The problem is that the only two daughters with some interest have no offspring, one daughter shows no interest whatsoever and a fourth daughter is barred from the succession. Then the only grandson which showed some interest has been barred from the succession, the two only granddaughters left live their private lives in London resp. Paris and are invisible.
So, it is nice to start about King Michael's daughters, etc. but on the longer term the interests of the House of Romania are best served with ending the unlucky, unneccessary and unilateral decision by King Michael to forget that he is a Prince von Hohenzollern himself. Remember that until seven years ago these "Germans" were simply in the line of succession, as they have been for decades and decades. It is not that a whole new situation is invented or something. It was already how it was, nothing new under the sun.
It was how it was 70 years ago, the last time Romania was a monarchy. Since then, the old constitution has been defunct and it stands to reason that a return to monarchy in Romania will entail a new constitution in itself.
One factor that should not be overlooked, is that a royal restoration in Romania will be news all over Europe, if not globally, as it is a very, very rare occurence, and it will be scrutinized, commented and criticized from many sides. If you add into the mix, bypassing an existing Royal Family to find a male heir among its forefathers, it will raise far too many uncomfortable questions that a government wanting to be re-elected etc, will not want to face. Here's a few examples:
'What is so wrong with the Romanian Royal Family that they need to be overlooked when your government is seeking to restore the monarchy?'
'Does the Romanian government believe that it is right in 2016 that women cannot accede to the throne?'
'Is the government walking backwards into the future, by restoring what many will see as an old-fashioned way of government, and topping that with saying to the world that women cannot do the job, and we will go back in the family tree to get a German prince to fill the role?'
'The monarchy was abolished in Germany in 1918. In Romania it was abolished in 1947. Why does the government feel it is more appropriate to call on a German prince to fill the role of monarch, and not a member of the former Kings own family?'
My point is this: We can argue in circles about who is interested, who is known, who will do a better job etc. The truth is, those views are less interesting than what can practically be expected of a government who has to answer uncomfortable questions, make difficult and controversial choices and be able to both see them through and get itself re-elected.
I am convinced that there will be talks between the government and the RF when the time is ripe to make a choice about putting this question to the people. Those talks will result in the government being given a viable option as to who should ascend the throne in a restored monarchy, and who can take the heritage forward. The family will have to compromise and work with the government and political leaders to find a solution that can be implemented in practice, and I've laid out how I think that will pan out, and the reasons why.
In the end, all of us who wish the monarchy restored, because we truly believe it is a far superior form of government, have to both be realistic, practical and supportive in our approach to these questions, just as both the government and the Royal Family itself has to be.
