Hungarian ABCs of European Integration
The main lobbyists for Ukraine’s entry into the European community of nations are not state agencies in Eastern European countries but the average citizen. This was the principal message of the 10th international forum “From Europe to Europe: Common Denominators of Euro-Atlantic Integration,” which was held recently in Szeged, 180 km from Budapest. The unofficial slogan was “A Joint Europe: Our Common Purpose.”
Hungary has already traveled the road to European integration. It has been a member of the EU for almost one year, and of NATO, for almost six. Hungary is willingly sharing its integration experience with its Ukrainian neighbor, although Hungarians freely admit that their experience was anything but enjoyable. Fundamental socioeconomic reforms in that country, aimed at adapting it to EU standards, led to staggering inflation, a soaring unemployment rate, and so on. Naturally this didn’t help convince the people that EU membership was what they actually needed.
In the conference lobbies experts were explaining that Ukraine can’t avoid such upheavals either, although it is possible to soften the blow to a considerable degree. Actually, these kinds of meetings are held precisely for this purpose. Ukrainian diplomats in Budapest have enthusiastically interpreted the true meaning of the geopolitical message. They are certain that our membership in European structures is expedient for the countries of southern and Eastern Europe. With the EU’s borders expanding, Ukraine will now be on the front line, not Hungary. Enlisting neighboring countries as NATO members is also a matter of honor for the newly admitted countries. Their own economic, social, geopolitical, and other achievements look far less convincing against the backdrop of their straggling brothers. It is also good from the standpoint of national and general European interests — for example, global security priorities.
The stance of the Hungarians, who are emphasizing the importance of Ukraine’s membership in the EU, was demonstrated even in minor aspects. At the conference the Ukrainian delegation received VIP treatment. Most of the ideas in the speakers’ presentations concerned Ukraine. Among the national colors of the participating countries, which were displayed next to the podium, the Ukrainian flag was placed next to those of NATO and the EU. Special emphasis was placed on civic rather than government initiatives. As proof of this thesis, the participants preferred to describe their project as a civic forum and not simply a conference. Laszlo Toth, head of Szeged’s Center “For a Security Policy,” expressed the organizers’ feelings when he said that “quite often key initiatives on the continent come from civic organizations that are traditionally more sensitive to changes in social moods and orientations.” The Serbian delegation laid stress on the importance of intergovernmental contacts, including the formation of interparliamentary commissions. The Serbian experience is far more complicated, and conducting the European promotional campaign wasn’t easy after the NATO bombing raids.
However, the set of integration tools is anything but all-purpose. Campaign technologies that are effective in some countries may well prove disastrously ineffective in others. A cardinal turning point in the mass post-Soviet mentality remains the biggest obstacle on the road to EU and especially NATO membership. A year ago Hungary’s EU membership was decided by a referendum, which Ukrainian diplomats described as a big gamble. It would have been lost but for a law establishing a rather narrow turnout margin to keep it legitimate. In Ukraine such a referendum would be recognized as invalid.
The propaganda campaign at the preparatory stage garnered the most attention. Youth was deemed the key factor. However, words like “propaganda” were carefully sidestepped: campaign architects explained that popularizing European ideas had nothing whatsoever to do with communist brainwashing techniques. Problems emerged when time came to deal with the older generation, especially in the countryside. Here simple arguments, like combating terrorism, didn’t work, so the most exotic possible ones were used, including ecology and “global security of the environment.” In the end, however, the official policy bested mass consciousness; Hungary has been a member of the EU for the past year, yet polls show that its citizens cannot get used to this reality.
Laszlo Toth, as the forum’s chief organizer and initiator, feels sure that “strong civic, interethnic contacts, including business ones, are the only guarantee of success...Europeans must trust each other and build a common system of values and coordinates, in which the language of business is more understandable than all others. Then the dilemma of the world in Europe or Europe in the world will cease to exist.”
