I think everyone would be better off if Hungary simply avoided lustration
except for the most egregious cases. Freedom and democracy are the best
revenge.

Regards, Marc

Greg:

The MSzP and SzDSz got together with representatives of all six parties to
choose the media board. I think this happened in mid-June. Does anyone have
the exact date?

-Marc

I just got off the phone with my brother in Hungary and he told me that
another powerful bomb exploded in Budapest.  This time the target was
the Mathias Church in the Buda castle district.  Or maybe it was directed
at the "Halaszbastya", adjacent to the church.  It's a major tourist
attraction in Budapest.  Does anybody have more details about this?

Joe Pannon

Laszlo Bekes, the Hungarian Finance Minister announced that Hungary will
NOT reschedule the debt.

More moves like that and I convert.


                                                                Attila

Greg Grose writes:
> I don't follow; how do the six parties share [the blame for appointing an
> MSZP member to head Radio]?
The idea was to have certain jobs in the public sector be depolitized, so
that you don't have to find a new Alan Greenspan every time a new
administration comes to power. While the exact range of jobs to be held by
permanent undersecrataries or whatever was never spelled out, originally
people thought that public servants like the director of a hospital, a
museum, or the TV, will not be political appointees.

What the exact range should be is unclear, but there was a fair amount of
consensus back in 89 that TV and Radio fit here, and in fact the media
presidents (Hankiss and Gomba1r) were appointed by six-party consensus.
However, MDF soon decided that this wasn't good enough, that they want to
have these positions (and also the presidency of the Hungarian National
Bank) be filled by their own people. As it happened, the new democracy
forgot to get rid of a 1974 government decree that gave legal power to the
MDF to control the media, a power which they started to excercise. The media
presidents were effectively removed, and executive power was in the hands of
the vice presidents (Na1hlik and Csu1cs) who were MDF creatures.

The upshot is that MDF used its (legally dubious, but factually very real)
power to redefine the set of (de)politized jobs in the public sector. They
overturned the six-party consensus, and in the subsequent media war never
showed the slightest intention to return to a depolitized model. They didn't
bother to negotiate a decent media law while they were in a position of
strength, and as a result now they can't appeal to anybody when Horn does as
he sees fit. Also, they weren't content to put center conservatives in these
positions (and yes there are such people, Mr. Antall was one of them) but
rather they put MIE1P-supported characters there who didn't have the
slightest chance to survive the elections.

So Mr. Horn is behaving badly, but the whole structure for him to be able to
do so was put in place by the previous governing coalition. To the victor go
the spoils and the media was redefined as spoils by MDF. If this goes on,
Hungary will have a model like Austria where every goddamn village
goatherdship is distributed along party lines. I still hope MSZP shows some
restraint, and truth be told at least they didn't bring in people supported
by Munka1spa1rt. But this is only because Horn is not beholden to his
party's extremists the same way Antall was to his. Besides, enough MSZP
supperters are there in the media so he doesn't have to do anything very
agressive to have things go his way, unlike Mr. Antall.

So I'm qute peeved about this but I don't see MSZP as the only culprit.
Maybe Fidesz, not being in power at any time, is free of blame. OK, five
parties share the blame. To the Viktor go the spoils? But why spoil it
so badly in the first place?

Andra1s Kornai

Yet another sound analysis from Mr. Kornai, except for the "Viktor" pun. :-)

In reply to your message of "Sat, 23 Jul 94 02: 11:01 PDT."
             >
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 94 08:09:46 -0700
From: 

Andra1s Kornai writes:

> ...this is only because Horn is not beholden to his
> party's extremists the same way Antall was to his.

I've heard the conjecture that one big reason for forming the coalition
was to minimize or avoid precisely this type of hold by extremists.
(Sorry, way off topic, I know.)


--Greg

In reply to your message of "Sat, 23 Jul 94 02: 06:15 PDT."
             >
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 94 08:01:55 -0700
From: 


>From The Economist of London June 18th, p116

                                ***
Among the reforming economies of central and eastern Europe, Hungary
led the way in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) in 1993 with
a net inflow of $1.2 billion.  It was also the biggest draw in terms of
investment per head, at $130 in 1992-93.  On the same measure, the
Czech Republic ($75) and Slovenia ($70) were the next most popular
destinations for FDI....[goes on to report figures for former Soviet
Union, Estonia the largest at $46.]
                                ***

A bar chart shows that, after Hungary at 1200 million:  Russia 625,
Poland 600, Czech Rep. 600, everyone else below 250 million.  The per
capita figures for Russia and Poland are $5 and $11.


--Greg

Marc Nasdor writes:

> Yet another sound analysis from Mr. Kornai, except for the "Viktor" pun. :-)

Actually, it was yet another BS from Kornai, based on a bunch of false
premises.  It is "sound" only to left-leaning list members of the likes
of you, Marc.

Joe

Andras Kornai wrote in answering Marc Nasdor:

>I still feel quite
>a bit queasy. I'm not happy with the summary treatment of the mayor/MP
>issue, and even less happy with the handling of the media presidents.
>. . . .
>Already there are some mixed
>signals (like Horn asking Kohl for debt relief while Be1kesi making a song
>and dance about how it's absolutely central for Hungary to retain its
>creditworthiness) and there are some unambiguously bad signals (like
>appointing an MSZP member to head Radio)

Let me add a few more to the list.

