Abstract
Since the end of the Cold War, painful historical events that could not be openly discussed during Communism have become more salient in public debates throughout Central and Eastern Europe. The border changes and forced population transfers that occurred after the First and the Second World War, and more specifically the plight of the civilians who experienced these traumatic events, have been one of the most contentious issues discussed in the new democratic regimes. The enduring tensions surrounding the situation of the Hungarian minorities are another striking example of the contemporary political consequences of these ‘wounded histories’. The redrawing of Hungary’s borders in the wake of the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, which resulted in the loss of a large part of its former territory and population,1 is still portrayed as a ‘historical injustice’ by some parts of the Hungarian society and political leaders. This perception justifies ‘symbolic policies’ aimed at reinforcing the link with the diaspora, as was made clear as early as 1989 when the Hungarian Constitution was amended to include the following statement of support: ‘The Republic of Hungary bears a sense of responsibility for the fate of Hungarians living outside its border and shall promote and foster their relations with Hungary.’
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
F. Benoit-Rohmer and H. Klebes (2005) Le droit du Conseil de l’Europe. Vers un espace juridique européen (Strasbourg: Editions of the Council of Europe).
D. Chandler (1999) ‘The OSCE and the internationalization of minority rights’, in K. Cordell (ed.), Ethnicity and Democratization in the New Europe (London: Routledge).
CSCE (1990) Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE, www.osce.org/odihr/elections/14304, date accessed 13 September 2011.
B. Fowler (2004) ‘Fuzzing Citizenship, Nationalizing Political Space: A Framework for Interpreting the Hungarian “Status Law” as a New Form of Kin-state Policy in Central and Eastern Europe’, in Z. Kántor, B. Majtenyi, O. Ieda, B. Vizi and I. Halasz (eds), The Hungarian Status Law: Nation Building and/or Minority Protection (Sapporo: Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University), pp. 177–238.
V.-Y. Ghebali (1996) L’OSCE dans l’Europe post-communiste, 1990–1996: vers une identité paneuropéenne de sécurité (Brussels: Bruylant).
L. Greenfeld (1999), ‘Is Nation Unavoidable? Is Nation Unavoidable Today?’, in H. Kriesi, K. Armigeon, H. Siegrist and A. Wimmer (eds), Nation and Nationalism: The European Experience in Perspective (Chur, Switzerland: Rüegger), pp. 37–53.
J. Hughes and G. Sasse (2003) ‘Monitoring the Monitors: EU Enlargement Conditionality and Minority Protection in the CEECs’, Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 2003(1), http://www.ecmi.de/publications/detail/ issue-12003–62/, accessed 13 September 2011.
Z. Kántor, B. Majtenyi, O. Ieda, B. Vizi and I. Halasz (eds) (2004) The Hungarian Status Law: Nation Building and/or Minority Protection (Sapporo: Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University).
W. Kemp (2001) Quiet Diplomacy in Action: The OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (The Hague, London: Kluwer Law International).
L. Neumayer (2007a) ‘Les institutions européennes comme acteurs de la réconciliation en Europe centrale: une médiation entre droit et politique’, in G. Mink and L. Neumayer (eds), L’Europe et ses passés douloureux (Paris: Editions La Découverte), pp. 195–209.
L. Neumayer (2007b) ‘Conclusion: la réconciliation – variations sur un thème européen’, in G. Mink and L. Neumayer (eds) L’Europe et ses passés douloureux (Paris: Editions La Découverte), pp. 247–60.
L. Neumayer (2012): ‘Dépasser Trianon’: les transformations du nationalisme hongrois, de la “politique de la nation” à la protection des minorités dans I’UE’, Politique européenne, 37: 92–121.
OSCE (2001) ‘Sovereignty, Responsibility, and National Minorities: Statement by Rolf Ekeus, OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities’, http://www.osce.org/hcnm/53936, accessed 24 September 2012.
PACE (2003) Resolution 1335 (2003), ‘Preferential Treatment of National Minorities by the Kin-State: The Case of the Hungarian Law on Hungarians Living in Neighboring Countries (“Magyars”) of 19 June 2001’.
PACE (2006) Recommendation 1735 (2006), ‘The Concept of “Nation” ’.
Venice Commission (2001) The Protection of National Minorities by Their Kin-States (Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing).
Venice Commission (2007) Presentation, http://www.venice.coe.int/site/main/ Presentation_E.asp, accessed 13 September 2011.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2013 Laure Neumayer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Neumayer, L. (2013). Symbolic Policies versus European Reconciliation: The Hungarian ‘Status Law’. In: Mink, G., Neumayer, L. (eds) History, Memory and Politics in Central and Eastern Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137302052_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137302052_13
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-34638-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-30205-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)