Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej (1901-65) became a revolutionary post-WWI, joining the then outlawed Romanian Communist Party in 1930 and being sentenced to 12 years’ gaol. A member of the Romanian Communist youth movement in the early 1930s, Nicolae Ceaușescu (1918-89) was imprisoned twice for his Communist activities and became an aide of his cell mate, Gheorghiu-Dej. In 1939 Nicolae married a fellow Communist Elena Petrescu
Ceausescu spoke forcefully to the Romanian Communist Party,
Bucharest Nov 1989. npr
In Aug 1944 Ceaușescu became Secretary of the Communist Youth Union (1944–5). He met and loved Elena Petrescu, marrying her in 1946. After the Communists’ takeover in Romania in 1947, he became Minister of Agriculture (1948–50) and from 1950-4, Deputy Minister of the Armed Forces. Then the party’s Deputy Leader.
Prime Minister Gheorghiu-Dej adopted economic and foreign policies that served Romania’s own national interests eg vigorously pursuing a major industrialisation programme. In mid-1960s Gheorghiu-Dej formed warner relations with the People’s Republic of China, now more alienated from the Soviet Union.
When Gheorghiu-Dej died (1965), Ceaușescu became First Secretary of the Communist Party; then President in Dec 1967. He won popular support for his own nationalist political course which openly challenged the Soviet Union’s control. Ceaușescu ended Romania’s active participation in the Warsaw Pact military alliance, condemning the invasions of Czechoslovakia (1968) by Warsaw Pact forces and of Afghanistan (1979) by the Soviet Union. But while following an independent policy in foreign relations, at home he was rigidly orthodox about centralised administration. His secret police, Securitate, maintained total control over all media.
The very expensive Palace of the Parliament, Bucharest
second largest administrative building in the world.
Built when most citizens didn't have enough money for food.
Yet the Ceausescus built the sumptuous Republic House, the palace now housing the Romanian parliament. Angry residents were evicted from their homes for the palace, causing an even greater poverty that Ceausescu had inflicted.
Rally organised for Nicolae Ceausescu in 1978.
rolandia
Trying to pay off the large foreign debt that his government accumulated in the 1970s, Ceaușescu ordered the export of the country’s agricultural and industrial production in 1982, resulting in more shortages of food, fuel and energy.
To increase births, the brutal Ceaușescu banned contraception and abortion. Doctors had to monitor women of child bearing age to ensure they were not controlling their fertility, so maternal mortality rates rose from illegal abortions. Equally tragic, Ceausescu insisted that HIV was not sexually transmitted so he banned condoms, condemning many young citizens to death.
In 1989 Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev announced his nation would never again interfere in nations’ affairs; in fact the Soviet Union released its satellite states. During 1989 those nations threw off Soviet rule; Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia and East Germany replaced their communist rulers, mainly by peaceful means.
Seeing what was happening elsewhere, the Romanian population stirred. The first protests in Dec in the western city of Timisoara were by members of Romania’s Hungarian minority. At first the army went in but as soon the city was burning, martial law was declared and tanks entered the streets. By 17th Dec, demonstrations had spread across central Timisoara, and security forces implemented Ceausescu's shooting orders. A large number of demonstrators were killed, while others seriously injured and arrested. It didn’t matter; inside the Romanian Communist Party, it looked great for Ceausescu who’d been elected for a new 5-year term.
In 20 Dec 1989 with Nicolae on a government visit to Iran, Elena Ceausescu despatched her Prime Minister to Timisoara to take control. He offered to free those arrested but was met with protestors demanding that Ceausescu resign. Workers, who were bussed in to replace the striking dissidents, joined them instead. Ceausescu returned from Iran as western media disseminated news of the Timisoara revolt.
How did Ceausescu not know his rule was a nasty personality cult? Convinced by his own self-delusions, he was incapable of understanding that it was only upheld by his oppressive security services. He still planned to make a public speech to the people to be broadcast nationwide, to show that Ceausescu retained control. God grief!! C100,000 protesters gathered in Bucharest Square carrying Romanian flags and huge pictures of the dictator. Ceausescu raised his hand to give his speech but was stunned to note that the jeering didn’t stop! Finally even HE finally realised his legitimacy was over. Romania was the last Communist nation to fall and its last days were very violent.
With protestors closing in and the army unwilling to defend him, the couple dramatically fled Bucharest’s rooftops by helicopter, with seconds to spare. But the pilot was unhappy carrying the dictator to safety so he dropped into a field. The Ceausescus flagged down a car and told the driver find them a safe place at an agricultural institute. There the driver locked them up and called the police to take them to Targoviste military base!
On 25 Dec 1989 a military tribunal of military judges met, charging the couple with genocide by starvation and subversion. The defence lawyers asked the couple to claim mental incapacity, but both rejected that recommendation. In the end, the trial lasted only two hours!
