Tag Archives: Viktor Orbán

The “Let’s stop Brussels” questionnaire: Orbán’s silver bullet?

I haven’t analyzed Viktor Orbán’s speeches for some time, but yesterday he delivered a fairly important speech to parliament. So I think it’s time to take a closer look at the Hungarian prime minister’s state of mind.

As usual, he is on a war footing with Brussels. But if I’m correct, his posture, despite his belligerent tone, is more defensive. His position within the European Union has weakened considerably since the Brexit referendum and the French election. More and more voices can be heard within the European Union calling for financial retribution as a form of punishment for countries that refuse to cooperate when it comes to the refugee crisis. For the time being Jean-Claude Juncker would like to avoid such a drastic step, but the announcement of a looming infringement procedure can be expected any day.

Obviously, Orbán has been expecting such a move on the part of the European Commission. Right now the only bullet in his defensive arsenal is “the national consultation,” with which he wants to “stop Brussels.” But not all bullets are equally effective. The “Let’s stop Brussels” campaign and its imbecilic, deceptive questions have annoyed the Commission from the beginning. I very much doubt that the Commission will be impressed by the responses the Hungarian government received arguing against any interference by the European Union in what Viktor Orbán considers purely national affairs.

Before I turn to the actual speech, I would like to say something about the “success” of this particular consultation. The claim is that the “Let’s stop Brussels” questionnaire was returned by a record number of citizens. Indeed, if we take a look at the Wikipedia entry on “Nemzeti konzultáció,” we can see that this year’s questionnaire was returned by a greater number of people than any of the other five campaigns previously staged. However, we must keep in mind that no independent body counts the returned forms. We have only the number the Orbán government provides.

Given the lack of accountability of the government, I have long had my doubts about the government’s figures in connection with these consultations. This time I’m even more suspicious than before. The consultation drive began on April 1, and on April 19 Antal Rogán’s propaganda ministry reported that 140,000 questionnaires had been returned. But then, on April 25, six days later, Csaba Dömötör, undersecretary in the prime minister’s office, announced that 380,000 questionnaires had been received. Quite a jump, I would say. Two weeks after that, the same Dömötör triumphantly announced that “more than 1,130,000” citizens had already returned their questionnaires. In two weeks the numbers had almost tripled. But if the drive was such a success, why was it necessary for Lajos Kósa, as leader of the Fidesz parliamentary caucus, to ask for an extension of the deadline from May 20 to May 31? In any case, Viktor Orbán at the beginning of his speech in parliament yesterday claimed that 1.4 million people are practically unanimously standing behind the government in its fight against Brussels. This number, by the way, by the end of speech became 1.7 million. So, who knows?

Altogether 8.1 million questionnaires were sent out to all citizens over the age of 18, and therefore it doesn’t matter how you slice it: 1.4 or 1.7 million returned questionnaires, take your pick, shouldn’t be hailed as a great victory. But what is really annoying is that Viktor Orbán blithely turned the official government figure(s) of a 17%-21% return rate into a pro-government response rate of greater than 50% when he said that “the majority of Hungarians think that Brussels is going in the wrong direction.”

What do the government and the “majority of Hungarians” want, according to Orbán? They want “a Hungarian Hungary and a European Europe.” A couple of years ago Jobbik’s Gábor Vona announced with great fanfare that “Hungary belongs to the Hungarians,” and it seems that Viktor Orbán now agrees with him. I wonder what he would say if the prime minister of Slovakia or Romania announced that he wants to have an ethnically pure Slovakia or Romania and the Hungarian minority has only two choices: emigrate or assimilate. I assume there would be an incredible outcry, and with good reason. As for the “European Europe,” we all know what Orbán has in mind. A white Europe.

In connection with the ten-year jail sentence for “terrorism” meted out to Ahmed H. for using a megaphone to call for calm during clashes at the Serbian-Hungarian borders, Orbán accused “Brussels” of supporting terrorists at the expense of the security of the Hungarian people. Bernadett Szél (LMP) said in response that Orbán had “misplaced his medication.” George Soros couldn’t be left out of Orbán’s speech to parliament, and indeed the “American speculator” was pictured as someone who is directing the fate of Europe. The European Commission is under his influence. He asked the members of parliament “not to stand by Brussels in Hungary’s disputes with the European Union.” In addition, the parliamentarians “should stand by the Hungarian people in the battle between the Soros mafia and Hungary.”

Orbán announced that Hungary “can’t accept that [its] future is decided in Moscow, Brussels, and Washington.” As for the future, Orbán made some strange comments. Let me quote one of them. “The French election during the past weekend shows that the revolt of the European people has also reached France.” We know that when Orbán in the last couple of years was talking about “the revolt of Europeans” he was not thinking of Macron’s centrist movement. Macron’s victory is not a welcome piece of news for Orbán, which he tries to hide here. He also seems worried about a possible French-German “experiment to transform Europe,” which may take place after the German election. At the moment, “it is not clear whether these developments will help or hinder the realization of Hungary’s national interests.” Odds are, however, that hard times are coming, and therefore the national consultation took place at the best possible moment.

