Dehai News

https://ericzuesse.substack.com/p/usnatoeu-coup-overturns-romanias

https://theduran.com/nato-eu-coup-overturns-romanias-election-imposes-dictatorship

U.S./NATO/EU Coup Overturns Romania’s Election, Imposes Dictatorship

17 January 2025, posted by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

https://theduran.com/romanias-silent-coup-eu-nato-tries-to-stop-georgescu/

“Romania’s silent coup. EU/NATO tries to stop Georgescu”

TRANSCRIPT:

0:00

ALEX CHRISTOFORU: All right Alexander, let's talk about

0:01

what is going on in Romania uh big

0:05

protests the other uh the other week in

0:09

uh

0:10

Romania um people in Romania are very

0:14

upset very upset about what has happened

0:17

with their

0:19

elections, the cancellation the annulment

0:21

of the second round of the elections,

0:23

where uh Geogescu 

[Călin Geogescu, the progressive — anti-imperialist and pro-nation’s sovereignty over only its own own territory — candidate, whom the CIA-edited and written Wikipedia (which blacklists (blocks from linking to) sites that aren’t CIA-approved) says is “far-right” because he doesn’t want Romania to stay in the U.S. empire* (because he opposes Romania’s being a part of ANY empire)*] 

was was going to win, I

0:27

think it's now pretty much accepted that

0:29

he was going to win big, some of the

0:31

polls had him winning with 63 to 64% of the

0:35

vote and the Supreme Court cancelled the

0:39

elections, and now the reports are that

0:42

they just want to do the whole thing all

0:44

over again, new elections, new

0:47

candidates, uh Georgescu is not going to be

0:50

allowed to run, um I believe uh Lasconia, I

0:54

believe, was uh was the candidate's name

0:57

the the opposition, that was going to be

0:59

in the second round,

1:00

she's going to be out, I mean you're

1:02

hearing reports saying that they just

1:04

want to do a complete do-over and just

1:06

basically run all of the

1:08

pre-approved, uh EU globalist candidates,

1:12

and uh and just start it all from from

1:14

scratch, and uh I don't think people in

1:18

Romania, most people in Romania, are going

1:19

to be uh going for this kind of plan.

1:22

Anyway, what what are your thoughts about

1:24

what is happening in Romania because

1:26

this is a huge uh a huge deal, uh

1:29

canceling elections because Chinese

1:32

owned Tik Tok was interfered by, by

1:35

Russia, which which has also been proven

1:37

false by the way, from Romanian media

1:40

snoop.com  did an investigation and they found that this had nothing to do with Tik Tok or Russia,

1:45 

this was one of the major Parties in Romania, trying to to get cute

1:51

with uh with the elections, and it

1:53

backfired on them. Anyway, your thoughts?

