American Hungarian Educators Association(AHEA) 37th Annual Conference

Hungarian Borders and Hungarian Minorities after the Collapse of the Cold War and joining the European Union

Dr. Kumiko Haba Professor of Aoyama Gakuin University Visiting Scholar at Harvard University

26-29 April 2012 Long Island university, Brooklyn Campus University Plaza, Brooklyn, New York

Hungarian Borders and Hungarian Minorities after the Collapse of the Cold War and joining the European Union
Dr. Kumiko Haba Professor of Aoyama Gakuin University, Visiting Scholar at Harvard University

Introduction 1) Why the History of the Hungarian Minority? The author wishes to investigate that border-nationality question under the Enlargement of the EU and Wider Europe. Why does the author learn the history of the Hungarian minority ? I learn from the history of the Hungarian minority, the pluralistic perspective of history. History is not composed by the one right view, but by each position, there are completely different views, depending on which position he/she is standing, and what he/she wants to see. There is a different history from the national history, or the Right history. There are always conflicts over the perspective of history. According to know such things, he/she could know that his/her point of view is not always correct. From the 1990s until around 2002, I had been much research on the Hungarian Minority, visiting hatarontuli magyarok, in Transylvania, Vojvodina, Ukrajna, and Slovakia. in every two-three years. I investigated during 10 years of the end of the Cold War, and I have seen and visited there up to 14 years of expanding EU. Then I have not gone to the survey, because I concentrated to EU Enlargement to Balkan countries and Asian Regionalism, historical reconciliation. So, my research of Hungarian minorities and border question is concentrated on that period, from 1990 to 2003. However the period from 1990 to 2003, was a important turning point, as well. 1) The collapse of a wall of the Cold War, the iron curtain no longer existed, but the boundaries of the Schengen agreements of the EU, stood in front of the minorities outside of the EU border, as a new wall. Even now, the countries outside the EU, have a similar situation. Around the EU, there are so many poor countries especially in the Eastern and Southern part, and for them, it is very difficult to enter to rich and prosperous countries through the EU border.. 2) It is contradictory, that to ensure the free and secure movement of people 2

inside the EU, is guaranteed by shutting out the border against the outside immigrants, or risks and crimes against outside arms and drugs. 3) Against such situation, what policy did Hungarian Government tried to That was status torveny (the status law), and Ketts llampolgrsgi perform towards the minorities outside of the borders? trvny( the dual citizenship law). These laws were nationalistic, but tried to answer the request of minority ethnic groups outside the border. The problem is that they only looked at their minority, and were ignoring the value of the others. That is why they were condemned as Hungarian nationalism/ or chauvinism, from the neighboring countries, and had led to criticism of the EU, as well. What should be done?, what was the better solution?. That is extremely difficult. The author would like to investigate what was the situation. 2) Border Question (1) and the Wider Europe: Neighborhood Policy The Wider Europe and Neighborhood Policy of the EU was introduced at the end of 2003, because first, economic globalization and Energy Policy with Russia, second, Security reason and Poverty, and bankrupt states surrounding the EU, and menace of terror, which are already analyzed in detail in this other articles, and moreover there is a third reason, nationality and border question, as cohesion coexistence policy of several nations and minorities, cultures, religions among national borders. The EU Enlargement towards Central European 10 countries lastly accomplished in Dublin, Ireland in May 2004 and in January 2007, including 27 countries. The NATO is also enlarged to 7 Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries at the end of March 2004 and 2009, as 28 countries. By these two enlargements, most of former Eastern Europe affiliated the European organizations, and the integrated New Europe was realized. Most of the Russia/CIS and Eastern Europe are already joined to the OSCE and EAPC. However, integrated and enlarging Europe seemed to be a Division of Europe by Russia and other border countries especially outside of borders. (Managing the (Re)creation of Divisions in Europe, 20-22 June 2002, of the CEEISA(Central and East European International Studies Association), NISA(Nordic International Studies Association, and RISA(Russian International Studies Association) International Convention at MGIMO, Moscow 2002. ) My article is concentrating on that problematic issues during this period. Integrated and Enlarged Europe under the free movement of people, goods, service and capital(money) is really effective to do economic community, however, if one is outside of the EU border, especially seeing from the Eastern part and 3

Southern part, it looks as if it made the new economic wall or protectionism or double standard of Western Europe(2). That is one of the reason why the Wider Europe, the Neighborhood policy was adopted and declared the trans-border economic, regional and autonomous cooperation in the late 2003. Why occurred the border question of Europe?. And What was the problem of them? This is rudimentary, but very fundamental question. First, it is the question of European notion, so called European Identity. It means, What is Europe, and what is not Europe, and until where is it Europe, from where is it not Europe?. It is not only the border, territorial question, it might be caused sometimes geopolitical, cultural, religious question, or psychological question, or modernizations, democratizations criteria. Second, it is the legal question, the question of the Schengen border. Under the Schengen Treaty(3), the citizen of the EU, can go freely everywhere until the end of the EU border without any passport control. But if one is not the citizen of the member country of the EU, it is very difficult to come into the border and there is a severe passport control. So it makes not only legal distinction, but some psychological discrimination, we are not Europeans, especially for just outside of the border citizens, it made new differentiation, or so called New Division of the EU in the new border, especially in the turning century in 2000-2002(1). Because they think why they are not included into Europe, why they are outside of Europe, and felt the Europe was not integrated for us, Europe was divided and shut out, just in front of us. The Enlargement of the EU and NATO caused the appearance of the psychological obstacle for the people outside of the new border countries, so called the Wall of the Schengen, especially on 2003. it means the Enlarged EU brought differentiation in the border like invisible lace curtain. According to the enlargement of the EU, the border of the EU moved to East: first it was from the east border of Western Germany, second it became eastern border of Poland, then to Baltic Countries, that means to break into the former Soviet Union and to the eastern border of Romania, Moldova, and Bulgaria in 2007. Russia and former Soviet Union (Ukraine, Belarus) was surrounded by the new EU border. That influenced to the Orange Revolution in Western Ukraine which broke out in December of 2004, as they insisted We are Europeans between the Enlarged EU and influence of Russia. Besides, in the Eastern Ukraine, the Influence of Russia and Economic strong tie with Russia was continued and back to Russophile Government in the election in 2010. Thus the Relation between Russia and the EU was very complicated in East-West Ukraine. It makes not only 4

