The formulation of an immigration policy is a sensitive issue ali over the world. This is also true for Hungary. This year 1 was surprised to no te the unpredictable emotions it aroused even in highly-qualified professionals.
The series of stimulating debates organised in 1995-96 on the initiative of professor Dr. Mária Kopp and a young, enthusiastic joumalist, Zsuzsa Galgóczy, in the Behavioural Research Institute of the Semmelweis Medical University has, hopefully, not passed un-noticed in scholarly circ1es. Besides the problems related to changes in the basic para-digms of healthcare, the organisers also inc1uded certain questions on the fate of Hungary:
among others, they initiated a debate on issues related to population policy. At one of these debates 1 raised the issue of population policy in Germany and Israel, mostly be-cause 1 felt that certain elements might be useful in formulating Hungary's migration strategy, especially in view of the country's chronic population dec1ine. One of the de-mographers participating in the debate reacted by recounting that on one of his trips to Paris he to ok the metro and was alarmed to see more and more African and Arab passen-gers as the metro approached the outlying districts. His reaction surprised me since J was speaking not of Afro-Asian immigrants, but was rather proposing the absorption of ethnic Hungarians who had already left their home land and who could, instead of moving to Sweden, Australia or other countries, increase the numbers of a dec1ining population in the mother country. The debate was later published in the periodical of Magyar Szemle.
György Vukovich, Iwho was not present in the original debate, commented on my views in a separate article, also published in that periodical. He claimed that immigration policy cannot be an instrument of popuJation policy. Hungary should pursue an active population policy and the ethnic Hungarians currently in the country should be encour-aged to retum to their homeland. Naturally, I felt 1 had to reply to this bizarre critique, and in another artic1e 1 argu ed at greater length that a pro-natal population policy can be expected from neither a left-wing nor a conservative govemment. The current situation, characterised by an ageing, declining population which will soon be unable to generate the necessary pensions and maintain a social security system, could perhaps be remedied using other means. The repeated appeals for the necessity of combating early mortality, a key issue continuously stressed by leading demographers and sociologists alike, is un-likely to improve Hungary's demographic situation.
IDemographer, the president of Central Statistical Offíce at that time. (1. T.)
Insofar as we truly wish to change the appallingly tragic demographic composition of Hungary's population, we must also search for other solutions. I first encountered the interpretation of subsidiarity in terms of national-mino rity problems in a writing by Imre Borbély, a writer and active politician in Ternesvár, who is also László Tőkés'" counsel-lor. What is subsidiarity? The term is predominantly used in German scholarship. It is practically the equivalent of solidarity - a term worn thin and monopolised by various left-wing movements, class struggles and interest groups - which is now employed bythe Christian Social ist movement. Subsidiarity favours address ing social problems at their roots, through reciprocal assistance and formulation of interests. A lasting and efficient solution to social problems can only be expected if ali affected parties are truly interested in solving a particular problem. An approach based on subsidiarity holds that large, cen-tralised organisations are inadequate for solving such problerns, primarily because of the less than adequate efficiency of these organisations, but also because such an approach emphasises the importance of autonomous local action. The anti-totalitarianism of sub-sidiarity excludes the omnipotence of the state. Reciprocal assistance based on common interests, the co-ordination of local initiatives, can contribute to a reassessment of diffi-cult, long-neglected social issues and aid in their successful solution.
Even though the proponents of subsidiarity use this method for addressing social problems, the method itself is broader and can be used for resolving national and demo-graphic problems. Approaching subsidiarity from German immigration policy we find that the absorption and settlement of ethnic Germans from Eastern Europe improved not only the situation of the German minorities who, owing to the twists and turns of history, found themselves in an unfavourable historicai environment, but also encouraged the emergence aspecific strata in the German labour market which does not struggle with cultural or linguistic difficulties in the course of integration, as opposed to other nationalities who sought employrnent, who were of a different religion or - in the case of certain population groups - who had aradically different mentality. Obviously, there can evolve conflicts between distinct population groups even in spite of affinities and similarities. Following the honeymoon of German re-unification, several contlicts emerged between "Ossis" and
"Wessis". Even so, these conflicts can be more easily resolved owing to an essential ly identical national identity than would be the case ev en if these conflicts were also bur-dened with ethnic and religious differences.
National subsidiarity can also be approach ed from another angle. Following the grad-ual re-settlement of ethnic Germans there was no need for social solidarity in this area since their absorption - in this case an economic and social, rather than a linguistic or religious assimilation - is onlyamatter of time and th us the problem will effectively be solved. This can be promoted if the population of the host country perceives that the new arrivals serve their interest in dealing wi th an easier variant of the guest worker problem.
National subsidiarity in Israel differs from the practice in Germany. Similar to the for-mer German diasporas, Jewish communities emigrating to Israel consider their settlement in the mother country to be final. However, several thousand years of Jewish culture and tradition have made minority existence a fact of life to su ch an extent that there exist
" Leader of the Reformcd Church in Romania (Transylvania) and honourablc Chairman of the Hungarian Cealition PaI1y in Romania. Cr.J.)