Let me express my very serious doubts that Orbán’s national consultation is the kind of silver bullet that will save the Hungarian government from the consequences of Viktor Orbán’s antagonistic, confrontational behavior and his flaunting of the core values of the European Union. Surely, in his sane moments he must know that those stacks of returned questionnaires are not worth a plug nickel when it comes to negotiations with the important political players of the European Union.

June 13, 2017

The agony of Hungarian football

The “humiliating defeat” of the Hungarian national football team by the amateur players from the tiny Principality of Andorra has prompted a nationwide uproar. One might retort that football is just a game and there is no guarantee that teams considered to be inferior always lose and the better ones always win. Why all the fuss? Perhaps the best answer came from Bence Jávor, sportswriter for Index, who, in connection with the Andorra-Hungary 1-0 game said that “at the moment the greatest problem with Hungarian football is that it is not really about football.” Viktor Orbán made the game a vehicle for the much coveted national greatness. An incredible amount of money and effort has gone into the sport since 2010 without any improvement in the quality of the players.

Hungarian football and Viktor Orbán exist in a symbiotic relationship. The defeat in Andorra is a defeat for Viktor Orbán and his vision. Last summer when during the European Football Championship games Hungary scored a couple of victories, Orbán obviously believed that his strategy of making Hungarian football great again was working. Those who are aware of the depth of the problems, however, knew from the start that all the billions of forints spent on the sport had been in vain.

The government media has been circumspect. Origo, for example, tried to minimize the defeat by publishing a long article listing all the horrible Hungarian losses suffered in games with inferior opponents, starting with the Olympic Games in Paris in 1924. Government propaganda outlets must be careful. One doesn’t joke around when it comes to football. After all, that is Viktor Orbán’s domain.

Thus, it is mostly the opposition papers’ sportswriters who offer penetrating analyses of the state of Hungarian football. Index pointed out that while last year, after the two Hungarian wins against Austria and Portugal, Orbán immediately posted on his Facebook page “Na, ugye” (You see), claiming that his strategy had worked, this time he was silent. Not a word about the fact that Hungary hasn’t won one game yet in the preliminaries to the World Championship, to be held in Russia. This defeat is also Orbán’s defeat. As Bence Jávor said in his Index article, “In Hungary, football is a sector of the national economy, even a nation-forming sector which, as a result of the exclusively divine political will, is able to return the lost confidence of our people so they can continue to rise again because their talented children in the stadiums will enforce at last the much deserved appreciation of the world.” But there is a wide chasm between Orbán’s imagined role of the sport and reality, which despite all efforts cannot be closed.

In Népszava Iván Hegyi, formerly sportswriter at Népszabadság, wrote an excellent article titled “Magyar Dwarfs in Lilliput.” He points out that the “cheap propaganda” that can be read in government papers’ sport sections or in such papers as Nemzeti Sport, the favorite newspaper of Viktor Orbán, only matches the level of Hungarian football. In the last few years pro-government oligarchs have poured 190 billion tax-free forints into football clubs and into Orbán’s very own Puskás Academy in Felcsút. The Orbán government has spent 400 billion forints on building stadiums. As Hegyi says, “almost 600 billion forints for practically nothing.” That is a sizable amount of money: 2.2 billion dollars more or less down the drain. Some “experts” even tried to “analyze” what happened but, as Hegyi puts it, “this kind of analysis is made only in Humbugistan.” This is where Orbán’s vision of football as a “strategic sector” has led. To Humbugistan.

Another article that created quite a controversy appeared in HVG. It bore the title “[András] Hont: Na ugye.” This is a take-off on Viktor Orbán’s by now infamous bragging last summer after a couple of wins during the European Football Championship. “You see? Didn’t I tell you? It was worth it!” All that in two short words. But now Hont says to Orbán, “Na, ugye.” It means, didn’t we tell you, Viktor Orbán, that all the money you’ve been pouring into football has been a total waste? All that money that was given to football instead of to education and healthcare.

But what really upset the Hungarian right was Hont’s devastating words on the Hungarian football hooligans who accompanied the national team to Andorra. As usual, they wreaked havoc when they were ready to remove the players’ shirts because “they didn’t deserve to wear their uniforms.” Even though Hungary’s defeat in Andorra was described in the media as “shameful,” “what we really ought to be ashamed of is that from time to time we let a few hundred unhinged Neanderthals with Nazi tattoos invade Marseilles, go to Lisbon to attack gays or to Bucharest to make a racket. They should be left somewhere where no-go zones or zoos should be built to accommodate them.” The following video will give you an idea about the behavior of the Hungarian “fans.”