the differences to outside of the border, but gave many influences to peoples lives and oppressed feelings in outside countries. The people who live in outside of the European Integration, feels the new border of the EU very severely. The citizens of the countries which did not nominate to the enlargement group, are very much dissatisfied to the Border. Moreover after the Maastricht and Schengen Treaty came into effect, the management of the border control of the EU becomes severer to defend and guarantee of the free movement of people, things, capital, services and information, against immigrants inflow, dangerous armaments and Mafias from outside, energy and economics like Russian and Ukrainian Mafia and the Russian armament, flowing into through the EU borders. It might be contradictory, the EU has to defend the free movement inside the border, so it has to control or shut out severely the free movement outside the border. According to the enlargement of the EU, the border of the EU moves to East until the Eastern border of Poland, Baltic Countries, Romania, and Bulgaria. It makes big differences between inside and outside countries, and gives many influences to peoples life in Central European countries. After the Maastricht Treaty came into effect, the management of the border of the EU becomes severer for the guarantee of the free movement of people, things, money, and information, and against Russian and Ukrainian Mafia and the Russian armament flowing into through the EU borders. It has to cope with the ethnic conflicts and the large quantity of emigrants, either. So the border of the EU and NATO became the legal wall or a paper curtain, which shut out the cheep labors, immigrants, and the dangerous armament. And these border policy of the EU seemed to the Economic protectionism and blocked economies, and criticizes from Russia and EU outside countries started the cheep agricultural good. So in this article, the author wishes to investigate three things. First, Border question and minority questions between Hungarian Border of Romania, Second the Kaliningrad Question, which is the enclave territory in the EU. and not only economic cooperation but also cohesion coexistence policy between Russian and EU border citizens. third, Wider Europe, EUs Cohesion Policy, from the view point of not only energy and economic policy, but also co-development and international coexistence policy. In the process of the EU Enlargement, there are three borders of the EU (See Map 1). First border is the recent EU and the first 10 applicants countries borders, which will disappear in May 2004. There are already no big problems. People who pass it need no visa and no passport control. But it remains some concrete problems passing through cheep agrarian goods, cheap labor, and some security 5

things (powder and shot ammunition, drugs, and mafias) actively of CFSP and immigrant limitation from Western Europe. Second border lays Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia. Here also starts the remission of the visa. Romania and Bulgaria joined to the NATO in the may 2004, and they will be able to join to the EU in 2007-8. The third one is biggest and more severe Problems. It lies in Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia. These countries can not find the possibility to join to the EU and NATO until now, and some of them are instable situation by ethnic conflicts, autocratic government, and unconsolidated borders. pressure from the EU. So the border policy, especially CFSP and Judiciary Home affaires Policy of the EU bore complex problems about habitant daily labor and security policy. Chapter 1: The Schengen Treaty and the minorities outside of the EU Integration. First, we would like to investigate the nationalities outside the EU Integration. The Schengen treaty is concluded in Schengen village, Luxemburg in June 1985. It regulated about the free movement of the goods, and the immigrant policy in 1990 and executed legally in March 1995. After the Maastricht in 1993, it stipulated that the nations which conclude this treaty, need not to show the passport or identification card to pass the border. This Schengen treaty was incorporated in the Amsterdam Treaty. But on account of guarantee on the free movement inside of the EU, they have to simultaneously guarantee the security inside the region, so they need much more severe to control the border. Already in the Maastricht Treaty, it is regulated that the Third countrys Nation, which has to carry visa. (4) So due to making a system which guarantees the free movement for the EU participants, on the contradictory, it restricts severely the movement of outside emigrants. It is concretely control of visa, border severe control, and the exclusion of the Third Nations. It looks like the division of Europe, not integration of Europe, especially to Central and East European people. Until then, Central and Eastern Europe existed as comparatively a large sum of common history and experiences, so they went in and out relatively freely. But after the collapse of the Cold War, although the significance of the national border faded out, goods, information, people and weapons flew into and out freely from the EU border under the globalization, it needed the severe security among 6 Here people feel real but invisible

borders as the CFSP policy. It gave a difficult and complex influence toward Central and East European minorities. 1) The minoritys situation after the System transformation After the System Transformation in 1989, the characteristics of the minorities drastically changed. One is the increasing of the immigrants to the West. It started from 1980s, when the border is comparatively free. Especially young men, intelligentsia, skilled labors went out from the minority villages to over the border legally or illegally. According to this, the minority regions loosed population especially in Romanian Transylvania. Emigrants were very much increased after the collapse of the Cold War. The Emigrants number from minority villages in only one year 1990 was four or five times more than the sum of 32 years during from 1958 to 1990. Especially skilled labors from 14 to 49 years old moved out from their countries of Romania, Yugoslavia, or Carpathian Ukraine (5). By the effect of the great number of emigrants, proportion of the Minorities in Central and Eastern Europe is decreasing rapidly. The symbolic case is the example of the Transylvanian case in Romania. 2) The Hungarian Minority outside of the Integration. The one of the big problems in 2002 was the Hungarian Minorities in Central and Eastern Europe. After the breakup of the Austria-Hungarian Monarchy and the Trianon Treaty of First World War in 1920, the new territorial border was drawn, and by the result of that, 3 million Hungarian minorities remained outside of Hungarian state until now. The Hungarian minorities outside of the country are: 1,624 thousand in Romania, 567 thousand in Slovakia, 341 thousand in Yugoslavia, 156 thousand in Ukraine, 22 thousand in Croatia, 8,5 thousand in Slovenia, and 3,5 thousand in Austria(6). It is the third or fourth Minorities in Europe, the first is Muslims 15 million, and Russians 10 million, and Albanians 3 million. Between the Two World Wars, there were many problems, for example, the oppression of minorities, demand of territorial modification and instability of the nation states. For these Hungarian Minorities, they strongly wish to move freely after the collapse of the Socialist system, however, the Schengen border limited their movement severely again. There is one typical example of the decreasing of minority in Romanian Transylvania. First, the drastic emigration and the effect of that, depopulation 7

