Traian Basescu, President of Romania, told political parties yesterday that he wanted a governmental team based on representatives of the PNL (National Liberal Party), the PD (Democrat Party) and the PLD (Liberal Democrat Party), but without the present PM. This message is giving the Liberals hard times and it makes the PSD (Social-Democrat Party) reach a decision.
The President's proposal on a new PM is part of negotiations, but it also leaves the impression that President Basescu is fixing politicians' agenda. His view doesn't resist thorough analysis, since, mathematically speaking, the PNL, the PD and the PLD do not make parliamentary majority. Politically speaking, the proposal is meant to cause dissension in the PNL, it fuels the pressure on the PSD and it shows the President's constant wish to find a solution to put an end to the crisis. It is just that the PSD is going to announce support for one side or the other by the end of the week. The Social-Democrats are even thinking about a bill against the government, after a meeting at Cotroceni Palace held two days ago. There is also the fact that the PNL doesn't seem willing to drop Tariceanu and the Liberals have expressed willingness for the meeting due next week.
The President surprised political leaders yesterday, although the latter didn't agree on whether to support the government or to make a new one. The President invited the parties to more talks for next Friday. In the letter sent to the party heads, President Basescu insists on the choice for another PM, considering the outcome of the 2004 elections.
Here is the explanation in the letter: "After the May 28 consultations with the political parties, I have noticed that most of them are refusing the democratic solution guaranteed by the making of early elections. Given this, my proposal is that together we should decide on a PM to establish a government of PNL, PD and PLD representatives and propose it to the Parliament. It is the future PM's obligation to negotiate on a parliamentary majority clearly accounted for." And the argument continues as follows: "I believe that such a structure obeys both the outcome of the 2004 scrutiny and the option citizens expressed in the May 19 referendum. I also opine that such a structure is able to make the relations between rulers and opposition clear and allow for the intense continuation of reform and for the taking of political responsibility in front of the electorate until the next general elections." (...) (M.T., A.H.)