Systematization () was a programme of urban planning and social engineering in the Socialist Republic of Romania from 1974 to 1989. The legal framework for this programme was established as early as 1974, but it only began in earnest in March 1988, after the Romanian authorities renounced most favoured nation status and the American human rights scrutiny which came with it. The declared aim of this programme was to eliminate the differences between urban and rural, by razing half of Romania's 13,000 villages and moving their residents into hundreds of new "agro-industrial centres" by 2000. It was carried out by the Romanian Communist Party under the leadership of Nicolae Ceaușescu, impressed by the ideological mobilization of North Korea under its Juche ideology, with the stated goal of turning Romania into a "multilaterally developed socialist society". It consisted largely of the demolition and reconstruction of existing settlements, in whole or in part, in order to urbanize and modernize the country. Systematization was controversial for the mass demolition of historic centers which became known as Ceaușima. Within a year, on 18 April 1989, the first batch of 23 new agro-industrial towns had been completed. Although cut short by the Romanian Revolution in December 1989, at least three more rural settlements in an advanced state of systematization were ultimately transformed into towns.
Background
Nicolae Ceaușescu's 1988 idea to raze about half of Romania's 13,000 villages and rebuild others into "agro-industrial centers" was not new. It had been written into law in 1974. At that time, about 3,000 villages were scheduled to die out gradually, while 300–400 more were to be transformed into towns. However, industrial construction assumed priority, overshadowing the rural reconstruction and resettlement programme, which was not pursued with any vigour. In the spring of 1988, however, the rural systematization programme reemerged as a top priority on Ceaușescu's agenda.U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989, Revolt Against Silence: The State of Human Rights in Romania (an Update), p. 1 The concept was first developed by Nikita Khrushchev, aiming to raise the standard of rural life by amalgamating villages in order to stop the migration of younger people from rural to urban. However, the project was forgotten while Ceaușescu focused on other projects, such as the Centrul Civic and the Danube–Black Sea Canal, but it was relaunched in March 1988.Darren (Norm) Longley, Tim Burford, Rough Guides UK, Jun 1, 2011, The Rough Guide to Romania, p. 85 The 1974 law for urban and rural territorial reorganization provided for the development of the countryside by focusing on the more viable villages while the rest would be gradually starved of investment. However, momentum was lost in the late 1970s, and of the 140 new towns promised by 1985, only one – Rovinari – was completed in 1981. No explanation was ever given, but likely Ceaușescu transferred his attention to the aforementioned projects.Professor David Turnock, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., Jun 28, 2013, Aspects of Independent Romania's Economic History with Particular Reference to Transition for EU Accession, p. 51
Details of the plan The villages most likely to be phased out were those with minimal prospects for growth. By the year 2000, 85% of communes were to have piped drinking water and 82% modern sewage.Dennis Deletant, Hurst & Company, 1995, Ceaușescu and the Securitate: Coercion and Dissent in Romania, 1965-1989, p. 307 According to a statement by the regime, by the year 2000, Romania expected "to eradicate basic differences between villages and cities and to ensure the harmonious development of all sections of the country".U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989, Reform and Human Rights in Eastern Europe: Report Submitted to the Congress of the United States, Volume 4, p. 24 Ceauşescu's declared aim - based on an original idea in the Communist Manifesto - was "to wipe out radically the major differences between towns and villages; to bring the living and working conditions of the working people in the countryside closer to those in the towns". He thought that by gathering people together into apartment buildings so that "the community fully dominates and controls the individual", systematization would produce Romania's "new socialist man". Ceaușescu was determined to revolutionize agriculture by increasing the cultivation area, while also stifling individual initiative and increasing centralization. The peasants were to receive derisory compensation for their demolished homes and then be charged rent for their new blocks, in which there was no accommodation for animals.Darren (Norm) Longley, Tim Burford, Rough Guides UK, Jun 1, 2011, The Rough Guide to Romania, p. 85
Romanian historian Dinu Giurescu commented, "The ultimate goal is the proletarianization of our society. The final step in this process is the loss of the individual house.". The US Congress claimed it was an all-out effort at social engineering: kitchens and bathrooms were supposedly meant to be communal space in the government-owned and controlled apartments.U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989, Reform and Human Rights in Eastern Europe: Report Submitted to the Congress of the United States, Volume 4, p. 78 The number of villages was to be reduced to 5,000–6,000 (grouped in 2,000 communes), implying that 7,000–8,000 would be destroyed. Workers and intellectuals were to be settled in three- to four-storey buildings, with small blocks of four apartments or individual two-storey houses for the farmers. The countryside would be urbanized through 558 new agro-industrial towns. Although aspects of the programme were absolutely necessary (improvement of services, diversification and stabilization of the workforce), it allowed little scope for local consultation and its implementation timespan was far too short (hence compulsory resettlement) with no realistic compensation for the required expropriation.Professor David Turnock, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., Jun 28, 2013, Aspects of Independent Romania's Economic History with Particular Reference to Transition for EU Accession, pp. 51-52