and mental labors and young generations outflow. At the Medical Science and Pharmaceutical college in Tirgu-Mures (Marosvasarhely) in the central region of Transylvania, which is one of the Hungarian Minorities villages, it was almost all professors, pharmacists, and students were Hungarians in statistics in 1948, but under the Ceausescu era, the percentage decreased drastically to 55,15 % were Romanians and 43,46% were Hungarians. Although after the System Transformation, the Hungarian number decreased only 18, 49%, and 80, 5% were Romanians in 1995(7). Main reasons of it, most of professors, pharmacists and students of Hungarian Minorities went out to Hungary or other foreign countries, because of more free and high grade research, or high wage. And they did not come back again. Such situation made frustration to remainders and makes to feel minority problems more hopeless. Second problem is reorganization and strengthening of the Nation State in multinational states. After the Collapse of the Cold War Democratization, Nation State and National language were emphasized and forced to majorities and minorities in Yugoslavia, Romania, Slovakia and Ukraine in 1990s. Under this slogan, the cultures and languages of Minorities are oppressed, and financial aid was cut off. Zoltan Tibori Szabo, Hungarian minority and a correspondent of Nepszabadsag in Romania, stressed that among 40 Hungarian classmates in his high school, only 2 persons remained there, almost of all others went out to foreign countries or had dead.(8) It was said that Nation State was a reaction against weakening of the national centripetal force under the Globalization, system transformation, and free movement of emigrant over the border, and division of the Federal states as Yugoslavia and Czech-Slovakia. It is a little contradictory, however, nation states divided from the federal state; minority became more difficult to live, because the new nation state forced their new language and culture. After the independence of Slovakia and Ukraine, Minority has to learn new national language, Slovakian or Ukrainian. The leaders of Hungarian minority in Slovakia insisted that they were easy to live and to fight for their minority in the multinational and federation state not in the new nation state (9). Third is severe poverty in the minority regions. The collapse of the socialist system and the euphoria of One Europe made illusion of freedom and wealth in Central and Eastern Europe, but several years later it makes more big difficulties among minorities regions. For example, the GDP of Hungary is 5962 in 1996, but that of Ukraine, 3310 dollar in the same year(10). In the international conference of Hungarian 8

Minority in West Ukraine, they could not get even 20 dollar in a month, and complained that it was impossible to give educations for children because of poverty (11). Chapter 2: Minority problems under the EU Integration outside of Hungary 1) The Status Law of Hungarian Minorities outside of Hungary 0n 19 June, 2001, Act XII of 2001 the Status Law of Hungarian Minorities in neighbor countries was adopted in Hungarian Parliament under FIDESZ Central Right Government (12). At that time 92, 4% of representatives in Hungarian parliament supported this law. But only two years later, it had to change in the new Central Left (MSZP) Government by the opposition of Romania, Slovakia and the advice of the European Commission (13). Why Hungarian government presented this status law, notwithstanding that Hungary was the one of the top runners toward the EU applicants and estimated highly liberal until then? And what type of the law is it? Nemeth Zsolt, Hungarian Foreign Secretary, expressed that the Status Law defends the Identity of Hungarian minorities who live in neighbor country (14) especially under the strengthening of the Nation State reorganization in Central Europe. It was provided that the Hungarian status law guarantees Hungarian Minorities in the following points. (1) To give Hungarian identity card to who explains himself/herself Hungarian. (2) To give free travel tickets to children under 6 years and persons over 65 years. For other Hungarians, give aid until 90% discount travel ticket 4 times in a year. (3) To give employment: 3 months limit or a little longer inside the new EU border. (4) To give social security rights: Medical treatment, pension system by paying the insurance premium. (5) To give education and cultural right, fund of education and culture, scholarship (15). Hungarian minorities, especially old people were glad to adopt this law in Hungary, because they can guarantee their life or small visit to Hungary. But this law rose up serious objections from Romania and Slovakia. Romanian government protested by the official documents, and accused to the EU and the European parliament. intervention (16). Romanian Hungarian minority leader, Marko Bela noticed that the Romanian behavior can understand enough, because it was impossible to regulate 9 The government of Romania and Slovakia condemned that this law was the symbol of the Hungarian irredentism and

foreign minorities by the domestic law (17). 2) The problems of the status law This law had basic problems from the beginning. First one is the Identity problem. marriage and complex nationality? When Hungarian government admits one mixed minority as Hungarian, who says and identifies themselves I am Hungarian, many persons wish to say I am Hungarian, because they can get employment and free cheap ticket and social security. So the statistic number of Hungarians grows much, even if it is not reflect the true number. If Romanians say they are Hungarians, is it all right or not? Or why only Hungarians can guarantee in Hungary? Why Hungarian government does not help neighbors: Romanians, Slovakians, and Ukrainians? If some of them from the EU border, wish to work in Hungary, why they cannot go into? About these problems, there are much opposition in Romania and Slovakia. Second is also the problem of Hungarian identification problem. Hungarian minority wasnt accepted in Hungary, and sometimes boycotted from Hungarian society, because of poverty, cheap workers, or security difficulties. It is rather regretful that Hungarian minority is not always welcomed in their own country. In Hungary under the socialist system, Hungarian minorities from Romania were welcomed against Ceausescu governments oppressed policy. But after the collapse of the Socialist System, many Hungarian minorities came into Hungary over border, and raised immigration problems. Hungarian minorities were isolated from majorities in Romania and Slovakia, however, when they go through to Hungary they are not welcomed enough. It was believed misunderstanding that immigrants make problems to their own countries for example, deterioration of social security, unemployment, cheap wages, and disorder. So Hungarian minorities alienated even by the Hungarian majority in Hungary, as using such words, Go back to your countries. (18) Identity crisis that they do not belong anywhere. EU itself didnt regard that this law interferes the EU criteria at first, but it advised to find the friendly solution or compromise by mutual negotiations and revision. On the other hand, the Research of the Spiegel in Germany showed the questionnaire on which country they approve or opposite to the EU Enlargement? Germans answer is favor of Hungary, Czech, Slovakia to join to the EU 10 These minorities have Who is Hungarians? And who can decide he or she is Hungarians under the situation that there are many mixed

