-
members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the mind of each lives the image of their
community.133
Nevertheless, the sense of fraternity in a nation seems to be mostly imagined. Anderson
explains that through unequal or exploitation rapport inherent in every society, the nation
is always understood as a horizontal partnership:134 (…) it is the fraternity that makes it possible, over the past two centuries, for so many millions of
people, not so much to kill, as be willing to die for such limited imaginings.135 The questions surrounding a national spirit of sacrifice places us in a deeper context of the
nation, shedding light on the driving force behind it: nationalism.
Nationalism is characterized as an ideology and a global political movement, and is
often considered to be one of the most powerful forces in the modern world.136 Founding
fathers of the ideological movements of nationalism, such as Rousseau, Herder, Fichte,
Korais and Mazzini, saw in nationalism the power to reunite the aspirations of the modern
world: autonomy, unity and above all, an authentic identity.137 Therefore, nationhood and
nationalism have been related to democracy, political legitimacy, social integration and
civil solidarity.138 But, as Ghia Nodia recognizes, nationalism is a coin with two sides139 –
129 Ibid. 130 Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony, D. (1994): Nationalism, Oxford University Press; Oxford: 15. 131 Renan, Ernest (1882): Qu est-ce qu’une nation? in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony, D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 17-18. 132 Anderson, Benedict (1983): Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism; Verso, New York: 6. 133 Ibid. 134 Ibid: 7. 135 Ibid. 136 Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony, D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 3, 47. 137 Aira, Kemiläinen (1964): Nationalism: Problems Concerning the Word, the Concept and Classification, cited in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony, D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 4. 138 Brubaker, Rogers (1999): The Manichean Myth: Rethinking the Distinction Between “Civic” and “Ethnic” Nationalism; in Kriesi, Hanspeter; Armigeon Klaus; Siegrist, Hannes and Wimmer, Andreas (eds.): Nation and National Identity. The European Experience in Perspective; Ruegger Verlag, Chur, Zürich: 55. 139 Nodia, Ghia (1994): Nationalism and Democracy, in Diamond, Larry and Plattner, Mark F. (1994): Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict and Democracy; The Johns Hopkins University Press, London: 14.
46
a good and a bad one.140 Therefore, nationalism is also associated with irrationalism,
intolerance, xenophobia, forced assimilation, ethnocentrism, ethnic cleansing and even
genocide. Additionally it is blamed as “the starkest political shame of the twentieth
century”.141 The conclusion of Rogers Brubaker, “nation and nationalism designate a
whole world of different things,”142 requires a distinction between the main characteristics
of nations and of nationalism.
5.2. Two Concepts of Nations and of National Movements
To understand the general particularities of states and national movements, we choose a
simple dichotomous scheme formulated first by Friedrich Meinecke - Staatsnation and
Kulturnation.143 Later, Hans Kohn replaced the dichotomy in the debate with forms of
nationalism, distinguishing between the West and the rest.144 The rest later was
transformed to the East or Eastern nationalism.
Kohn sees nationalism as a “state of mind, (…) an idée-force, which fills man’s brain
and heart with new thoughts and new sentiments.”145 He explains that the crystallization of
national movements emerged in two distinct forms: the Western and the Eastern forms.
Kohn designates representatives of Western nationalism as states such as England, France,
Netherlands, Switzerland, United States and the British dominions, while Central and
Eastern Europe (in particular Germany) and Asia are regarded as regions representative of
Eastern nationalism.
According to Kohn, the rise of nationalism in the West has a political character,
preceded by the creation of a nation state, or as in the case of United States coinciding with
140 Lord Acton differentiate between the good British and the bad French doctrines of nationality. Cited in Nodia, Ghia (1994): Nationalism and Democracy, in Diamond, Larry and Plattner, Mark F. (1994): Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict and Democracy; The Johns Hopkins University Press, London: 14, 22. 141 Dunn, John (1979): Western Political Theory in the Face of the Future, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 55. 142 Brubaker, Rogers (1999): The Manichean Myth: Rethinking the Distinction Between “Civic” and “Ethnic” Nationalism; Kriesi, Hanspeter; Armigeon Klaus; Siegrist, Hannes and Wimmer, Andreas (eds.): Nation and National Identity. The European Experience in Perspective; Ruegger Verlag, Chur, Zürich: 55. 143 Meinecke, Friedrich (1922): Weltbürgertum und Nationalstaat. Studien zur Genesis des Deutschen Nationalstaates (World Citizenship and Nation-State. Studies on the Origin of the German Nation-State); R. Oldenbourg Verlag, München, Berlin. 144 See Kohn, Hans (1945): The Idea of Nationalism: A Study in Its Origins and Background; Macmillan, New York, or Brubaker, Rogers (1999): The Manichean Myth: Rethinking the Distinction Between “Civic” and “Ethnic” Nationalism; Kriesi, Hanspeter; Armigeon Klaus; Siegrist, Hannes and Wimmer, Andreas (eds.): Nation and National Identity. The European Experience in Perspective; Ruegger Verlag, Chur, Zürich: 56. 145 Kohn, Hans (1994): The Idea of Nationalism; Macmillan, New York, in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 162.
47
it.146 Considering the rest, or the East, the national movements in these parts of the world
emerged later and were stimulated by aspirations to redefine political borders according to
ethnographic demands.147 Due to backward political and social developments, Eastern
nationalism found its expression in culture, and has a mystical, authoritarian character.148
Using the same perspective, Brubaker proposes a more appropriate distinction of
nationhood and nationalism, distinguishing between the Western political and Eastern
cultural regard: civic and ethnic.
In Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany, Brubaker explains that the idea
of nationhood was first elaborated in theory during the second half of the eighteenth
century, when France and Germany defined two distinctive, even antagonistic models of a
nation and national self-understanding.149
In France, the idea of nationhood was the work of a broad bourgeois stratum, and
gained a strong political character, oriented to the reform of an existing state.150 In other
words, a post-state character defines French nationhood by striving for cultural and
political unity - an essentially political, civic understanding151 (see Figure 6).
Fig. 6: Civic Nationalism in France
Contrary to this, the pre-political German nation, die Volksgemeinschaft, preceded the state
with a pronounced ethnocultural character. Placed in the context of a flourishing
Bildungsbürgertum, the German understanding of nationhood was apolitical, ethnic and
146 Ibid: 164. 147 Ibid. 148 Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 160. 149 Brubaker, Rogers (1992): Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany; Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: 1. 150 Ibid: 6. 151 Ibid.
DrivingForce
• middleclass
Aim
• reform of the existing state
Understanding
• as creation of the state
Character
• liberal • civic/political • assimilationist
48
cultural.152 The concept was identified here with a particularly literary national spirit – the
Nationalgeist153 (see Figure 7).
Fig. 7: Ethnic Nationalism in Germany
While the French understand the nation as the creation of their state, the Germans see the
nation as basis of their state and while civic nationalism, inspired by France, is liberal,
voluntarist, universalist and inclusive, based on common citizenship, the typically German
model of ethnic nationalism is illiberal, ascriptive, particularist and exclusive, and is based
upon common ethnicity.154
Turning to the current implications concerning the understanding of nationhood, we
discover a great influence on contemporaneous state affairs and on its social picture.
Policies and politics of citizenship are a central point, where national sovereignty is
manifested and where the understanding of nationhood has remained influential. To
illustrate this point, Brubaker shows that the French understanding of nationhood is state-
centred and assimilationist, due to its gradual formation of the nation state around a single
political and cultural centre. This aspect is expressed in an open definition of citizenship
that manifests in the more ready assimilation of newcomers (immigrants) to French
citizens.155
On the other side, the conglomerated pattern of post-national state building in
polycentric Germany promoted a Volk-centred and differentialist national self-
understanding.156 The ethnocultural understanding of nationhood here embodies an
152 Brubaker, Rogers (1992): Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany; Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: 6. 153 Ibid. 154 Brubaker, Rogers (1992): Civic and Ethnic Nations in France and Germany; in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Ethnicity; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 169. 155 Brubaker, Rogers (1992): Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany; Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England: 5. 156 Ibid: 1.
DrivingForce
• elites
Aim
• apolitic • cultural
Understanding
• as basis for the state
Character
• illiberal • ethnic/cultural • exclusionist
49
exclusivist definition of citizenship: open to ethnic immigrants outside Germany, and
closed to other non-Germans.157 Hence the differences in the concepts of nation and
nationalism are emphasised by the sharply opposed citizenship policies of both states.
Expansively combined, jus soli, birthright citizenship and jus sanguinis, the principle that a
person's nationality at birth is the same as that of his natural parents, together express the
primordial state centred and assimilationist national self-understanding in France. On the
contrary, the concept of citizenry in Germany is more restricted and reflects the pure jus
sanguinis principle. Hence, while France remains the classical country of assimilation, the
national self-understanding remains more ethnocultural in Germany.158
France and Germany have furnished two distinctive models of nationhood and national
self-understanding. The impact of these on world politics increased when nationalism
started to spread. Although every national movement is an indigenous process, the core
nationalism patterns of political ideology were imported from France and/or Germany.159
Therefore, we can speak about adoption of a model of national understanding, rather than
creation. Liah Greenfeld underlines that creation of a nation, and implicitly adoption of a
new identity was marked by the dissatisfaction of a community regarding its traditional
character, or as Greenfeld states: “a change of identity presupposed a crisis of identity”.160
The particularities of different crises in many communities around the world determined
adoption of a specific understanding of nationhood – civic, ethnic or a mix of both. The
nature of nationalism was formed by the local social order and by the nature of change, but
the shape was “borrowed” from outside.
157 Ibid: 5. 158 Brubaker, Rogers (1992): Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany; Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts: 3-5. Brubaker’s statement in 1992 illustrates the traditional shape of nationhood in France and Germany. His prediction that these structural differences between France and Germany would continue to affect citizenship policies of both countries, were contradicted in 1993 by the German and French reforms of citizenships. Both policies put emphasis on the citizenship of emigrants. For details see: Basta Fleiner, Lidija (2009): Participation Rights under the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (FCNM): Towards a Legal Framework Against Social and Economic Discrimination: 67-68; in Council of Europe (2009): Institutional Accommodation and the Citizen: Legal and Political Interaction in a Pluralist Society, Trends in social cohesion, No. 21; Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. 159 Greenfeld, Liah (1992): Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity; Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts; in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 168. 160 Ibid: 169.
50
CASE STUDY 1: THE ROMANIAN CONCEPT OF NATIONHOOD
In this chapter we are interested in observing how nation building occurred in Romania
and what form it adopted. Therefore, the French model of civic nationalism and the
German model of ethnic nationalism are the main instruments in analyzing the Romanian
national self-understanding. We are interested in identifying and interpreting key aspects in
Romania’s nation building process, similar to one or the other described models. Finally,
we intend to measure the impact of Romanian particular national self-understanding on
interethnic relationships. In the Figure 8 below the dichotomist characteristics of
nationhood and national self-understanding are simplified in two major patterns:
Fig. 8: Civic and Ethnic Understanding of Nationhood and National Self-Understanding (Brubaker)
We understand the policies of citizenship as a picture of the state’s perception on who
belongs and who does not belong to the nation. Therefore, the civic or ethnic
understanding of nationhood may deliver a picture on the interaction of state not only with
potential immigrants, but in first line with its own citizens having a different cultural or
ethnic attachment than the mainstream population. Our focus here is inwards rather than
outwards, focused on culturally and ethnic distinct groups already within the state
boundaries and not on recent immigrated groups.
Starting from the premise that, like citizenship policies, the national strategies for
minority accommodation are connected to the historical matrix of the nation state, we use
the knowledge acquired around the civic and ethnic understandings of nationhood to find
explanations for the general perception of Roma as outsiders and for their social exclusion.
What role does the Romanian self-understanding play in regard to Roma
marginalization?
CIVIC(POLITICAL)• liberal• universalist• assimilationist• basedoncommoncitizenship
ETHNIC(CULTURAL)• illiberal• particularist• exclusionist• basedoncommonethnicity
51
CHAPTER 6: NATION BUILDING AND NATIONAL SELF-UNDERSTANDING IN
ROMANIA
The Romanian idea of a nation was designed by intellectuals in the 19th century, and
consisted in the effort to create a common conscience of identity and to promote a political
thinking,161 in order to unify the three main territories inhabited by Romanians. At that
time the later Romanian state was divided into three main provinces – Moldavia, Walachia
and Transylvania (see Figure 9).
Fig. 9: Transylvania, Moldavia and Walachia in the first half of the 19th century162
Moldavia
Ottoman Rule
Transylvania
Austro-Hungarian Rule
Walachia
Ottoman Rule
Being under different spheres of political influence – the Ottoman Empire in Moldova and
Walachia, and the Austro-Hungarian Empire in Transylvania – the provinces have had
separate administration, institutions and various religious orientations. In the absence of a
middle class, the Romanian nationalism found its first expression in the cultural field and
embodied the nationalist dream of an elite. Giving the social, mental, cultural and political
fragmentation of societies in the three lands, the unitary theory of the nation was, therefore
a very challenging project for the scholars and poets.
