INTERVIEW An American Republican from New York, former advisor to Trump, describes Nicușor Dan as "one of the most insightful European leaders when it comes to the relationship with the United States".

An American Republican advisor to Donald Trump, James Jay Carafano, views Romanian leader Nicușor Dan as one of the most insightful European leaders regarding the US-Romania relationship. Carafano emphasizes that the key to this relationship is pragmatism, where both parties must make efforts. Regarding military presence, Carafano suggests Romania aligns with the Baltic states and Poland in their reasoning. Economically, he notes Romania's proactive approach in areas like critical minerals and infrastructure. Carafano believes Dan has understood the mechanism for building this relationship effectively. Concerning internal stability, Carafano asserts that a stable government is necessary to solve structural problems like state-owned companies and inefficiency, noting that current results matter more in the short term than the composition of the government. The long-term strategy for Romania, according to Carafano, should rest on the pillars of the European Union, NATO, and the United States, which represents a path to strategic autonomy. Furthermore, Carafano contrasts Romanian views with those of other leaders like Viktor Orbán, particularly regarding energy policy where he suggests distancing from policies dictated purely by climate change in favor of affordable energy.

The narrative presents a sophisticated calibration of geopolitical reality, suggesting that external political structures (EU, NATO, US) form the most reliable framework for internal success, regardless of immediate domestic political turbulence. The assertion that Romania is an example of a correct European actor operates as a moral claim, framed by Carafano’s lived experience within the American conservative sphere, setting up a contrast with other regional actors. A critical tension exists between prioritizing EU integration versus US alignment in Romanian policy, specifically regarding energy—where Carafano rejects climate-driven policies in favor of energy availability and affordability. This suggests a strategic divergence where specific national interests (energy security) supersede broad institutional commitments. The observation that the effectiveness of internal governance is separate from electoral outcomes points to a systemic failure in political mechanisms rather than a simple desire for change, which challenges the expectation that political performance directly dictates international standing. Furthermore, the discussion on migration highlights a tension between national sovereignty and broader European humanitarian concerns, positioning US engagement as a potential counterweight to potentially destabilizing internal dynamics. The emphasis on strategic autonomy—defined not as absolute freedom but as making effective decisions within a multi-pillar framework—suggests that true agency lies in mastering institutional coordination rather than unilateral action.