Enlargement, skeptical and precautious to Poland, and against to Romania and Turkey. It shows a little historical or cultural prejudice. Especially the Germanys precaution owes to the 7; 2 million immigrants come to Germany in the future. It makes serious unemployment of their own countries (19). Considering it, it is very difficult to open the eastern border. subject. Finally it was revised not only Hungarian Minority, but also Romanians who wishes to go across the borders, and can go freely across the borders showing with their identity card, and it was not so much effective to use. Hungarian Government tried to introduce the double nationality law in 2005, but it didnt succeed in the peoples referendum. After the EU Enlargement and the perspective of the joining to the EU of Romania and Bulgaria, not only minorities but also Romanians go freely to the EU border. So the situation revised much after 2004. 3) Minorities and communication among national border. I wish to investigate the communication over borders. One is Slovakia, Second is Burgenland, third in Vojvodina, and firth is in Kaliningrad. (1) Danube bridge and Minority question The Question of Danubian River causes big influence in Central and Eastern Europe historically. The Danubian River had a highly important role in Communication, Economics and Military. The Danube Bridge between Hungarian and Slovakian border (Maria Valeria Bridge) was neglected to reconstruct after the blast of the Nazis Germany during the Second World War in 1944. However it reconstructed from summer to autumn in 2001, and the opening ceremony were held in October 2001 by the help of the EU Regional Policy. Victor Orban, Hungarian prime minister, Zlinda, Slovakian Prime minister, and Verheugen, EU Enlargement Commissioner were participated in that ceremony (20). This bridge between Hungarian Estergom and Slovakian Strovo (Parkany), where 73, 5% of population is Hungarian minority in 1991(21). For this reason of the Hungarian minority, Slovakian Government was rejected to reconstruct the bridge, but by the EU Enlargement, the importance of the River, bridge, the maintenance of infrastructure, and the importance of the regional communication was stressed by the EU commission side, Slovakian government also agreed it for the sake of preparing conditions of the EU affiliation. By the reconstruction of the bridge, the communication between 11 So the immigrants and emigrants problems in the border are very much important

Hungarian minoritys villages and Hungarian villages became very easily. develop their regions in both sides.

It

makes good news not only to Hungarian Minorities but also Slovakian people to Now between Hungary and Slovakia, cooperation of the Euro-Region of Miskolc-Komarno, and the Euro-Region of Vienna-Bratislava-Gyor are progressing, and these Western border regions are swiftly developing. This regional cooperation over the borders (CBC: Cross border cooperation) has important role for the minorities. In this program, under the aid and fund of EU and Regional NGO and Companies, mutual citizen communication, economic cooperation, and mutual voluntary language education, music/songs/national dance communication is progressing gradually. There is also interesting data about the Slovakian Hungarian statistics. There are some questions about homeland, national affiliation, and information. First question is, What do you feel about your homeland?: More than 50% (50,6-60.2%) answer was birthplace is homeland not Hungary. But question about: What decides your national affiliation? The answer was culture and mother tongue 82, 2%. And question: what information do you get most? The answer is from Hungarian TV is 92%, Hungarian newspaper is 77, 8 %( 22). Language is such an important element for minorities. (2) Vojvodina, Yugoslavian Minority before and after the NATOs Kosovo Bombing The Policy of the Hungarian Minorities was very important criteria of Democratization in neighbor countries. When the Democratic Government built up in Romania and Slovakia, both of their government made Hungarian minority parties participate in the government for the sake of EU Enlargement. It was highly estimated by the EU. In Vojvodina of Yugoslavia, the situation was completely contradictory in 1990s period. The wide autonomy under the Tito Government was abolished and the Serbian emigrants went out to Vojvodina. Kasza Jzsef, the Mayer of Svotica (Szabatka) informed that fertile region of Vojvodina was exploited by Socialist government and Milosevic government historically. There was limited regional law and autonomy in this historical multinational cooperating region. Minority right in Vojvodina was deprived. The Vojvodina political claim is the cultural autonomy and the personal autonomy (it means the right of mother tongue use, the educational right to learn by mother tongue, the right of expression of culture and art and so on). More long term perspective, their demand will be regional autonomy or wide autonomy of Vojvodina Vrady Tibor, the ex. Minister of Law of Pasic government and Professor of 12 And the

Central European University, suggested the Vojvodina regional autonomy, and their model is the South Tyrol German communication, and the Catalonian or Belgian Germans. He demanded the personal autonomy (and the use of national tongue). (23) After the EU Thessaloniki Summit in 2003, Western Balkan countries nominated as the future Enlargement, until 2013-2015. But from 2004, new national conflict between Serbian and Hungarian minority started in Vojvodina, and many Hungarian minorities was oppressed again in new situation. The EU and the Schengen treaty are regarded generally most progressive guarantees of free movement and citizen right, when seeing the insider of the EU or nearly inside applicant countries. But under the EU Enlargement, when we see them outside of the new EU border, we could know the contradiction from the free movement. There grew the high and strong Wall for guarantee the inside free movement, security, employment and convenience The biggest influence of the Wall is given not the government of outside, but the people and minorities outside of the border. The EU integration, multinational coexistence, and mutual co-development are not only to defend inside of the system, but also the coexistence with outside people and nations. To think minoritys life over the border is the important key point to correct the problems of globalization from peoples side. Chapter 3: The Kaliningrad Question (24) Last, but not least, the author investigates the case of Russian Kaliningrad (German Konigsberg). What is the Kaliningrad Question? It was one of the most serious problems in 2001-2002. Moreover it was the symbol about the European Integration and the Division of Europe, the European Identity, Border Question) and the Border Economy. Kaliningrad is the Russian exclave, and now the EU enclave surrounded by Poland and Lithuanian territory. Historically it belonged to Germany until 1945, but after the Potsdam peace conference, it transferred to the Soviet Union. Now the 78% of population is Russian, only 0.8% is German, others are 10% Belarus, 6% Ukraine, and 4% Lithuanian (25). Under the Second World War Germans were force to or voluntarily emigrated from this area, so there is almost any German population remained there. Kaliningrad is militarily and geopolitically very important region for Russia. 13