Well, the members of the “Carpathian Brigade,” who created the upheaval in Andorra, were not happy with Hont, whom they kept calling “Andráska.” Even Magyar Idők felt that it had to weigh in on the issue. Although the article quoted Hont’s exact words on the tattooed Nazis, it still accused Hont of a lack of patriotism. “What kind of man is it who is happy when his country loses and sad when it wins?” This is the level of “government journalism” in Hungary nowadays. Despite the fact that Hont said not a word about being happy that the Hungarians lost.

What do we know about Viktor Orbán’s reaction to the Andorra fiasco? The little journalists managed to get out of him was the following: “We have the same leadership at the head of the Hungarian Football Association that was able to find the appropriate answer after the devastating 8-1 loss suffered at the Hungarian-Dutch game. Now we must all trust that President Sándor Csányi and his team will make a wise decision after proper deliberation.” This leads me to believe that Viktor Orbán is still incapable of realizing that his strategy has totally failed, that everything he has done has been for naught.

I’m also sure that today he regrets the words he uttered only a few days before the disastrous performance in Andorra. “Hungarian football is doing much better today because we have football academies. The system of academies is the greatest value in Hungarian football. We must preserve and strengthen it. This is what we have learned in the last ten years. This is what we are good at…. In brief, I think that if we stabilize the system of academies we will have world-class Hungarian football.” We are indeed in Humbugistan.

June 12, 2017

Government media on foreign affairs: The British election

For today I chose a topic that may help readers become more familiar with the Hungarian government media’s coverage of foreign news: British Prime Minister Theresa May’s ill-fated snap election that brought political uncertainty to the United Kingdom and that greatly weakened the May-led Conservative Party.

As is often the case, the inspiration for this post came from a friend from Hungary who called my attention to an article in Origo that kept insisting, even after the election results showed that the Conservatives hadn’t achieved a majority, that the Tory victory was spectacular.

The Hungarian government has a clear preference for the Tories. Orbán had excellent relations with David Cameron, and Cameron’s departure after the Brexit vote was a heavy blow to the Hungarian prime minister. He lost a powerful friend in the European Council. Moreover, the Labour Party led by the “Marxist” Corbyn is an anathema as far as the far-right Fidesz is concerned.

Flórián Hecker, a regular op-ed writer of Origo, wrote a wildly optimistic forecast of the election results on June 8 when British newspapers were already full of devastating descriptions of the very poor Tory campaign and the likelihood that there would be an unexpected turnabout in public sentiment. Hecker predicted that “Conservatives are in the home stretch and Labour in the lee,” although he admitted (in a seeming lapse of logic) that the “Jeremy Corbyn-led party had somewhat forged ahead.” In Hecker’s view, the really important issues of the British election were terrorism and migration. The two terrorist attacks and May’s radical reaction were helping the Conservatives. The majority of the Brits are still pro-Brexit and May’s hard Brexit stance also helps May’s chances, while Corbyn’s desire for the U.K. to have access to the EU market is not a popular position in Britain.

After the election Origo announced the results with surprising enthusiasm. “It was the Conservative Party that finished first in the British parliamentary election. The exit polls indicated their victory with 314 seats, which they surpassed by a little.” Yes, this is an exact translation. The article dismissed Labour’s gains by saying: “266 seats were predicted for the Labour party [but] they received a bit fewer.” Moreover, nowhere in the article do we learn outright that the Conservative Party hadn’t won enough seats to form a majority government. The closest the article comes to the hard truth that Theresa May’s gamble failed is the muddled statement that “the Conservatives may be in the majority with the Democratic Unionists.”

A day later, on June 9, another article appeared in Origo, heralding that “the Conservative party has won the snap election with a convincing ascendancy.” This time the “impressive” win was interpreted as a supportive vote on Brexit. Origo consulted a foreign policy expert from Századvég, who said that the number one topic in Great Britain is still the country’s relationship with the European Union. Terrorism and national security, he said, despite the recent terrorist attacks, played a relatively insignificant role in the election results.

Today Magyar Idők ran an editorial by Zoltán Kottász, an old supporter of the British Conservatives, who a couple of months ago predicted a conservative turn from France through Germany all the way to Eastern Europe. This time he admitted that Theresa May made a lot of mistakes, but “the fact is that she won” and her situation is not significantly worse today than it was before the election. As the headline of the op-ed piece read in English: “Business as usual.”

It was difficult to maintain this phony enthusiasm for a great Conservative victory for long. Mariann Őry of Magyar Hírlap admitted today that May had made a bad mistake by calling for a snap election. She cataloged a host of mistakes that May made during the campaign and announced that many Conservatives want her to resign. Her conclusion is that May wanted to be a new Margaret Thatcher, “but according to all signs she is unequivocally not.”

Also today Origo decided to ask an associate professor of Corvinus University for his assessment of the election results. He said that “the results of the snap election have made Britain’s domestic politics unpredictable.” This was translated in the headline to the short article as “Political chaos may await the Brits.” The professor believes that Theresa May will resign shortly after the opening rounds of the negotiation talks. Accompanying the short article was the following photo.