161 Neumann, Victor (2008): The Concept of Nation in the Romanian Culture and Political Thought; in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 153-154. 162 Source: www.nationalist.ro
52
6.1. The Socio-Political Context in the 18th Century
In the eighteenth century the Phanariots were named as princes in Moldavia and Walachia,
for administrating the provinces on behalf of the Sublime Porte. These high Ottoman
officials, of Greek origins, had a great administrative influence in the territories dominated
by the Ottoman Empire and their regime in the two provinces was characterized by
economical reforms, but also by corruption and excessive fiscal policies. Their name –
Phanariots – came from the Istanbul Phanar district, where they use to live and where the
Turks commonly selected the dragomans163 and the princes for Moldavian and Walachian
thrones.164 Since along with the Phanariot administrators many Greek aristocratic families
settled in the two Orthodox provinces, there was an enormous oriental and neo-Greek
impact on the cultural life of the Romanian lands.165
In the ethnically diverse Transylvania, belonging to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the
Romanians were mainly Orthodox peasants, while the dominant Magyars, Szeklers166 and
Saxons constituted a privileged class, belonging to the Calvinist, Lutheran, Unitarian and
Roman-Catholic churches.167
Social agitations in Transylvania culminated in 1784 in the uprising of the repressed
peasantry. This movement was directed against the feudal compulsions of the Magyar
nobility, which made life miserable for peasants and put in question the status of the
orthodox Romanians in Transylvania as tolerated minority. Therefore, this moment can be
seen as having mainly a social character, but also a national one.
The counterpart of the Transylvanian uprising was the 1821 Walachian revolution
against the Turkish-Phanariot regime. As in Transylvania, the uprising had a social and
political character – an accentuated claim being the non-involvement of Ottomans through
the Panariots princes in Walachia’s affaires.
The echo of the 1821 Walachian revolution was also felt in Moldavia, and the
progressive decline of the Ottoman Empire lead to the intensification of relations between
Moldavia and Walachia, and to the merging of a national consciousness. While in
Moldavia and Walachia the idea of nation became a sense of solidarity between different
social classes having a common ideal of liberation from an external foreign power – the
163 Foreign ministers. 164 Romanian Academy (1996): Romania, Historical-Geographical Atlas; Editura Academiei Romane, Bucharest: 52. 165 Ibid: 53. 166 Szeklers are a Magyar-speaking population concentrated in Eastern Transylvania. 167 Hitchins, Keith (2008): Romania Nation-formation in Transylvania; in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 63.
53
Ottomans –, the Romanians in Transylvania were united within a bottom class by the
desire to be free of the exploitation by an internal “foreign” power – the Magyar
Aristocracy.
However, Moldavia, Walachia and Transylvania all shared the overlapping of social
motivation with political ambition. The profound desire of Romanians in all three
provinces to be released from an oppressing foreign ruler and to unite with their “blood
brothers” can be seen as a robust base for the future idea of “unity” in the Romanian
national sense.168
6.2. The Language as Pattern of National Identity
The collapse of the Turkish-Phanariot regime, which had imposed the Greek language in
administration and culture (just as Slavonic some centuries earlier), made way for an
exalted interest in the language mostly spoken by the peasant mass – Romanian.169
If in a primordial phase the idea of nation was an elitist project, the need to also involve
the peasant majority, in order to generate a nationalist mass movement and to create a
public opinion, became clear very soon. Therefore, Romanian nationalism manifested first
in the spheres of education and propaganda, rather than in political projects. Intellectuals in
Moldavia and Walachia actively promoted the empathy of the nobles to the Romanian
peasants, as “we are the same people of the land”,170 while peasantry was implemented in
the collective mentality as “a symbol of fidelity to the past and an innocent victim of the
social and of eighteen centuries of history”.171 Nation, in this sense, was to be formed
especially across social classes, sharing the same language.
The rediscovery of language played a key role in defining the national idea and the new
national consciousness thus achieved consistency. The Romanian language was
predestined to serve as a great vehicle of national and patriotic identity for all Romanians
in all territories.
168 Nicoara, Simona (2008): National Sensitivity in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries); in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 85. 169 Ibid: 88. 170 This perspective was shared in 1811 by Serban Gradisteanu, a political figure of that time, cited by Nicoara, Simona (2008): National Sensitivity in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries);in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 85. 171 The Walachian historian Nicolae Balcescu, cited in Nicoara, Simona (2008): National Sensitivity in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries); in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 89.
54
Intellectuals underlined several key aspects in promoting the national idea through the
Romanian language. First, the Latin origins172 were able to project deep historical roots,
suggesting the continuation of the Roman Empire and conferring legitimacy to the nation.
Another important aspect was the uniqueness conferred by the language to Romanians,
among their Slavic neighbours and foreign rulers of Magyar, Germanic, Turkish and Greek
origin. And even more exalting was the identification with Western civilizations, and
especially with “the great Latin sister”, France.173 At the same time, the language provided
the nation with inclusion and exclusion criteria – key to every successful nation building
exercise.
6.3. A common past, the same people
The national movement has slowly been extended towards the great mass of people and the
nationalist discourse concentrated on the common descent of Romanian speakers from the
Roman settlers of Dacia.174 The growing idea of nation designated also the people joined
together in a community by the common language, a common origin and a shared history.
The political message emphasized more and more the duty to be faithful to the master
of the country, the devotion to the homeland, its culture and history,175 but also to the
Romanians as superior chosen people, due to their glorious past: “When Romanians should
see from what noble vintage they had come, they should all be led towards kindness and
common sense”,176 the historian Petru Maior Noted in 1809.
During the 1848 revolution, which extended over all three provinces, Moldavians,
Walachians and Transylvanians gained a common voice against the social and political
structure and claimed national unity based on the common ethnicity of Romanians. The
172 The Latin origin of Romanian language is a result of the realm of Latinity that in Antiquity includes the northern part of the Balkan Peninsula. The Romanian language had in the 18th century undergone a process of re-latinization and finally came under French influence. Through linguistic reforms, remarkable efforts were made for introducing French words and to replace old Romanian vocables of Slavic or Oriental origin. For details see Boia, Lucian (2001): Romania. Borderland of Europe; Reaktion Books, London, : 28-58, and 59-111. 173 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 160. 174 Hitchins, Keith (2008): Romania Nation-formation in Transylvania; in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 63. 175 Nicoara, Simona (2008): National Sensitivity in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries); in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 86-87. 176 Noted in 1809 by the Romanian historian Petru Maior, cited in Nicoara, Simona (2008): National Sensitivity in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries); in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 86.
55
principle of “civil freedom” claimed by the French revolutionaries in the same epoch, was
developed and transformed into “national freedom” for the oppressed Romanians in
Transylvania, Moldova and Walachia, while the social claims were overlapped with the
idea of national unity. Consequently, the claim for self determination rights embodied in
the dream of unification of the three provinces, including within the national corpus the
Romanian everywhere,177 was the belonging to the same ethnic and linguistic
community.178
6.4. Looking to the West - The French Myth and the German Countermyth179
After a first phase, when intellectuals were trying to “imagine” a new sense of community,
looking for linguistic, historical and traditional cultural elements, the bond with the West
had to be clarified. A visceral attachment to France was manifested in numerous scholarly
writings. To exemplify the power of the French myth for the Romanian national imaginary
we take a look to a memorandum addressed in 1853 by Ion C. Bratianu to Napoleon III.
Here, the Romanian politician pleads for the unification of principalities and sees this
national project as a “French conquest”: The army of the Romanian state would be the army of France, its ports on the Black Sea and the
Danube would be entrepôts for French trade. (…) we have all the advantages of a colony, without
the expenses which this implies.180
Since France was perceived as our second homeland and Romania’s destiny was to
become its colony,181 it seems that the way to Romanian Westernization lead first into the
arms of the great Latin sister, France.182
Moldavia and Walachia eventually united in 1859 and the independence of the new
Romanian state was recognised by the European powers.
177 Naum Râmniceanu cited in Nicoara, Simona (2008): National Sensitivity in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries); in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 88. 178 Nicoara, Simona (2008): National Sensitivity in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries); in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 88. 179 Expression used by Boia in Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest:160 180 Bratianu, Ion C. (1932): Acte si cuvantari (Documents and speeches), Vol. 4, Cartea Romaneasca, Bucharest: 241; cited in Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 161. 181 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 160. 182 Ibid.
56
As Boia shows, the French myth continued to play an important modelling role for the
newborn Romanian nation. In terms of language, the process of the second Latinization
resulted in the elimination of Slav and Oriental elements in the Romanian Language and in
the adoption of numerous neologisms of French origin.183 Boia states that in today’s
Romanian speech, one word in five is of French origin.184 Therefore, former Greek
language and culture was replaced by French, the Oriental costume by the Parisian fashion,
young people left Constantinople to study in Paris and generally, for more than a century,
the French culture had a great impact on the leading elite of the country.
In 1898, Pompliliu Eliade argued in De l’influencé française sur l’esprit public in
Roumanie that Romania owed its whole modern civilization to France and that, thanks to
France, we can see “not the rebirth of a people, but its birth”.185
Remaining in the zone of highly mythologized representations, the power of the French
myth was later challenged by the German “countermyth”, balancing somehow in the
imaginary, the relationship between these two distinct understandings of nationhood. It
seemed that the German culture offered more proper solutions for the aspiration of the
Romanian nation than the French one. Especially the German sense of unity and the
understanding of patriotism fascinated many cultural personalities. Kogalniceanu,
Maiorescu or the greatest Romanian poet, Mihai Eminescu, belonged within this current,
having been educated in a German cultural spirit.186 Therefore, Kogalniceanu stated that (…) it is largely to the German culture, the university of Berlin, German society, and the men and
great patriots who accomplished the rising up of Germany again and its unity, that I owe all that I
have become in my county, and that it was from the fire of German patriotism that the torch of my
Romanian patriotism took its flame.”187
Concerning the French attachment, the polarization between enthusiastic reception and
absolute rejection188 is best illustrated in the notorious poem, Epistle III, of Eminescu: In Paris, in brothels of cynicism and idleness
With its lost women and in its obscene orgies (…)189
183 Ibid: 161-162. 184 Ibid. 185 Eliade, Pompiliu (1898): De l’influencé française sur l’esprit public in Roumanie (On French Influence on the Public Spirit in Romania; Paris: i-xi, in Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 161. 186 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 163. 187 Kogalniceanu, Mihail, Opere (Creations), Vol. 2; cited in Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 609. 188 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 163. 189 Eminescu, Mihai (1975): Poezii (Poems); Minerva, Bucharest.
57
A minority of intellectuals, especially represented by Junimea Society, supported the
German myth of nationhood and national self-understanding. Nevertheless, Junimea was
the most influential intellectual and political association of Romania in the 19th century,
which established the basis of the modern Romanian culture. Therefore, the German
understanding of nationhood was the decisive influence in the cultural and political
embodiment of the nation.190
6.5. The Religion as Pattern of National Identity
The nationalist ideas promoted by intellectuals in Romania found little echo among
Romanians living in the region of Transylvania. Here, the “national awake”191 was mainly
lead by the Scoala Ardeleana (Transylvanian School), a group of Romanian intellectuals,
which propagated the European enlightened ideas for stimulating people’s national
consciousness. Nevertheless, ethnicity was not the most important factor that led to
solidarity among Romanians in Transylvania, but the common social discontent. The
nobles (largely Magyars), and the privileged groups (Szeklers and the Saxons) represented
not only the ruling classes, but also the dominant “nations”. This important cohesion factor
among the oppressed Romanian peasants was therefore based on shared economic
hardships and social discrimination.192
Another important role here was played by religion. While the Austro-Hungarian rulers
were adepts of Calvinist, Lutheran, Unitarian and Roman Catholic churches, due to their
inferior social position the Romanians were isolated not only from the dominant nations
but also from the churches of Transylvania.193 Therefore, they felt drawn to the Orthodox
churches in neighbouring Walachia and Moldavia, where their priests were allowed to
study, and at the same time to the entire Orthodox commonwealth.194 The Orthodox
Church empowered the collective identity and institutionalized a clear distinction between
the Christian population and the Muslim rulers (Turks) in Walachia and Moldavia and
between the Orthodox Romanians and the Calvinist, Lutheran, Unitarian and Roman
Catholics in Transylvania.
190 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 163. 191 Expression used by Max Weber in The Nation (1948). 192 Hitchins, Keith (2008): Romania Nation-formation in Transylvania; in Mitu, Sorin (2008): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj: 63. 193 Ibid. 194 Ibid.
58
“The Romanian people were born Christian” was the first axiom intending to fuse
nation and church, and identified the Orthodox Christianity with the historical roots of the
nation.195 The church became yet another functional element in the national (self-)
definition.196
Hence the definition of nation was enlarged and designated by people joined together in
a community by the common language, a common origin, a shared history and a common
set of religious values.
6.6. The Unitary Character of the Romanian Nation-State
Besides the solidarity between and within the social strata, the desire of liberation from a
foreign ruler and the linguistic cohesion, for the emerging modern Romanian nation state
the orthodoxy surfaced as an additional support for national unity.197 And the wish for
national unity was the final point on which all Romanians living in such different contexts
agreed.198 The “Great Romania” emerged.
Fig. 10: The “Great Romania” in 1919199
195 Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest: 11. 196 Kitromilides, Paschalis (1989) Orthodoxy and Nationalism; in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 208 197 Kitromilides, Paschalis (1989) Orthodoxy and Nationalism; in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 208. 198 Sugar, Peter (1969): Eastern and Domestic Roots of Eastern European Nationalism, in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 175. 199 Source: www.nationalist.ro
59
The configuration of the later Romanian nation state was rounded off in 1918, during the
final episode of the World War I, when the ”unification with Romania of all Romanians”200
took place.