On the other hand, it has strong economic connection with the EU and Northern Europe. Pursak, Novgorod county governor and vice chairman of the European Council General Assembly, stated that it is possible that Kaliningrad join to the EU as county, staying in Russia (26). So the Kaliningrad Problem has many aspects. The first problem is the visa and border question: According to Poland and Lithuania joining to the EU, visa system had to introduce to Kaliningrad Russia, so Russian people need visa to go to Kaliningrad, their own country through Lithuania and Belarus. It caused many problems, because there were many shuttle traders who work over the mutual borders. The Second is Security policy: Armament, Mafias are coming into the EU. These are really serious problems. That is why discussions of Foreign Minister and President started among Russia, Poland and Lithuania, but it did not progress in vain. During these times, the terror on 9.11 2001 occurred, and the Afghanistan bomb by the U.S. and the U.K., Russian Putin helped so much them against terrorism. The US and Russian Relation turned better drastically. So by the proposal of Tony Blaire, the NATO-Russian Council (NRC) was built up in May 2002. Under this situation, Putin, the Russian President decided the top negotiation with Prodi, the President of the European Commission about Kaliningrad Question, and reached an agreement with them as FTD (Facilitated Transit Document) and FTD RW in November 2002(27). It was the transitional measure until 2005, but it helped Russia, that they could trust the EU and the US cooperate with Russia, not be isolated. Third is economy. It was the Free Economic Zone (Yantar) from 1991, and Special Economic Zone in 1996.(28) Because the lack of capacity, it did not got positive effect in 1990s, however it developed <the Pilot Region of Russia and the EU from 1999> and became <the Common European Economic Space> from the 21st century. It started to develop with the EU eagerly and swiftly. Third is economy. But from Russian side, if the Kaliningrad position is admitted as special region economically for the EU, they can admit Kaliningrad to join to the EU. But they strongly wish to stay in the Russian Federation, so they are precautious against the separation from Russia, because it has so important role geopolitically and militarily. Kasyanov, Prime minister also highly motivated the economic development by German investment. Belarus government opposes against such friendship relation between Kaliningrad, Ukraine and EU or NATO brains, because they are suspicious about the EU Enlargement, and strongly cooperated with Russia. But the intelligence of Belarus already began to speak that how much different the Belarus culture from 14

Russian one, and how much useful the democratization of Belarus politics and joining to the EU (29). Fourth characteristics of this area are immigrants from Russia main land to Kaliningrad, but not going out, coming into Kaliningrad. After the collapse of the socialist system, migrants number from 1990 to 2001 was 400, 000. And the balance was positive 103,000. So it means that from outside of Russia, people come into Kaliningrad (30). Chapter 4. The Wider Europe: The Neighborhood Policy In these circumstances, the Wider Europe, Neighborhood Policy of the European Union, a part of the World Strategy of the EU started in November 2003 by commission of the EU (31). The Wider European policy manages to make that the EU border does not means the division of Europe and doesnt make conflict and antagonism in the border, but the border is the symbol of cooperation, coexistence and co-development. The Wider European policy cooperates with the countries of Middle East and North Africa (that is the Barcelona Process countries) in South, and Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldavia (the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement) in East. With Russia and the former CIS countries, they mainly cooperate with Economic level. To supply high qualitys natural gas and oil to Europe, which avoid the risks of the supply from Middle East by war and terror. And with Middle East and the Northern Africa, EU shows the human rights, stability, and sustainable development as Human security policy with the UN. in Iraq and Middle East. The EUs policy combined with the Wider Europe and the European Security Strategy (Solana Paper) managed to develop together with neighbor countries by cooperation and mutual development, not to make conflict, or force to make democratization. The important massage of Wider Europe is not to make division between the borders, but to cooperate with inside and outside of the borders, like Contact zone, in which different culture, religion and customs meet between the borders and cooperate and amalgamate each other or coexistence together which demonstrated by the research of Anthropology,: The border area is the Contact zone of different cultures and nations. Under these circumstances the second wave of Democratization occurs in Georgia, Western Ukraine, and Uzbekistan by themselves that they declare they wish to be included in Europe, they have European Identity, wish to cooperate with 15 It is a differentiation policy from Bush, the President of the US, the War for Democracy

the EU. Are the problems solved, which occurred in Kaliningrad or other border regions? It is not solved completely institutionally, but it is helpful to promote their own development, not oppressed by antagonism or discrimination, using the Euro-region, regional cooperation, or EUs Neighbor Economic policy, like Pan-European Economic Space, which Samson, French economist investigates. Conclusion How should the minority issues be resolved? It is extremely difficult. That is why the Hungarian Government and Administration at that time did trial and error because there were always different solutions what should have been. The world looks different from general national history, when they saw from the minorities view. That is why if they have an action to protect national minorities outside, as a national policy, it produces the conflict surrounding neighboring countries and there would also be different from "the universal principles of freedom, human rights, democracy and prosperity". Globalization and the end of the Cold War open the national border, to the free movement of people. After joining to the EU, not only peoples movement, but goods, capital, services and information also move, come and get out. There is a social gap in each country even if the border is open; people go out further in search the revise of that disparity. Skilled workers and youth go out, and minority villages depopulation starts. Problems of the Status Torveny. 1. The Points may not have been wrong, which they tried to solve the ethnic minoritys problem outside of the border, suffering; employment, education, travel, human rights, financial assistance, and so on. 2. The problem is that it had only limited to "the people outside of the borders of Hungary". Who is Hungarian?, Who is not? Why the majority of neighboring countries make a loss, and Hungarian minority benefit? In a long run, it was an exclusive law, not inclusive. 3. About that, point it "had been taken with the policy to increase the ethnic Hungarians minority in an arbitrary manner" in the neighboring countries. 4. It was the same as the dual citizenship law. As it was too much focused on minority, it brought a majoritys opposition in the neighboring countries. It was needed the persuasion, and the description to the others, 5. It needs the proposals for, how minorities can live comfortably in that (neighboring) country, and the recommendations for, when he comes to mother 16

