HUNGARY 2007-8/9
One of the most significant
developments in this period was the emergence of two extreme right-wing groups,
the paramilitary Magyar Garda (Hungarian Guard) and the Jobbik movement.
Attempts to ban the latter were evaded by means of various legal manipulations.
The battle over historical memory and its place in contemporary Hungary has intensified since the 50th anniversary of the 1956 Hungarian uprising in 2006.
THE
JEWISH COMMUNITY
The 80,000 Jews living in Hungary, out of a total population of 10.55 million, constitute the largest Jewish community in eastern
Europe outside the borders of the former Soviet Union. The great majority live
in Budapest, but there are also communities in Miskolc and Debrecen, as well as
in smaller cities.
The Federation
of Jewish Communities (Mazsihisz) is the main body of Hungarian Jewry. Among
other activities, it supports the publication of a yearbook, Antisemitic
Discourse in Hungary, published in Hungarian and English by the B’nai
B’rith Budapest Lodge. The Hungarian Jewish Cultural Association publishes a
monthly, Szombat (Saturday), and conducts a wide variety of cultural and
educational activities. The quarterly Mult es Jovo (Past and Present)
publishes original and translated essays on a variety of topics. The content of
the community’s bi-weekly Uj Elet (New Life) reflects a religious
revival among some segments of the Jewish population.
The Rabbinical
Seminary, which has university status, has become an active, well- known
institution for Judaic studies, continuing its long tradition as one of the
most established rabbinical seminaries in Europe. There are several Jewish
schools, which have expanded their activities over the last few years.
The Budapest
Holocaust Memorial and Documentation Center conducts activities related to the
Holocaust and its memory.
POLITICAL
PARTIES AND EXTRA-PARLIAMENTARY GROUPS
One of the most significant
developments in this period was the emergence of two extreme right-wing
nationalist groups, the paramilitary Magyar Garda (Hungarian Guard) and the
Jobbik (a play on words, meaning “more to the right” as well as “better”) movement. There is some overlap in membership between
the Guard and Jobbik. The latter tested public opinion with its website (www.jobbik.net)
before its formal formation as a political group and then a party (see
also Stephen Roth Institute Topical Brief, “Hungary – the
Case of a Post-Communist Society in Crisis”).
The appearance of the
Hungarian Guard as a paramilitary group, with a growing number of branches in Budapest and other localities, raised a series of debates in the Hungarian media, as well
as condemnation by members and officials of the two government coalition
parties, the Hungarian Socialist Party and the SzDsz (Alliance of Free
Democrats), and of numerous NGOs. Several attempts to ban the Guard were
aborted due to the latter’s legal manipulations – leaving the Hungarian
situation seemingly without parallel in the EU. This raised the question of the
ability of the legal system to prevent the rise of a right-wing paramilitary
organization. The Guard aroused fears among the Roma community and the Jews, since
their marches, aimed at "safeguarding Hungarian interests and
security" and marked by right-wing symbols from the past and nationalist
and xenophobic slogans, attracted support from among pensioners and youth.
In contrast, the number of
neo-Nazis is small, but they are visible at public demonstrations on national
days or anniversaries linked to World War II. The most notorious neo-Nazi group
is the Hungarian Welfare Association, which has appeared under various guises
and adheres openly to the legacy of the Hungarian fascist Arrow Cross movement,
led during the war by Ferenc Szalasi. Small groups such as Blood & Honour
organize demonstrations on anniversaries linked to World War II and the legacy
of Hungarian fascism. Skinheads, whose numbers remain stable, have been less
active on the streets and in the dissemination of propaganda. Nevertheless,
this violent sub-culture with its neo-Nazi symbols continues to be a threat to
public order.
As in previous
years, in February 2007 and 2008, Hungarian police confronted groups of local
neo-Nazis, especially from the transnational Blood & Honour, who were
celebrating the anniversary of the 1945 attempt of Hungarian and Nazi troops to
break out of Soviet-besieged Budapest. Following such displays of neo-Nazi
power, the authorities promise to clamp down. However, the marches have become
an annual display of neo-Nazism and Holocaust denial and are condemned by
liberals and leftists in the Hungarian media.