After this historical episode, not only did Romania’s territory increase, but also its
population and its ethnic composition. The Paris Minority Treaty (1919) forced Bucharest
to guarantee equal rights, religious freedom and schools in the mother tongue for the post-
war Romanian ethnic minorities.201 In the 1923 Romanian Constitution not all of these
guarantees were included, and, according to Joseph Rothschild, “the ethnic minorities (…)
were regarded as foreigners.”202
The constitution of 1923 (also called The Constitution of Union) defines in its first
article the character of the modern Romanian state as unitary and indivisible.203
The idea of a unitary state can be seen as a result of the fundamental historical and
regional context in which the Romanian modern state emerged: it was the only way to
empower the national identity of, in fact, a multicultural society, to sustain the
homogeneity mission of the nation state and to avoid potential legitimacy questions.
And finally, the unitary character of the Romanian nation-state can be interpreted as a
security measure and as a reaction to the already traumatic past marked by foreign
territorial annexations, occupations, or interventions in the intern affaires. There were
proposals for a federalized system, like for example the project of a “Danubian
Confederation”,204 but the powerful rhetoric of the neighbouring foreign threat became an
instrument in discouraging any tendencies of a decentralized state: “We cannot be
unaware that around us the adversaries of Romanian unity are ceaselessly active”,205
noted a Romanian politician in 1943. The unitary character of the state represented the
perfect formula from the point of view with the ethno national ideal and became, alongside
continuity, the guiding axis or the historical discourse.
The expression of the unitary and indivisible state nation-state and the deep ethnic
conception of the Romanian nation are two elements that continue to define Romania,
200 Romanian Academy (1996): Romania, Historical-Geographical Atlas; Editura Academiei Romane, Bucharest: 54. 201 Crowe, David M. (1994): A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia; St. Martin's, New York: 127. 202 Ibid. 203 Romanian Constitution (1923), Art. 1: http://www.constitutia.ro/const1923.htm 204 The project was supported among others by the Romanian historian Nicolae Balcescu, and stipulated that Romanian should join a “Greater Austria”, finding its unity under the patronage of Vienna. For details see Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness;Central European Press, Budapest: 130-131. 205 Bratianu, George Ioan (1998): Originile si formarea unitatii romanesti (The Origins and the Creation of Romanian Unity; Editura Universitatii “Al. I. Cuza”, Iasi.
60
being anchored in its Constitution. The first phrase of the document lay down that:
“Romania is a sovereign, independent, unitary and indivisible National State”, while the
Art. 4, stipulates: “The State foundation is laid on the unity of the Romanian people and
the solidarity of its citizens”.
The ethnocultural frontiers continue to separate the Romanian people from the
Romanian citizens, emphasizing the exclusionary character of the nation. We may
understand that the national minorities are citizens within the Romanian state but not
members of the ethno-nation. Putting differently, using the “winner-takes-all” principle,
The Romanian nation-state sees the minorities as tolerated foreigners and marginalize
them permanently.206
There is not consistent information on Roma minority in the newborn Romanian state.
As some authors relate, in all these national agitations Romanian Roma remained
impassively outside the main flows of political, social and economic development. As
nowadays, the Roma minority did not have ambitions on a territory or a national status,
“they were mostly silent and invisible bystanders while important social and political
forces took shape all around them.”207 Glancing at this period, Hancock characterises the
Roma as “outsiders in the everybody’s country”208 – or, according to Barany: “nobody’s
children.”209
206For details on the constitutional principles for a multicultural state, see Fleiner, Thomas and Basta Fleiner, Lidija. R. (2009): Constitutional Democracy in a Multicultural and Globalised World; Springer-Verlag, Berlin; 656-651. 207 Pogany, Istvan (1999): Accommodating an Emergent National Identity: The Roma of Central and Eastern Europe; International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, 6: 153. 208 See Hancock, Ian: Genocide of the Roma in the Holocaust; in Israel W. Charny (1997): Encyclopedia of Genocide; ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara. 209 Barany, Zoltan D, Nobody’s Children (1994): The Resurgence of Nationalism and the Status of Gypsies in Post-Communist Eastern Europe; in Serafin, Joan (ed.): East-Central Europe in the 1990´s, Westview Press, Oxford: 235.
61
THEORY 2 – THE CONCEPT OF SOCIAL EXCLUSION
As we have seen in Chapter 2, all sociological surveys, official recommendations and
political strategies concerning the Roma in Romania, put great emphasis on the dramatic
living conditions of many members belonging to this community, on the discriminatory
treatment many of them face in all aspects of every day life, and finally, on the vicious
cycle that seems to imprison many Roma in bitter poverty, social exclusion and their own
resignation.
Identifying the source of these inequalities and the way in which they occur may be
vital for understanding the current challenges in their social and political sphere. An
analysis of the mechanisms, actors and processes that lead to social inequalities may
deliver a transparent perspective on the current socio-political challenges, and therefore,
may have a positive impact on the drawing of appropriate policies for combating them.
The main theoretical perspectives on social closure will be outlined, focusing on two
strategies of social exclusion based on race and ethnicity. Even if, scientifically speaking,
the term race is not proper if we speak about humans, the concept will be used in the
context of people’s actions that target groups of racist manifestations – at this level, race
becomes a cultural construct, independent from the biological standpoint.210
Finally, the chapter attempts to clarify the connection between the social status of a
group early on and its social exclusion later on.
210 Eriksen, Thomas, H (1996): Ethnicity, Race, Class and Nation; in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Ethnicity; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 29.
62
CHAPTER 7: THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN PROCESSES OF SOCIAL EXCLUSION
7.1. The Theory of Social Closure
When trying to understand the structural inequalities of a certain group as a result of
historical processes and social actions, the theory of social closure211 founded by Max
Weber, and developed by Frank Parkin, appears as a suitable theoretical tool.
Weber, who first made the differentiation between open and closed relationships, refers
to social closure as the process by which social collectives seek to maximize rewards by restricting access to rewards
and opportunities to a limited circle of eligible members.212 These rewards can be understood as resources, privileges, power or prestige. The actions
of distinct social players for monopolizing them lead to social exclusion, placing certain
groups in disadvantaged positions, at the bottom of the social ladder, or even outside the
social system.
Closure, therefore, refers to social confrontations for monopolizing chances, privileges
and resources and by doing so, restricting the participation of certain groups in the social
system.213 As a result of closure, the phenomenon of social exclusion designates inferiority
in rights, status and opportunities, combined with rejection and the impossibility of
escaping from a system based on inherited inequalities.214 The concepts social closure and
social exclusion will be used interchangeably for designating the same phenomenon: the
placement of certain groups through specific strategies outside or at the bottom of a given
social system.
211 Weber is seen as the founder of the theory of social closure, but he placed the approach only in an economical context. Weber’s theory was further developed by Frank Parkin (1972, 1974, 1979), Randall Collins (1971, 1975, 1987) and Raymond Murphy (1984, 1986,1988), who developed it in a more general theory, applicable on all relations of social dominance. For details see Mackert Jürgen (2004): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden. 212 Weber, Max (1968): Economy and Society, edited by Roth, Guenther and Wittich, Claus; Bedminster Press, New York: 342, cited in Parkin, Frank (1974): The Social Analysis of Class Structure; The British Sociological Association, London: 3. 213 Mackert Jürgen (2004): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden: 19. 214 Esman, Milton J. (2004) An Introduction to Ethnic Conflict; Polity Press; Cambridge: 120-121.
63
In the following paragraphs we will operate with parts of this theoretical instrument, in
order to be guided for the proposed approach: to identify the strategies, the actors and the
mechanisms behind processes of social closure and structural exclusion of certain groups.
7.1. Strategies of Social Exclusion
For justifying the monopolization of specific, usually economic opportunities, Weber
stresses that dominant groups tend to exploit any distinct trait, such as language, race,
class, religion, social origin or descent, in drawing strategies of social exclusion.215
Another important characteristic and, as Parkin puts it, the most effective way of directing
privileges to one’s own group and closing out the participation of others, is the
enhancement of group distinctiveness’ as opposed to individual distinctivess’.216
Thus, exclusion strategies are easier to follow when the victim group can be defined as
foreign, the justificatory basis of exclusion and of economical monopole being founded on
certain particular social, cultural or physical group features.217
7.1.1. Race and Ethnicity as Targets in Social Exclusion Originated in the hierarchies of decision-making power and in the early social division of
labour, most applied strategies of social exclusion of groups are built on perceived
differences, whereby race and ethnicity are two of the most important closure features.218
The literature on early racial and ethnic relations underlines that racial categorization was
mainly constructed around skin colour or facial features. Most common, there is the
imagined black/white dichotomy that defines the inferiority of superiority of individuals.219
While racial features are perceived as inherited and place people in biologically distinct
215 Weber, Max (1968): Economy and Society, edited by G.Roth and C.Wittich; Bedminster Press, New York: 342, cited in Parkin, Frank (1974): The Social Analysis of Class Structure; The British Sociological Association, London: 3. 216 Frank, Parkin (2004): Dual Closure; in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden.33. 217 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 64. 218 Ibid: 81. 219 Ibid: 69.
64
sections of humanity, cultural features such as language, dress, cultural values and so forth
mark the differences between groups in terms of ethnicity.220
Charles Mills emphasizes that even if racial categorization often has a cultural
dimension, it is not the culture of racialized groups that first places the people in inferior
positions, but their physical distinct features that often lead to the failure to recognize the
people’s humanity.221 As Anthony Appiah stress: “It is not the black culture the racist
disdains, but blacks.”222
Therefore, whereas in exclusion processes race is seen as an unchangeable treat, and
leads to inescapable positions in an imagined biological hierarchy (racism), the one single
“chance” for ethnic minorities to be accepted in a social system is acculturation.223
Therefore, even if there is a high risk of conflict, the ethnocentric rapports are more
flexible than those that imply constructed racial differences.
To summarize, the crucial difference in drawing strategies of exclusion in ethnic and
racialized relations is that while the culture of certain ethnic groups may not be recognized
as equal with others, the defining characteristic of racism is the failure to recognize the
very humanity of the racialized group.224
7.2. The Role of the State in the Process of Social Exclusion
Referring to the main actors that develop strategies of closure and promote the social
exclusion of certain groups, Parkin’s theory of social closure further sheds light not only
on the dominant group and the ruling class, but also on the role of the state as an actor in
their exclusion.225 In the first instance, for understanding the social dynamic of an excluded
group, Parkin calls attention to its early official status in the society over time. He sustains
that:
220 Mills, W. Charles (2007): Multiculturalism as/and/or Anti-Racism? in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 101. 221 Ibid: 94-95. 222 Appiah, Anthony (1997): Multicultural Misunderstanding; New York Review of Books: 36, cited in Mills, W. Charles (2007): Multiculturalism as/and/or Anti-Racism? in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 101.94-95. 223 Mills, W. Charles (2007): Multiculturalism as/and/or Anti-Racism? In Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 101. 224 Ibid: 94. 225 Parkin, Frank (1979): Marxism and Class Theory; A Bourgeois Critique, Tavistock, London: 89-116.
65
In all known instances where racial, religious, linguistic, or sex characteristics have been sized
upon for closure purposes, the group in question has already at some time been defined as legally
inferior by the state.226 As Parkin emphasizes, the state plays a major role in drawing strategies of exclusion,
enforcing the separation lines of physical or cultural features drawn by ruling classes and
dominants groups, through institutionalized rules. In the following section we will first
look at the involvement of the state in the racialized strategies of exclusion and then we
will turn to the institutionally induced ethnic violence.
7.2.1. The State’s Mechanisms in Exploitation through Racialized Relations
The processes of racialization originate in the division of labour, in different forms of
exploitation, the most prominent being slavery.227 Engels states that slavery is a form of
the first great division of labour that occurred as a result of the increased productivity of
work. This exploitation form had a great impact on the social setting, polarizing the people
in slaves and their masters, the exploiters and exploited.228
Due to nonconformity to a normalized body aesthetic and being targeted as foreigners,
certain minority groups were in the past constraint by states, ruling classes or dominant
groups to carry out the physical, dirty or servile work, being stigmatized, segregated and
labeled as inferior and as non-human.229 The denial of slave’s humanity placed many
groups outside any social class, the racialized people being rather perceived as “beasts in
human shape”,230 “as an intermediate link between white humanity and the rest of the
animal kingdom, or as fully-fledged members of that kingdom”.231 Hence, due to a distinct
body aesthetic, certain groups were not only placed at the bottom of the social system, like
in the case of ethnic groups, but were totally excluded from it, since their humanity was
226 Ibid: 96. 227 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 69. 228 Engels, Friedrich (1972): Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State, Chapter IX: Barbarism and Civilization; International Publishers, New York: 217-237. 229 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 69. 230 an Englishman wrote in the seventh century about the Native Americans “ We look upon them with Scorn and Disdain and think them little better than Beasts in Human Shape”, cited in Mills, W. Charles (2007): Multiculturalism as/and/or Anti-Racism? in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 95. 231 Mills, W. Charles (2007): Multiculturalism as/and/or Anti-Racism? in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 95.
66
denied. In this early form of class society, slaves were property of the state or members of
the ruling class, held against their will, doing hard labour from which owners accumulated
profits.232
Identifying the implication of the state in shaping structural inequalities, Young
explains that while slavery has been practiced throughout the world at various times, this
overt discriminatory practice was largely legalized by states.233 The racialized relations in
form of slavery confirm Parkin’s theory of social closure, indicating the crucial role the
state plays in promoting and facilitating exclusionary practices on certain groups. Slavery
was, therefore, a form of social exclusion, based on racialized inequalities and having an
economical scope: to maximize profits for states and for members of the ruling groups.