country, to be guaranteed more security(to take the right of studying in mother country, of getting job or to getting nationality easily, and so on), rather than to stimulate the neighboring countries. It may give some sort of affirmative action, but it is really difficult how it should be performed... Even today, Hungarian minorities in Ukraine and Vojvodina, Romanian minorities in Moldova, Serbian minority in Kosovo, or all minorities in the world are suffering in each country, especially in autocratic countries. Many minorities have continuous experiences of the "wall of the border," in the same way. There are many poor countries surrounding the EU, even seeing form the global perspective. It is extremely important to work together with the minorities and with poor countries as the EU Neighborhood Policy, and Cohesion Policy, for the human rights, poverty alleviation, and economic development... As for the Conclusion, we can summarize the following things. The EU policy and the Schengen treaty was regarded generally most progressive guarantees of free movement and citizen right, when seeing the insider of the EU. But under the EU Enlargement, when we see them outside of the new EU border, we could know the contradiction from the free movement. security, employment and convenience. It is very contradictory. Wider European Policy and the European Security Strategy is the EUs important offer to solve the Border conflict and Division of Europe to make economic, cultural and human cooperation and sustainable development policy differentiated from the US Bushs Policy, War for democracy. They insist the Cooperation for democracy, or Cooperation for development. Wider Europe and the border Question of the Enlarged EU give big suggestion and lesson to mitigate the border conflict of minorities and people not only in Europe, but also Middle East, East Asia and all over the world. They became the high and strong Wall for guarantee the inside free movement,

17

Notes
1) About the Relation between the EU Enlargement and the minorities over the EU border, Solana, the EU Superior Adviser, had a lecture in the Institution of the International Association of Japan, and admitted that it might become one of the most important subjects according to the EU Enlargement. At the Lecture in IIAJ on 24 October, 2000. About the General Characteristics of the EU and NATO Eastern Enlargement and the Nationality Problem, see following: Kumiko Haba, The Eastern Enlargement of the EU & NATO and Central EuropeNationality problems over the EU border, European Integration and its perspective, ed. by Takashi Miyajima and Kumiko Haba, Jinbunshoin, 2001. 2) About, so called, protectionism or Double standard of Western Europe, see: Bojko Bucar(University of Ljubljana, The issue of Double Standard in the EU Enlargement Process, EU Enlargement III, in 3rd Convention of CEEISA, NISA, RISA: Managing the (Re)creation of Divisions in Europe, Moscow Congress, 20-22 June, 2002. 3) About the Schengen Treaty and the Nationality Problems, see the Minorities Research which was offered to the European Council : Peter Kovacs, Co-operation in the Spirit of the Schengen Agreement, The Hungarian beyond the Borders, Minorities Research, Budapest, 1998, pp. 124-131. 4) Peter Kovacs, ibid. pp. 124-127. 5) Pal Peter Toth, Contributions to the Forming Hungarian Political Strategy Concerning the Emigrants, Minorities Research, Budapest, 1998, pp. 121-122. 6) Ethnic Geography of the Hungarian Minorities in the Carpathian Basin, by Karoly Kocsis and Eszter Kocsis-Hodosi, Budapest, 1998, 17. 7) A Marosvasarhelyi Magyar nyelvu orvos es gyogyszereszkepzes 50 eve (50 years History of Hungarian speaking doctors and Pharmacist in Marosvasarhely: Tirgu-Mures), Budapest, 1996, pp.474-476, and Kumiko Haba, Enlarging Europe: Challenge of Central Europe, Iwanami Shoten, 1998, pp.108-114, 118-121.About the Nationalization and Depopularization, of Minorities, the author tried some fact-finding investigation travel and the International Conference in Transylvania: Cluj-Napoca (Kolozsvar), Timisoara (Temesvar), and Szekely regions: and July, 1996, 2000, 2002. 8) Interview to Zoltan Tibori Szabo, 12 August 2002. 9) About these Minorities speaking, the author interviewed and gathered from the representatives of Carpathian-Ukraine and Slovakia in the International Conference of Hungarians over the border, which was held in the monastery, 18 Tirgu-Mures (Marosvasarhely), Sfintu George (Sepsi St. Gyorgy), Miercreatiucu (Csikszereda) of Transylvania, in May

Pannonhalma, Hatarontuli Magyar kisebbsegi nemzetkozi konferenciaja, Pannonhalma, 2000 augusztus 3-4. 10) Nepszabadsag, 1996. februar 2. Kumiko Haba, Enlarging Europe, ibid., p. 31. Hungarian GNP per capita was 6,410 dollar in1996. RSC Policy Paper, no. 98/2. Florence: European University Institute, March, 1998. But I could not find the GNP of Ukraine at that time. 11) Hataron tuli Magyar kisebbsegi nemzetkozi konferenciaja, Pannonhalma, 2000 augusztus 3-4. 12) Act LXII of 2001 on Hungarians living in Neighboring countries, Hataron tuli magyarokrol szolo status torveny, 2001. junius. 19. This Act constituted 4 chapters and 29 articles. It arranged to guarantee many interests (Identification, travel, employment, social security, and education) to Hungarian Minorities who live in neighbor six countries (Croatia, Yugoslavia, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, and Ukraine, except Austria) by Hungarian Government. 13) Nepszabadsag, 2001. junius 20. 14) Nepszabadsag, 2001.junius 14. 15) About the interests which are offered in the Status Law of Hungarian Minorities in neighbor countries, Nepszabadsag, 2001. junius 28. 16) Nepszabadsag, 2001. juniustol szeptemberig. Dokumentumok a Magyarorszagi kulugyministerium. 17) Nepszabadsag, 2001. Julius 15. 18) Words of the Romanian taxi driver, from Szekelyfold. May 1996. 19) By Hungarian Daily News, Nepszabadsag, 21 June 2001. There are 35 million immigrants in all over the world: among them, 7,2 million in Europe, 7,3 million in Asia, 6,25 million in Africa. These immigrants will go to the following countries: 1. Germany, 2. the U.K., 3. the U.S., 4. France, 5. Netherlands. During only first three months in 2001, 1, 45 million immigrants were repelled from Afghanistan, Iraq, Turkey, and old-Yugoslavia, by wars, ethnic conflicts, and religious persecution. Nepszabadsag, 2001. junius 21. After the Afghanistan Bomb in October 2001, the number of emigrants are raising swiftly. 20) Central and East European Fax News, 2001.l0.12. junius 1. es October 12. Nepszabadsag, 2001.

