Hungary in NATO -- after two years of membership

By Ambassador Andras Simonyi

Very recently my family and I moved back to Hungary from Brussels after eight and a half years. I worked with the coveted institutions of integration NATO and the European Union. Of that the greater part a determined group of young diplomats and military men at our representation to NATO who have devoted their energies and skills to achieve what I today would describe as the most important historic development for our country in the 20th century: become a member of the North Atlantic Alliance. Joining the family of nations of Europe and North America who stand for shared values of freedom and democracy was indeed the turning point after a sad century mostly characterized by lost wars, bad alliances, foreign domination and by extreme ideologies.

Hungary has for good landed where it always should have belonged: the core of Europe.

The process continues and we are facing the even more demanding tasks before the country, to be able to achieve the next step, the completion of our Euro-Atlantic integration, membership in the Union. It is good to remember that success is a result of hard work, risk taking and some luck.

Many years ago, right after the fall of the Berlin wall, I was frequently lecturing in different parts of Western Europe as a proud Hungarian, clearly conscious of the part we had played in those very historic days of the Autumn of 1989. One of my trips went to Denmark, a country to which I have very close ties, and where I have acquired much of my democratic instincts. There a very good friend of mine, the late researcher Mary Dau Hansen, who was also full of praises for my country, cautioned me in my euphoria and said: democracies have a short memory. She had told me not to expect to survive for very long on the gratefulness of other nations, and that we have a hard and difficult road ahead of us, full of pain and difficulties, sorrow and sacrifice.

But that’s all right. We are today not only members of NATO and on the threshold of becoming members of the Union because of the gratitude of other nations, but because of the common interest we have in a stable and prosperous Europe. And honestly we did not open the borders of Hungary to allow thousands of Germans deprived of their freedom to flee to the West because we expected a repayment in kind, but because we wanted to show the World our determination to adhere to the values of democracy and human rights, to the principles of political freedom and a market economy. It is good to remind ourselves of this, because soon Hungary will be in the position to make judgments and decisions on others’ joining Euro-Atlantic institutions.

What has all this got to do with NATO?

Well, I remember in the early days when only a few really believed in an enlarged Alliance some basics were burnt into my mind on the criteria to be fulfilled by any country to be considered as one of those joining. Stability of democratic institutions, a free market economy, good neighborly relations and the respect for human rights, civilian control of a thoroughly reformed armed force. There is no need to give an analysis of each and one of them, but it is maybe good to recall the hard steps we had to take. Also because there are lessons to be learned for those who intend to follow in our footsteps. Ask me what was the most difficult of these? They were all difficult, because they were part of an adaptation to the mostly unknown.

The heavy handed remarks remarks on the poor performance of the economy when it was thought that tough measures of economic reform can be evaded. Or watch the eyebrows be raised on the poor state of relations with our neighbors. One would recall how had to listen to the heavy criticism of the outdated, old fashioned military establishment, which would not open up for public scrutiny, for democratic control .

In the end we did well, because there was a realization that all this is not to be done in order to please NATO or the EU for that matter, but because that is in the best interest of the country. We did not have to strengthen democratic institutions because a certain Secretary General says so. We did it because that was the only way to create strong foundations for economic development, stabilize our newborn democracy. Only thus will there be citizens who are able to think and act freely, not being dependent on the state. And it also dawned upon us that membership in these institutions is a means to an end. That becoming a member in any of them is not the miracle solution in itself. It is the values they are built on and the discipline and respect for those that pave the way to success. Ultimately they are both instruments of modernization. And that is what we want. National interests and the interest of NATO and the European Union coincide.

The foundation of the North Atlantic Alliance is democracy, security and solidarity. With membership come rights and responsibilities, and we Hungarians had plenty of opportunities in the last decade to learn that they are equally important. Only a nation that is fully aware of the price of freedom, and is ready to pay that price has an understanding of the cost of its’ security and stability. Still too many take the freedom they have for granted, and are not willing to realize and face the threats we face. That underpins the importance of keeping the Alliance strong and capable of facing future threats, which will come at one point in time. Only a determined and capable alliance will be able to face up to the challenges of the new millennium, an Alliance that is strong and has the cohesion to be able to take hard decisions, whose members display solidarity and the willingness to act.