7.2.2. The State’s Mechanisms in Inducing Ethnic Violence
Another form of group exclusion is marked by violent actions leading to ethnic
extermination or ethnic cleansing. Esman explains that, like in the case of racial
differences, the dominant groups “invent and popularize reasons, biological or cultural, to
demonstrate the superiority of their people and the inferiority of the other, which justifies
their dominant status”234 (...) treating entire communities with “unimaginable cruelty on
individuals who are held to be collectively guilty of the presumed offenses that occasion
such draconian punishment”.235
Emphasizing the role of the state in this kind of closure processes, Esman shows that
intimidation and oppression of certain groups are often sustained by the police or by
judicial forms of the state, being enforced by laws that institutionalize inferiority,
producing a spirit of resignation among the oppressed people.236
Violence against certain ethnic communities is a method of enforcing exclusion, involving
attacks and mobs, often exercised by state’s agents.237 And even if the state is not directly
involved in such hostilities, Parkin sustains that, in fact, the hierarchical stratification of
232 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 69-70. 233 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 69-71. 234 Esman, Milton J. (2004) An Introduction to Ethnic Conflict; Polity Press, Cambridge: 120. 235 Ibid: 123. 236 Ibid: 121-122. 237 Ibid: 122.
67
cultural groups occurs exclusively through the action of the state, which allows a group to
exclude another one.238
7.3. Reproducing Patterns of Social Exclusion
While the theory of social closure underlines the role of the state in the historical processes
of social exclusion, Parkin fails to explain how state-induced exclusion influences the
target groups over time, that is to say, even after discriminatory practices have become
illegal. How can an early-institutionalized categorization of people based on racial or
cultural lines lead to structural processes, where currently there is no institutional rule
against a certain group?
Young explains that although over time, political and legal disadvantages may be
reduced, the formerly institutionally excluded groups remain at the bottom of the economic
and social hierarchy, their inherited disadvantages continuing to keep them as victims in
the struggle over distribution of power and resources.239 Referring to the consequences of
the early racialized work relations, Young states: “While chattel of slavery was abolished
(…), racialized positions in the social division of labor remain.”240 In other words the
formerly oppressed group that occupies the lowest status, continues to be segregated by the
dominant group.241 Therefore, even if discriminatory state induced rules no longer exist,
the new social order does not lead to a prompt social inclusion, but to a subcategory of
second-class citizens.242 Young explains the mechanism of perpetuation of previous
patterns of social closure by pointing out that:
238 Frank, Parkin (2004): Dual Closure; in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives) Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden: 51. 239 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 70-71. 240 Ibid: 70. 241 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 70. 242 See Frank, Parkin (2004): Dual Closure; in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden.
68
(…)even in the absence of explicitly discriminatory laws and rules, adherence to body esthetic,
struggle over power, and other dynamics of differentiation, will tend to reproduce given
categorical inequalities unless institutions take explicit action to counteract such tendencies.243 Parkin states that the social exclusion of a group appears as relievable when this group is,
or previously was, weakened by the state policies.244 Therefore, the target groups for
structural disadvantages, even in the absence of explicitly discriminatory laws, are those
that already are vulnerable, due to former institutional practices and of physical effects of
past actions and policies.
Even if there are no longer discriminatory policies, the social classes continue to act on
stereotypical assumptions that systematically reinforce the limited opportunities for
vulnerable groups and reproduce the social inequalities.245 Once the state tries to stop this
kind of tyranny and tries to integrate the excluded group into society, political problems
may emerge. At this moment, the dominant cultural group starts a conflict with the state,
since previously accepted exclusion practices are now regarded as illegitimate.246 The
protest against the new integration measures and the sharing of power expresses the
disappointment of even the lower social classes who feel deceived by the state and often
the state comes too late to protect the subordinate groups.247
So far we have understood that physical or ethnic differences are important indicators
for dominant groups in placing certain other groups at the bottom of the social system or,
like in the case of racialized relations, even outside of it. Second, we have seen that the
dominant groups and the state draw strategies of closure, in order to extract benefits by
their hierarchical relation to the others,248 many of the exclusion strategies being enforced
by institutional rules and laws. And third, even if legalized forms of oppression against
selected groups have came to an end, this does not mean that the previously oppressed
243 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 64. 244 Frank, Parkin (2004): Dual Closure; in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden: 51. 245 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural injustice and politics of difference, in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, Frank, Parkin (2004): Dual Closure; in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden. 246 Frank, Parkin (2004): Dual Closure; in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden: 52. 247 Ibid: 51. 248 Young, Iris Marion (2007): Structural injustice and politics of difference, in Laden, Anthony Simon and Owen, David (2007): Multiculturalism and Political Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York: 81.
69
groups are now welcomed into the social system. They mostly remain at the bottom of
society, building a subclass of second-class citizens. Therefore, the fact that the
mainstream society excludes certain groups seems to be the result of earlier state measures
of exclusion, which continue to be followed by the society even when discriminatory
practices have become illegal. As displayed in Figure 11, once mechanisms of social
exclusion begun to come to play, official attempts to integrate previously stigmatized and
excluded groups cannot guarantee the liberal condition of justice, as long as the state
tolerates the intrusion of socially inherited handicaps and easements that directly affect the
individual’s capacity to perform249 (see Figure 11).
Fig. 11: Social Exclusion Based on Racial and Ethnic Differences
249 Frank, Parkin (1974): The Social Analysis of Class Structure; The British Sociological Association, London 8.
• De`iningforeignersonperceiveddiferences:
• Race• Cultural/ethnic
• Lawsandpolicies• Socialreproductionofformerpolicies
• Groupweakenesandincapacitytoredress
• Economicalbene`its• Confrontationsforresources
• State• Rulingclass• Dominantgroup
ACTORS AIMS
STRATEGYMECHANISMS
70
CASE STUDY 2: THE SOCIAL EXCLUSION OF ROMA
The socially excluded Roma are the object of numerous discussions attempting to explain
their dramatic situation in Romania. Paradoxically enough, even if there is no institutional
rule aiming at segregation and social exclusion, because discriminatory practices are illegal
in Romania, a large part of the Roma community is burdened with the consequences of
inequalities and disparities in mainstream society and of daily stigmatization.
As we have seen in the Chapter 1 and Chapter 4, policies of social inclusion of the
Roma developed by the Romanian government and by a variety of international actors,
even if sustained by forms of affirmative action, have lead to no significant results and are
not able to offer equal opportunities and hope for the Roma community. Moreover,
promises of social inclusion over the next decades often disregard that a prerequisite of
social inclusion may imply a previous exclusion from the social system. While policies are
concentrated on the present and especially on the future developments, the political
discourse turns a blind eye to the past experiences that may, to a great extent, have caused
the socio-political inequalities the Roma community face today.
This chapter is guided by the theory of social closure, which states that even if there are
no overt discriminatory practices against a certain group, the causes of its social exclusion
are to be found in earlier discriminatory contexts provided by the state, which during a
certain period of time officially defined the group as socially subordinate.250
Turning to the case of social exclusion of the Roma, we look at their past status on
Romanian territory, attempting to identify possible key moments when this community
was officially defined as subordinate.
250 Parkin, Frank (1979): Marxism and Class Theory; A Bourgeois Critique, Tavistock, London: 89-116.
71
CHAPTER 8: THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN THE SOCIAL EXCLUSION OF ROMA
8.1. Racializing the Roma Minority - Slavery
The earliest written evidence of Roma on Romanian territory was recorded in 1385,
when Prince Dan I confirmed in a document the gift of 40 Roma families to two
monasteries. The Romanian historian, Neagu Djuvara, relates how, from the beginning of
their arrival across the Danube to the province of Wallachia, groups of Roma were
captured and immediately enslaved.251 Alone in Europe, Roma were enslaved on a great
part of the current Romanian territory, the Wallachia and Moldavia regions, serving the
ruling class, the church and the state.252
The manner in which Roma slaves were treated in these two provinces was not very
different from other societies based on the division of people into masters and slaves - they
were bought and sold like ordinary commodities and were considered to be the private
goods of their possessors.253 Mihail Kogalniceanu, a Romanian liberal writer described in
1837 his memories of Moldavian Roma slaves: On the streets of the Jassy of my youth, I saw human beings wearing chains on their arms and legs,
others with iron clamps around their foreheads, and still others with metal collars about their
necks. Cruel beatings, and other punishments such as starvation, being hung over smoking fires,
solitary imprisonment and being thrown naked into the snow or the frozen rivers, such was the fate
of the wretched Gypsy. The sacred institution of the family was likewise made a mockery: women
were wrested from their men, and daughters from their parents. Children were torn from the
breasts of those who brought them into this world, separated from their mothers and fathers and
from each other, and sold to different buyers from the four corners of Rumania, like cattle. Neither
humanity nor religious sentiment, nor even civil law, offered protection for these beings. It was a
terrible sight, and one which cried out to Heaven.254
251 Djuvara, Neagu (1995): Între Orient şi Occident. Ţările Române la Începutul Epocii Moderne (Between Orient and Occident. The Romanian Lands at the Beginning of the Modern Era), Humanitas, Bucharest: 289 252 The slaves were separated in “ţigani domensti”, belonging to the state, “ţigani mânăstireşti”, belonging to church and monasteries, and “ţigani boiereşti”, belonging to private persons, boyars (ruling class). It is interesting to note that at that time the term ţigan was used in Moldavia and Walachia for designating the slaves and for describing a certain social class. See Djuvara, Neagu (1995): Între Orient şi Occident. Ţările Române la Începutul Epocii Moderne (Between Orient and Occident. The Romanian Lands at the Beginning of the Modern Era), Humanitas, Bucharest: 289. 253 Djuvara, Neagu (1995): Între Orient şi Occident. Ţările Române la Începutul Epocii Moderne (Between Orient and Occident. The Romanian Lands at the Beginning of the Modern Era), Humanitas, Bucharest: 187-203. 254 Hancock, Ian cites Kogalniceanu (1987): The Pariah Syndrome: An Account of Gypsy Slavery and Persecution; Karoma Publishers, Ann Arbor: 16-17.
72
For illustrating the Romanian context of the XIX century, when in the enlightened Europe
intense debates took place on liberty, equality and human rights, the 1818 Penal Code of
Wallachia continued to describe the status of the Roma as follows: “All Ţigani are born as
slaves” and “The Ţigani without a possessor become state property”.255
In the other province, Moldavia, the 1833 Penal Code also stipulated clauses for the Roma
slaves: Legal unions cannot take place between free persons and slaves. Marriage between slaves cannot
take place without their owner’s consent. (…) The price of a slave must be fixed by the Tribunal,
according to his age, condition and profession.256
At the time, in Wallachia and Moldavia, Roma were placed outside the given social
system, due to physical and cultural attributes of difference. Their bodily characteristics,
like skin color, or facial features, may have been decisive elements for targeting the Roma
as foreigners – a characteristic that, as we have seen, is pivotal in drawing strategies of
social exclusion. There was also an affiliation of Roma to a distinct culture - language,
clothing and social organization, but as Mills suggested, it is not the cultural differences
that first determine dominant groups to build inequalities and to deny the very humanity
minority groups, but the possibility to epidermalize257 their differences. Therefore, we can
state that group distinct body aesthetic lead to an early racialization of relations, this
mechanism transforming Roma for 500 years into language gifted working animals258.
The early presence of Roma on what is now the Romanian territory was marked from
the beginning by relations of domination and exclusion that adopted a predominantly racial
specific form. This is evident from historical literature. Therefore we can state that the
current stigmatization of Roma in Romania has its roots in this division of labour, namely
slavery. It is interesting to underline here not only the evident role of the state that
sustained and took advantages of Roma discrimination through the legalization of this
racialized social structure, but also the position of the Orthodox Church, which, as an
owner of thousands of Roma, fully participated in slave transactions, being unapologetic
about it.259
255 Ibid: 16-17. 256 Crowe, David M (1994): A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia; St. Martin's, New York: 113-114. 257 Fanon used the term “epidermalize” in Fanon Frantz (1967): Black Skins, White Masks; Grove Press, New York, 1967. See also Slaughter Jr., Thomas F (1983): Epidermalizing the World: A Basic Mode of being Black; in Harris, Leonard (ed.): Philosophy Born of Struggle; Kendall Hunt Publishers, Dubuque. 258 Cărtărescu, Mircea (2007): Die Zigeuner – ein Rumänisches Problem, (The Gypsies – a Romanian Problem); in Neue Zürcher Zeitung, November 29. 259 Cărtărescu, Mircea (2007): Die Zigeuner – ein Rumänisches Problem, (The Gypsies – a Romanian Problem); in Neue Zürcher Zeitung, November 29, 2007.