Jewish communities which, in spite of their solidarity and sympathy for Israel, nonethe-less prefer to remain in their present homeland. Zionist propaganda was unable to trigger the mass emigration of American Jewry to Israel owing to the economic advantages en-joyed by the Jewish community. However, examples to the contrary can also be quoted, when a Jewish community decides to remain where it is since in spite of its links to the Biblical homeland, as the ties binding it to its present home land are much stronger. One good example for the latter is Hungarian Jewry.
More distant communities can also maintain close ties through subsidiarity. They can support each other, ass ist the needy and, if necessary, provide shelter for refuge es or people whose prospects are bleak. While in Germany subsidiary aid is - in spite of a demonstrable reciprocity - essentialIy one-sided owing to population ratios and economic strength, the case is entirely different in the case of international Jewry. Only a smaller part of world Jewry lives in Israel and there are many countries beside the US where their living standards are better than in the Near East.
It is thus natural that in the sixth decade following its foundation, the State of Israel tends to receive rather th an to give - at least as far as financial support is concerned.
What Israel can offer lies more in the intelIectual, cultural and religious sphere. Intensive links are thus not only reflected in economic and financial transactions, but extend to alI areas, including individuals who constitute a national society, who are sent on study trips, who exchange their experiences and pre serve their common tradition using alI possible instruments. In times of crisis this reciprocal co-operation intensifies and can extend to the domain of biology and, in our case, to demographic aid. The isolation and the unpro-portionately small demographic weight carried by Israel in the Near East is a weil known fact. The state has systematically and continuously increased its demographic potential since its foundation. The State of Israel is ready to absorb ali Jewish masses whose life is endangered or who live under bleak poiiticai and economic conditions which can be remedied through subsidiary solidarity.
Both in Israel and in Germany the state plays an active role. Without this, co-operation could hardly be achieved. But neither could it have emerged and been successful for long decades, were it not wholeheartedly supported by the smalIer communities which make up these two states. Macro-society, reflected in the state, offers an essential framework for social processes on the micro-level, The field of subsidiarity is in fact a genuine, living or easily activated network which reacts immediately to new problems. The interacting im-pulses enrich national - and in the case of Israel - religious existence, if necessary, through the mass movement and rescue of individuals or groups, similar to the recent resettlement offamished Ethiopian Jewry, without regard to the financial sacrifice.
In spite of certain differences, the German and Jewish examples shares distinct paral-Ieis with the Hungarian question. One of the differences is that the majority of ethnic Hungarians live not far from the other side of the border, in areas to which they did not migrate but where, through the twists and turns of history, they have been stranded owing to border changes. Vet this is not quite as clear-cut as it may seem. The history of hu-mankind, including that of the Hungarians, can be described as a history of migrations.
And these migrations are clearly not over. Internal migrations, which may be of the same magnitude as international migrations, and which are not always restricted to the migra-tion from village to towns, are hardly over. Hungarian history provides several examples
for internal migrations, beginning with the Hungarian Conquest, through various settle-ments and re-settlesettle-ments throughout history. Aceording to recent research, the Szeklers were drawn from various tribes and were settled in Transylvania to guard the border. In time, they were replaced by Saxons invited to settle there from the west, and the Szeklers were moved to their present settlement territory where, as a consequence of overpopula-tion, they migrated in ali directions.
The southern areas of Hungary which were depopulated after the Turkish wars were repopulated 200-250 years ago through a systematic internal and external resettlement programme. Large-scale migrations continued in the 19th and 20th centuries. Beside overseas migrations, two main internal migrations can be noted in the Age of Dualism: a north to south migration, resulting in the population of the Great Hungarian PIa in, and a migration from the peripheries to the centre, through which Budapest evolved into a me-tropolis. The Trianon borders increased these migrations for one or two years - owing to successive waves of refugees - but at the same time also restricted th em thanks to the erection of border barriers. However, as soon as migration again became possible, these natural processes continued. Hungarian migrat ion again picked up during World War II, and these migrations were not triggered simply by border changes and war itself. The ethnic Hungarians who found themselves under Romanian rule, migrated towards the centre of Hungary in search of work and a better life when northern Transylvania was annexed to the country. The present migration from Romania can be seen as a sudden sweeping migration in the wa ke of several decades of isolation.
There is considerable opposition to the immigration of ethnic Hungarian, not the least of which is a few that territories historically populated by Hungarians will now be lost forever. One variant of this opinion holds that there is hope for some kind of historicaI jurisdiction in the Carpathian Basin. However, global tendencies and the direction of
European development contradict this hope. The importance of borders is dwindling and the process of globalization which also affects our continent has created a new situation.
Following the changes in Eastern Europe, the radical improvement of living standards through international migration has become a realistic option for people living in this part of the world. The spiritualization of the borders will also change the nature of migration.
Temporary employment abroad may become a mass phenomenon since one is not forced to leave one's country forever upon receiving an excellent job offer. Even so, many of those who have genuinely left with the inte nt of staying only temporarily may become citizens of another country.