Source Citizenside / Photo: David Whinham

Magyar Idők also eventually decided to recount the real story of the snap election. Instead of relying on MTI reports, Tamara Judi, a regular at the paper, wrote a lengthy article in which, quoting The Telegraph, she reported that the “remain camp took the election as a second referendum and supported those who offered the mildest exit conditions.” This must be difficult for the Orbán government to swallow since it has been a strong supporter of Theresa May’s position on many issues–save, of course, for the status of the half a million Hungarians who live and work in the United Kingdom.

Within two days the key government papers, Origo and Magyar Idők, wrote conflicting (I suppose one could kindly describe them as “evolving”) stories about the British election. Imagine that these papers were your only source of information about the election. Is it any wonder that there is such confusion in Hungarian right-wing heads?

June 10, 2017

Far-right western politicians in Hungary: Jim Dowson and Nick Griffin

Do you remember what Viktor Orbán said in his “address to the nation” back in February? Instead of admitting migrants from the Middle East and Africa, “we will let in true refugees: Germans, Dutch, French, and Italians, terrified politicians and journalists who here in Hungary want to find the Europe they have lost in their homelands.” The fact is that a number of people–nationalists, opponents of liberal values, members of extreme far-right parties or movements–have been gathering in Hungary for some time. After all, Hungary is the only country in the European Union where “two extreme far-right parties, the governing Fidesz and Jobbik, the largest opposition party, make up most of the National Assembly,” as Carol Schaeffer pointed out in The Atlantic.

A few months ago one of the readers of Hungarian Spectrum called my attention to a lengthy investigative article by IRBF, a group that monitors far-right hate groups and social media pages. IRBF stands for International Report Bigotry & Fascism. The article was about “a new kid on the block in 2014,” the “Knights Templar International.” From the start, IRBF was suspicious that Jim Dowson, a notorious right-winger, former Orangeman, leader of the British National Party and Britain First, was behind this new formation. I have no space here to list Dowson’s “accomplishments” in the United Kingdom, but anyone who’s interested in his career should consult his entry in Wikipedia, which also details Dowson’s activities in Eastern Europe.

I assume that Dowson relocated to Hungary sometime at the end of 2013 where he was joined, at least on a part-time basis, by another British far-right politician, Nick Griffin, who was the chairman of the British National Party between 1999 and 2014. The two men came to know and join forces with Imre Téglásy, the leader of a small anti-abortion group in Hungary.

The ideology of KTI, in addition to the standard far-right views, includes a great admiration for Aleksandr Dugin, a Russian political scientist whose views are often described as “fascist.” In fact, both Dowson and Griffin attended a “conservative forum” in St. Petersburg about a year ago organized by Dugin and his followers.

The leaders of KTI are sworn enemies of Muslims, so Viktor Orbán’s anti-migrant policies might have been a precipitating factor in Dowson and Griffin moving to Hungary. Dowson is also a great supporter of Donald Trump. In the summer of 2016 he established the “Patriot News Agency” to help elect Trump president of the United States.

Shortly after settling in Hungary, Dowson became acquainted with László Toroczkai of Jobbik, who is the mayor of Ásotthalom on the Serbian-Hungarian border. Toroczkai organized a volunteer group whose members were helping the Hungarian police catch migrants. He was also the one whose town council adopted a local ordinance that forbade building a mosque or wearing a burka. The Hungarian Constitutional Court has since struck down this ridiculous ordinance. Dowson’s last sighting, according to the Daily Mirror, was on the Turkish-Bulgarian border with a vigilante paramilitary group.

Jim Dowson and László Toroczkai at the Serbian-Hungarian border

A few months after the appearance of IRBF’s article, in April 2016, Magyar Narancs also discovered KTI. Gergely Miklós Nagy wrote a long article about “the Russian-friendly British neo-fascists” who work hand-in-hand with Toroczkai and Jobbik. The author of the article didn’t mince words when he described the British leaders of KTI as “the British Isle’s toughest far-right, former holocaust deniers with multiple jail sentences, and Putinist characters behind whom most likely stands one of England’s paramilitary parties.” Magyar Narancs spotted the group in Hungary through an ad on Facebook promoting Hungarian real estate for white, Catholic, conservative Western European citizens who are worried about the growing “Islamic invasion.” KTI has almost 90,000 followers on Facebook.

As for Nick Griffin, his political career ended in 2014 when he lost his seat in the European Parliament and was expelled from the far-right British National Party, which he had chaired ever since 1999. Cambridge educated, he joined the National Front at the age of 14. Since then he has had several run-ins with the authorities on charges of inciting racial hatred. Griffin decided to move to Hungary, he told 444.hu in March of this year, because the political atmosphere is appealing in Hungary for the nationalist right.

