Interview with Siegfried Mureșan, Member of the European Parliament – European People’s Party (EPP), Romania.

As the vice-chair of EPP, you are in a delicate leadership position: you are a young voice in an older party, you have always been vocally pro-European and pro-democracy, but at the same time you have had to manage anti-democratic developments outside the European Union, within its borders and sometimes even within your European party. What do you feel is your greatest challenge at this point as an EPP leader in trying to keep at bay anti-democratic developments within the European Union?

What we have to do is first and foremost keep our house in order. At a national and European level, we have to promote democratic values, a balance of power and strong, resilient institutions including the judiciary.

There is no better news for authoritarians around the world than a European Union that is not strong in defending its values. As it often goes in life, there is first the disease and then you find the vaccine or the medicine. We have seen developments that we could not anticipate: Brexit in 2016 and the rise of extremism and populism in some member states of the European Union. We all saw the negative consequences of Brexit and these days we are just witnessing the figures, UK exports to the EU are collapsing. 

We have to stand firm, we have to defend our values, as I said, at national and European level, but also in our European Neighbourhood, because we can only be safe in our Union if we are surrounded by countries that share our values and that are safe and stable.

“The questioning of our democratic institutions serves autocrats around the world”

It is all good to say that we need to keep our house in order, but there are many within the ranks of the EU that do not seem to agree with the same idea of order that some of us may have. Do we have at a European level the instruments to ensure that we are playing by the same rules, or do we just need to wait until the day comes when the Hungarian people go to the poll and vote Orbán out of office?

The truth is that fake news and disinformation play a very big role in the era of social media. It is just as true that a spectacular lie survives much more on Twitter than a boring truth. To the challenges that we are facing, solutions are often complicated. There is no silver bullet.

There is no better news for authoritarians around the world than a European Union that is not strong in defending its values.

We as policymakers need to do a better job in explaining that populism offers no real solutions. We need to educate people and better inform them on how to behave online, because it can be a dangerous place, too. They have to understand that internet is as serious as real life, and that you have to learn where and how to read and how to better spot disinformation.

We also need to provide more rules for distributing content online. The fact of people being encouraged in undertaking violent acts online represents a threat to our security not only at the level of cybersecurity, but also in real life. 

How often have we seen attacks from anti-European politicians (that are instead branding themselves as Social-Democrats, Conservatives, or Christian-Democrats, when in fact they aren’t) towards the European institutions in countries like Poland or Romania appearing just weeks before on pro-Russian outlets? We have to connect the dots and explain to people the global picture and that the questioning of our democratic institutions serves autocrats around the world. It is much harder to create for instance a pro-Putin, or a pro-Erdoğan group of supporters in members states of the EU than it is to seed doubt with regard to management at the European level.

“We need to establish clear rules for the virtual world, just like for the real world”

The European Commission has already advanced two major policy proposals to the European Parliament, the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act. As the discussion has started on this topic, what is the pulse in the European Parliament regarding the form of these proposals?

Months ago, we saw large social media companies like Facebook and Twitter shut down the accounts of a former US President. Some of us said “Maybe a bit too late, but finally!”, some of us said “Why?”. The companies were in a position where there was no legal basis to act upon, and they had to act in their own name.

We need to establish clear rules for the virtual world just as we have rules for the real world, that need to be determined by democratic institutions, through a democratic process. We need predictable and clear regulations that are communicated to the users beforehand so that they know what they are allowed to do and what they are not, and these rules shall be decided in very transparent debates. In the European Parliament, we are planning to invite the social media companies to share their insights and their challenges, and we are going to evaluate what they are going to tell us. Parliaments around the world need to set these standards, and I would appreciate a consultation with the US Congress on this topic so that the regulations that we adopt are similar on both sides of the Atlantic.

The preoccupation of a party which cannot become a majority party will be to keep the loyalty of that minority, and that makes you go towards the extremism corner and tell people whatever comforts them, not necessarily what is true.

The legislative process is still in the beginning, so it is too early to present the final details. The European Commission has presented the draft legislation in December and the Parliament’s work has just started, but we are going to carry it in a transparent way so that people know what awaits them online and that corporations have a clear textbook on the basis of which they can act.

“If the rule of law is weakened, the individual is not safe anymore”

We have seen with the storming of the US Capitol how the idea of freedom has become a relative one, with some rioters considering their actions as legitimate forms of freedom of expression. Does Brussels have the instruments to ensure a healthy democracy, where one’s freedom does not impinge on anybody else’s? Or is it just up to national politicians to make sure that people make the best-informed choices?

One thing is clear: if you receive European support, you should respect European rules and values. This should be a basic principle and we have made lots of progress in the past months to adopt legislation. For example, as of the 1^st of January 2021, you can only receive EU funds if you respect the rule of law. This is valid for the traditional Budget of the European Union, but also for the €750bn support made available for those affected by the COVID-19 pandemic: people, enterprises, regions, countries. 

