George Simion, the leader of the far-right Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR), is predicted to perform well in this year’s Romanian presidential election. Drawing on a new study, Mihaela Mihai and Camil Ungureanu explore how an anti-colonial narrative has combined with environmentalism and religion to give the party a novel platform.
European far-right populist parties have surged on waves of anti-immigration sentiment, Euroscepticism and economic protectionism. They currently make up the second-largest grouping in the European Parliament, divided into three factions: Identity and Democracy, the European Conservatives and Reformists, and a third group consisting of non-affiliated parties.
Romania’s main far-right party, the Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR), belongs to the third, “unaffiliated” category. Founded in 2019, it brings together religious conservatives, hardcore nationalists, COVID-19 deniers and anti-vaxxers, all united in denouncing the so-called “dictatorship of the elite”.
Its supporters are predominantly young, urban men in economically precarious situations, primarily from Eastern Romania and the Romanian diaspora in Europe. In the 2024 European elections, AUR came second behind the cartel-like coalition of Romanian social democrats and national liberals. Its leader, George Simion, a former environmental activist and nationalist agitator, is predicted by some to reach the second round of this year’s Romanian presidential election.
Romania as a semi-peripheral democracy
AUR’s rise is mainly a response to several key social, economic and ecological pressures characterising post-communist Romania. After the fall of communism in 1989, there were great expectations that the country would gradually align with Western secular and capitalist democracies. However, with the rearrangement of the world system, Romania became a semi-peripheral and semi-autonomous player in the global capitalist order.
Despite the establishment of a plural party system and basic liberal rights, the democratic promise of shared prosperity failed to materialise. Structural inequality, poverty and systemic corruption fuelled political polarisation and mass emigration. Alongside low birth rates, emigration has triggered severe population decline: at least 5.7 million Romanians currently live and work abroad, which has had a damaging impact on the economy and the social fabric.
In response, most Romanians have become disenchanted with political elites and the appeal of EU integration has declined over time. Nationalist Orthodoxy provides a modicum of solace against rampant inequality and social anxiety. Romania has also witnessed several waves of socio-political mobilisation, including by far-right populist parties such as the Great Romania Party and the Romanian National Unity Party. These parties were over-dependent on charismatic leaders and gradually weakened, leaving the field open to AUR.
Anti-colonialism and orthodoxy
The existing literature on far-right populism tends to centre on Western and Central European cases. It portrays far-right populists as focused on the idea of a pure, homogenous “people” being threatened by corrupt liberal elites and mass immigration from the Global South. Researchers also argue that Christianity is used by European far-right populists instrumentally, as culture or heritage, with secularising effects. Moreover, European far-right parties are thought to use ecology strategically, to address external pressures or attract young voters.
In a recent paper, we argue that AUR partly departs from this model and challenges the assumption that Eastern European parties are mostly mimicking Western models. First, Romania is a country of emigration and AUR focuses on the country’s conversion into a “colony” that provides cheap human and natural resources to Western Europe. While many European far-right parties embrace “eco-bordering” agendas, invoking neo-Malthusian tropes and the “great replacement theory” to oppose migration from the Global South, AUR addresses Romanians’ “demographic anxiety” by championing family policies, the repatriation of the diaspora and the re-incorporation of the Republic of Moldova. The party also promotes natalism based on a return to the Christian, “natural” lifestyle of the heterosexual family.
This anti-colonial language shines through AUR’s denunciation of foreign capitalist exploitation and environmental damage at Europe’s periphery. It gives voice to a widely shared sense that global corporate forces enabled by domestic profiteers preyed on Romania’s resources after the fall of communism, turning the country into a “place that doesn’t matter”. In describing Romania as a “colony”, AUR also criticises its status as a second-rate member within the EU, reactivating existing geopolitical resentments about the country’s economic and cultural marginality in Europe. This discourse “sticks” because it is historically embedded in local experiences and traditions of nationalist anti-imperial thought dating back to the 19th century. It is worth noting that after 1989 both Left- and Right-wing politicians and intellectuals deployed this language to condemn the social and environmental costs of wild liberalisation.
AUR also challenges the secularising nature of far-right populism. They believe Christian Orthodoxy is essential for personal and national salvation as the fundamental, trans-political, theological foundation of all politics, including environmental politics. AUR’s main “enemy” is not Islam, which sets them apart from other Western far-right parties, who advocate for secularism and hypocritically deploy feminism and pink-washing to demonise Muslim populations. AUR’s main adversary is secularism, a colonial and “neo-Marxist” imposition. In its anti-secular vision, religion is seen as a key source of normativity for earthly existence, encompassing gender relations, sexuality, the family and ecology. The party thus advocates for a “counter-revolution” or “conservative revolution” aimed at restoring Orthodox-Christian principles.
Far-right environmentalism
AUR has a peculiar position on ecology. Due to Simion’s long-term commitment to the environment, ecology is a primary theme for the party. Since its founding, the image of national decay motivating the party has been framed in environmental terms, with a “sustainable revolution” being presented as central to the “conservative revolution”. AUR’s ecological perspective is theologically grounded, as the interests of the divinely ordained nation take primacy: the nation is seen as capable of great virtue and sustainable flourishing on its God-given territory.
Anti-colonial themes inform AUR’s environmentalism. They condemn the abusive exploitation of Romania’s natural resources by external predatory capitalists, embrace a strict resource nationalism and promote food sovereignty. AUR celebrates the “authentic Romanian peasant” – constructed as the model of “naturalness” and “sustainable management”. The focus on the protection of forests – a key symbol of anti-imperial resistance and national identity – inadvertently reproduces an exoticizing image of the continent’s periphery, i.e., the Eastern European “wilderness frontier”.
AUR’s contradictions
AUR’s discourse displays several contradictions. First, there is a tension between their commitment to sustainability and defending the nation’s economic interests, leading to an opportunistic position on EU ecological standards.
Second, while they criticise post-1989 predatory capitalist exploitation and the environmental and economic inequities it generated, AUR proposes small “c” capitalist extractivism of the nation’s natural resources by Romanian entrepreneurs.
Third, AUR remains split between the protection of the nation’s earthly well-being and a Christian “eschatological optimism”, which trivialises earthly environmental concerns.
These contradictions will not, however, dent the force of AUR’s narrative. Its political rise signals a powerful form of far-right populism in Europe, with a toxic yet formidable political message that resonates deeply with many disillusioned Romanians. While their vision may be framed in eco-friendly terms, it poses serious dangers to both democracy and a genuine green transition.
For more information, see the authors’ accompanying paper in Geoforum
Note: This article gives the views of the authors, not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics. Featured image credit: LCV / Shutterstock.com
Discussion about this post