The last stop: MFN status Between 3 August 1975 and 3 July 1988, Romania was accorded most favoured nation status from the United States.U.S. International Trade Commission, 1990, U.S. Laws and U.S. and EC Trade Agreements Relating to Nonmarket Economies, Volume 1, p. 18U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995, Congressional Serial Set, Issue 14164, p. 3 In 1988, Ceaușescu renounced Romania's MFN status with the United States, just as the latter was about to suspend it over human rights violations.Carswell Company for the UNB law journal, 1994, UNB Law Journal, Volumes 43-44, p. 269 In July 1987, the United States Congress voted to suspend Romania's MFN status. Although the suspension was meant to last at least 6 months, in order to avoid further humiliation, Ceaușescu renounced his country's MFN status.George Schöpflin, Hugh Poulton, Minority Rights Group, 1990, Romania's Ethnic Hungarians, p. 23U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989, Reform and Human Rights in Eastern Europe: Report Submitted to the Congress of the United States, Volume 4, p. 53 More than 85 oral testimonies and 995 written statements were submitted to support the suspension of Romania's MFN status. On 26 February 1988, in order to save face, Romania announced that it did not need MFN status. The House and Senate votes were rejected as unacceptable "interference in the internal affairs" of Romania. To underline this rejection, the village-bulldozing program was made public in April 1988.Akadémiai Kiadó, 1990, Hungarian Studies: HS., Volumes 6-7, pp. 84-85 Romania's renunciation of MFN status in February 1988 resulted from Ceaușescu's growing irritation with American pressure over Romania's human rights situation, such as Ceaușescu's treatment of his opponents.Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, 1990, 1990 Trade Policy Agenda, And, 1989 Annual Report of the President of the United States on the Trade Agreements Program, p. 60Dennis Deletant, Center for Romanian Studies, 1999, Romania Under Communist Rule, p. 148 Ceaușescu's renunciation of MFN made its suspension by the United States Congress meaningless.Stephen Sisa, Vista Books, 1990, The Spirit of Hungary: A Panorama of Hungarian History and Culture, p. 193 His action showed that he would not submit to pressure from either side, East or West.Dennis Deletant, Mihail E. Ionescu, Politeia-SNSPA, 2004, Romania and the Warsaw Pact, 1955-1989: Selected Documents, p. 42
Implementation and results
Romania had traditionally been a largely rural country, with the vast majority of the population living in villages when the Romanian Communist Party (PCR) came to power after World War II. By the early ‘60s, the rural population still amounted for two-thirds of the population.
Ceaușescu felt fed-up by continuous United States Congressional scrutiny of Romania's human rights record, a scrutiny hindering his long-cherished "grand design". Shortly after his gesture on MFN, Ceaușescu announced the most sweeping and ominous plan of his regime, involving the liquidation of up to 8,000 villages.Stephen Sisa, Vista Books, 1990, The Spirit of Hungary: A Panorama of Hungarian History and Culture, p. 193 On 3 March 1988, speaking at an official conference, Ceaușescu announced that by the year 2000, 7,000 - 8,000 of Romania's 13,123 villages would be "modernized", as in transformed into 558 "agro-industrial" centres.Janet Fleischman, U.S. Helsinki Watch Committee, 1989, Destroying Ethnic Identity: The Hungarians of Romania, p. 49 The Ilfov Agricultural Sector around Bucharest was chosen by Ceaușescu as a showpiece (to be completed by 1992-1993), as a model for emulation by the rest of the country. The first evictions and demolitions took place in August 1988. Only two to three days were given before shops were closed down and bus services were stopped, forcing the inhabitants into the selected villages. Whole communities were moved to blocks in Otopeni and Ghermănești, where as many as ten families had to share one kitchen and the sewage system had not been completed. In other villages, "ugly" concrete civic centre buildings began to emerge in the planned new towns. Around eighteen villages had suffered major demolitions by the end of 1989, while five others were completely razed.Darren (Norm) Longley, Tim Burford, Rough Guides UK, Jun 1, 2011, The Rough Guide to Romania, p. 85Professor David Turnock, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 28 iun. 2013, Aspects of Independent Romania's Economic History with Particular Reference to Transition for EU Accession, p. 56 According to the Wall Street Journal: "In the countryside, smashed hamlets and villages are making way for the same prefabricated housing blocks of Orwellian Bucharest."U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989, Reform and Human Rights in Eastern Europe: Report Submitted to the Congress of the United States, Volume 4, p. 78 The systematization programme encountered resistance from both villagers and local authorities. The US Congress claimed local revolts against systematization had taken place in the villages of Petrova, Monor and Parva. Local officials were supposedly threatened, while in other places officials allegedly refused to carry out their orders. The director of the Miercurea Ciuc County Savings Bank supposedly resigned in protest over pressure to designate his native village of Păuleni-Ciuc as a street of the nearby town of Frumoasa.U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989, Revolt Against Silence: The State of Human Rights in Romania (an Update), p. 2