1:55

ALEXANDER MERCOURIS: Yeah absolutely, let's let's just be

1:58

clear about what happened. After the

2:00

first round, they cancelled the second

2:03

round, they cancelled the second round

2:06

and they annulled the first round, this is

2:08

the decision of the Supreme Court and

2:11

they did this on the basis of an

2:12

intelligence assessment which uh you

2:15

know because the intelligence people

2:17

tell us something it, it must be true,

2:20

that there was a Russian organized

2:22

campaign on Tik Tok that now is even a

2:25

reason to annul an election result. I

2:28

would say no. If you can find produce

2:31

evidence that Russia is backing Georgescu,

2:36

produce it, put it to the Romanian people,

2:39

invite them to vote against him in the

2:42

second round on the grounds that he's a

2:45

cat's ball of Russia. Apparently the

2:48

Romanian authorities were not prepared

2:51

to allow that. Then that

2:54

whole narrative starts to crumble

2:57

because it looks as if it was not the

2:59

Russians at all who were behind the

3:01

Tik Tok campaign, to the extent that

3:03

there even was a Tik Tok campaign in the

3:06

first place. I mean lots of lots of

3:07

things go out on Tik Tok on social media,

3:10

all kinds of candidates get support and

3:12

you know there's nothing unusual in that,

3:15

but that whole narrative crumbles when the

3:18

Supreme Court is invited to reexamine

3:21

the whole issue and they nonetheless

3:24

continue with their course of annulling

3:28

the elections, annulling elections,

3:31

elections which have happened in a

3:33

European Union State have been annulled

3:36

now. Note, note

3:40

that annulling elections, as far as I

3:42

know, has never happened before in the

3:45

European Union's entire history, simply

3:49

because the person who came first is not

3:54

someone that the establishment the

3:56

political establishment likes, and they

4:00

disagree with his politics as well, they

4:03

looked to see whether there had been

4:05

evidence of vote rigging, they did a

4:08

recount, they found no evidence of any

4:10

problems, but they came up with this

4:13

further excuse, and they annulled the

4:15

elections, and they canceled the second

4:17

round, and what is now causing increasing

4:20

anger I think in Romania is

4:23

that, well if they'd done all of that and

4:26

they'd called elections, new elections

4:28

immediately, and rerun the whole

4:31

thing, well some of the

4:35

damage, because this is going to cause a

4:37

lot of damage some of the damage from

4:39

that, might have been you know repaired

4:44

but they haven't called new elections.

4:48

Romania is in limbo. It has Iohannis

4:52

who was the previous president, and he's

4:54

still the president, he's still there,

4:56

he's still acting as President, we don't

4:58

know how long he's going to be president.

5:00

Is he legitimate? Well

5:01

sorry. I wonder, I mean, I don't know, I

5:04

don't know what, I don’t, I mean I'm

5:06

not an expert on Romanian constitutional

5:09

matters, but I don't know on what basis

5:12

he is President still, just just to say,

5:15

but there he is, he still um handles the

5:19

business of the

5:21

presidency, so he is there, um we have no

5:26

clear idea of when the elections are

5:29

going to happen, or conceivably if

5:32

they're going to happen at all, and now

5:35

we're hearing new stories. The people who

5:38

stood in the first elections in the

5:40

actual elections the real elections are

5:43

going to be prevented from standing

5:45

again, and you know they're talking about

5:48

all of these other candidates being

5:49

prevented from standing, but of course

5:51

everybody could see that the real

5:53

objective is to prevent Georgescu from

5:57

standing, there is no other purpose to

5:59

this. This whole thing is being

6:01

organized and orchestrated in order to

6:04

prevent the person who won the first

6:06

round in the election and who probably

6:10

almost certainly would have won the

6:12

second round, from being elected again.

6:15

Now people in

6:18

Romania understandably are becoming

6:20

angry, they're starting to protest. We had

6:24

one big first protest. I am certain that

6:28

there are going to be others.

6:30

I have been in touch with people in

6:32

Romania, and I understand that many many

6:36

people in Romania are becoming very

6:38

angry about the situation and

6:41

importantly this anger extends beyond

6:45

people who voted for Georgescu or would have

6:50

voted for him in the second round, even

6:53

many people who

6:55

self-identified as leftists** are angry

6:59

about this

7:00

because they take the conduct of

7:02

diplomacy or democracy in Romania,

7:06

seriously, and there is a real

7:09

possibility, it seems to me, that this

7:12

thing

7:13

could rapidly expand, and that the

7:17

political class could conceivably even

7:19

start to lose

7:21

control. CHRISTOFORU: Yeah, I think this situation

7:23

highlights how uh how much control um

7:27

NATO has of uh of Europe and of the

7:31

EU, you can't really separate the the

7:35

European Union with the European member

7:38

states of NATO. No And I say that because

7:41

uh Georgescu he's been uh making statements

7:45

saying that it is his belief he sees

7:47

things in NATO as one side, there's

7:50

there's certain parts of

7:52

NATO that that do not want uh a war with

7:56

Russia that did not want to to push

7:58

everything towards escalation and World War Three,

7:59

but there's this EU part, and he

8:02

pretty much labels it the EU part, yeah

8:04

of NATO, which is trying to gain control

8:07

of NATO and trying to push for

8:10

escalation and World War III, and

8:12

according to Georgescu there their

8:15

vehicle to get World War III started is

8:18

through Romania. Um, it does make sense

8:21

given that NATO is investing so much in

8:24

Romania, and they are building a huge, uh

8:27

NATO base in Romania, and of course you

8:29

know everyone knows about the the

8:31

weapons flow and then Romania's

8:32

proximity to Ukraine uh and and the role

8:35

it's played in uh in the conflict in

8:38

Ukraine so uh the the the argument is

8:41

that uh that this is very much about um

8:44

about controlling NATO and about

8:47

escalating to the point uh escalating

8:49

with Russia to the point of of World War

8:51

III and and using Romania as a as a way

8:54

to do that. You know the EU and NATO it's

8:58

just the same fricking organization at

9:00

at this point. MERCOURIS: Well absolutely, and by the

9:03

way, that's going to be important in

9:05

terms of the Ukraine um Peace

9:08

negotiations, assuming they ever happen,

9:10

because up to now the Russians have not

9:12

objected to Ukraine's bid to enter NATO [WHAT? That statement from him is an outrageous falsehood; he almost certainly had meant to say the exact opposite]