Secondly, populists by definition always need an enemy. We just need to call their bluff and explain to the people why defending democratic institutions at the end of the day is in their best interest, because if the rule of law is weakened, the individual is not safe anymore. 

Yes, the people who are opposed to our democratic order are a consistent minority, but a minority, nonetheless. They represent a higher percentage of the population in some states, but they are not a majority. The preoccupation of a party which cannot become a majority party also because of demographics will be to keep the loyalty of that minority, and that makes you go towards the extremism corner and tell people whatever comforts them, not necessarily what is true. We should not forget, Brexit too started with lies. 

This is why we have moved into a public debate in which there are no more generally accepted truths, but only opinions. This is why the promotion of facts and science as well as tackling fake news is so important and is something that we have not done sufficiently so far.

In Romania, the vast majority of the population and the political class is theoretically very pro-European, but in reality, our system of values is something that has not fully evolved into becoming European. This may be the reason why we did not pay attention that nationalism was rising in Romania too, and that we have authoritarian tendencies as well. Do you feel like this is something that needs to be addressed soon, or just that it is there, as in many other countries and that it is nowhere near becoming a crisis?

The general consensus at the level of the society is that NATO is good, the EU is good and that the West is good. But politicians have not made sufficient efforts in explaining to the people what the actual benefits of transatlantic integration are, due to two main reasons.

Firstly, many of them simply did not have the intellectual capacity and the competence to do that. Secondly, the less educated the people are, the more vulnerable they are and that was simply in the interest of some political actors. The Social-Democratic party for instance has never declared itself to be anti-European, but it has at decisive moments played the card of “We are fighting Brussels, we are sovereign!”. We have not seen the rise of a Eurosceptic party in Romania in recent electoral cycles also due the fact that slight Euroscepticism was taken care of by other parties, particularly the Social-Democratic party. 

We need to do more to inform people of the real benefits of European integration. The less they know about it, the more vulnerable this pro-European consensus will be in the future.

“We need to get out of party headquarters. Politics needs to reflect society”

What is the most effective way of communicating with the electorates of such Eurosceptic parties, to avoid alienating them further, but without legitimising the radical forces they support?

Firstly, established parties need to get out of their comfort zone. We need to get out of party headquarters, go to where people are, talk as people talk and address the issues that concern them. Politics needs to reflect society: we need politicians of all qualifications, age, and backgrounds.

Secondly, pro-European centre-left and centre-right parties should cooperate on this issue. I was encouraged by the debate in the European Parliament on the 20^th of January, when we were discussing the US presidential inauguration and the future of the transatlantic relations. My political family, the centre-right European People’s Party was united with the newly established Renew Europe group, with the Greens, and even with a significant part of the Social-Democrat group, in advocating towards making our economies more modern, cleaner, and greener on both sides of the Atlantic. On the other side, there was the extreme right, a part of the conservative group which is in power in Poland and a part of the Communist group. At the end of the day, the extreme parties have more in common than we may initially realise.

When it comes to the rise of extremism, we the centre have to work together but also be able to differentiate ourselves. Otherwise, in the absence of a differentiation, there is a risk that the centre will shrink, and extremist parties will end up having more space to grow.

“Small states are the stewards of European values”

What direction do you think the transatlantic relationship is heading into? We have just seen Josep Borrell’s highly criticised visit to Russia, and the EU debate, with some countries being more cooperative towards Moscow than others. So who is going to be the steward of the transatlantic relationship in Europe?

We need to be clear that economic interests and human rights go hand in hand. You cannot say “business first, human rights later”, because the more money you pour into the accounts of the Kremlin, the easier it will be for it to keep the Russian people hostile. The more money comes through gas revenues for instance, the easier it is for the government to increase pensions and keep people happy with a regime that is endangering human rights and the rule of law.

When it comes to the rise of extremism, we the centre have to work together but also be able to differentiate ourselves. Otherwise, in the absence of a differentiation, there is a risk that the centre will shrink, and extremist parties will end up having more space to grow.

Who will be the steward of European values? I was recently encouraged by the behaviour of small states of the EU, countries from the Baltic Area for instance, and Eastern Europe in general, who are standing up to Russia and have a competitive advantage in this regard. I think that especially with Antony Blinken as Secretary of State there is an open door now in Washington and it is time to strengthen the transatlantic partnership and not to seek a warm spot in the middle between Moscow and Washington. I believe that the visit in Moscow of the High Representative was a mistake and a failure.

About the project

Supported by the National Endowment for Democracy, Political Capital and its partners from Austria, Bulgaria, Czechia, Poland, Slovakia and Romania are researching value-based attitudes to foreign policy and authoritarian influence in the European Union’s institutions.