Newspaper report of the executions
Today 26/12/89
The Ceausescus were dragged crying into a freezing military courtyard, lined up against a toilet block and shot by the 80 guards. The images were shown on television in Romania and elsewhere. Whatever one thinks of the brutally oppressive regime, or of capital punishment, it was terrible… as the European Court of Human Rights argued.
Once the new government National Salvation Front took power and arranged free elections, Romania was always headed for a free-market democracy. And note that 13 days later Romania outlawed capital punishment. How ironic that Nicolae Ceausescu and wife were the last victims.
Once the new government National Salvation Front took power and arranged free elections, Romania was always headed for a free-market democracy. And note that 13 days later Romania outlawed capital punishment. How ironic that Nicolae Ceausescu and wife were the last victims.
38 comments:
Now this was interesting, for this lover of history maybe not for some young people who think history is boring
What goes around comes around. This is a great history summary that I get to learn today. Ironic that the capital punishment is reserved for the couple in the end.
Helen, I wonder if Romanians could immigrate when Nicolae Ceaușescu ruled. Or at least cross the borders to a safer haven?
Attempting to ban BBC television and replace it with Chinese broadcasting was the last straw and caused the population finally to rise up and revolt.
Our grandson-in-law's parents grew up under that regime and are grateful for their peaceful lives now.
I visited Romania in the early 1970s and,four of us, we had a hire car from Bucharest, unusual at the time, and we saw almost all the country in one month. Bucharest had giant picture of Ceausescu on the government building. Many areas in the city we were not allowed to take photographs. We learned that many old buildings had been destroyed to make his Palace, including churches. Once outside the city it was like going back in time with few cars, many places no cars at all, and the roads were hit and miss as to whether they were there or not. We saw horses and carts in the fields, no tractors, and in the villages people came out to stare at us but were always friendly. I watched the live scenes on tv when Ceausescu fell along with his wife and they were finished. My mother was horrified that I was going to Romania and tried to stop me (the trip was all planned by two friends). Later Jimmy Carter visited. Ceausescu cultivated this appearance of being a great person when in fact he was a greedy, nasty dictator.
Jo-Anne
Alas you may be correct. Teenagers tend to think that history of earlier generations is not worth studying because that "wasn't their problem". They want to spend their time on future issues eg computing, science, medicine, mathematics, foreign languages, climatology etc.
They are wrong. If we don't know what happened in Central and Eastern Europe in the 20th century, for example, how will we understand the future?
roentare
true that! The clothes change, the music modernises and the languages vary, but what comes around, goes around. Nicolae Ceaușescu started off looking after oppressed workers and the unemployed, then gained power. How quickly he moved to secret police, forcing women into constant pregnancies, mass shooting of demonstrators in the streets etc etc. Does this mass murderer remind you of Benito Mussolini? Stalin? Muammar Gaddafi?
jabblog
how extraordinary that your in-laws lived under the Ceaușescu regime, survived, left home and found a welcoming home in the UK. Have they told you stories of their experiences in Romania?
I could not find much about the BBC. But it seems that the BBC filmed young children in straightjackets, groups of mentally disturbed adolescents spent their days in bleak rooms sitting in eerie silence, babies nearly starving to death. The proliferation of babies in overcrowded inhumane institutions was so great that babies were stacked on the shelves of a cart like loaves of bread. Did the BBC try to broadcast these images?
https://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=124078&page=1
Rachel
I am glad to hear you and your young friends had a fun month exploring Romania back in the early 1970s, and that you returned home safely. Were you and your friends knowledgeable about what was happening during the Nicolae Ceaușescu regime back then?
I think your mum was correct to be very anxious about her daughter. I was in Israel until January 1967, just before the Six-Day War, and my mother was making herself sick with anxiety about getting me out of there.
Student
Even those citizens who applied to emigrate legally reportedly faced harassment, imprisonment and torture. And their applications could result in loss of jobs and threats. Those who simply tried to sneak across the border to seek asylum in a safer environment were followed closely by the secret police, and could pay a great price.
The only people who had more success were those travelling in other countries on legitimate business eg in embassies or trade organisations.
Hels, no I was not aware of what was happening except that it was a Communist country and much wealth was on display in Bucharest so something was not right because everywhere else was very poverty stricken and it was like going back in time.
As a romanian born, I'm ashamed of what they did to Ceausescu and his wife, and so are many other romanians. I don't like even to read about that. The only "comfort", so to speak, is that it started in Timisoara, the main city in the ungarian minority region. Ungarians are different from romanians - more agressive and cruel, and it's a great pity they gave the tone in ending Ceausescu's reign.
Rachel
I don't know how old you were back in the early 1970s, but very often teenagers don't understand the conditions people live under in a dictatorship, especially if those teenagers grew up in a democracy like you did. I thought I knew it all back then, but the more I read as a uni student and grad student, the more I learned.