For Hungarians, because of the geographic vicinity of the Balkans, the possible threats of the aftermath of the Cold War was a reality, early on we had to face real risks. The process of course was full of nice moments the display of a deep understanding of our history Those who believed that Hungary’s fate is linked to the core of Europe, were eager to pass on the message: there is no alternative to joining the Trans Atlantic Community. However we had to win not only the minds but the hearts of people for the cause. And real life gave us plenty of opportunities to test our ability to convince fellow citizens on the importance of the process.

Have you ever heard of a town called Taszár ? Well Taszár is a little town in the Southernmost part of Hungary: a never-heard-of place, formerly known as the “village with a Soviet base”. And the locals have hardly ever heard or wanted to hear of the idea that Hungary wants to join NATO just a few years after having got rid of Soviet domination, the Warsaw Pact. While they were quite aware of the crisis on the other side of the border to Former Yugoslavia, they thought little of them being involved in the efforts to bring peace to the region. So don’t think that the city fathers and the local citizens were all that enthusiastic about the decision to allow American troops to set camp there on their way to Bosnia with the NATO forces in the Autumn of 1996.

The citizens of Taszár were scared, the city fathers worried what might become of their town. Those Hungarians have seen only a few foreigners in their entire life, and suddenly they were going to have them around by the thousands. To help open their eyes to the real world we sent a group of local politicians to Brussels, where they got to see the Supreme Allied commander at a time when Ministers stood in line to get to see him. They met with US troops in Germany. The mayors of towns involved would tell about all the problems they had with the „foreigners”, the cultural divide between America and Europe, but also very simple facts of economic advantage for the community. Reluctantly our friends form Taszár would accept reality. And thus they did a splendid job. Today the Mayor and his fellow compatriots agree: the Americans must stay!

One wonders if there are really „greatest” moments in ones life. The day Hungary became a member of the Alliance, the 12th March 1999, is certainly a strong candidate to be the greatest in mine. It sure was and will remain the most Historic for me. That day was full of symbolism. The flag of Poland, Czech and Hungary being raised to fly with the banners of 16 democracies was for us the real conclusion of the Yalta legacy. The end of the East – West divide. Hungary’s ship has finally arrived.

The great event was only too soon followed by what would be some of the most difficult months in our recent history, testing mental and physical strength of humans, but above all the moral and political endurance of nations. Hungary had to go through a baptism by fire, being part of a military campaign. NATO took the decision to resort to military means after all the possibilities of diplomacy were exhausted to stop the killing of the civilian Albanian population in Kosovo. That decision was taken unanimously by the 19 members, just to within days make any difference between old and new members insignificant. The decisions we had to take were the most difficult a diplomat could ever face. Thinking that it was an easy one is foolish. We all knew that there would be human lives involved, and what ever the skill of our fighting the quality of our weapons and men and women, there will be casualties.

But for Hungary the challenge was even more difficult. We are a neighbor to Yugoslavia. Our citizens could see and hear allied planes cross our airspace. They could hear the targets being hit. There are four hundred thousand people of Hungarian origin living in Voivodina, with close ties to their relatives in Hungary.

Hungary was also a brand new member that had to prove itself.

But we also had to prove that enlargement was not a mistake, and that Hungary together with Poland and the Czech Republic will not weaken the solidarity and cohesion of the Alliance, and would not hamper its ability to take very difficult decisions with consensus. What was at stake was not only Hungary’s prestige, but also the fate of further enlargements.

Hungary stood the test. In some instances our perseverance was key to taking decisions by consensus. We didn’t weaken but rather strengthened the solidarity among member nations as well as the cohesion that helped to conclude the campaign.

But what was most astonishing was the way the grater part Hungarian public reacted. No one was happy to see this war happen. A public understanding for the decision that NATO had taken was displayed throughout those difficult days. Hungarians were well aware of the risks involved. But they also had a firm belief in the determination of NATO to fulfill its obligation of the security guaranties, should Hungary be threatened by Milosevic. And they also knew that Hungary’s stance would leave a long lasting impression among nations.

Only a nation that is willing and ready to take its’ share of burdens can count on the support of others. Hungary has learned a great lesson in the necessity to reconcile national interests with those of the Alliance.