As in previous
years, in October 2007 and 2008 a small group of neo-Nazis tried to commemorate
the anniversary of the rise to power of the Nazi Arrow Cross party in Hungary
in 1944. The open endorsement of the legacy of the Arrow Cross and its leader
Szalasi by the Group for a Hungarian Future (Magyar Jovo Csoport), serves to
spotlight the re-emergence of similar groups, which attract dozens of
sympathizers.
Extremist nationalist
groups have intensified their use of the Internet. Several websites, such as
jobbik.net, disseminate xenophobic and antisemitic/anti-Israel views, often in
vague terminology in order to avoid legal action. Such sites are monitored by www.antiszemitizmus.hu of the Jewish
publication Szombat (see below).
ANTISEMITIC AND RACIST ACTIVITIES
The highly politicized Hungarian
society is split between the liberals, the left (some of them reformed
Communists), the center-right, and the more extreme right, over the
significance of legacy of the 1956 Hungarian uprising for the present. Since
October/November 2006, when Hungary experienced perhaps its most acute crisis
since the change of regime in 1989 and extremist and antisemitic activity
reached a new level with the events commemorating the 50th anniversary of the
uprising (see ASW 2006),
the battle over historical memory and its place in contemporary Hungary has
become a key topic in the sharp-tongued political discourse. As Csurka’s
movement (see below) did for years, the anti-communist right wing emphasizes
the role of Jews during the Stalinist years of oppression in Hungary under ruler Mátyás Rákosi (1945−56). They present that regime as a Jewish
tool, led by Jewish Communists who betrayed the Hungarian nation. (For a
comprehensive analysis of the situation in Hungary, including its extremist
manifestations, see G.M. Tamas, “Counter-revolution against a Counter-revolution,”
in www.eurozine.com , 18 Sept. 2007.)
Liberal
voices such as Nepszabadsag and the weekly Elet is Irodalom warning against
a revival of extremist and antisemitic forces that would endanger the new
Hungarian democracy and which emerged against the background of the
October-November 2006 events, were vindicated, with the expansion of the
extreme right's activities, the escalation of violence against Roma and the
general intensification of the antisemitic discourse, which appears to have
triggered a rise in antisemitic incidents. As in other member states from the
former communist bloc, all these trends should also be seen against the background
of the world economic crisis and the parallel rise of Euro-skepticism among
some segments of Hungarian society − a result of expectations from the EU
not being met in terms of improved material stability .
The rising trends
in antisemitism, xenophobia and extremism were discussed widely in the liberal
media, which, as noted, had originally sounded the alarm. They were monitored,
too, outside Hungary. Political analyst Agoston Mraz commented in the International
Herald Tribune (May 8, 2008): "While I myself don't believe that there
is a clear increase in anti-Semitism, there is now an opportunity to be more
explicit about it." Another observer, Janos Ladanyi noted in the same paper that "in Hungary it is all right if you behave as a religious Jew. But what is being denied here is
the notion that Jews, no matter how we behave, are the same as non-Jews."
Stating that acts
of vandalism against Jewish cemeteries were on the rise in 2007−2008, the
Jewish community originally linked this to a general rise in vandalism, including
against Christian cemeteries. It took some time for the community to issue a
call for government action that would include measures to stem the rising
racist violence against Roma and the formation of extremist organizations such as
the Hungarian Guard and Jobbik. There was special concern over the appearance
of flags with the "Arpad stripes," a centuries-old traditional
nationalist symbol, also used as a fascist emblem by the World War II Arrow
Cross movement. The contemporary standard bearers of the flag in the Hungarian
Guard deny its symbols have any connection with the Arrow Cross. In parallel, the
debate in the media focused on the usage of a recognized historical symbol,
whose display could not be seen as innocent as some claimed because of the
memories it evoked among those who had seen it carried by Hungarian fascists
during the Holocaust. The right-wing daily Magyar Nemzet and the weekly Magyar
Demokrata supported the extremist fringe groups, which were becoming more
active and visible in defending the display of the Arpad flags.