73
8.2. From Slaves to Second-Class Citizens
Eventually, after the revolution of 1848, under international pressure and thanks to the
newly established pro-Western Romanian elite, tendencies of slavery abolition were
recorded. After 500 years of racialized relations and institutionalized slavery, between
1855-1856 the Roma slaves became free in Moldavia and Walachia,260 where, as
Cărtarescu puts it, the common message of the newly enlightened owners to their slaves
was: Brothers, you are free to go where your feet take you!261 But as further social
developments show, this “generosity” merely paved the way for new tragedies. Referring
to this episode, Cartarescu goes on to note: (…) this slaves liberation occurred without the slightest logistical or psychological preparation,
wreaked unthinkable havoc. Hundreds of thousands of Gypsies were free to die of hunger. With no
money, clothing or livelihood, without a belief or a culture – with nothing but with their naked
humanity, they soon populated the prisons en masse. No one knows how many perished at the time
from so much freedom, or how many have died until today as a result.262
Also in this case, Parkin’s theory of social closure demonstrates its validity: even if state-
induced rules no longer existed after the abolition of slavery, the Roma were not therefore
automatically integrated into the Romanian society. They continued to occupy the lowest
social stratum, becoming a subcategory of second-class citizens.263
8.3. Institutionalized Measures of Acculturation
The greatest part of the current Romanian territory was defined in 1918 by the
unification of three main provinces: Moldavia and Walachia (which had already made up
the pre-modern Romanian state) and Transylvania. While in the two provinces the Roma
were confronted with a brutal form of social exclusion, the Austro-Hungarian Regime in
Transylvania applied converse policies. In the 18th century aggressive assimilation
programs launched by Maria Theresia, the Empress of the Austro-Hungarian Empire,
260 Djuvara, Neagu (1995): Între Orient şi Occident. Ţările Române la Începutul Epocii Moderne (Between Orient and Occident. The Romanian Lands at the Beginning of the Modern Era), Humanitas, Bucharest: 298-302. 261 Cărtărescu, Mircea (2007): Die Zigeuner – ein Rumänisches Problem, (The Gypsies – a Romanian Problem); in Neue Zürcher Zeitung, November 29, 2007. 262 Ibid. 263 See Frank, Parkin (2004): Dual Closure; in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden.
74
affected the Transylvanian Roma. Known under the name of “the four great decrees of
Maria Theresia” or the “Gypsy Decrees”, the state policies prohibited the use of Roma
language – Romanes – together with all other cultural traits that defined the ethnical
affiliation of the group. The Roma were forced to give up their way of life in order to be
acculturated and assimilated. Not only the destruction of their cultural identity was the goal
of the decrees, but the total elimination of any physically distinct trait. Therefore,
marriages between Roma were also prohibited, the Roma being forced to marry only inter-
racially. A cruel aspect of the decrees stipulated that Roma children had to be taken from
their parents, in order to be educated in farming families.264 Even the name “Cigany",
which was commonly used for designating Roma in the Eastern part of the Empire, was
replaced by the Magyar terms like Ujpolgár (new citizen), Ujparasztok (new farmer) or
Ujmagyar (new Hungarian). The state’s aim here was not social exclusion, but this
procedure can hardly be called social inclusion either, as long as compulsory state
measures were used for it.
Therefore, all three provinces developed state policies targeting Roma as distinct
people. While in Moldavia and Walachia they were placed in a racialized category from
the beginning, their humanity being denied, in Transylvania, they were first categorized
due to distinct cultural traits. However, the policies that forced the Roma community to
marry only non-Roma, induced a state-constructed inferiority of Roma racial traits,
attempting to eliminate them.
Even if Transylvanian Roma were not the object of overt social exclusion, the aim of
the state to assimilate them and the brutal acculturation of the Roma as a group, denotes
clear discriminatory practices and displays state-induced violence. Therefore, while in
Walachia and Moldavia we have located, in the practice of slavery, a pivotal moment when
the state has placed the Roma in a context of racial subordination, in Transylvania,
through policies aiming at Roma acculturation and forced assimilation, we identified
another way in which the state placed the Roma in a context of ethnical and cultural
subordination.
264 See Rombase Didactically edited information on Roma. http://ling.kfunigraz.ac.at/~rombase/cgi-bin/art.cgi?src=data/ethn/groupsat/at-bgld.en.xml&xanchor=a1#a1 Fraser, Angus (1992): The Gypsies; Blackwell, Cambridge, or Mayerhofer, Claudia (1999): Dorfzigeuner. Kultur und Geschichte der Burgenland-Roma von der Ersten Republik bis zur Gegenwart, Village Roma. Culture and History of Burgenland Roma from the First Republic until Nowadays); Picus, Wien.
75
8.4. First tendencies of Roma Ethnic Self-Awareness in Romania
Together with their status as people, at the end of the 19th century, when the pre-modern
Romanian state emerged through the unification of Moldavia and Walachia, the Romanian
Roma gained popularity as musicians, as skilled artisans, and as subjects of romantic
literature. They generally occupied a low place in the social scale, but compared to their
status on the same territory during the preceding five centuries, their official position was
now improved. Due to a considerably increased territory after 1918, the newly born
Romanian Nation-State consisted of a greater ethnical composition and in this context a
sense of Roma ethnic self-awareness first emerged. A newly established Roma elite set up
associations,265 opened Roma Journals,266 and even organized national and international
conferences in Bucharest, placing great emphasis on education, health-care, and countering
the disintegration of Roma culture and traditional professions.267
8.5. The Roma Genocide
But the modest tendencies in Roma emancipation and social inclusion where annulled
very soon, during the Nazis’ assumption of power in Europe. After the implementation of
the idea “to protect the German Blood and Honour”, beside the Jews and persons with
psychical disabilities, Roma became victims of the Gesetz zur Verhütung erbkranken
Nachwuchses.268 The main instrument of this law was compulsory sterilisation. The idea of
the inferiority of the Roma people was transformed into “irrevocably inferior”, in the Nazi
racist ideology269, and at last, the “Gypsy Problem” finds its “final solution” in the
extermination of Roma in Germany and other territories under the German occupation.
In 1940, after Romania hat entered the German camp, the newly established military
regime of General Antonescu made Romania “Hitler’s favourite ally.”270 In a public
265 e. g. The General Union of Romanian Roma or General Association of Romanian Roma. 266 e. g. Neamu Ţigănesc (The Roma Kinship), Glasul Romilor (The Voice of the Roma), or Timpul (The Time). 267 Crowe, David M (1994): A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia; St. Martin's, New York: 127-131. 268 Law for the Prevention of Hereditary Diseased Offspring. 269 Thelen, Peter (2005): Roma Policy: The Long Walk Towards Political Participation, in: Roma in Europe. From Social Exclusion to Active Participation; Skopje: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung: 19. 270 Crowe, David M (1994): A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia; St. Martin's, New York: 132.
76
speech, Antonescu declared: “mice, rats, crows, Gypsies, vagabonds and Jews don’t need
any documents”.271
In the first year of World War II, along with the Jewish population, more than 25000
Roma (half of them children)272 from the region around Bucharest were deported to the
Transdnistrian extermination camps, in the eastern Moldovian region, part of the Soviet
Union at that time. It is estimated that during Antonescu’s fascist regime (1940-1944),
approximately 36,000 Roma were exterminated by the Romanian state.273 Due to a lack of
wartime records, it is difficult to say how many Roma died in Europe as direct victims of
the holocaust.274 However, as is also the case today, there was never a clear estimate of the
number of Roma in Europe in the first place.
8.6. How to deal with the Past?
In 1982 the German Chancellor Helmuth Schmidt made an official apology on behalf of
the German nation and recognized the Roma genocide: “We commemorate all the Roma
who were victims of the systematic genocide in Nazi-occupied Europe”.275
In 2007, President Băsescu also publicly apologized for the Romanian state’s role in
deportation of Roma to Nazi death camps: The authorities were merciless. They took the Roma from their homes, from the towns and army
and sent them far away, in order to obtain a pure nation. (…) We must tell our children that six
decades ago children like them were sent by the Romanian state to die of hunger and cold.”276 Nevertheless, like in the case of Roma slavery, no extended debated succeeded277. This
may be one reason why the current public opinion still oscillates between considering
General Antonescu a war criminal or a national hero.278
271 Ibid: 133. 272 See The International Commission on the Holocaust in Romania (2004): Final Report: 288: http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:wZsTnRwLaq0J:www.ushmm.org/research/center/presentations/features/details/2005-03-10/pdf/romanian/chapter_08.pdf+exterminarea+romilor+de+catre+regimul+antonescu&cd=3&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=firefox-a 273 Crowe, David M (1994): A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia; St. Martin's, New York: 135. 274 It is estimated that 500.000 Roma were exterminated in Europe due to the same racial madness that lead to the extermination of the European Jewry. 275 Rose, Romani (2007): Roma and Sinti – Human Rights for Europe’s Largest Minority, Heidelberg, Central Council of German Sinti and Roma; Documentation and Cultural Centre of German Sinti and Roma: 22. 276 Divers Bulletin no. 40(283)/10/29/2007: Romania's President Apologizes for State's Role in Deportation of Roma: http://www.divers.ro/eveniment_en?wid=37646&func=viewSubmission&sid=7920 277 While no major official public debates occurred, Romanian media exposes the controversial historical view on general Antonescu. For example see the article concerning the retrieval of Antonescu’s honor in
77
8.7. The Vicious Cycle of Roma Social Exclusion
Starting from the premise that every problem has its own unique history, and that only
this history allows a proper understanding and an appropriate point of view for developing
suitable solutions, this chapter was guided by the theory of social closure and attempted to
locate relevant junctions as to when Roma were put into an institutional context of social
exclusion, which was created and maintained by the state.
Roma were prevented rather than encouraged from integrating into the institutions of
the majority culture and currently they continue to be the easy targets of most racially
motivated acts of violence.279 Although over time, political and legal disadvantage have
been reduced, Roma have mainly remained at the bottom of economic and social
hierarchy, being confronted with structural processes that produced and reproduced
segregation. Their inherited disadvantages may as well have played an important role in
their current social exclusion, continuing to keep them victims in the struggle over
distribution of power and resources.
The state, in all its temporal and spatial configurations, played a crucial role in the
social exclusion of Roma by supporting slavery during 500 years and conducting processes
of ethnic and racial cleansing during World War II. Therefore, the choice of criteria in the
social exclusion of Roma is not arbitrary today, the closure strategies being preceded by
legal definitions of Roma as a subordinate group. The social exclusion that is rooted in
racialized inequality determines that discrimination and stereotyping persist, hindering
marginalized Roma to develop and to exercise their rights and their capacities.
The Roma, which were denied civil and political rights by the state over extended
periods of time, became the natural target for exclusion from the mainstream society, even
in the absence of official rules discriminating against this group. The reproduction of
discriminatory attitudes and their own inherited vulnerability are important mechanisms
Gândul, 07/05/2008: The General Antonescu can’t be rehabilited, or Evenimentul Zilei, 24/08/2008: 23 August, between catastrophe and escape.referring to the birthday of the communist regime in Romania, when General Antonescu was executed. 278For instance, when the Romanian public television conducted the series “Mari Români” (Great Romanians), and asked the public to vote the 100 greatest Romanians, Antonescu was designated by the public as the sixth greatest Romanian of all times Details on the project are available at: http://www.mariromani.ro/ 279 Barany, Zoltan D (1994): Nobody’s Children: The Resurgence of Nationalism and the Status of Gypsies in Post-Communist Eastern Europe; in Serafin, Joan (ed.): East-Central Europe in the 1990´s, Westview Press, Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford: 239.
78
that imprison a large part of the Romanian Roma in the vicious cycle of helplessness and
hopelessness.
Finally, the state appears as an active actor in the every day social exclusion of Roma,
since as Parkin showed, through its action allows the mainstream society to exclude the
vulnerable groups.280
280 Frank, Parkin (2004): Dual Closure; in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives) Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden: 51.
79
III. OUTCOMES AND VERIFICATION OF THE HYPOTHESES
We have been moving on one axis, from the present to the past, and on another from the
periphery to the centre. Two structural issues that we have hypothesized to be two of the
key aspects that challenge the current efforts to integrate the Roma have been intertwined
with these movements through time and space: the Romanian national self-understanding
and the nature of the social exclusion of Roma.
This chapter will first discuss the outcomes that this analysis of the Romanian national
self-understanding deliver, and then move on to the results delivered by the examination of
social exclusion of Roma. The second section of the chapter aims at verifying the
hypotheses formulated at the beginning of the research.
CHAPTER 9: DISCUSSION OF OUTCOMES
9.1. The Concept of Romanian Nationhood and the National Self-
Understanding
In the absence of a robust political expression, able to exprime the national feeling and
having no institutional achievements to take esteem in, the only source of national pride for
the Romanians was to be found in the past: in the primordial attachments in the people’s
inherited racial, linguistic and cultural identities, in the imagined consanguinity and in
through kin connections. The ethno-cultural frontier was not only imagined for separating
Romanians from their territorially external Magyar or Slav neighbors, but also from their
internal ethnically different groups.
The conception of the Romanian nation is clearly ethnic, establishing the jus sanguinis
as membership criteria. Looking at the specificity of Romanian nationalism, beside its
obvious ethnic nature, we observe a strong irredentist character. The national idea was
promoted in all provinces by a revolutionary act, and found its common expression in the
desire for liberation from foreign rulers: the Ottomans and their Phanariot princes in
Wallachia and Moldavia, and the Austro-Hungarian monarchy in Transylvania. Aiming to
transfer sovereignty from the foreign rulers to the people, there was only a single formula
80
able to fire Romania’s imagination: an ethnic irredentist nationalism.281 This aspect
furthermore accentuates the opposition against all those who are perceived as foreigners.