His conversation with 444.hu took place after “Stop Operation Soros!,” a conference organized by the Identitárius Egyetemisták Szövetség (Association of Identitarian University Students), a Hungarian offshoot of the Identitarian movement that began as a conservative pan-European student movement. Nick Griffin was one of the speakers at the conference, attended by about 60 people, half of whom were journalists. As 444.hu put it, Griffin delivered the toughest and most obviously racist message. He talked about Gypsy crime and racist Jewish conspiracies, and he showed a great knowledge of all the Budapest spots that, according to him, are “citadels of left-wing gatherings.” The journalist’s conclusion was that there was practically no difference between the ideology of the far-right, extremist groups represented at the conference and that of Fidesz politicians.

A few days ago “Hope not Hate”, an advocacy group based in Great Britain that “campaigns to counter racism and fascism,” triumphantly reported that Jim Dowson had been expelled from Hungary. The group heard that Dowson “was stopped from reentering the country” because “the government has been concerned for some time about extremists from across Europe moving to their country.” The most intriguing part of this expulsion is that, according to the statement issued by the Ministry of Interior, the decision to expel Dawson was at the recommendation of the Anti-Terrorist Center (TEK). The reason? Dowson poses a threat to the national security of Hungary. Two days later came the news that Nick Griffin must also leave Hungary. Perhaps, after all, Viktor Orbán decided that it was becoming a bit embarrassing that alt-right groups from all over the world found Hungary a perfect place to settle.

June 6, 2017

A new declaration of war: Justice for Hungary!

I had no intention of writing about Trianon today. The truth is that I had completely forgotten about the “Day of National Unity” until I began skimming the Hungarian media’s headlines this morning. Some of these headlines piqued my curiosity and prompted me to read further. What I found astounded me.

I assume that most people even vaguely familiar with the history of modern-day Hungary know that the Treaty of Trianon was the peace treaty between the by then independent Kingdom of Hungary and the Allied and Associated Powers. It was signed somewhat belatedly on June 4, 1920, almost two years after the end of World War I. The demand for a day of remembrance originally came from Jobbik, but it was promptly adopted by the new Orbán government.

My decision to read an assortment of articles on Trianon turned out to be wise because I found some real gems among them. From the interpretations there emerges a fascinating sociological and psychological portrait of the Fidesz regime. It’s not pretty, but it may help us to understand the thinking of Viktor Orbán’s propaganda machine. In light of the official government announcement by János Lázár, this particular Day of National Unity may be a turning point in the Orbán government’s handling of the Trianon issue.

The first problem is the false historical background these far-right, nationalistic authors present in their writings. The general thesis is that Hungary was the blameless victim of those nationalities that Hungary’s rulers allowed to settle in Hungary at various times over history. In their interpretation, the nationalities in pre-1918 Hungary had extensive rights, and their continued national existence was in no way threatened. In fact, it was the cursed liberalism of the Hungarian political elite that was responsible for the growing number of non-Hungarians at the expense of Hungarians. This statement, by the way, is erroneous.

In almost all these writings journalists and politicians portray present-day Hungary not terribly differently from the “victim” that was being torn apart by hostile neighbors in 1918-1919. At least one of the commentators, György Pilhál of Magyar Idők, who labels the members of the Little Entente hyenas, considers Hungary’s present neighbors just as antagonistic toward Hungarians as their people were 100 years ago. Hungary is still being besieged and unfairly treated, just as in the past.

Moreover, Pilhál continues, cataloging Hungarian woes, before Trianon there was the Mongol devastation in 1241, the Battle of Mohács in 1524 which signaled the beginning of 150 years of Ottoman rule, and the surrender at Világos in 1849 after a lost war of independence. Pilhál ends this greatly distorted historical summary with the following remarkable words: “Do you want to flood this mutilated, blood-soaked remainder of the homeland with migrants? No, No, Never!” Thus, the migrant question today is being elevated to the level of the most significant dates in Hungarian history. Just as Hungarians had to face the Mongols, the Turks, and the hostile Austrians and Russians, now if they don’t stand fast they might end up being victims of the onslaught of migrants, which would be the equivalent of a second Trianon.

György Pilhál’s son Tamás, who works as a journalist for Pesti Srácok, also wrote an opinion piece that in some ways is even more interesting than his father’s. He also has some harsh words for members of the Little Entente, but in his eyes the real perpetrators were the allies. “The West, with capital letters, cut our hands and feet and threw us among to-this-day antagonistic neighbors that had been fattened by our body parts.” These new neighbors hate the Hungarians because they know that they were conceived in sin and received their territories as a result of unforgivable injustice. Therefore, they don’t feel secure within their own borders. They are not really robbers or thieves, “they are only fencers of stolen goods.” The real criminals obviously are the western powers. “The West is Trianon itself. They have never apologized, they have never tried to rectify their sins and lessen the damage.”