9:15

there's increasing signs that they will

9:17

do so and what's happened in Romania is

9:19

likely to make them even more intent on

9:22

doing so, just saying, but coming back to

9:26

Romania itself, you're absolutely correct

9:29

I mean um NATO and the EU have been

9:32

using Romania as a forward base

9:37

to engage in Ukraine in Moldova with which

9:42

of course Romania has very very strong

9:46

ethnic linguistic cultural historical

9:49

connections, which should not be denied

9:53

and of course with the Black Sea in the

9:54

Black Sea and

9:56

Romanians increasingly do not like to

10:00

see their country being used in that way,

10:04

that is why they voted for Georgescu because

10:07

Georgescu said look this is nothing to do

10:09

with us, we are being drawn into a war

10:12

which does not really concern us, we do

10:15

not want a war, we should stay out of

10:17

this war, and that is what I will ensure

10:21

happens if I am elected your president.

10:24

Romanians heard that, they approved of it,

10:27

they voted for him in in the first round

10:30

in large numbers, and all the indications

10:33

are that in the second round he would

10:35

have won so, given that this is so. What

10:40

we see is in effect that the EU and the

10:44

uh NATO have used the agencies of the

10:48

Romanian State, the Supreme Court, the

10:52

presidency, the intelligence services, to

10:55

carry out what I would straightforwardly

10:57

call a coup to prevent

11:01

Romania exercising its sovereign rights

11:05

to conduct its own elections, to elect

11:07

its own president. so that the course of ...

11:11

——

* That Wikipedia article, which uses every trick in the book in order to prejudice the U.S.-empire-brainwashed reader against Georgescu, included also this truthful statement: “Speaking of the Russo-Ukrainian War that began in 2014, Georgescu said: "The situation in Ukraine is clearly manipulated, with the goal of provoking a conflict destined to financially help the military-industrial complex of USA."^[34][35] Georgescu has also pledged to end military aid to Ukraine if he is elected president.^[36]” I think that that statement encapsulates what is perhaps even the main reason behind this U.S. coup against Romania. Lockheed Martin, the chief contractor on the 2016 U.S.-installed Aegis Ashore missile system to blitz-nuke The Kremlin from Romania, is trying to prevent losing Romania as a U.S. colony. The U.S. regime says that “While intended to intercept threats from Iran, the installation of the sites has drawn protests from Russian officials who have repeatedly said the BMD sites blunt their own strategic weapon systems and could cause risk to Russian security.” Everyone has always known that the system is designed NOT “to intercept threats [missiles] from Iran” but for two purposes: 1. to intercept missiles from Russia that would be responding to a blitz-nuclear attack by the U.S. regime; and, 2. to itself possibly be used for launching a U.S. blitz nuclear missile attack against Russia, which the system could do if it gets loaded with ballistic missiles instead of with anti-ballistic missiles — the switch could be done very quickly and secretly so that Russia would have no advance warning of the U.S. regime’s attack. Putin tried many times to discuss his concerns about this with Obama, but Obama always refused. So, this is very important to the U.S. regime that wants to conquer Russia, and to the military contractors such as Lockheed that (by means of the billionaires that control it and that control the newsmedia etc.) control the U.S. regime.

** Mercouris here (saying that “even … leftists” are opposed to the coup) is falsely assuming that Wikipedia and the other U.S.-empire propaganda vehicles are correct in their post-2000 U.S.-empire habit of using “far-right” to refer to progressives (anti-imperialists and opponents of privatizations) instead of to conservatives (pro-imperialists and supporters of privatizations) — to refer to leftist democrats (or democratic socialists) instead of to rightists (conservatives) — but this new usage actually reverses the pre-2000 usages so as to associate the hyper-imperialist (and thus authentically “far-right”) Hitler with progressives and with opposition to neoliberalism-libertarianism (which Hitler actually supported).