(1) According to news reports, Horn in Innsbruck (before taking office)
announced that Hungary's application to the European Union must be
renegotiated. The *168 o1ra* claims that the French ambassador told the
foreign minister elect that this act would "set you back at least five
years." La1szlo1 Kova1cs tried to calm down the diplomatic corps. It is a
simple misunderstanding, he told them. Horn spoke only a "review of the
agreement." According to a VOA news report, "The prime minister said his
government does not rule out a second referendum on whether Hungary should
request membership in the European Union."

(2) According to the same VOA report: "Hungary's new prime minister Gyula
Horn says he wants to hold a referendum on whether Hungary should seek
membership in the NATO alliance.  Stefan Bos reports from Budapest on the
prime minister's foreign policy views.

Text:   Just hours after taking up his post, Mr. Horn offered a broad look at
Hungarian foreign policy, saying that he himself has doubts about Hungarian
association with NATO.

Mr. Horn told reporters that many Hungarians were happy when Hungary left the
now dissolved Warsaw Pact, and do not want to join another military block.

He said his government plans to hold a referendum on whether Hungary should
 seek NATO's membership."

Although I am sure that Horn is correct when he says that "many Hungarians
were happy when Hungary left the now dissolved Warsaw Pact, and do not want
to join another military bloc," a foreign policy promoting neutrality is not
a viable one for Hungary, IMHO. An Eastern Europe, left as a no man's land,
similarly to the situation between the two world wars, would be a
catastrophe. So, all in all, I am becoming quite unhappy, just when I started
to make my peace with the idea of an MSZP-led government. Eva Balogh

I posted a note on an interesting slip of the tongue, found in *168 o1ra.*
The article referred to the Antall/Boross government as an "interregnum." I
happen to mention the Ne1meth government which I characterized as a
government under the one-party system of the pre-1990 days. Zoli Fekete
responded:

>Dear Eva,

>just FYI: the Nemeth government actually ended the one-party system.

>-- Zoli

Dear Zoli,

just FYI: I am aware of the fact that the Nemeth government was instrumental
in preparing the ground for multi-party democracy. Yet this in no way alters
the fact that the Nemeth government, however capable and well meaning, was
the last of Hungarian governments which was not democratically elected in
more than forty years. To call the democratically elected government of
Hungary an "interregnum" is shameful and inexcusable. The population may have
gotten disenchanted with the Antall/Boross government but it was a government
the people of Hungary freely elected in 1990. It was in no way an
interregnum. Eva Balogh

Dear Eva,

Horn has most definitely not promoted neutrality - he was the first
politician, back in the early days of the previous Parliament, who
suggested application to NATO. The referendums seem to be planned for
affirming, not rejecting the move toward EU & NATO, as seen in the
relevant RFE report I include after my sig here. This is not to say you
should make peace with the idea of having the MSZP government, but it
would be nice to blame them for only things they actually do...

-- Zoli
 HORNS IMMEDIATE FOREIGN POLICY OBJECTIVES. At a 15 July
international press conference, Premier Horn said he would lead
Hungarys delegation to the 16 July Trieste summit of the Central
European Initiative then hold a working meeting on 18 July in Bonn
with German Chancellor Helmut Kohl to strengthen bilateral
economic ties. Horn rejected the view that the four Visegrad group
countries should be dealt with jointly as a bloc with regard to
their future admission into the European Union. He denied the
existence of a consensus in Hungary over NATO membership and
favored the holding of a referendum on the countrys admission to
both the EU and NATO, adding that he would work toward an
                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
affirmative vote on both issues.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Andras Kornai's analysis of the Horn administration's first moves is
fine as far as it goes, but I find the situation far more alarming than
he does.  Just as in American administrations, the first few weeks are
often crucial.  That is when the basic power relationships are formed,
and precedents established.  The way Horn went about replacing the heads
of the state radio and television was an unmitigated disaster.  It showed
enormous arrogance and insensitivity, when moving through a political
minefield.  Andras is correct that it was the MDF that made these positions
into a political football.  True, but irrelevant.  First, the MDF was a
bunch of power-hungry amateurs who couldn't pull off the simplest political
move without making a hash of it.  They were not truly dangerous.
Horn and his crew, on the other hand, are power-hungry professionals.
Second, the supposed rationale for the SZDSZ to enter into the coalition
was to act as a brake on just this type of Socialist power grabs.

The coalition agreement specifies, in excruciating detail, the types of
major issues where the Socialists cannot make unilateral decisions
without Kuncze's countersignature.  This is one of the supposed checks
and balances that the SZDSZ insisted on as the price of their entering
the coalition.  Was this procedure followed here?  I don't know.  Is this
how things are supposed to work from now on?  Horn will make the decisions
and the SZDSZ will rationalize them and apologize for them?  Was Kuncze
consulted?  Did the SZDSZ delegation in the six-party consultatative talks
even know about the decision taken behind their back?  Did Horn double-cross
his own MSZP delegation to those talks?  Are we going to find out?  If
at least one Hungarian reporter would stop pontificating, and dig up some
news for a change, then we should have a blow-by-blow description of how
this decision was made.  I'm not sure we will.  If the SZDSZ cannot
play the checks-and-balances role in government, then the press must
do it for them.  If the press has the spine to do their job, that is.