How can Hungary regain its former position as a mid-sized power in Europe? Just as the historian of the Trianon Museum suggested, Hungarians must “repopulate the Carpathian Basin.” Well, he used a more amorous, untranslatable expression “szeressük vissza Magyarországot!” which more or less means getting Hungary back by love-making. This is not a very different formulation from the one Szilárd Németh, Fidesz vice-chairman, uttered a while back, according to which the world belongs to the nation that populates it. So, the only way of getting back Hungary’s former glory is through “the modification of the national scale.” And the horizon is not the “mock borders” of Trianon but at least the confines of the Carpathian Basin.

The third piece is by István Stefka. His ideas might strike readers as outright bizarre, but he fervently believes everything he says. It was about a week ago that I saw him on a television program where three other journalists, including a conservative one, tried to convince him in vain that his theories are untenable. He too sees a second Trianon coming through the activities of George Soros, who is “the Béla Kun, György Lukács, Oszkár Jászi, and Mihály Károlyi combined, who with his civic organizations wants to ruin the country.” Hungary 27 years ago regained its sovereignty, but “now not with weapons, but with scheming, lies, ignominy, hard financial influence, and paying off internal enemies” Soros and like-minded people want to take away Hungary’s mastery over its own affairs. If the Hungarian socialists and left-liberals don’t stand by the people and follow Soros and Co., “they can no longer be considered part of the nation.” In that case, they are also working toward the destruction of Hungary.

Let me now turn to a more official source: the second most important man in the Orbán government, János Lázár. In a speech yesterday he sent the following message to Brussels: “It’s time for our neighbors and the leaders of Europe to acknowledge and adjust their policies accordingly: the Hungarian nation is the victim of Trianon and not its originator and perpetrator.” It is unacceptable that the only thing the leaders of the neighboring countries can say is that it’s time for the Hungarians to get over their old grievances. “The Hungarian nation should receive if not material at least moral reparations for the greatest injustice in world history.” He added that “we don’t want any change of the borders and especially not ethnic tension … new wars in Europe … but that doesn’t mean that we will tolerate the provocations, the repeated violations of our national sensibility for another 100 years. Yes, we can say even now: “Justice for Hungary!” which was the cry for revision after 1929.

I strongly suspect that these new words were not born in the heat of a fiery nationalistic speech. The Orbán government seems to have decided to open another front in its war against Europe, this time for a reinterpretation of the Treaty of Trianon. This is a serious turn of events that may not bode well for peace in the region.

June 4, 2017

George Soros and the mafia state: The Hungarian reaction

The Brussels Economic Forum (BEF) recently held its annual conference on economics and finance. BEF is a European Commission- sponsored organization where politicians and scholars deliver lectures, and where panel discussions are normally moderated by journalists. It is a truly international gathering. This year’s keynote speech, delivered by George Soros, created an uproar in Hungarian government circles.

The speech was mostly about the European Union’s precarious position given that it is confronted with powers that “are hostile to what [Europe] stands for”–“Vladimir Putin’s Russia, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s Egypt, and the America that Donald Trump would create if he could.” Soros talked about the need for “both salvation and radical reinvention” of the European Union. He addressed Brexit, the Eurozone, the migration crisis, and the banking crisis in Italy. It was at the very end of his short speech that he talked about the resistance of young people all over Europe and Great Britain against undemocratic right-wing parties and governments. He singled out “the ruling Law and Justice party in Poland, and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party in Hungary.” He was most surprised and heartened by the resistance in Hungary to the Orbán government’s attack on Central European University, something he was not expecting. He added: “I admire the courageous way Hungarians have resisted the deception and corruption of the mafia state Orbán has established, and I am encouraged by the European institutions’ energetic response to the challenges emanating from Poland and Hungary. While the path ahead is perilous, I can clearly see in such struggles the prospect of the EU’s revival.”

George Soros had visited Brussels a few weeks ago to confer with EU politicians about the plight of Central European University, but otherwise he had remained silent on the subject. Nonetheless, for months he has been under relentless attack by the Orbán administration, so it was amusing that the first reaction to his speech from members of the Fidesz leadership was that Soros’s comments were a clarion call for war against the Orbán government. As Tamás Deutsch, a Fidesz EP member, put it a few hours after the speech, “if it’s war, let it be war, we are ready.” By the next morning, when Viktor Orbán delivered his Friday morning “interview,” Soros’s critical words about the “mafia state” had become a “declaration of war.” Orbán said that if anything in Hungary can be called “mafia-like,” it is “the Soros-sponsored network of NGOs.” Fidesz filed a complaint with the European Commission, the sponsor of the Brussels Economic Forum. The party is looking for an explanation of how such comments could have been uttered at an event under the aegis of the European Commission.