21) Change in the number and percentage of ethnic Hungarians in selected cities and towns of South Slovakia (1880-1991), K. Kocsis and E.Kocsis-Hodosi, Hungarian Minorities in the Carpathian Basin, op.cit. p.32. NHK(Japanese Broadcast Office) Film: Danubian Bridge, Hungary/ Slovakia, NHK, BS -1, 2001. May 21. 22) Lampl Zsuzsanna, A Sajat utjat jaro gyermek (Children who go their own way), 19

Madach-Posonium, 1999, pp. 12, 13, 15, 16, 17. 23) Interview to Kasza Jzsef, Szabadka Mayer, Leader of VMK(Vajdasag Magyar koalicio), and Varady Tibor, Professor of CEU and the ex. Minister of Law of Pasic Government, Szabadka, 1999 augusztus 20-dikan. 24) About the Kaliningrad Question, I owed the documents and information to Prof. Zapototskina, the vice President of Kaliningrad University, and Prof. Fodrov, Rector of the department of University of Kaliningrad. My main theme is the EU and NATO Enlargement and in these 3, 4 years concentrating the Enlarged EUs border question, security-and identity policy, because it caused very serious problems, and it became the one of most serious subject of the EU in these years. Books and Pamphlet of the Kaliningrad Question, The Kaliningrad Question, Richard J. Krickus, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, New York, 2002. The EU & Kaliningrad, Kaliningrad and the Impact of EU Enlargement, Ed. by James Baxendale et al., Printed in European Union, 2000. Kaliningrad Region of Russia and the EU Enlargement, Analytic report, Kaliningrad, 2003. Support Transforming the Kaliningrad Oblast into a Pilot Region of Russian EU Cooperation, East West Institute, Kaliningrad, 2003. 25) The EU and Kaliningrad, ed. by J.Baxendale, S. Dewar & D. Gowan, Federal Trust, 2000. p. 269. Kumiko Haba, The Challenge of the Enlarged EU, Pp.130-137. 26) The speech of Mr. Pursak. Russian News, 11 May, 2001. The speech of Prime Minister, Kasijanov, 26 April, 2001. 27) The lecture and information of Peter Tempel, Head of Cabinet of Commissioner Gunter Verheugen, Seminar of Japan Business Federation, Tokyo, 12 March, 2003. Interview, 12 March, 2003. 28) Support Transforming the Kaliningrad Oblast into a Pilot Region of Russian EU Cooperation, p.17. 29) The lecture of Belarus man of literature in the IV ICCEES (International Council for Central and East European Studies) World Congress, Tampere, 29 July- 3 August, 2000. And the presentation of Belarus Political Scientist, Go toward Europe or go back to the Soviet Union, Japanese Institution of International Affairs (JIIA), 28 September, 2000. 30) Support Transforming the Kaliningrad Oblast, p.15. 31) Wider EuropeNeighborhood: A New Framework for Relations with our Eastern and Southern Neighbors, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, 2003.

20

<<References>>
(News Paper and Journals) Central and East European Fax News Europe: Journal of the Delegation of the EU Nepszabadsag (Peoples Liberty) <<Interviews and investigations in 2002. >> <In Belgium> Correspondent from Russia: Blemia Novostie, Novaya Gazeta, Alexandre Mineev, Correspondent from Hungary, Magyar Radio, Zsuzsanna Roka The EU Japan Delegation <In Hungary> Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Minority, Director, Dr. Szarka Laszlo, Romanian section: Dr. Blenesi Eva Hungarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, State Secretary for Integration, Economic Policy and Harmonization Department, Dr. rpd Gordos, Director General Habsburg Gyrgy, Ambassador of the Enlargement of the European Union, grandson of the Habsburg Karl IV, son of Habsburg Otto. Budapest University of Economics, ex-Dean, Palankai Tibor Budapest University of Economics, Dean, Chikan Attila <In Romania: Oradea, Cluj-Napoca, and Timisoara> Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Veszprem University, Dr. Major Istvan Institute of Minorities, Teleki Laszlo Foundation: Bardi Nandor Diaspora-Szorvany Foundation, President: Bodo Barna, President of Association of Muzeum in TransylvaniaEgyed Akos RMDSZ Kolozsvar szekhely parlament kepviselo: Konya-Hamar Sandor Parlament of Romania, Committee for Foreign Affairs Correspondent in Romania, Nepszabadsag, Szabadsag: Tibori Szabo Zoltan Magyar Pulitzer dijas ujsagiro <In Ukraine: Berehove, Mukacevo, and Uzhhorod> Beregszasz Tanarkepzo Foiskola, Foigazgatoja: Orosz Ildiko Beregszasz Tanar kepzo Foiskola, Igazgatohelyetes: Soos Kalman Limes (Hatar) Intezet Igazgatoja MTA KKI kutatoallomas vezetoje: Csernuicsko Istvan KMKSZ Parlament kepviselo(volt): Kovacs Miklos Novunu Zakarpattja Foszerkeszto helyettes: Ivan Csopovdja Head of Department, Transcarpathian Regional State: Anton Melega Administration Department of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Economic Activity

21

<<Books and Articles>> ASEM: The Asia-Europe Meeting Process: from Sexy Summit to Strong Partnership? Yeo Lay Hwee, Danish Institute of International Affairs, Copenhagen, 2002. Bideleux, Robert, Europeanization versus Democratization in East Central Europe, Ten Years On, BPDT, HCDSF, Budapest, 1999. The Breakup of the Federal States: Soviet Union, Czech-Slovakia, and Yugoslavia, Ed. by Kazuo Nakai, Nobuhiro Shiba, and Tadayuki Hayashi, Taga Shuppan, Tokyo, 1998. Cameron, Fraser, The Wider Europe, EPC Issue Paper No.1. 10.6.2003. Carpathian Foundation, Fund for the Development of the Carpathian Euro region, Report 1995-97, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Ukraine, Budapest, 1998. The Challenge of Europeanization in the Region: East Central Europe, Hungarian Political Science Association, 1996. Countdown to Copenhagen: Big Bang or Fizzle in the EU Enlargement Process? Danish Institute of International Affairs, Copenhagen, 2002. The Enlargement of the European Union toward Central Europe and the Role of the Japanese Economy, Ed. by Kumiko Haba, Janos Hoos, and Tibor Palankai, Aura, Budapest, 2002. Etnikai Kontaktzonak a Karpat-medenceben a 20. szazad masodik feleben, Nemzetkozi tudomanyos konferencia, Aszod, 2004. augusztus 26-28. The EU and Kaliningrad: Kaliningrad and the Impact of the EU Enlargement, Ed. by James Baxendale, Stephen Dewar and David Gowan, Printed in the EU, 2000. European Integration and its perspective, ed. by Takashi Miyajima and Kumiko Haba, Jimbunshoin, 2001. Gergely, Attila, Integracio, Globalizacio, Regionalis fejlodes-A Karpatok es Duna-Koros-Maros-Tisza euroregiok, macro-politikai osszefugesek, Budapest, 2001. Haba, Kumiko (1994), The Nationality Questions in Integrating Europe, Kodansha shinsho, 1994, 2004(7th revision) Haba, Kumiko (1998), Enlarging Europe, Central Europe is searching a way, Iwanami shoten, 1998. Haba, Kumiko (1999), The Expanding EU and Central Europe, Working Paper, International Studies Association National Convention, Washington D.C., 17 February, 1999. Haba, Kumiko (2000), Globalism and Regionalism in East Central Europe; Nationality Problem and Regional Cooperation under the EU and NATO Enlargement, International Congress of Historical Sciences, Working Paper, Oslo, Norway. (CD Rom, 2000) 22