In these difficult days we, and indeed other countries of Central and Eastern Europe, have all given ample proof that the logic of an integrated Europe that expands towards the East is the only right historic choice. It was not and is not aimed against anyone but poverty and deprivation, dictatorship and nationalism. The enlarged NATO and European Union is the logic to extend the zone of security and stability towards the East to create the basis for material and spiritual well-being for Europeans. Only a Europe that stands for progress of its citizens, but which is unselfish will be able to face the challenges and threats of the new millennium. We Hungarians will therefore stand in the forefront of efforts to continue the process believing that other nations of Central and Eastern Europe should benefit from an enlarged Euro Atlantic area.

NATO stands for Trans Aatlantic relations, and the maintenance of this organization means the keeping of a reliable institution that is a bridge between the two sides of the Atlantic. Don’t however take this relationship for granted. That needs a lot of care and efforts. I do not believe that this is a one sided affair, benefiting only Europe. On the contrary, NATO stands for interests on both sides, for American and European alike. There has not been and there is no better vehicle to carry these common interests than NATO. It is the ultimate territory of our cooperation, the expression of our togetherness.

There are always voices on both sides of the Atlantic who would rather want to see these ties loosen. There have always been isolationists in either camp. The relationship is however interest driven, and we who believe in its’ importance for the security of the larger Euro Atlantic community, we must act to preserve this relationship. The building of a military capability for Europe is on the agenda and a greater responsibility for Europeans in military affairs will not change the need to maintain what has served democracies for over 50 years. The ambition of Europeans to create a real force, capable of acting when the Alliance as a whole will not act, is alright. It shows the maturity of Europe as an integrated political entity. If we do it right the result will be a stronger more reliable cooperation between the US and Europe.

In the Alliance we Hungarians have accepted US leadership, which has always proved crucial in time of crisis. Leadership is not dominance. Consensus will remain the most important element in the decisions of the Alliance. That will be the cornerstone of its’ cohesion and solidarity. Leadership will mean sharing risks by America for the sake of its’ own interest. It is a mistake to think that America is better off without the old continent. America’s future interest lies within a strong bond with the Europeans.

Now the next great leap forward, to join the European Union in order to complete the foundations. We all used to think that we will be part of a greater Union just a few years after taking the bold steps of the early nineties We are joining the Union with great ambitions but realistic expectations. The World has changed, and we are facing a Union which is different from the one we set our eyes on in the beginning of the nineties.There used to be a joke among Hungarians that the date of EU membership is always five years from the day it is being discussed. Now finally we are zeroing in with less idealism and more pragmatism, but with sufficiently strong foundations and a well prepared mindset to join in as equal partners. Because equality is not only a material and financial matter. It is also a question of the will to cope with challenges, the endurance of society to make necessary sacrifice and the ability to innovate. Our country has those qualities. However it is also the understanding that there are other courageous nations around and peoples with the desire to catch up with development not to be left behind forever in the fast moving world.

What to do with those who fear that Hungary will weaken the solidarity of Europeans because of its’ strong inclination to the Atlantic idea? There there is no contradiction. We would like to strengthen Europe while constantly working on the cementing of Transatlantic relations. Hungary will want be 100 percent European, while remaining 100 percent a good and reliable ally.

Ten years after the Great Change the country is moving with considerable momentum to catch up with lost time. Economic recovery has happened with amazing speed. Courageous decisions which at times hit hard on the majority of the population have ensured a stable growth. Now the task is to allow this wealth to spread more evenly without hampering initiative and reward for Hungarian entrepreneurs, who dare take risks.

Hungary has a role in the region. Not a mission, because we are not missionaries. But we have a duty to help reconstruct. Our ambition is to live in a region of well-being. We must continue to be a factor of stability. It is in our interest that our neighbors benefit from the consolidating effects of European integration on their societies. That is why Hungarians have a desire to see NATO continue to enlarge, extending further to the East the boundaries of stability. This is in the interest of all of us, including our Russian partners. It must be in their interest to consolidate their borders to the West by finding there a growing number of prosperous countries. We want to be a wealthy country surrounded by equally prosperous nations since only prosperity will help these countries get rid of aggressive nationalism. Only thus will the turbulent neighborhood, adjacent to us towards the South, become a lastingly stable part of the continent.