It has been in the air for some time that certain Fidesz politicians are preparing themselves for renewed anti-government demonstrations sometime in the fall. If trends continue, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if spontaneous or quickly organized demonstrations would take place as soon as students return from their summer vacations. Most likely the Fidesz leaders feel the growing dissatisfaction, and they’re trying to lay the groundwork to counter such events. One way of handling such situations is to blame any kind of anti-governmental movement on a foreign culprit. And, of course, there is no more prominent culprit than George Soros. Antal Rogán, at one of his propaganda campaign stops, indicated that there might come a day when the police will have to use force against the demonstrators, who receive instructions in training camps and who provoke the police. He claimed to know about the existence of such training camps in Hungary. And who is behind these training camps? Naturally, the Soros-financed NGOs.

This nonsense is now being spread far and wide by the government propaganda machine. Ottó Gajdics, the editor-in-chief of Magyar Idők and one of the most primitive Fidesz propagandists, is warning Viktor Orbán to be prepared for “blockades and the occupation of government buildings.” The organizers of the past demonstrations realized that “rallies with music and dance” are not effective enough, and therefore hard-core violent demonstrations might take place. Gajdics’s fear of such a development was reinforced by George Soros’s “message.” Soros said in his speech in Brussels that “it is not enough to rely on the rule of law to defend open societies; [one] must also stand up for what one believes.” As far as Gajdics is concerned, that is a call for revolution.

The editors of Magyar Idők found the idea of a revolution in the fall organized by George Soros so attractive that, in addition to Gajdics’s editorial, the paper published another opinion piece in which the unnamed author foresees a scenario similar to that taking place in Macedonia. Macedonia, in his opinion, “has been ravaged” by George Soros via his NGOs. There the situation has deteriorated to such an extent that a few days ago a would-be assassin fired three shots at an outgoing minister of the Gruevski government. “We can only hope that [what happened in Macedonia] is not the dress rehearsal for the Hungarian elections [because] the expression ‘mafia state’ wasn’t uttered by accident as the crowning moment of the merciless speculator’s speech.”

It is somewhat surprising how enraged the Orbán government is with the label “mafia state” since the term, as readers of Hungarian Spectrum well know, has been in circulation since at least 2013, when Bálint Magyar published the first article in which he used it. The term stuck abroad as well. I found via Google over 1,000 mentions in English of Hungary as a mafia state. In Hungary about a year ago an opinion poll revealed that a majority of Hungarians describe the Orbán regime the same way.

A couple of days ago I saw a headline claiming that the anti-Soros propaganda campaign is not as successful as earlier Fidesz propaganda efforts had been. Well, equaling or surpassing the anti-migrant campaign would be a difficult task, I admit, but the latest Republikon Intézet poll reveals that this particular Fidesz effort is in fact effective. Only 31% of the population think that Soros does not at all or does not seriously intervene in Hungarian domestic politics, while 28% believe that he has considerable influence on Hungarian politics and 12% think that he has some influence on Hungarian politics, with about 20% not willing to take sides. That means that 40% of the adult population more or less bought the anti-Soros propaganda. Of course, Fidesz voters are especially prone (about 70% in this case) to believing whatever the party tells them. For those who understand Hungarian, I highly recommend taking a look at this video where hard-core Fidesz voters tell the journalist what they think of George Soros and Brussels.

The socialist-liberal-Jobbik group is more immune to the government propaganda: only 30% swallow all the horror stories they hear on television or radio or read on the right-wing internet sites. Indeed, it could be worse, but unfortunately propaganda Orbán-style is extremely attractive because it appeals to patriotic or nationalistic impulses, which are hard to combat.

June 3, 2017

MSZP’s László Botka in Brussels

László Botka has become a superbly self-confident man since he received overwhelming support from MSZP’s delegates to the party congress less than a week ago. At the press conference he gave in Brussels, he identified himself as “Hungary’s candidate for the premiership.” To clarify his status, at the moment at least five politicians are vying to replace Orbán: Gergely Karácsony (Párbeszéd), Lajos Bokros (MoMa), Tamás Lattmann (representative of civic society), Gábor Vona (Jobbik), and László Botka. These are just the declared candidates, but if at the end each opposition party has a separate party list, even Ferenc Gyurcsány, as leader of DK, might be one of the challengers. This, of course, is just an aside to show that MSZP isn’t paying much attention to reality. They are in a state of euphoria, which might not be warranted. In fact, several opinion pieces appeared lately describing Botka as the man who will oversee the total disintegration of the party. Or, a more charitable opinion, in a couple of years no one will remember who László Botka was.

I’m not so pessimistic, but I’m watching with growing concern the MSZP candidate’s moves. For example, I find it an annoying socialist habit to fight Fidesz by trying to appease its voters with the slogans of Fidesz itself. Socialist politicians should have learned by now that this kind of strategy leads nowhere.