DUTA
capital punishment was always an obscenity, whatever the crime was and whoever the crim was. I would not have allowed even Eichmann to be executed.
In this case, the trial was very quick and the couple were quickly taken outside and executed by dozens of guards. It reminded me of the witch trials in the early middle ages - cruel, no proper trial and publicly celebrated.
Capitalists or communist, if the government is not answerable to the people, tyranny is the likely result. What's always odd is how the tyrant eventually ends up not being able to distinguish true affection from compulsory affection.
What an interesting blog. Thank you for posting about this.
(1) I think last year the BBC Radio 4 had a one-off documentary - with actress Ionia Adriana - about the children in Romania. One of the consequences of such authoritarian policies designed to increase the number of children was a huge number of parents who could not afford to raise their children. As a result, the state-ran orphanages began to fill up. The conditions were so awful and dire you wouldn't believe. Kids in filth & neglect and largely having to fend for themselves.
(2) For me, the problem with their execution of C. + his wife was that it was a total show trial which lasted a single hour and which was broadcast on national TV. Particularly the latter, which I think reduces the state organs of justice to something pornographic. I don't object to capital punishment on principle for certain crimes which are evil. Certain things cannot be atoned and certain people cannot be reformed. And I am not sure I see the obvious benefit in dispensing with life sentence which, to my mind, are protracted forms of the death penalty. I would put crimes against humanity in that category. I appreicate you take a different view on this point.
Thanks once again for the interesting blog poast which I enjoyed reading.
Hello Hels, The Ceausescus were a dim memory until you reminded me of their horrible story. A classic example of a self-aggrandizing dictator overreaching, from which apparently the world (as well as newly emerging would-be dictators) have learned nothing. I am not sure how I feel about capital punishment (mostly against), but your last sentence stuck me as oddly worded, since this was such an extreme example. I do respect your views on this issue, but I still would not like to evoke pity for such people.
--Jim
Boa tarde. Parabéns pelo seu trabalho maravilhoso e pesquisa. Obrigado pela oportunidade de adquirir novos conhecimentos. Bom início de semana.
Parnassus
murdering a criminal for committing murder on innocent citizens might be equal in law, but murder is immoral for any reason.
I had no pity for them. As long as there has been a proper trial, I don't mind if criminals are locked in gaol for the rest of their lives and have to live off bread and cheese.
Luiz
yet another tragic dictatorial story, nod. I assume you are familiar with similar histories in the Americas.
Kirk
agreed... if the government is not answerable to the people, tyranny is the definite result! But how did it go on for so long?
Liam
You are quite right. As I wrote, the BBC filmed young children in straight jackets, groups of mentally disturbed adolescents spent their days in bleak rooms sitting in eerie silence, babies nearly starving to death. The proliferation of babies in overcrowded inhumane institutions was so great that babies were stacked on the shelves of a cart. Imagine the mothers and fathers who were 1] forced into unwanted pregnancies and births and 2] saw their babies treated like animals.
Ionica Adriana, one of the first children to be adopted from Romania after the fall of the communism, returned "home" to uncover its past and her own. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001897q
I remember all this happening quite well.I remember too that it started a lot of thought about how children's brains need stimulation and interaction and love in order to thrive and even in order to be able to function with any sort of normality . It seems that the tendency for the planet to have a certain number of countries run by dictators with awful consequences for their country and the world in general , will never go away . .The only defense we have is critical thinking in the population , a strong and independent judiciary and some good luck . hence the absolutely critical business of teaching history to anyone and everyone . I guess though that it is equally important as to who is teaching the history .
mem
I would agree with you IF we ever had a world population that understood the consequences for the countries run by mass murdering dictators. But we have either 1] learned nothing from dictatorial crises or 2] there is no local or global organisation able to control the dictatorship. As of 2020, there are 52 nations with a dictator or authoritarian regime ruling the country: 3 in the Americas, 27 in Asia and the Middle East, and 22 in Africa. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/dictatorship-countries
But even with a mature, thinking electorate, who is going to stop a brutal dictator: a strong judiciary? the nation's army? the neighbouring nations' armies? The United Nations? If only people escaping dictatorships could be given asylum in other countries, instead of drowning the refugees in small boats.
Hi Hels - we recently had a doctor come and talk to us about an organisation that provides medical assistance to people who are marginalised either as a result of conflict, poverty or the remoteness of their homes - in various parts of the world.
Before the medical charity was set up - in 1990 after the Berlin Wall came down the dreadful plight of the Romanian Orphanages became apparent – he had gone out as a young GP to help where he could ease the children's torment - it still resonates to this day.
I hate what people inflict on others through complete terror and control. Hilary
I remember hearing about the murders and the end of Communism in Romania. It's interesting how delusional leaders can become-if they aren't already. We have one of them here in the US who thinks the world revolves around him. Hope your new week has started off well.
