Hungarian Heritage Review, 1990 (19. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)
1990-01-01 / 1. szám
yes, but no action. The matter of lowering the boom on Romania for its suppression of the human rights of the Hungarian minority in Transylvania has been brought up time and time again on the floor of Congress to no avail. In fact, when Bucharest was told to ease up by Gorby he was told in no uncertain terms to mind his own business. Moreover, when Hungary protested loud and clear, Ceacescu massed Romanian troops on the Hungarian border and threatened to invade. He also threatened to lob a few missiles across the border. It seems that the West has forgotten the lesson it was supposed to learn from “appeasement” and which, to be sure, lit the fuse for the outbreak of World War II.) “We cannot exactly tell now how it was meant to be, for, before it had been actually launched, the world raised a word of protest. So much that it was impossible to tell how it was supposed to start and what has been changed in the meantime. The other question is, how it is to continue for it appears, and most probably it is true, the scheme has not been abandoned. This is not a policy that would give up such a plan because of international protest. No, they have not given it up, only the methods have been changed. They try to conceal by the policy of wait-and-see, manoeuverings, and eye-wash that they still want to materialize it. Some months before, they began with merging the villages. Normally, two, three, or four villages belong to a community. Now they go on with merging. Still more villages are attached to the community, thus making them lose their importance. These are generally the villages assigned for liquidation. Now, they send out party officials and state leaders to each country - like they did when they wanted to push collectivization. They convene a meeting of the inhabitants or party meetings, where they dish up the question in a way that the people themselves ask for the liquidation of their own villages, for the conditions of life are no more given. I know of villages where people were forced to sign an application to be resettled in the blockhouses to be built. Thus, instead of a spectacular village destruction, they apply the policy of atrophy hardly to be traced. So, for instance, the doctor of a village is removed, its school with a small number of pupils is closed. This compels the children to go to the school of another larger community. It compels the patients to go to see the doctor in the neighboring village. Very often they cease the supply of electricity and other utilities. They cut the supply of the shops. So the position of the inhabitants becomes more and more hopeless and they feel forced to leave their village. This is a diabolical scheme, indeed! Otherwise, as far as village destruction is concerned, it is much discussed if it is realistic at all. Even here, the question comes up if it will be materialized or not. This is no problem at all, many people say, for this massive plan cannot be materialized due to financial reasons.' I would say it is quite realistic, for the destruction did not start when it came to be published. By the way, it was a great mistake to publish it at all. It really started years ago. For example in Kolozsvár, in the Holstadt, when a great number of the agricultural population - equal to the inhabitants of five or more villages - were removed from their homes and moved into block-houses. They lost their gardens, houses, and rented land that assured their living. Village destruction started in the cities long ago and in a paradoxical way. Districts, as big as several dozens of villages, were liquidated in the past years, decades. Thus, the tendency prevails beyond doubt. The question is only how far they can put it into practice, how much they are helped by the economic situation, and how much they are influenced by international protest. And, let me add, how far God allows them to go, for we can place all our trust in God alone. This hope is reflected in our hymn, the song of Martin Luther: “A mighty fortress is our God’’. I could paraphrase it, adapting it to our present conditions, saying: “A mighty fortress is our Church’’, for this alone has remained to us .. . our church/’’ • to be continued JANUARY 1990 HUNGARIAN HERITAGE REVIEW 13