Here is one example. The Hungarian public has heard nothing else in the last seven years but that the European Union is on its last legs. And yet we have ample evidence that the great majority of the Hungarian public is still pro-EU, despite the massive anti-EU propaganda. So, it would be logical to have an election campaign resting on the slogan: “Either Europe or Orbán.” To launch such a campaign, however, would require a full embrace of the Union. One shouldn’t be uncritical, of course, but for Botka to say, after arriving in Brussels, that he is “watching the performance of the European Union with apprehensive criticism” is not exactly a good beginning. What followed was no better. Botka announced that a significant number of citizens had lost their trust in the democratic institutions of the EU, which in turn is responsible for the upsurge of populism. I wish politicians would consider the truth of their political rhetoric before they open their mouths. Does Botka really think that a lack of trust in democratic institutions led to the rise of populism? It is enough to look around the world, from Russia to the United States, to know that this assertion simply cannot be true. After that introduction, to say that he is “deeply committed to the European Union” sounds hollow. Moreover, some of his suggestions to “solve” the crisis could have been uttered by Viktor Orbán himself. This is not the way to distinguish yourself from your political opponent.

Prime Minister Candidate of Hungary

Let’s take another example. The government media discovered that not only would László Botka be in Brussels. George Soros also stopped by for a short visit before flying on to Budapest. What a great opportunity for the kind of journalism practiced in Orbán’s Hungary. The M1 TV station announced that “László Botka and George Soros will negotiate on Wednesday.” Magyar Hírlap published as front-page news that “At last Soros and Botka will find each other in Brussels.” Practically all government papers carried the same news, insinuating some secret cooperation between MSZP and George Soros. What does a good politician do in a case like that? Does he keep insisting that he has never in his life met George Soros? Does he excuse himself by emphasizing that he has never been a beneficiary of Soros’s largesse and that MSZP has never received any money from “the financial investor or his circles”? Surely not. In fact, if he were a brave opponent of Viktor Orbán, who has been demonizing George Soros, he would simply brush aside the whole issue as a typical example of primitive Fidesz propaganda and say that whatever dirt they have been throwing at Soros is undeserved and disgusting. But, no, the brave socialist candidate is afraid that perhaps Fidesz-infected citizens who really think that Soros is the devil incarnate will not like him if he defends the founder of Central European University.

The most important meeting that István Ujhelyi, a MSZP member of the European Parliament, secured for Botka was with Frans Timmermans, who is well versed in Hungarian affairs. Timmermans is one of the most resolute critics of the Orbán regime, and therefore I’m sure it was unnecessary to convince him that “the socialist party and the democratic opposition are interested in the restoration of the rule of law.” What is more difficult to decide is what Botka meant by his request that “the Orbán government should be punished and not Hungary.” How can that be achieved? Viktor Orbán and his government represent the country, so whatever “punishment” is meted out to that government for any infraction will unfortunately affect the whole country and its population. Botka’s request was a timid response to the accusation that the opposition is lobbying in Brussels against its own country. Such pious pronouncements will not change the opinion of Fidesz supporters about the opposition’s alleged unpatriotic actions.

In addition to Timmermans, Botka also met with Marita Ulvskog, vice president of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament. She is also the vice-chair of the EP Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. This meeting was logical given Botka’s emphasis on a truly socialist agenda for MSZP, as opposed to the more centrist or even Third Road approach of the party under Ferenc Gyurcsány. The very low wages in Hungary and the lack of employee protection is truly appalling, and since 2010 the situation has only deteriorated. For example, the total destruction of the power of unions is a relatively new development. What I don’t understand, however, is what Botka was driving at by pointing out “the incredible inequality that exists between member states” as far as the level of wages is concerned. Currently, it is Jobbik that is in the midst of a campaign for equal wages for equal work in all member states of the European Union. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge of economics knows that this is utter nonsense. It is one thing to support the creation of a union-wide social network, but complaining about small or medium-size member states “being powerless to defend the interests and wages of employees of multinational companies” is simply unfair, at least as far as Hungary is concerned, where employees working for multinational companies are better off than those who work for the “patriotic” Hungarian oligarchs.

At home Botka stepped on quite a few toes in the last couple of days. I have no idea what he had in mind when he answered the question of whether he would consider placing Gordon Bajnai, an economist and businessman who proved to be a popular and very effective prime minister in 2009 and 2010, on a common list of politicians of the opposition parties. He said: “Under no circumstances would I place Gordon Bajnai, János Kádár, Mátyás Rákosi, or Miklós Horthy on the list.” What on earth prompted Botka to utter this nonsense? Soon enough Bajnai placed this witty retort on his Facebook page: “I would ‘like to reassure the worried public that I have no desire to be placed either on the list of MSZP or on those of MSZMP, MDP, or even the Peyer Pact.” For those unfamiliar with these acronyms, MSZMP was the communist party under János Kádár between 1956 and 1989; MDP was the party of Mátyás Rákosi between 1948 and 1956; the Peyer Pact was a political arrangement between the Bethlen government and the Hungarian Social Democratic Party in 1921.

I don’t know, but Botka’s first few days are not promising. Popular reactions on Klub Rádió, ATV, and Hír TV are mixed, but there are many who don’t like Botka’s attitude. Let’s hope he and his party realize, and quickly, that this is not the best way to win the hearts of voters.

June 1, 2017