National membership based on jus sanguinis combined with the ethnic and irredentist
nationalism set clear boundaries separating the Romanians from all those who do not share
the same blood, language and culture. Therefore, for Romanians, the ethnic groups who
share the same citizenship yet not the national characteristics are first perceived as being
foreigners and as not truly being Romanians. In respect thereof, when speaking about the
Romanian population we may differentiate between the demos and the ethno nation282,
between “true” Romanians and the undesired possessors of Romanian citizenship. This
leads to ethnic tensions marked by hostility and reciprocal lack of trust.
The exclusionary conception of Romanian nationhood has determined the tracks along
which Roma, as a distinct cultural group, are marginalized and perceived as foreigners, in
spite of their Romanian citizenship. The Romanian nation state generates exclusion of all
who do not share Romanian blood, language and culture (see Figure 12).
Fig.12: Outcomes: The Concept of Romanian Nation
281 Sugar, Peter (1969): Eastern and Domestic Roots of Eastern European Nationalism, in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford: 175. 282 More on the differences between inclusive and the exclusive concepts of nation in Basta Fleiner, Lidija, R. (2008): Trust and Tolerance as State-Making Values in Multicultural Societies. Paradoxes and Chances of federalism as a Conflict-Management Tool; Eleven International Publishing, Utrecht: 77-82.
PrimordialAttachment• Blood,language,
culture
MembershipCriterion• JusSanguinis
Differencebetweencitizenandmemberof
thenation
Nationalism• Ethnicirredentist(doubleaversionto
foreigners)
Relationswithnationalminorities
• Lackofacceptanceandtrust
Exclusion
81
9.2. Understanding the Tradition of Social Exclusion of the Roma in Romania
In the labyrinth of defining, enforcing and separating patterns of identity, all non-Roma
communities of Romania have a common ground manifested in the animosity toward the
Roma.283 While the German or even the Hungarian minorities (as former ruler) are
considered “accepted foreigners”, the Roma are invested with an additional degree of
otherness.
This analysis of the nature of social exclusion of Roma has revealed actors and complex
mechanisms responsible for the production and reproduction of social exclusion. The
current social exclusion of Roma, which originated in historically racialized relations of
slavery and in constant attempts of the state to acculturate and even exterminate this
minority, continues to be reproduced even in the absence of explicitly discriminatory laws.
The Romanian society therefore perpetuates old patterns of exclusion, previously drawn by
the state. The inherited inequalities have considerable weakened the Roma minority,
inhibiting their ability to develop and exercise their capacities and increasing their
isolation. Their vulnerability further transforms them into easy targets of social exclusion,
drawn on deep roots of racial and social boundaries (See Figure 13).Draw, generate
Fig. 13: Outcomes: The Social Exclusion of Roma
283 Bran, Mirel (1995): New Xenophobia in Europe; Kluwer Law International, London: 287.
TheState• Tracedpatternsof
exclusion(slavery,genocide,acculturation)
OriginofSocialExclusion
• Racializedrelations
Society
• Reproducesgivenpatternofexclusion
TheState• "Allows"social
exclusionandenforcestheseparationlines
Romaminority• Weakenedby
inheritedinequalities
Vulnerability• Leadstonewpatterns
ofexclusion
82
Due to of poor economic and social representation, and former institutionalized and current
informal discrimination in most aspects of social life, Roma are not only seen as belonging
to a distinct ethnic group, but they have built in time a distinct economic and social class.
The wide social inequalities the Roma face, lead to the identification of an additional
barrier between Roma and the Romanian majority, as well as between Roma and the other
national minorities of Romania, drawn not only on an ethnic foundation, but also on a
racial and a socio-economical one. Multiple and reproduced patterns of social exclusion
continue to isolate the Roma community (See Figure 13).
CHAPTER 10: VERIFICATION OF THE HYPOTHESES
The guiding research question of this study attempted to find out why have the national
and international strategies for improving the living conditions of Roma in Romania, and
finally for including them into Romanian society remained a “pleasant fiction”284?
The two hypotheses suggested that analyses of the concept of Romanian nationhood and
the history of Roma social exclusion on Romanian territory, would deliver valuable
insights into explaining the failure of the project aiming at Roma integration. In the
following paragraphs both research hypotheses will be addressed in turn.
10.1. To what extent does the concept of the Romanian nation-state challenge
the attempts of Roma integration?
The first hypothesis argued that one of the main factors hindering a successful integration
of Roma is the Romanian conception of the nation state. The results of the study seem to
confirm that the Romanian conception of nationhood influences, on a basis of imagined
consanguinity and kin connections, who does and who does not belong to the nation. This
restrictive principle primarily excludes ethnic differences and it is not favorable for the
284 The term was used in 1998 by the European Roma Rights Center, for describing the human rights situation of Roma in Macedonia. For further information see European Roma Rights Center, The Country Reports Series No. 7 (1998): A Pleasant Fiction. The Human Rights Situation of Roma in Macedonia. http://romawomeninfo.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=251%3A2009-09-01-09-56-16&catid=107%3A2009-09-01-09-52-41&Itemid=249&lang=en
83
ethnically distinct Roma, placing them in the role of the ethnically marginalized
“foreigners”.
It is the very nature of Romanian nationhood that excludes the Roma from the
nation, its ethnic understanding falling short of bringing ways for acceptance and
integration. The validity of the first hypothesis is confirmed therefore, by the ethno-
nationalist logic that is opposing to any efforts aiming at integrating the ethnocultural
distinct Roma, excluding them.
10.2 To what extent does the historical evolution of the relations between the
Roma and the majority society hinder the process of Roma integration?
The second hypothesis asserts that another major factor posing considerable barriers to
the integration process is found in the specific historical evolution of the relations between
Roma and the majority society. This hypothesis required a deeper historical focus on the
social status of the Romanian Roma on the Romanian territory. The approach identified
decisive moments when Roma were put by the state into a context of inferiority and
therefore were officially excluded from the given social system. These power relations
created structural inequalities that, due to later informally reproduced social exclusion,
continue to isolate the Roma community. Victims of the reproduced patterns of
discrimination and of their own inherited vulnerability, Roma continue to be an easy target
for social exclusion, this vicious cycle representing a major barrier for any effort aiming at
Roma integration.
The idea that early strategies of state-induced exclusion, continue to be informally
reproduced, even if this is not legal anymore, delivers a comprehensive explanation for the
major barriers that historical evolution of the relations between the Roma and the majority
society pose to the integration process.
Both hypotheses have contributed to our understanding of the roots and the complex nature
of Roma exclusion based on class and ethnicity. The following figure distills the main
findings of the research, underlying the barriers in implementation strategies of integration
(see Figure 12).
84
Fig. 14: Verification of Hypotheses: The Concept of Romanian Nationhood and the History of Social Exclusion of Roma as Barriers in Implementing Strategies of Integration
The research question – why the national and international strategies for improving the
living conditions of the Roma in Romania,\ and finally for including them into Romanian
society have remained a “pleasant fiction”285? – finds two valuable answers in the
exclusionary concept of Romanian nationhood and the perpetuating mechanisms of social
exclusion. These domestic particularities are major factors that generate and enforce
patterns of exclusion, therefore holding back any attempts to integrate the Roma minority.
285 The term was used in 1998 by the European Roma Rights Center, for describing the human rights situation of Roma in Macedonia. For further information see European Roma Rights Center, The Country Reports Series No. 7 (1998): A Pleasant Fiction. The Human Rights Situation of Roma in Macedonia. http://romawomeninfo.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=251%3A2009-09-01-09-56-16&catid=107%3A2009-09-01-09-52-41&Itemid=249&lang=en
BarriersofRomaIntegrati
on
HistoryofSocial
ExclusionofRoma
• Oldmechanismsofclosurecontinuetogenerateandtoreproducesocialexclusiononsocio‐economicalboundaries
Conceptof
RomanianNationhood
• ThelogicofethnicnationalismexcludesRomafromthenationonbasisofethno‐culturalboundaries
85
IV. CONCLUSION
At this time in history state policies towards minorities are evaluated in a global context
and by global standards. While the principles followed in Western democracies in terms of
the accommodation of national minorities may be to a great extent transferable to other
states, however, in some circumstances, it seems challenging to “import” values and
policies, from one country to another, without adequately addressing certain local
specificities and case-particular priorities. There are situations, which have no comparable
experience to the Western models, and the Western models are not able to deliver
appropriate answers. In respect thereof, the literature on minorities and multiculturalism
refers to the case of the Roma as one of the so-called hard, or anomalous cases,286 with no
analogue model among Western democracies.
The case of the Roma minority appears as complicated from various points of view:
the Roma are a culturally distinct group that build the largest European minority, have no
kin-state, are spread throughout many countries and form no majorities in any region. The
lack of a territorial concentration and their own state that could represent their interests,
may deliver valuable answers in regard to their vulnerability as a group and to the history
of discrimination and exclusion that marks the Roma presence in many parts of Europe.
The complexity of the Roma case is further reflected in the Roma position as a distinct
ethic group, which in many countries overlaps with Roma position as a distinct social
class. That picture of crosscutting elements drawn on cultural, racial and social lines
reveals a multifaceted hybrid of affiliation and exclusion patterns, where standardized
policies and discourses may fall too short. Therefore, we argue that a major task facing any
multicultural agenda, which aims at Roma inclusion, must evaluate on a country-by-
country basis the local circumstances that have previously led to exclusion of the Roma.
As this study has revealed, one of these local particularities that works against
attempts at integration may be the local concept of the nation, which plays a very
important role in holding a society together or fragmenting it. The resistance of Romania to
ethnic neutrality is a burden of proof that at the moment, the state is unable to keep its
integration promises. A condition indicating that the state would have the will and the
286 See Kymlicka, Will (2001): Western Political Theory and Ethnic Relations in Eastern Europe, in Kymlicka Will and Oplaski, Magda (eds.): Can Liberalism be Exported? Oxford University Press, Oxford.
86
capacity to offer fair terms of integration for the culturally distinct Roma would imply
what Walzer calls “a sharp divorce of state and ethnicity”.287
The Romanian population continues to be divided into a privileged majority and
exceptional minorities,288 according to the ethnic nature of the nation state. This fact is
anchored in the Romanian constitution, which differentiates, as we have seen, between the
“Romanian people” and the “Romanian citizens”.289
From this point of view, the Romanian reality has many parallels with most Eastern
and Central European states, which have built their nation-state on a similar ethnic
exclusionary basis. Coincidentally or not, the largest Roma communities live in this part of
Europe, and it is also here that they are confronted with the highest degrees of
discrimination and segregation.
However, in order to better understand why the case of Roma is often seen as a hard,
one, and at the same time to reveal a second aspect that seems to disfavour their
integration, we need to look deeper than to the ethnocultural threats, which only seem to
supplementary accentuate the isolation of many Roma communities.
Even if the current challenges that the Romanian Roma face may appear comparable
with those faced by other Roma in other countries, especially in Eastern Europe, the very
roots of the problems are generally different in almost each country, and therefore, call for
different approaches of intervention. For instance, addressing the social exclusion of Roma
in Romania – where the phenomenon is rooted in centuries of slavery and therefore Roma
were not recognized as human beings – may require a totally different approach than in the
case of the social exclusion of Roma in another country like for example, in Serbia, where
the phenomenon is rooted in the misrecognition of the equal worth of Roma culture. As
this study has revealed, the very causes of social exclusion play a crucial role in the current
dynamics of the phenomenon, and dealing with their roots rather than with their
consequences may fill an appropriate agenda aiming at Roma inclusion.
There are several local aspects that can be identified as posing resistance to the
policies aiming at Roma integration. However, when looking only at these two just
mentioned Romanian particularities – history of social closure (slavery) and conception of
nationhood (ethnocultural) – one could argue that it may be pointless to draw multicultural
287 Walzer, Michael (1994): Comment, in Gutman, Amy (ed.) Multiculturalism; Princeton University Press, New Jersey: 99-103. 288 Ibid. 289 For instance, Art. 4 stipulates: “The State foundation is laid on the unity of the Romanian people and the solidarity of its citizens.” Romanian Constitution (2003): Article 4 - Unity of the people and equality among citizens.
87
policies in a state that does not accept and does not trust a part of its own citizens.
Furthermore, it is difficult to get public support for multiculturalism policies when the
group that should beneficiate from them is perceived as illegitimately resident, or even not
worthy in terms of race. This picture allows a glance at the risks that multicultural policies
may pose in an inappropriate environment, which is marked by lack of understanding, trust
and mutual respect. In this case, drawing upon and trying to implement multicultural
policies means more than designing a pleasant fiction, but, paradoxically, that may even
lead to reverse consequences, which are able to further inflame the aversion against a
certain vulnerable minority.290
Once we have recognized some of the difficulties that Roma integration in Romania
poses and that imported policies may fall too short in addressing it, it became clear that a
suis generis approach that addresses a variety of needs-specific measures has to be worked
out. These may include approaches such as dealing with the past,291 which may help
societies to break out of the cycle of violence and exclusion, by redefining the power
relations within society and creating a minimum ground of trust and acceptance. There
may be steps to be taken by the Romanian government in recognizing the Roma as equal
partners in drafting strategies of integration. And there has to be not only encouragement
to Roma to integrate, but also frameworks have to be developed in order to convince the
mainstream society to allow the Roma to integrate. Therefore, the policies of integration
have to take in consideration also the actions of the dominant society.
