The Eighth Tribe, 1978 (5. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)

1978-01-01 / 1. szám

Page 4

THE EIGHTH TRIBE

January, 1978

NATIONALITY OPPRESSION UNDER THE CARPATHIANS

WHO BEARS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FUTURE OF THE HUNGARIAN MINORITIES?

G. B. McGregor

Although far from being in the center of the world’s attention, the difficult position of the Hungarians in the so-called Successor States — particularly in Roumania and in Czechoslovakia — is now generally known in the Western World. This awareness is still rather low-keyed. Western powers still appear to be more interested in the oppressed or allegedly oppressed minorities of Africa, Asia and various other sections of the Third World than in the plight of the Hungarians in Transylvania (Roumania). And this is so, even though the latter constitute the largest and most oppressed national minority in Europe outside the Soviet Union. While this situation seems to be changing, this change is rather slow. Moreover, insofar as there are changes, these are due almost exclusively to the activities of the Hungarians in the Western World — particularly those in the United States — most of whom are gravely concerned about the fate of their brethren in the Successor States.

In assessing the efforts of the most influential Hungarian-Americans, it must be admitted that initially their efforts were plagued — and to a lesser degree, are still plagued — by inefficiency and by a lack of real understanding of the workings of the American political system. More recently, however, we have witnessed some major improvements. This does not of course mean that the full human and national rights of the Hungarians in Roumania, Czechoslovakia and some of the other Successor States has been secured; for nothing could be further from the truth. But in the course of the past two years or so, the struggle for this goal has become somewhat more rational and better organized. Moreover, there is a growing awareness among most Hungarians that the responsibility for the outcome of this struggle rests with all of them — be they in Hungary, or in any other section of the world. Unfortunately, there are still a number of problems that impede this struggle.

The first of these problems is connected with the attitude of the politically active Hungarian-Americans (or American-Hungarians, as the case may be), many of whom display a substantial lack of political realism, along with a surprising ignorance about the workings

of American party politics. (And here the reference is primarily to those first generation American-Hungarians who are most active and vocal in Hungarian “emigre politics,” and who consequently are generally regarded as the spokesmen of the American-Hungarian community.) But without political realism, without making one’s goals attainable, one can hardly hope to succeed in one’s political aspirations. Within the context of American political life this means basically that Hungarian-Americans will simply have to make their goals realistic, and they will also have to gear these goals to the needs of American national interests. To formulate and to propagate unrealistic and unattainable goals, or goals that go against American national interests, is equivalent to inviting total disaster for their cause.

As is well known to the masters of the field, politics is an art of compromises. Thus, one who is unwilling to make compromises, is jeopardizing the very goals that he had set out to achieve. And so it is with the Hungarian struggle for the welfare of the Hungarian minorities in Roumania and Czechoslovakia. This struggle must also be based on the principles of political realism anad compromise. And in light of these principles, at this moment of history demanding basic human and national rights for the 2% million Hungarians in Roumania and for the nearly one million Hungarians in Czechoslovakia is much more realistic than calling for territorial revisionism. This is all the more so as the Soviet Union, which is also suffering from the rising national consciousness of its minority peoples, could hardly agree to such a border revision without starting an avalanche in its own backyard. No less is this true for the United States and for most other Western states, whose policies at this time do not allow for territorial revisionism. Thus, if the various organizations devoted to the welfare of the Hungarian minorities in Roumania and Czechoslovakia (more specifically, Slovakia) wish to achieve meaningful results, they will have to take the above realities into consideration.

While the policies and actions of many of the politically active spokesmen of the Hungarian-American community often suffer from a lack of political realism, the policies and actions of the Hungarian Government suffer from an unusual and unnecessary timidity in dealing with the question of the Hungarian minorities. There were times when this timidity (or perhaps even lack of interest in those days) went so far that the growing oppression of these minorities could not even be raised and discussed. Fortunately,