[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 86 (Thursday, May 24, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2919-S2920]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HUNGARY
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, this week, the Senate is poised to confirm
the nomination of David Cornstein to serve as the next U.S. Ambassador
to Hungary. Against that backdrop, as well as reports that Secretary of
State Pompeo will meet with the Hungarian Foreign Minister in
Washington at the end of this month, it is timely to consider the
troubling situation in Hungary.
Budapest is a fabulous city. The Parliament is regarded by many as
one of the most beautiful legislative houses in the world. Hungarians
are a warm and generous people, and the United States and Hungary have
a shared history dating to the times of Lajos Kossuth, whose bust
graces the halls of the U.S. Congress. Hungarians have come to this
country as both immigrants and refugees, enriching our national fabric.
The beauty of Budapest masks a growing climate of fear, however. For
the past 8 years, Hungary's ruling Fidesz party has tried to pass
majoritarianism off as democracy. Media pluralism has disappeared. The
government plays favorites with religions, preferring some while
discriminating against others, like the Hungarian Evangelical
Fellowship. Moreover, the checks and balances that are essential for
democracy are missing in action. To say that the ruling party now
exercises unchecked legal power is not an exercise in hyperbole, but
merely a concise analysis of the facts.
Prime Minister Viktor Orban has allowed corruption to flourish,
enriching his own friends and family. The government has recentralized,
and more of the economy is either under state control or in the hands
of Orban's cronies. Once Fidesz won two-thirds of the seats in
Parliament in 2010, the party changed the election system to perpetuate
that outcome. As Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe,
OSCE, elections observers concluded, separation of state and party is
no longer respected. For a country that suffered under a one-party
regime, that is a deeply disturbing conclusion.
In 2013, I chaired a Helsinki Commission hearing on the trajectory of
democracy in Hungary. Frankly, I did not think things would get this
bad, in part because I did not think the ruling Fidesz party would
become more extremist than Hungary's strongest opposition party,
Jobbik, but after 2010, with Jobbik's anti-Semitic and anti-Roma
rhetoric serving as a Greek chorus, Fidesz leaders carved out their own
revisionist bona fides, worked to rehabilitate fascist-era figures, and
repeatedly awarded, elevated, and amplified one of the country's most
extremist polemicists. They determined that they could get away with
further escalating hate-mongering against racial and religious
minorities with one tweak: call them Muslims and migrants. Hatred, it
seems, is fungible.
Not surprisingly, the politics of fear, historical revisionism, and
national grievances have found expression in the ruling party's foreign
policy too. The most alarming example has been Hungary's opportunistic
approach to Ukraine following Russia's 2014 invasion, with Hungary's
rhetoric often echoing Moscow's. Overall, the Hungarian Government's
approach suggests that it is not interested in a dialogue about the
Hungarian minority in
[[Page S2920]]
Ukraine, but in finding a new political enemy. The fact that this is
music to Vladimir Putin's ears may be just a coincidence.
In any case, Hungary's posture regarding Russia is unusual in the
region, to say the least. As suggested in the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee Report we issued on ``Putin's Asymmetric Assault,'' Russian
disinformation isn't just creeping in over the transom; the Hungarian
Government has opened the door and put out a welcome mat.
Paradoxically, however, while Prime Minister Orban may tilt his country
to east, Hungarians themselves remain among the most pro-European Union
of Europeans and many still vote with their feet, forming a steady
exodus west. In fact, the outward exodus is contributing to an emerging
labor shortage.
It is not surprising that Hungary gets compared to Russia: the
nongovernmental organization, NGO, Law adopted in Budapest last year
was inspired by Russia, proposed by Jobbik, and passed by Fidesz, but
there are still big differences between Hungary and Russia. Journalists
are not murdered in Hungary, and no one goes to jail for his or her
opinions. Instead, Hungary is using a fist in a velvet glove to silence
civil society and thwart political dissent without ever leaving a mark.
Viktor Orban has mastered nonviolent means of repression. He has used
the renationalization of segments of the economy, the recentralization
of state authority, and the kleptocratic control of putatively private
business to stymie opposition and dissent. I know political analysts
are using a lot of different terms to describe the specific system that
has emerged in Hungary under Orban--illiberal or mafia state? Oligarchy
or kleptocracy? One of the most apt may be ``goulash
authoritarianism.''
There are worrying signs that things may get worse before they get
better. Viktor Orban now appears set to fulfill his campaign pledge to
extract ``moral, political and legal'' retribution from those who
opposed him. He welcomed the publication of an ``enemies list''
containing some 200 names--including numerous American citizens--and
urged the close-to-Orban media to do more to root them out. This is the
kind of smear campaign that often comes just before the gloves come off
and the blows begin.
Under these challenging circumstances, the United States needs to
speak with a clear and unambiguous voice. As Senator Corker said at the
confirmation hearing last week, ``Mr. Cornstein will have the important
task of reminding the Government of Hungary that its future lies not in
a return to the dark days of the past but in remaining an active member
of the community of liberal democracies.'' Messages delivered behind
closed doors are likely to have little effect or may even be completely
misrepresented in public by Hungarian officials.
The United States will always have a relationship with Hungary, but
the question is: What kind of relationship will that be? One built on
deeply shared values or only fleeting transactional interests? Our
strongest alliances are with countries where human rights are respected
and democracy is strong, and that is the kind of relationship I hope
Mr. Cornstein will help build.
____________________