It is not clear whether the multicultural discourse can address such deep-rooted causes
for lack of trust and acceptance,292 as we have identified in the Romanian case, but it is
clear that these values are sine qua non for a successful implementation of integration
policies. The question is therefore not whether multicultural policies are the appropriate
measures in drafting strategies for integrating the Roma minority, but rather what steps
290 An example in this sense may be delivered by the measures of affirmative action in area of education, implemented in the early 1970s, by the American government, as a helping hand for the vulnerable African Americans, in order to overcome the handicaps resulted by the legacy of institutionalized racism. Beside the fact that these measures have failed to reach large parts of the African-American underclass, they have been regarded as reverse discrimination, waking up sentiments of injustice among many White males and therefore, resentments against African Americans. More on measures of affirmative action in Esman, Milton J. (2004): An Introduction to Ethnic Conflict, Polity Press, Cambridge: 185-189. 291 More on the concept of “dealing with the past”, in Sisson, Jonathan (ed.) (2007): Dealing with the Past in Post-Conflict Societies: Ten Years after the Peace Accords in Guatemala and Bosnia – Herzegovina, Conference Paper 1; Swisspeace Annual Conference 2006, Berne. 292 More on the role of trust and tolerance in multicultural societies, in Basta Fleiner, Lidija.R. (2008): Trust and Tolerance as State-Making Values in Multicultural Societies. Paradoxes and Chances of Federalism as a Conflict-Management Tool; Eleven International Publishing, Utrecht.
88
have to be taken next in order to create conditions for these policies? How to develop
sustainable measures for properly addressing this particular context?
Looking over the Romanian debate on Roma integration, it is difficult to estimate to
what extent the policies adopted in recent years have improved or declined the status of the
Roma in the Romanian society. However, we are inclined to believe that a clear outcome
of those policies would be that we become more aware of the specific questions the Roma
integration poses.
89
V. BIBLIOGRAPHY
ACADEMIA ROMÂNA (1996): România. Atlas Historico-Geografic (Romania, Historical-
Geographical Atlas); Editura Academiei Române, Bucharest. AIRA, KEMILÄINEN (1964): Nationalism: Problems Concerning the Word, the Concept and
Classification; in Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony, D. (eds.): Nationalism; Oxford
University Press, Oxford ANDERSON, BENEDICT (1983): Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism; Verso, New York. BARANY, ZOLTAN D. (1994): Nobody’s Children: The Resurgence of Nationalism and the Status of
Gypsies in Post-Communist Eastern Europe; in Serafin, Joan (ed.): East-Central Europe in the
1990´s; Westview Press, Boulder, San Francisco, Oxford.
BASTA FLEINER, LIDIJA R. (2009): Participation Rights under the Framework Convention for the
Protection of National Minorities (FCNM): Towards a Legal Framework Against Social and
Economic Discrimination; in Council of Europe (ed.): Institutional Accommodation and the
Citizen: Legal and Political Interaction in a Pluralist Society, Trends in Social Cohesion, No.
21; Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg. BASTA FLEINER, LIDIJA R. (2008): Trust and Tolerance as State-Making Values in Multicultural
Societies. Paradoxes and Chances of Federalism as a Conflict-Management Tool; Eleven
International Publishing, Utrecht. BOIA, LUCIAN (2001): Romania. Borderland of Europe; Reaktion Books, London. BOIA, LUCIAN (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press,
Budapest. BRĂTIANU, GEORGE IOAN (1998): Originile şi Formarea Unitatii Românesti (The Origins and the
Creation of Romanian Unity); Editura Universitatii “Al. I. Cuza”, Iasi. BRĂTIANU, ION C. (1932): Acte şi cuvântări (Documents and Speeches); Cartea Românească,
Bucharest. BRUBAKER, ROGERS (1992): Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany; Harvard
University Press, London. BRUBAKER, ROGERS (1996): Civic and Ethnic Nations in France and Germany; in Hutchinson,
John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Ethnicity; Oxford University Press, Oxford. BRUBAKER, ROGERS (1999): The Manichean Myth: Rethinking the Distinction Between “Civic”
and “Ethnic” Nationalism; in Kriesi, Hanspeter; Armigeon, Klaus; Siegrist, Hannes und
Wimmer, Andreas (eds.): Nation and National Identity. The European Experience in
Perspective; Ruegger Verlag, Chur, Zürich.
90
CROWE, DAVID M. (1994): A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia; St. Martin's,
New York. DIAMOND, LARRY and PLATTNER, MARK F. (1994): Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict and Democracy;
The Johns Hopkins University Press, London. DJUVARA, NEAGU (1995): Între Orient şi Occident. Ţările Române la Începutul Epocii Moderne.
(Between Orient and Occident. The Romanian Lands at the Beginning of the Modern Era);
Humanitas, Bucharest.
DUNN, JOHN (1979): Western Political Theory in the Face of the Future; Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge. ELIADE, POMPILIU (1898): De l’influencé Française sur l’esprit public in Roumanie (On French
Influence on the Public Spirit in Romania); Ernest Leroux Libraire-éditeur, Paris. EMINESCU, MIHAI (1975): Poezii (Poems); Minerva, Bucharest. Engels, Friedrich (1972): Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State; International
Publishers; New York.
ERIKSEN, THOMAS, H (1996): Ethnicity, Race, Class and Nation; in Hutchinson, John and Smith,
Anthony D., (eds.): Ethnicity, Oxford University Press; Oxford, New York.
ESMAN, MILTON J. (2004): An Introduction to Ethnic Conflict; Polity Press, Cambridge.
FANON, FRANTZ (1967): Black Skins, White Masks; Grove Press, New York. FLEINER, THOMAS and BASTA FLEINER, LIDIJA. R. (2009): Constitutional Democracy in a
Multicultural and Globalised World; Springer-Verlag, Berlin. FRASER, ANGUS (1992): The Gypsies; Blackwell, Cambridge. FURET, FRANÇOIS (1988): La Révolution (The Revolution); Hachette Littératures, Paris. GAARDE, SIGNE (2006): Recreating the Roma. Policies and Activism; Department for Minority
Studies, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen. GRASS, GÜNTER (2000): Ohne Stimme – Reden Zugunsten des Volkes der Roma und Sinti (Without
a Voice. Speeches in the Favor of the Roma and Sinti); Steidl Verlag, Göttingen. GREENFELD, LIAH (1994): Nationalism: Five Roads to Modernity; in Hutchinson, John and Smith,
Anthony D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford. HANCOCK, IAN (1987): The Pariah Syndrome: An Account of Gypsy Slavery and Persecution;
Karoma Publishers, Ann Arbor. HANCOCK, IAN (1997): The Genocide of the Roma in the Holocaust; in Israel, Charny W. (ed.)
Encyclopaedia of Genocide; ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara. HITCHINS, KEITH (2008): Romania Nation-Formation in Transylvania; in Mitu, Sorin (ed.): Re-
Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book Access, Cluj. HUTCHINSON, JOHN and SMITH, ANTHONY, D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
91
KITROMILIDES, PASCHALIS (1989): Orthodoxy and Nationalism; in Hutchinson, John and Smith,
Anthony D. (1994): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford. KOGĂLNICEANU, MIHAIL (1843): Cuvânt pentru Deschiderea Cursului de Istorie Naţională în
Academia Mihăileană (Inaugural Speech on National History at the Newly-Founded Academia
Mihăileană; in Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in Romanian Consciousness; Central
European Press, Budapest. KOGĂLNICEANU, MIHAIL (1870): Opere (Creations); in Boia, Lucian (2001): History and Myth in
Romanian Consciousness; Central European Press, Budapest. KOHN, HANS (1945): The Idea of Nationalism: A Study in Its Origins and Background; Macmillan,
New York. KOVATS, MARTIN (2003): The Politics of Roma Identity: Between Nationalism and Destitution;
Open Democracy, Budapest. KYMILCKA, WILL (2005): Liberal Multiculturalism: Western Models, Global Trends, and Asian
Debates; in Baogang, He and Kymilcka, Will (eds.): Multiculturalism in Asia; OUO, Oxford KYMLICKA, WILL (1995): Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights; Oxford
University Press, New York. KYMLICKA, WILL (2001): Western Political Theory and Ethnic Relations in Eastern Europe; in
Kymlicka, Will and Oplaski, Magda (eds.): Can Liberalism be Exported? Oxford University
Press, Oxford. KYMLICKA, WILL (2004): Justice and Security in the Accommodation of Minority Nationalism; in
May, Stephen; Modood, Tariq and Squires, Judith (2004): Ethnicity, Nationalism and Minority
Rights; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. LEWIS, OSCAR (1961): The Culture of Poverty; in Moynihan, Daniel (ed.): On Understanding
Poverty: Perspectives from the Social Sciences; Basic Books, New York. MACKERT, JÜRGEN (2004): Die Theorie Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven.
(The Theory of Social Closure. Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für
Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden.
MAYERHOFER, CLAUDIA (1999): Dorfzigeuner. Kultur und Geschichte der Burgenland-Roma von
der Ersten Republik bis zur Gegenwart (Village Roma. Culture and History of Burgenland
Roma from the First Republic until Nowadays); Picus, Wien. MEINECKE, FRIEDRICH (1922): Weltbürgertum und Nationalstaat, Studien zur Genesis des
Deutschen Nationalstaates (World Citizenship and Nation-State. Studies on the Origin of the
German Nation-State); R. Oldenbourg Verlag, München, Berlin. MILLS, W. CHARLES (2007): Multiculturalism as/and/or anti-racism; in Laden, Anthony Simon
and Owen, David (eds.): Multiculturalism and Political Theory, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, New York.
92
MIRGA, ANDRZEJ (2005): Roma and EU Accession: Elected and Appointed Romani
Representatives in an Enlarged Europe; Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Skopje. NEUMANN, VICTOR (2008): The Concept of Nation in the Romanian Culture and Political
Thought; in Mitu, Sorin (ed.): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International Book
Access, Cluj. NICOARA, SIMONA (2008): National Sensitivity in Romanian Society (Eighteenth and Nineteenth
Centuries); in Mitu, Sorin (ed.): Re-Searching the Nation: The Romanian File; International
Book Access, Cluj.
NODIA, GHIA (1994): Nationalism and Democracy; in Diamond, Larry and Plattner, Mark F. (ed.):
Nationalism, Ethnic Conflict and Democracy; The Johns Hopkins University Press, London. NOHLEN, DIETER (2001): Kleines Lexikon der Politik, (Lexicon of Politics); Verlag C.H. Beck,
München. PARKIN, FRANK (1974): The Social Analysis of Class Structure; The British Sociological
Association, London.
PARKIN, FRANK (1979): Marxism and Class Theory. A Bourgeois Critique; Tavistock, London.
PARKIN, FRANK (2004): Duale Schliessung (Dual Closure), in Mackert Jürgen (ed.): Die Theorie
Sozialer Schliessung. Tradition, Analysen, Perspektiven. (The Theory of Social Closure.
Tradition, Analyses, Perspectives); Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH,
Wiesbaden.
RENAN, ERNEST (1994): Qu’est-ce qu’une nation? (What is a Nation?); in Hutchinson, John and
Smith, Anthony, D. (eds): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford. ROSE, ROMANI (2007): Roma and Sinti – Human Rights for Europe’s Largest Minority;
Documentation and Cultural Centre of German Sinti and Roma, Heidelberg. SERAFIN, JUAN (1994): East-Central Europe in the 1990s; Westview Press, Oxford. SIÈYES, EMMANUEL JOSEPH (1789): Qu’est-ce que le Tiers État? (What is the Third Estate?); Paris
fordham.edu/halsall/mod/sieyes.html (downloaded in August 2009). SISSON, JONATHAN (ed.) (2007): Dealing with the Past in Post-Conflict Societies: Ten Years after
the Peace Accords in Guatemala and Bosnia – Herzegovina; Conference Paper 1, Swisspeace
Annual Conference 2006, Berne. SLAUGHTER JR., THOMAS F. (1983): Epidermalizing the World: A Basic Mode of Being Black; in
Harris, Leonard (ed.): Philosophy Born of Struggle; Kendall Hunt Publishers, Dubuque. STEWART, MICHAEL (1997): The Time of the Gypsies; Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado. SUGAR, PETER (1994): Eastern and Domestic Roots of Eastern European Nationalism; in
Hutchinson, John and Smith, Anthony D. (eds.): Nationalism; Oxford University Press, Oxford,
New York.
93
TCHERENCOV, LEV and LAEDERICH, STÉPHANE (2004): The Rroma. Otherwise Known as Gypsies,
Gitanos, Gyphtoi, Tsiganes, Tigani, Cingene, Zigeuner, Bohemiens, Travellers, Fahrende etc.;
Schwabe Verlag, Basel.
THELEN, PETER (2005): Roma in Europe. From Social Exclusion to Active Participation; Friedrich
Ebert Stiftung, Skopje. WALZER, MICHAEL (1994): Comment; in Gutman, Amy (ed.) Multiculturalism; Princeton
University Press, New Jersey. WEBER, MAX (1968): Economy and Society; Bedminster Press, New York.
YOUNG, IRIS MARION (2007): Structural Injustice and Politics of Difference; in Laden, Anthony
Simon and Owen, David (eds.): Multiculturalism and Political Theory; Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, New York.
ZAMFIR, ELENA and ZAMFIR, CATALIN (1993): Ţiganii - Între Ignorare şi Îngrijorare (Roma:
Between Ignoring them and Worrying about Them); Alternative, Bucharest.