In spite of favourable conditions, the number of ethnic Hungarians who try their luck in Hungary will not increase dramatically. The potential option of returning to one's home land will no doubt prompt those who would ch ange their lives to a carefuI consid-eration of possible alternatives. If decision making is prolonged, a more circumspect decision is made. It would not be a matter of forced migration, but rather one of choice under natural conditions.
There is little emphasis on the fact that the demographic composition of ethnic Hun-garians who wish to work or to settle in Hungary is extremely favourable. They are domi-nated by young, dynamic age groups, and they have a higher than average educational attainment. It is a global phenomenon that the majority of individuals who seek to work abroad come from more enterprising and talented groups of society. Neither should we
forget that they are usually men, i.e. they are recruited from the more mobile sex, who are not only more will ing to gain experiences abroad than women, but are also prepared to retum if that seems a more practicable solution. A population of young, skilled males would improve the unfavourable demographic balance if they chose to settle in Hungary.
Another widespread opinion conceming immigrants is that their arrival is undesirable since it would swell the ranks of the unemployed. This superficial opinion is from time to time also nourished by professionals with their ill-phrased questions. Only the less edu-cated believe that there exists absolute unemployment. Unemployment is generally re-stricted to specific industries and on the level of relative interactions. Unemployment is almost always a structural problem. Most foreigners fill jobs which are rejected by locals.
In many Western European countries the number of unemployed citizens sometime runs into the millions, while at the same time there are about as many employed gu est workers.
This is why 1 was surprised to read György Csepeli's analysis inA szuverenitás káprázata [The illusion of sovereignty], published by the Korridor Poiiticai Research Centre. Pre-vailing Hungarian attitudes towards immigration were summed up on the basis of a socio-logical survey, in which the first in the series of "staternents" was that "Hungary should be more strict towards illegal immigrants", the second that "Crime is on the rise because of immigrants", and the third that "Immigrants take jobs from those who were bom in Hun-gary". These three rather negative statements - with which 91, 74 and 63 per cent of the respondents agreed - were followed by the alternative of making Hungarian citizenship more easily accessible to ethnic Hungarians, which was viewed favourably by 53 per cent.
At the same time, only 20 per cent of the respondents agreed with the statement that "the country will become more receptive to new ideas and cultures through immigrants", and only 8 per cent thought that "immigrants are useful to the Hungarian economy". The sur-vey was carried out by TÁRKI, and although it reeks of prejudices and ignorance, it was nonetheless deemed useful for constructing elaborate concepts which are now sanctimo-niously repeated: unfortunately, the Hungarian population feels only so much solidarity towards possible immigrants.
The respondents were not infonned that the overwhelming majority of possible immi-grants are ethnic Hungarians, including many young adults and men from ex- Yugoslavia who fled to Hungaly to evade military conscription or even death. Our good sociologists fai led to ask whether respondents would have agreed that "imrnigrants fill jobs which Hungarians reject" or that "most immigrants are ethnic Hungarians who did not enjoy minority rights in their former homeland, could not learn a vocation in their own tongue and who could not receive higher education in their own tongue".
There can be no doubt that Hungary needs to apply the principle of national subsidiar-ity and, in a wider sense, acknowledge the promotion of national interest by reciprocsubsidiar-ity. It would be futile to rebuke the man on the street when everyday existence is biased. There was a time when reciprocal assistance based on national sentiments was the rule, when demographic and settlement issues were judged in this light. The germs of a national attitude based on subsidiarity can, with some exaggeration, be attributed to Friar Julianus' joumey who, in the shadow of the imminent Mongolian attack, tried to convince ali Hun-garians of his day to join forces.
Illuminating examples of subsidiarity can be quoted from the Turkish occupation pe-riod even if those who practised it called it by another name. Did not the independent
Transylvanian Principality' sustain Hungarian statehood, culture, language and ethnicity through subsidiarity, when the greater part of the country suffered under the yoke of alien powers? The outstanding thinkers at the tum of the century worried about overseas mi-gration, about the dispersal of the Szeklers and the fate of the Csángó in Moldavia. The country carved up by the Treaty of Trianon was not simply mutilated, but also suffered a rather retrograde poiiticai establishment, and for a long time the organisation of the "new faced Hungarians" was only made possible by a considerably more demoeratic Czecho-slovakia. No matter how unique a phenomenon, the writers of Transylvania also practised a form of cultural subsidiarity when they founded the Erdélyi Helikon and the Szépmíves Céh. Antal Szerb's Magyar irodalomtörténet [Hungarian literary history] won the first prize of a competition announced in Transylvania. While Hungarian literature in Hungary was dominated by the kitsch churned out by Herezeg and Gárdonyi, the banner of high-quality literature was held high by Tamási, Kós and Benő Karácsony, as weil as the Karunk circle in another country. Neither should we forget the Yugoslavia of the 1960s and 1970s where ethnic Hungarians enjoyed much greater creative freedom and were also allowed to establish their own contacts with the West.
Leaving now the examples taken from literature and culture, and retuming to the issue
Leaving now the examples taken from literature and culture, and retuming to the issue