It's going to be a long four years.

-----
Gabor Fencsik

Joe:

Well, if Kornai's posting was BS, I would like to see your detailed rebuttal
sometime. BTW, are you saying that people who believe in democratic process
are "left-leaning?" If so, what makes a right-leaner. :-)

Marc

Jeez, Eva, the new government has been in power less than a month! I think
people are just going to have to wait and see what actions are actually taken
in the parliament. So far, all we've heard about are Horn's actions. Last time
I looked, Hungary was a parliamentary democracy, and Horn wasn't elected king.
BTW, I agree with your assessment about so-called neutrality. The playing
field has changed radically, and as most people see it, NATO membership (or
some flavor thereof) is about the only game in town.

Marc

I've got a brilliant idea :-)

Since we're getting all hot and bothered about the new government in Hungary,
could anyone find out how we might send e-mail to Horn, Kuncze, etc.  I mean,
if we're going to run Hungary from here (where is here?), we may as well
open negotiations with our lackeys on the hot seat! :-)

I'm serious: can we get their e-mail addresses? Do they have any?

--Marc

P.S., The winner gets an issue of Kadar-era NHQ.

Marc:

> Well, if Kornai's posting was BS, I would like to see your detailed rebuttal
> sometime. BTW, are you saying that people who believe in democratic process
> are "left-leaning?" If so, what makes a right-leaner. :-)

No, I am not saying that people who belive in democratic process are
"left-leaning".  How could I say that when I myself belive in the
democratic process and I am anything BUT left-leaning?  Actually,
democratic minded people come from both left and right;  it's the
extremists on both sides who do not belive in the democratic process.

But as far as "sound analysis" is concerned, I think this time Fencsik, a
well known fan of mine, is much closer to the mark than Kornai.  As a
matter of fact, there was hardly anything I could strongly disagree with
in Fencsik's latest post.  (Surprise, surprise!)

Here is the BS in Kornai's post:

> What the exact range should be is unclear, but there was a fair amount of
> consensus back in 89 that TV and Radio fit here, and in fact the media
> presidents (Hankiss and Gomba1r) were appointed by six-party consensus.
> However, MDF soon decided that this wasn't good enough, that they want to
> have these positions (and also the presidency of the Hungarian National
> Bank) be filled by their own people.

The above is based on the false premise that Gombar and Hankiss were
objective and independent, as if that was a given just because they may
not have been members of any party.  In fact it became obvious pretty
soon after their appointment that they were anything but even-handed.
That's why Antall wanted to replace them, not because he wanted people
who would parrot his line (though he would not have minded, I am sure. ;-)
Of course in comparison, any replacement of those two guys might have
looked like MDF hacks in the eyes of those who considered Gombar and
Hankiss their darlings.  But that's just a relative thing.  The replacement
of Suranyi, the president of Hungarian National Bank was no different
than when a new American administration gets a chance to nominate the
next chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.  This is considered normal
practice in every democracy.  Suranyi blew any chances for being
reappointed for the next term when he gave his open support to a highly
political organization of the opposition, the Democratic Charta.  Those
kind of thisng are just not done by selfrespecting central bank
presidents!

> As it happened, the new democracy
> forgot to get rid of a 1974 government decree that gave legal power to the
> MDF to control the media, a power which they started to excercise. The media
> presidents were effectively removed, and executive power was in the hands of
> the vice presidents (Na1hlik and Csu1cs) who were MDF creatures.

After we pretty much settled the issue that the two presidents actually
resigned themselves (though one of them, at least, had since second
thoughts about it), Kornai keeps repeating the same old lie over and
over again: they were removed.  How about saying that they were not
reinstated?  BTW, Nahlik and Csucs were duly appointed VPs of their
institutions.  That includes Goncz's signature!   Since by law such
appointments have to come from the government, why should that be
surprising that they were close to the MDF in their philosophy?  Would
you expect Clinton to nominate somebody to head the USIA whose thinking
is close to Bob Dole's?

So yes, on this basis I am not surprised that Horn nominated people to
head the Radio and TV who are close to his own philosphy.  Until the
Media Law is finally passed, he has a right to do so and (surprise,
surprise again!) Goncz rushed to affix his own signature to the
nominations.  Amazing how his reflexes speeded up lately, no?

> They (i.e., the MDF - JP) didn't
> bother to negotiate a decent media law while they were in a position of
> strength,

This is also a BS because it is based on the premise that it took only
MDF to do that.  In fact, the obstructionism of SZDSZ (Haraszti,
especially) is well know in that connection.  MDF and its coalition
never had the needed 2/3 majority strength to pass a media law over the
objection of the opposition parties.  Now the new ruling coalition has
it and we will see how they'll use it.  From the first weeks they show
themselves to be more arrogant than the MDF-lead coalition ever was.

Joe