I read a really interesting article in The Atlantic this morning entitled "How America got Mean" . It is talking about the decline in teaching around virtues and manners and the focus on our listening to ourselves rather than focusing on the communal good .The writers premise is that we are focusing on the psychological rather than the building of character in our people as we educate them .It sounds like it might be a horror read but actually I found it resonated a lot . See if you can find it Helen . I got it via Apple News . .
Hilary
the doctor who addressed you all was a very brave professional and human being. Can you imagine a young man, used to the NHS with all its (mainly) successes, being exposed to starving sick children and broken families. I would never be able to sleep at night again :(
I don't know what charity the doctors works for, but I often see The Surgery Ship on tv and am full of admiration for their work.
Erika
given that many of these dictatorial leaders were normal-ish when they first come into government, what happens when they start to become powerful individuals? I would say that
dictators, even those who seize power with the intention of helping the nation, frequently become tyrannical over time.
The dictator has absolute power, with no consultation with parliament or parliament is closed. After the dictator's rule is solidified, the rest of the nation loses all hope in their lives. The leader's brain, on the other hand, is likely to be overtaken by narcissism, vindictiveness, paranoia, even drug abuse.
mem
Thanks for the reference which I will read.
The writer's premise is that we are not focusing on the building of character in our people as we educate them. Even if that is true, I wonder if even a strong, moral nation would be able to control a would-be power-hungry leader backed by the army, the police and a secret central intelligence organisation.
You didn't write about Elena as much as you did about Nicolae Ceaușescu. So why was she tried and executed, alongside her nasty husband?
Joe
Elena Ceaucescu presented herself as a world-famous scientist, researcher, book author and the leader of Romania’s chemistry team at international conferences. One problem was that she failed Grade 4 and left school while still illiterate. A second problem was that the real scientists remained anonymous. However she wasn't executed for presenting science as her own.
Elena Ceausescu rose to important political positions in the Party, including as a member of the Central Committee and the Executive Committee. She was deeply involved in party administration alongside her husband, and together they set the policies and actions of the regime. The pair was accused of equally ordering the deaths of 60,000 people during their reign and stashing up to a billion dollars in foreign bank accounts. For this, she was executed.
Hello again, Joe was being very gallant with his question about Elena. There is/was a popular opinion that women cannot be as evil as men, and for married couples, the wife is innocent no matter what the husband does. In the infamous Kirtland Massacre case, which we have touched on before, Mrs. Lundgren portrayed herself as an innocent victim, terrified of her husband (at least that's what she said), while one phone call from her could have saved the lives of all those children and other people. One of the main defenses of Lizzie Borden was that a well-bred, society woman simply could not have committed such crimes, and anyway a "weak" woman would not have had the strength to wield the axe. (Although women were never forbidden from chopping up the woodpile for the stove.) A while back there was a supremely evil politician in the U.S. named Jesse Helms (he would fit right in with today's group of nasties). In his speeches he always evoked his %&$& wife, saying things like "Mrs. Helms would be shocked if she could see such filth." In the end I hated Mrs. Helms almost as much as her husband. She never left him, or refuted anything he said, thus giving tacit agreement and approval, and making her equally vile and culpable. If Helms had been (very deservedly) hanged publicly, many would have rejoiced to see Mrs. Helms done away with on the same scaffold.
Sorry for this rant. --Jim
Parnassus
I am a bit biased myself... that is I truly believe that few women would ever be dictators, even if they were afraid of their spouses.
It was even worse in Elena Ceaucescu's case because the terror she co-created was something no woman would ever do - ban contraception, ban condoms which could have reduced VD, starve families, put babies into institutions and force 5 unwanted pregnancies per woman. And she spent money like it was going out of style, even when citizens couldn't afford food.
I was so glad when those evil people died. I knew someone who worked in Bucharest and said there were many public buildings there which looked grand but were essentially facades. I believe that Romania is now trying to encourage the talented people to left the country in those bad times to return.
Jenny
The couple was executed in 1989. People who escaped the country during the Ceaușescu regime would probably never step foot on the soil again. People who left the country when it had been returned to a democracy might be prepared to set up in the homeland again, especially since housing is affordable and there seem to be many jobs available.
How am I so sure about Romania? When I was at school in the 1960s, 95% of the parents of my school mates were Polish and somehow escaped the Holocaust. Yet not one of those parents would EVER step foot on Polish soil again, not even to see their old homes or businesses.
You might like to read Norman Manea’s autobiographical novel "Exiled Shadow".
Deported to a concentration camp from 1941 until the end of the war, Norman Manea again left his native Romania in 1986 to escape the dreary, nauseating oppression of Ceausescu’s communist surveillance state.
Perfect timing, thank you :)
Post a Comment