The symbol of the collapse of communism in East Germany is hordes of Germans standing on the Berlin Wall in front of the Brandenburg Gate. In Czechoslovakia, the symbol is masses protesting in Wenceslas Square. In Romania, it is the body of the executed dictator Nicolae Ceausescu.
Last year the citizens of Poland, Hungary, East Germany, and Czechoslovakia cheered the end of the Communist Party's monopoly of power and the end of the communist political and economic system. Romania was the only East European state to suffer the violent overthrow of its ancient regime, and the cost was high - an estimated 10,000 people lost their lives. Not only was Romania's revolution brutal and vicious, the change was expressed in very different terms. Unlike the other countries of Eastern Europe, Romania’s revolution was personal - it was the toppling of a tyrant, the overthrow of Nicolae Ceausescu.
Ceausescu is dead, but Romania's new leaders are now grappling with his legacy. Their tasks is formidable: to create genuine democratic political institutions. Rebuild the country's economy, restore its international reputation, and cope with expectations heightened by the exhilaration of the Romanian revolution. The task is difficult because of the legacy of Ceausescu's quarter-century of misrule and malfeasance.
While Romania's Communist Party and political institutions were similar to those of its Warsaw Pact allies, there were important differences as well. Power was concentrated in the hands of the party chief; he was all powerful, not the first among equals in the Politburo. In many respects, Ceausescu's regime was much more like the totalitarian Stalinism of the 1930s and 1940s than the oligarchic party structure that evolved in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe after Khrushchev. The party was one of the principal instruments through which Ceausescu ruled, but it did not temper or limit his power. It was an instrument for the regime. The Romanian party was by far the largest in Eastern Europe with one-third of the working adult population as members. Membership, however, was simply one requirement to get ahead in the system, and party members were not the "vanguard of the proletariat," let alone participants in any kind of decision making.
CEAUSESCU'S GRIP
To prevent any subordinate from establishing a solid geographical or organizational power base from which to challenge him, Ceausescu rotated individuals in and out of positions. Officials were not permitted to remain in the same of similar positions for long periods. Ministers, county party first secretaries, local government leaders, and members of the central party hierarchy were constantly rotated from one position to another. The only constituent for aspiring officials was Nicolae Ceausescu.
Reliance on his own family was one of Ceausescu's key means of maintaining his grip. This is not simply case of nepotism - spreading the status, benefits, and perquisites of public office among relatives. Trusted members of the clan held key positions and played critical roles in government and party. The prime example, of course, is Elena Ceausescu, wife of the party leader. She was a full member of the party’s inner circle, first deputy prime minister, head of science and education in the country, and for the last decade supervisor of all party and government personnel appointments.
...
Read Full Article
|