The most difficult task however is to help the recovery of the individual. Great parts of society have found it easy to adapt to change, making good use of the opportunities as they arise, and looking at challenge with optimism. Still there are many who have not been able to cope, who will never recover. They find it difficult to find their way, to make decisions of their own and feel let down the first time they run into difficulties. The balancing act is called solidarity. The stronger part of society must not allow its fellow compatriots to permanently remain on the loosing side.

The world is now heading towards reaping the benefits of Information Society, the unstoppable conquest of the technologies which enhance the ability of societies to communicate. These technologies will probably be the single most decisive factor in the growth of economies. Hungary has to be part of that revolution. We must together make sure that the gap between communication haves and have-nots will shrink. The faster we adapt to the new realities of information society the better equipped will the nation be to stand the growing competition. It will in the end not weaken but rather enforce the ability of society to take the challenges of globalization positively rather then with fear of being overwhelmed by it.

Societies will continue to be in a race. But with the availability of new technologies at ever shrinking costs and increasing data flow capacities the difference between nations will not be primarily decided by hardware but by the ability of its individuals, organizations and institutions to innovatively make use of them. Artistic skills will be perhaps the most important element in this, because new territories of science will be conquered by those possessing the skills to unlimitedly explore new frontiers. These skills lie with those who are able to let their minds move unhindered. Musicians, composers, painters, sculptors, writers can do that. And many Hungarians have those has those talents. It is up to us and our wisdom to be able to make the best use of the power of arts.

Information for the individual means to serve her or himself better, to be independent and be able to freely make judgments on society, politics and the economy on their own. The well-informed individual will not ever surrender to authoritarian rule. It is our responsibility to help, thus further consolidate the democratic instincts of society.

The single citizen must be at the core of all our efforts big and small, create the best possible conditions for the citizen of a democratic society to live, think and act freely. Only a society whose members are not materially dependent on the goodwill of the state will be able to take decisions on their own fate without worries of being at the mercy of others. Finally: poverty is the enemy of democracy.

What has all this got to do with this years’ celebrity György Konrád?

For many in my generation Konrad has stood out as a voice during the very first years of our growing political awareness way back in the early seventies. It was then that the ideals of freedom and human rights, the importance of protecting human dignity became part and parcel of our thinking, and Konrad was one of those personalities who left a very strong mark on our thinking.

We had heard of Konrád for the very first time in the autumn of 1972 when I was still a student. As many other students I too was diligently, but not very heroically, trying to understand the critical voices emerging during the short period of relative softening of the system. It was then that we started to discover the dire realities of the countries, the social problems, real poverty and social deprivation which was a shame to the system and not to be discussed in public.

It was then I was told about Konráds’ book „the Visitor” or „A Látogató” in Hungarian. A book describing the harsh realities of Hungary back then through the eyes of a social inspector employed in the city council. A revelation for me, and certainly a decisive experience, affecting the way I would start to look at Hungarian reality. The book I had to have for myself, my own copy to be able to pass it on to others. But by the time I had heard of it had been removed from bookstores and was simply not to be gotten hold of. And typically of the system it was not removed from the bookshelves of the University of Economics, in those days still named after Karl Marx, and which I have been attending as a second grader. I found it there as the only last remaining copy, out of three as I can recall. So I took the book, and as the only time in my life I have ever done this I stole the book from the library. I never considered this as a great act of courage, or a heroic sign of my devotion to freedom. It was then for me just a great book.

I had not ever met Konrád until very late and only for a brief moment. It was in the process of our efforts to convince the Hungarian population of the importance of joining the Atlantic Alliance that a meeting was organized between the Secretary General of NATO and some outstanding personalities among them artists. Konrad was invited because he was then the President of PEN International, and we all thought that winning him would mean a lot in winning the minds and hearts of intellectuals. The meeting however turned out to be a disaster. State protocol managed to make sure that we all sat around a huge table, miles between each other, polite toasts, no dialogue, pretty cold atmosphere.

Finally I must remark, that during and after NATO’s intervention in Kosovo Konrád was one of the harshest critics of the Alliance action. I never thought that one should simply dismiss his criticism. I regret not having had the opportunity to try to give him a personal explanation. I wish I could have told him how hard it was to take those decision, and that I have not seen one single civilian or military colleague during the three months of that campaign who thought lightly of the things we had to do.

And perhaps I regret most that I was not able to tell him that we stood on the same side.