SURVEYS, REPORTS, PROJECTS AGENTIA DE DEZVOLTARE COMUNITARA “ÎMPREUNA” (2003): The Roma Access to the Labor
Market, Editura cartii de agribusiness, Bucharest; downloaded September 2009 from:
http://www.agentiaimpreuna.ro/detalii.php?id=21 AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL Report 2009, State of the World’s Human Rights. Romania;
downloaded December 2009 from: http://report2009.amnesty.org/ BALKAN INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING NETWORK, 15/11/2007: Jobs Boom in Bulgaria Leaves Roma
Behind; downloaded August 2009 from:
//209.85.129.132/search?q=cache:8sHOWfnSSVkJ:birn.eu.com/en/113/10/5823/+roma+integration,+eu+
precondition+for+romania&cd=3&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=ch&client=firefox-a DECADE OF ROMA INCLUSION (2005-2015)(2007): Decade Watch. Country Report: Romania;
downloaded June 2009 from: http://www.romadecade.org/decade_watch_report_20052006 EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2004): The Situation of Roma in an Enlarged European Union,
Luxemburg. European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC),; downloaded August 2009 from:
http://www.errc.org/cikk.php?cikk=2119. EUROPEAN ROMA RIGHTS CENTER (1998): A Pleasant Fiction. The Human Rights Situation of
Roma in Macedonia. The Country Reports Series No.7; downloaded July 2009 from:
http://romawomeninfo.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=251%3A2009-
09-01-09-56-16&catid=107%3A2009-09-01-09-52-41&Itemid=249&lang=en INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON THE HOLOCAUST IN ROMANIA (2004): Final Report 288;
downloaded December 2009 from: http://www.ushmm.org/research/center/
94
LIÉGEOIS, JEAN-PIERRE AND GHEORGHE, NICOLAE (1995): Roma/Gypsies: A European Minority;
downloaded October 2009 from: Minority Rights Group International Report;
http://www.minorityrights.org/1010/reports/romagypsies-a-european-minority.html METRO MEDIA TRANSILVANIA (2004): Barometer of Public Opinion on Discrimination in
Romania; downloaded August 2009 from: http://www.mmt.ro/Engleza/portofoliu.htm MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND RESEARCH (2008): Education development National Report on
Romania; downloaded May 2009 from: http://www.edu.ro/index.php MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, THE INSTITUTE OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES, THE
RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR QUALITY OF LIFE, and UNICEF (2002): Roma Children
Participation in Education – Problems, Solutions and Actors. Bucharest; downloaded May
2009 from: http://www.unicef.org/romania/children_1604.html MINORITY AT RISK PROJECT, Assessment for Roma in Romania; downloaded April 2009 from:
http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/mar/assessment.asp?groupId=36003 NATIONAL AGENCY FOR ROMA (2009): Project S.P.E.R. (Stop Prejudices about Roma Ethnie - The
Barometer of interethnic relations; downloaded September 2009 from: http://www.sper.org.ro/ NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRES (2003): Roma Political
Participation in Romania, Open Society Institute, Washington D.C.; downloaded August 2009
from: http://www.soros.org/ OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE, Monitoring Report (2007): Equal Access to Quality Education For
Roma; downloaded September 2009 from:
http://www.eumap.org/topics/minority/reports/roma_education/ OPEN SOCIETY INSTITUTE (2002): Minority Protection in Romania. An Assessment of the Strategy
of the Government of Romania for Improving the Condition of Roma. Romanian Official
Monitory No. 252. RESOURCE CENTER FOR ROMA COMMUNITIES CLUJ), THE EU MONITORING AND ADVOCACY
PROGRAM (OSI) AND THE ROMA PARTICIPATION PROGRAM (OSI) (2004): Monitoring the local
implementation of the Government Strategy for the Improvement of the Condition of Roma
(ROMAP)- Romania. Vol. 1 - Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Serbia; Monitoring and Advocacy
Program, Budapest, New York; downloaded November 2009 from:
http://www.eumap.org/topics/minority/reports/romap ROMANI CRISS (ROMA CENTER FOR SOCIAL INTERVENTION) and UNICEF ROMANIA (2008):
Monitoring the application of measures against school segregation in Romania, MarLink,
Bucharest. ROMANI CRISS (ROMA CENTER FOR SOCIAL INTERVENTION), MINISTRY OF EDUCATION,
RESEARCH AND YOUTH AND ROMA CENTER “AMARE RROMENTZA”(2008): The Project “Need
for Quality and Equality in Education” (2006-2008), Romani Criss, Bucharest.
95
ROMANIA’S NATIONAL STATISTICS INSTITUTE (2002): Census of Dopulation and Dwellings;
downloaded August 2009 from:
http://www.insse.ro/cms/rw/pages/rpl2002.en.do;jsessionid=0a02458c30d5f479d75c5e2249eeb
10edf3a73a9270f.e38QbxeSahyTbi0LaxeRe0 ROMANIAN TELEVISION (2006): Project Mari Români (Great Romanians); downloaded May 2009
from: http://www.mariromani.ro/primapagina.phphttp://www.mariromani.ro/
SAVE THE CHILDREN ROMANIA, Roma Children’s Rights Protection: The Right To Equal Chances
– Non Discrimination; downloaded October 2009 from:
http://www.savethechildren.net/romania_en/ce_facem/programe/rromi.html WORLD BANK - RINGOLD, DENA; ORENSTEIN, MITCHELL A. and WILKENS, ERIKA (2002): Roma
in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle; (Conference Edition), Washington;
downloaded September 2009 from: http://web.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=51083066&piPK=51083078&theSite
PK=258599&menuPK=311713&searchMenuPK=311713&theSitePK=258599&entityID=0000
90341_20041223131347&searchMenuPK=311713&theSitePK=258599 WORLD BANK (2007): Romania: Poverty Assessment. Analytical and Advisory Assistance
Program: First Phase Report, fiscal year 2007; downloaded September 2009 from:
http://web.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=51083066&piPK=51083078&theSite
PK=258599&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=311712&theSitePK=258599&entityID=00
0020439_20071204114818&searchMenuPK=311712&theSitePK=258599
MEDIA ARTICLES
CĂRTĂRESCU, MIRCEA (2007): Die Zigeuner – ein Rumänisches Problem (The Gypsies – a
Romanian Problem); in Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 29/11. COOPER, BELINDA (2001): We have no Martin Luther King; in World Policy Journal, 18/4. DIVERS BULLETIN no. 40(283), 10/29/2007: Romania's President Apologizes for State's Role in
Deportation of Roma; downloaded August 2009 from:
http://www.divers.ro/eveniment_en?wid=37646&func=viewSubmission&sid=7920 DIVERS BULLETIN no. 62(305), 05/12/2008: European money for Roma Education. Critics from the
President; downloaded December 2008 from:
http://www.divers.ro/opinii_en?wid=37649&func=viewSubmission&sid=8663 DIVERS BULLETIN no. 95(338), 02/09/2009: New Chairman at the National Agency for Roma;
downloaded February 2009 from: DIVERS BULLETIN no. 96(339), 02/16/2009: Roma Organizations: We Want Transparency in
Governmental Policies; downloaded May 2009 from:
http://www.divers.ro/eveniment_en?wid=37646&func=viewSubmission&sid=9659
96
http://www.divers.ro/actualitate_en?wid=37647&func=viewSubmission&sid=9636. EVENIMENTUL ZILEI, 24/08/2008: 23 August, Între catastrofa si salvare (23 August, Between
Catastrophe and Escape. GARDIANUL, 06/11/2007: Lectia de Istorie: Cioroianu Viseaza Deportarea Rromilor in Desert
(The Histor of Lection: Cioroianu Dreams about Deportation of Roma in the Desert). GÂNDUL, 07/05/2008: Generalul Antonescu nu poate fi reabilitat (The General Antonescu can’t be
rehabilited). JURNALUL NATIONAL, 17/3/2009: Proiect de Lege Jurnalul National: Tigan in loc de Rom (Draft
proposal Jurnalul National: “Tigan” in Place of “Roma”); downloaded April 2009 from:
http://www.jurnalul.ro/stire-tigan-in-loc-de-rom/propunere-jurnalul-national-tigan-in-loc-de-
rom-145427.html MEDIAFAX, 1/8/2008: We Recognize our Partially Failure Concerning Roma Integration;
downloaded August 2008 from: http://www.mediafax.ro/politic/basescu-recunoastem-esecul-
nostru-partial-privind-integrarea-romilor-galerie-foto-2839724 POGANY, ISTVAN (1999): Accommodating an Emergent National Identity: The Roma of Central
and Eastern Europe, International Journal on Minority and Group Rights. RROMA PAGE, 27/5/2008: Romania Leader let off over Gypsy Slur; downloaded September 2009
from: http://www.romapage.hu/europa/hircentrum/article/114278/191/page/5/ SMITH, ANTHONY D. (2003): The Poverty of Anti-Nationalist Modernism; in Nations and
Nationalism, Nations and Nationalism, Vol 9, Issue 3.
DOCUMENTS, LAWS, POLICIES CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS:
http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/005.htm (rechecked download February
2010) COPENHAGEN MEETING OF THE CONFERENCE ON THE HUMAN DIMENSION OF THE CSCE:
http://www.ena.lu/document_conference_human_dimension_csce_copenhagen_29_june_1990-
020004650.html (rechecked download February 2010) DECADE OF ROMA INCLUSION 2005-2015: http://www.romadecade.org (rechecked download
February 2010) EUROPEAN SOCIAL CHARTER (REVISED): http://www.coe.int/T/DGHL/Monitoring/SocialCharter
(rechecked download February 2010) EUROPEAN CHARTER FOR REGIONAL OR MINORITY LANGUAGES:
http://www.coe.int/T/E/Legal_Affairs/Local_and_regional_Democracy/Regional_or_Minority_l
anguages (rechecked download February 2010) FRAMEWORK CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES:
97
http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/Commun/QueVoulezVous.asp?NT=157&CL=ENG (rechecked
download February 2010) LAW 1540, PROHIBITING SCHOOL SEGREGATION, Romanian Ministry of Education and Research:
http://www.edu.ro/index.php (rechecked download February 2010) RECOMMENDATION 1203 ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE’S PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY:
http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta93/EREC1203.htm
(rechecked download February 2010) ROMANIAN CONSTITUTION (2003): http://www.cdep.ro/pls/dic/site.page?id=371 (rechecked
download February 2010)
ROMANIAN CONSTITUTION (1923): http://www.constitutia.ro/const1923.htm (rechecked download
February 2010) THE NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR IMPROVING THE SITUATION OF ROMA 2001-2010; Official
Monitory No. 252, 16 May 2001: http://www.anr.gov.ro/site/Programe.html (rechecked
download February 2010) UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS BELONGING TO NATIONAL OR
ETHNIC, RELIGIOUS OR LINGUISTIC MINORITIES:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/minorities.htm (rechecked download February 2010)
SOURCES OF JACKET ILLUSTRATION:
CHESS: http://standupforamerica.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/chess.jpg
ROMA FLAG: http://lexikon.freenet.de/Datei:Roma_flag.svg
98
Vita
Education
2010 Master of Arts in Social Science with major in Political Science and minors in Sociology and Social Politics, and Science of Media and Communication University of Fribourg
2009 Dealing with the Past in Post-Conflict Societies – A holistic Approach Center for Peacebuilding – Swisspeace. Training course
2008 Transcend Method for Conflict Transformation in Peace Processes Institute for Integrative Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding - The Art of Peace. Summer Academy Berne/Vienna
2008 Mediation and Other Methods to Foster Democratic Dialogue Central European University Budapest in co-operation with Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, New York, and Hamline University School of Law, Minnesota. Summer University
2007 Old Europe, New Europe, Non Europe – Re-shaping the European Union at the beginning of the 21st century Øresund University (Lund, Sweden). Summer University
2006 Federalism, Constitutionalism and Democratic Governance in Multicultural Societies Institute of Federalism (Fribourg). Summer University
2001 Licence diploma in Journalism and Public Relations The West University of Timisoara (Romania)
1996
High School leaving examination in Economics und Public Administration
Surname, name Gabriela Maria Mirescu
Nationality Romanian
Date and place of birth
August 16th, 1978 Timisoara, Romania
Contact Av. Jean Bourgknecht 6 1700 Fribourg , Switzerland Email: [email protected] Tel: ++41 76 542 71 70
99
Work Experience
2009-2010
Rroma Foundation, Scientific Collaborator
2007-2009 Institute of Federalism's International Research and Consulting Centre, Switzerland, Assistant Fellow
2006 Institute of Federalism, Voluntary Assistant in the Summer University Project
2003-2007 Multimedia Centre and Library of the Centre for Study and Research on Foreign Languages, University of Fribourg, reception and consulting service in using material in order to achieve knowledge’s in foreign languages
Languages
Romanian Mother tongue
German, English, French
Fluent
Italian, Spanish Basic knowledge
Swiss German Dialects
Very good understanding competencies
Research Interests
Conflict Dynamics/Conflict Transformation in Multicultural Societies
Human/Minority Rights
Local Governance/Decentralisation/Power Sharing
Mechanisms of Social Exclusion/Inclusion
Democratic Governance and Social Capital
Publications
Decentralisation and Access to Justice; co-author with Sarah Byrne and Sean Müller. Project mandated and financed by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). Institute of Federalism, Fribourg, 2007
100
Declaration of Authorship
Hiermit bestätige ich, dass ich diese Arbeit selbständig verfasst und keine anderen als die
angegebenen Quellen verwendet habe. Passagen, die sich auf verwendete Quellen
beziehen, sind als solche gekennzeichnet.“
Gabriela Mirescu Fribourg
3.03.2010