Haba, Kumiko (2002), The Wall of the EU, the Wall of the Schengen Convention; Nationalities outside the border, International Politics, JAIR, February, 2002. Haba, Kumiko (2002), Globalization and the Enlargement of Europe, the Development of Regionalism and Nationalism? Ochanomizu-shobo, 2002. Haba, Kumiko (2002), Globalization and Nationalism in Post-communist East Central Europe---Yugoslavia and East Central Europe under the EU Enlargement---, Journal of International Economic Studies, No. 16, 2002. Haba, Kumiko(2002), The European Union and NATO Enlargement and Central Europe, The Enlargement of the European Union toward Central Europe and the Role of the Japanese Economy, Ed. by Kumiko Haba, Janos Hoos, and Tibor Palankai, Aura, Budapest, 2002. Haba, Kumiko (2002), ed. By Kumiko Haba, Janos Hoos, Tibor Palankai, Aura, 2002. Haba, Kumiko (2003), NATO Enlargement and the Iraq WarCentral and Eastern Europe under the shadow of the US, 2. 2003. Haba, Kumiko (2004), Enlargement of Europe and its Division---Central Europe, National Interest, and Nationalities, Center of Excellence (COE) Program of Educational Ministry in the 21st Century, Kyoto University, March, 2004. Haba, Kumiko (2004), The Challenge of the Enlarged Europe, Chuo Koron Shinsya, June, 2004. History of International Relations in Europe, ed. by Hirotaka Watanabe, Yuhikaku, 2002.4. Hungarian Minorities in the Carpathian BasinA Study in Ethnic Geography, by Karoly Kocsis and Eszter Kocsis-Hodosi, Budapest, 1998. Hungarian Minorities in the Carpathian BasinA Study in Ethnic Geography, by Karoly Kocsis and Eszter Kocsis-Hodosi, Budapest, 1998. Hungary: A Member of NATO, editor Rudolf Joo, Budapest, 1999. Kisebbsegi jogok es az Europai Unio keleti bovitese Duray Miklos: Szukseg van-e a kisebbsegben elo nemzeti kozossegeknek politikai partra?, Gorombei Sara: A kisebbsegek eselyei az EU-csatlakozas utan, Pro Minoritate, 2001. sz. Kaliningrad Region of Russia and the EU Enlargement, Issues of the Pan European Integration, Analytic report, Russia and Europe; Past, Present and Future, Kaliningrad, 2003. Krickus, Richard J., The Kaliningrad Question, Oxford, 2002. Lampl Zsuzsanna, A sajat utjat jaro gyermekHarom szociologiai tanulmany a szlovakiai magyarokrol, Madach-Posonium, 1999. Local Government in Eastern Europe, Ed. By Andrew Coulson, Edward Elgar, 1995. A Marosvasarhelyi Magyar nyelvu orvos es gyogyszereszkepzes 50 eve (50 years History of Hungarian speaking doctors and Pharmacist in Marosvasarhely: 23

Tirgmures), Budapest, 1996. MTA Kisebbsegikutato Intezete dokumentumok: Romania, Ukrajna, Yugoslavia, Szlovakia National and European Identities in EU Enlargement, Views from Central and Eastern Europe, Ed. By Petr Drulak, Prague, 2001. Pal Peter Toth, Contributions to the Forming Hungarian Political Strategy Concerning the Emigrants, Minorities Research, Budapest, 1998. Quo va dis, Eastern Europe and Soviet Union? Euro Region beyond borders, No. 8. Summer 1993. : XXI , , 2000. Rothschild, Joseph, Return to Diversity: A Political History of East Central Europe since World War II , New York, Oxford 1989.(translated Kumiko Haba and Takashi Mizutani, Kyodo Tsushinsya, 1999) Schopflin Gyorgy A kulturalis biztonsag hianya es a kis allamok, Gabriel Toggenburg:Egy kenyes kapcsolatrendszer: Az Europai Unio es a kisebbsegi jogok, Gerdinand de Verennes A magyar kedvezmeny torbenyrol, Minoritate, 2002. Tavasz Tanaka, Toshiro, The Politics of the EU, Iwanami Shoten, 1998. Wider Europe-Neighborhood: The New Framework for Relations with our Eastern and Southern Neighbors, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 11.3.2003. Com(2003)104final. Yoshida, Yasutoshi, The Role of Euro Region and its perspectiveThe case study of Carpathian region, Foreign Ministrys Monthly Research, Tokyo, 4.2003. (Lecture) Razof, Sergej, Russia and the EU, and discussion, Japan International Issue Institute, 6.4.2004. (Conference) The 3rd Convention of CEEISA, NISA, RISA: Managing the (Re)Creation of Divisions in Europe, 20-22 June 2002. The Pan-European International Conference: The Constructing World Orders, The Hague, Netherlands, September 2004. The ECSA World Congress: The European Union and Emerging World Orders, December 2004. (homepage) http://www.clair.or.jp/j/forum/c_reoirt/html/cr193/ http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/e50001.htm http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/pas/phare/ http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/pas/phare/working_with_phares.htm http://europa.eu.int/comm/world/enp/pdf/com03_104_en.pdf 24 Pro