There are two cores of ideology: the chief international issue, which is imperialism, and the chief intranational (or “domestic”) issue, which is privatization (it’s the domestic policy that neoliberals/libertarians love the most). Despite the aristocracy-spread myth that privatization was introduced by two (alleged) democracies, the USA (Reagan) and UK (Thatcher), in the 1980s, privatization was, in fact, a big aim of the elite fascists. After all, aristocrats control the private wealth. Privatization means that they get to control also what was previously public. Privatization moreover provides corrupt politicians (their politicians) an opportunity to pay off their contributors (themselves) by offering them an inside track on public-asset sales. In September 2009, the European University Institute issued their RSCAS_2009_46.pdf, titled “From Public to Private: Privatization in 1920’s Fascist Italy” (subsequently retitled “The First Privatization: Selling SOEs” in the 2011 Cambridge Journal of Economics), by Germa Bel. (As I check for it again, I see that it has been removed by Google – probably because it busts the crucial neoliberal lie that the first privatizations were in the 1970s-80s by ‘democratic’ countries – and so here is its URL: http://www.ub.edu/graap/bel_Italy_fascist.pdf.) He said in his summary: “Privatization was an important policy in Italy in 1922-1925. The Fascist government was alone in transferring State ownership and services to private firms in the 1920s; no other country in the world would engage in such a policy until Nazi Germany did so between 1934 and 1937.” He particularly noted: “In his first speech as a member of the Italian Parliament in June 1921, Mussolini said: ‘The State must have a police, a judiciary, an army, and a foreign policy. All other things, and I do not exclude secondary education, must go back to the private activity of individuals.’” For examples: Mussolini privatized the Government’s monopoly match-producer; monopoly life-insurance firm; monopoly telephone-company; re-privatized "Gio. Ansaldo & C. ... a large producer of machinery such as boats, trains, airplanes, and naval equipment”; expanded “the concessions system, and provided great legal flexibility, allowing public works such as the building of the motorways to be carried out either by the State or by means of concessions to private firms” and so, “Beginning in 1923, six tolled motorways were constructed in a short space of time." Then, in the February 2010 Economic History Review, he headlined a study specifically about the German case, “Against the Mainstream: Nazi Privatization in 1930s Germany”. Here, he reported that, though “privatizations in Chile and the UK, which began to be implemented in the 1970s and 1980s, are usually considered the first privatization policies in modern history, ... none of the contemporary economic analyses of privatization takes into account an important, earlier case: the privatization policy implemented by the National Socialist (Nazi) Party in Germany. ... Although modern economic literature usually fails to notice it, the Nazi government in 1930s Germany implemented a large-scale privatization policy.” Furthermore, “Germany was alone in developing a policy of privatization in the mid-1930s,” since Italy had finished its privatizations by then. The purposes of these privatizations, in both cases, were chiefly “receipts from selling” the assets to finance rearmament (and Italy’s and Germany’s imperialism), and also “the desire to increase support from” the major aristocrats (such as, in Germany, the armaments-making firms of the Thyssens, the Krupps, and the Flicks), who received sweet deals on these assets.

Georgescu would probably call himself a “democratic socialist” because he admires and self-identifies with the countries that pioneered that, the countries of Europe, but he is opposed to the American regime’s impositions on Europe of wars: he even “says he is happy for Romania to be a member of both the European Union and NATO, but says he would not support Romania going to war. ‘We are all for peace’.” No wonder, then, that the owners of firms such as Lockheed Martin fear him and (by means of their agents) have ditched him — they DEMAND a Europe that is controlled from Washington DC via Brussels, and that’s a Europe which buys lots of America’s weapons. It’s only the U.S. regime’s control over Europe that he objects to (and that, apparently, lots of other Romanians also do).

Mercouris is ignorant about ideology, when he says that Georgescu is opposed by progressives. That’s the reverse of the truth. Georgescu is supported by progressives and opposed by conservatives: he is opposed by supporters of imperialism, and is favored by opponents of privatizations. However, Mercouris is a genius about geostrategy, and thus gave here a terrific news-report about the U.S. coup in Romania (despite his misunderstandings of ideology).

PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.). I am not asking for money, but I am asking my readers to spread my articles far and wide, because I specialize in documenting what the Deep State is constantly hiding — what the ‘news’-media ignore if they can, and deny if they must. This is, in fact, today’s samizdat.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.