A new dimension
was added to the emotional public debates on the intensification of antisemitism
in 2007, when Peter Feldmajer, president of the major Jewish community
organization, the MAZSIHISZ urged Jews to remain at home during the March 15
demonstrations commemorating the 1848 revolution, during which
nationalist groups traditionally convey nationalist and antisemitic messages.
Feldmajer's warning was intended as a provocation to generate a more open
debate on the dangers facing the Jewish community, but some elderly Jews took
it literally.
Yet another furor
developed with the publication of an article on March 18, 2008 in the conservative mainstream daily Magyar Hirlap, alleged by the liberal media to have
drifted in recent years to the far right. In it, Zsolt Bayer, a well known
publicist of alleged Jewish origin, attacked Jewish journalists who "back
in 1967 [as part of communist propaganda] were vilifying Israel. Today the same Jewish journalists of Budapest are vilifying the Arabs, FIDESZ [opposition
conservative/center-right party] and us [“decent” Hungarians] all. Because they
hate us more than we hate them…. Their mere existence justifies antisemitism."
Dozens of articles were published for or against Bayer. The author's claim that
he did not mean all Jews, just a few of the "bad Jews" did not help moderate
the debate. The owner of Magyar Hirlap wrote that the piece might be
offensive to some, but in the name of freedom of speech it should have been
published. (For coverage of the debate in English, see the blog at politics.hu,
"National Furor Erupts in Hungary over Publication of Alleged Anti-Semitic
Essay," March 28, 2008.)
Istvan Csurka, leader of
the xenophobic and antisemitic Hungarian Justice and Life Party (MIEP)
continued to provide regular analyses in his party’s weekly and monthly Magyar
Forum, in an attempt to prove complete Hungarian servitude to foreign
interests. Csurka reiterated that in Hungary everything was decided according
to the interests of the Washington–Tel Aviv global war axis. Magyar Forum
also continued to use the word “Judapest” to describe alleged Jewish attempts
to judaize Budapest (see ASW 2006).
In addition, Jewish infiltration of the Hungarian nation and their undermining
of Hungarian national interests appeared in the right-wing weekly Magyar
Demokrata and on several websites, such as www.jobbik.net.
The monitoring site www.antiszemitizmus.hu
claimed that Csurka, whose party has had no parliamentary representation since
2002, was no longer “the flagship of antisemitism” due the proliferation of
extremist websites and small groups.
As it did
during the Second Lebanon War, Magyar Demokrata published translations of
western anti-Zionist and anti-Israel publications during Israel’s military operation in Gaza in early 2009.
RESPONSES
TO RACISM AND ANTISEMITISM
The anniversaries of the Holocaust in Hungary in March and April were marked similarly to previous years, with the various events
stressing the “Hungarian tragedy” (the crime carried out by the Hungarian
people against their nation when they destroyed a community of fellow citizens)
while the right-wing media continued attacking
“holo-propaganda.”
Annual seminars
were held for Hungarian teachers both locally and at Yad Vashem, which updated
them on the latest educational approaches and methods for dealing with the
Holocaust, the Hungarian Jewish legacy, antisemitism and Holocaust denial.
Textbooks on these issues are updated regularly and included in the curriculum.
All parliamentary parties, including FIDESZ,
which was often accused of being "soft" on the extreme right, proclaimed
their determined efforts to combat any forms of antisemitism, racism and
xenophobia.
Prime Minister Ferenc Gurcsany visited Israel in May 2008 in honor of the latter’s 60th anniversary. In June 2008 both Prime
Minister Gyurcsany and FIDESZ leader Viktor Orban met with the visiting
Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel Yona Metzger, and stressed their support for
the Jewish community. Also in June, a multiparty delegation of the
Parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee visited Israel, including Yad Vashem. Earlier,
in May, Hungary's defense minister, Imre Szekeres, joined the Israeli ambassador
to Hungary, Aliza Bin-Noun, in the March of the Living at Auschwitz.
Nevertheless, such official gestures of support by
Hungarian leaders could not counterbalance the growing specter of political
polarization in Hungary, in which the extreme right has become more assertive
and visible through the proliferation of web sites and the formation of extremist
groups such as the Hungarian Guard and the Jobbik movement.
