(Photo: Flickr|EPP, licensed by CC BY 2.0)
To be proud of your
nation and cultural heritage is common, it is even desired and understandable.
Some, however, fall into the passions of ultranationalism. In the case of
Hungarians, this phenomenon might be called turulism.
The referendum on the EU quota on the resettlement of refugees in
Hungary—is passionately discussed nowadays. The stakes are high and we all wish
for clear answers of what is happening in Hungary. Is Orbán the savior or the annihilator?
Let us first repeat the crucial question that was asked on the 2nd
of October: Do you want the European Union to be able to mandate the obligatory
resettlement of non-Hungarian citizens into Hungary even without the approval
of the National Assembly? (Translation from Wikipedia.)
The attendance at the referendum was 43,80%, which is less than needed
for it to be legally binding. According to the official results, 39,8% of the
votes were valid, while 6,33% were invalid (more than 218 thousand). Fully 98,28%
voted against the quotas (3,282 million voters out of the 9,937 million
population) in contrast to the 1,72% who voted in favor a of them.
On 5th October Bence Tuzson, Communication State Secretary at
the Prime Minister's Cabinet Office announced that the government will
incorporate the results of the referendum into the Constitution as over three
million people supported the position of the government. However, 57,2% ignored
the referendum thus it is hard to say that the government is acting in favor of
the whole or at least the majority of the population. Plus, 6.33% of the votes
were invalid, which could be understood as a form of protest while keeping the civil obligations. On 10th
October PM Orbán submitted the Constitutional amendment—saying that no foreign
citizen can be relocated to Hungary through obligatory resettlement. All
immigrants and asylum seekers must be evaluated individually except for citizens
of the European Economic Area, which are excluded from this rule.
The government believes that the suggested five Constitutional amendments would create a “new unity” of Hungarians . The
main goal is to anchor the constitutional identity of Hungary which should be
protected on all state levels. Indeed, the “new unity” will include statements
regarding territory and population. The government wishes to base their claim
that the nation state should be the basis for European decisions, and not vice
versa, on constitutional grounds.. This is not building on the principle of
synergy between EU and nation state interests but rather intends to build a
hierarchy. Orbán´s government says it is taking the Hungarian spiritual essence
under its protective wings to shield it against those who threaten Europe—and
against Brussels´ dictate. Whether it
will be approved is a hard question. For
passing thought the Parliament the amendment has to be approved by a 2/3
majority. The far right Jobbik might secure the needed majority for FIDESZ, the
support is already announced. Broader discussion within the Parliament about
the concrete text is scheduled for 17th October. We will see on 8th
November whether FIDESZ’s attempt for the seventh constitutional change will be
another success.
The referendum itself has less of a legal affects than a political one. The
international media is strongly criticizing Orbán´s referendum. As John Dalhuisen, the Director of Amnesty International said,
“Prime Minister Orbán has replaces the rule of law with the rule of fear”. And yes, fear was systematically fed by the
campaign itself. Statements such as “we love our country” and “we do not allow
our daughters and wives to be raped by immigrants” were only some of the many
slogans used during the campaign. Even the “Roma card” was used in an
unexpected way: the campaign threatened that migrants will steal the chance for
a decent life for the Roma living in Hungary – as stated by Roma representatives close to the
government.
Mass hysteria was fed by oversimplifications, the degradation of more
complex views into black-and-white viewpoints, omnipresent xenophobia all
served the rhetorical needs of officials. But, in fact, the general population
has no real interaction with refugees or migrants (if we do not include their
transition through the country). One of the opposition voices, the Kétfarkú
Kutya Párt satirically pointed out in a question on a billboard set up in
response to the official referendum campaign: “did you know? A common Hungarian
sees more UFOs than migrants during their lifetime”.
Who really profited from the historically most expensive referendum (estimated
to cost approx. 42,816 million Euros)? It was reported that two days after the referendum new
billboards were placed in Budapest —exactly the same as prior to the referendum,
repeating the appeal to vote for NO. What
is the legitimacy behind placing outdated billboards on the street? The
anti-migrant campaign continues after the referendum and does not lose its
intensity.
On the 5th of October after the bomb attack in Budapest the Government decided to launch a several-day-long
counter-terrorism exercise in the Puskás Ferenc metro station by simulating a real-life terrorist attack. The
simulation included men, women and children acting as terrorists and victims, with shouts
of Allahu Akbar.
V4 officials and other prominent guests were invited to observe this exercise.
In addition to fearmongering, the government always sees on calling on
the sorrows of Hungarian history as a winning strategy . One of the examples used
by Hungarian officials goes like this: Hungary has always faced difficulties
alone, especially those imposed by foreign powers (such as the 1956 uprising).
Doing what is right and needed is often judged in the present but only the
future will show that righteousness is on the Hungarian side. Indeed, the fire
of the heart fed by these sentiments can often blur the facts that are on the
table.
However, let´s look now at the European dimension of the whole
quota-related problem. The passionately discussed quotas were introduced for
the sake of solidarity within the EU, aiming to reduce the sudden burden of countries
being closer to the conflict zones or being at the Schengen border as EU
countries would share the evaluation process of asylum seekers. It does not
mean that Brussels is imposing forceful relocation. Asylum applications would
be assessed according to national law by national officials.
In a recent letter from Donald Tusk in December 2015, Orbán agreed with the
European Council about all the suggested quick measurements regarding
asylum seekers. In
addition, the EU itself agreed that the project of obligatory quotas came to a dead
end at the Bratislava Summit in September. Solidarity among EU member countries
will now be on different terms. So, why was the referendum necessary? Who
benefited from it and how?
The media was saturated with the campaign. As a result, the majority of
other crucial issues, such as corruption, cronyism, insufficient healthcare and
the schooling system were marginalized.
Orbán is building up his arsenal of voters based on mild (or at least
milder than Jobbik) turulist rhetoric.
Simply because it works. Turulism has
always been present in the Hungarian society, even before joining the EU club.
In fact, neither the referendum nor the Constitutional amendment will bring any
significant change. Nevertheless, even though it might be perceived that way,
it is not an attempt to disintegrate the EU and there won´t be a HUXIT.
Hungarians are proud members of the EU. For other populist leaders across
Europe who are following the model of illiberal democracy this might be
different, meaning they might appeal for exiting the EU. Indeed, this cannot be
applied for Hungary—so far.
Alexandra Tóthová
