Re: Understanding Orbán
Bela Liptak
Kedves Árpád,
1) Az Orbán látogatás miatt van érdeklődés a médiában, ezért irásodat lehet, hogy OpEd formájában lehozná a Times. Elérhetőségük: op...@nytimes.com, Küldhetsz másolatot a levelek rovata szerkesztőjénak is tomf...@nytimes.com. Mindenesetre ebből a levelemről küldök másolatot a Magyar Lobbi résztvevőinek is, mert úgy gondolom, hogy tanulséghos gondolatokat vetettél papirra. Irásodra két megjegyzést tennék: Az első, hogy talán irhatnál pár mondatot Orbán tetteinek lélektani hátteréről is, mert úgy hallottam. hogy verte az apja és ha ez igaz akkor lehet, hogy az atyai hatalom elleni lázadás ivódott bele, s részben ez is hozzájárulhat a hatalmon lévők iránti érzelmei alakulásához (Soros, EU, USA, stb.).
A másik megjegytéem, hogy elolvashatnád az alábbi irást, hátha látsz benne emlitésre méltót: https://www.aei.org/op-eds/viktor-orbans-warm-welcome/?mkt_tok=NDc1LVBCUS05NzEAAAGRvLFrxyvIJ0aO0cQpsi57gT4QLLQswXzdu6dW8VeV_KAIPfZT-F6sGyS3VG7uloGvqiedLsy0cp4FiQyPQnaCnUlyv8Ga1EdLqek9UQp2rFOSPw
2) Április 6 messze van, de elképzelhető, hogy részt tudok venni a megbeszélésen. Az 56-os anyag gyüjtési akciótokat fontosnak tartom (nálam is sok MEFESZ anyag van még) és elküldhetem 56-os naplóm 3 nyelven megjelent anyagát is, mely persze E-mailre túl nagy (1.0 GB) de flash driven vagy DVD-n küldhető.
3) Az HL Trianon akciójáról annyit, hogy szerintem nem baj, hogy Orbán (a török államfő?!) ma majd beszél Trumppal Trianonról. Ez azért jó, mert Trampot nem érdekli Trianon vagy Európa jövője, de mert ez a találkozás fehivja a világsajtó figyelmét kisebbségeink helyzetének és általában a kelet-európai helyzetére, az ottani dolgok rendezésének szükséggességére és igy Európa egyensúlyának helyrebillentére, másszóval egy olyan összefogás szükségére, mimt amilyenről Kossuth, majd később Antall álmoztak, tehát valami Dunai-konfederáció szerü egység létrehozására, mely nem csak egyensúlyt teremtene az európai kontinensen, nem csak garantálhatná minden kisebbség számára az autonómiát, de egyben tudatositaná is, hogy a mai feszültség valódi oka nem a kelet és nyugat ellentéte, hanem a jövő milyenséért folyó harc, tehát a demokratikus és az autokratikus államok (orosz, kinai, iráni) közötti harc, mert ez fogja megszabni az emberiség jövőjét.
Ölel, Béla
In a message dated 3/8/2024 4:32:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, ar...@krizsan.net writes:
Kedves Bela, gondoltam esetleg érdekel a kis cikk amit Orbán látogatása kapcsán írtam, bár nem hiszem bárki fogja publikálni (bár probálkozom). Kiváncsi vagyok véleményedre...Understanding Orbán
Disruptor, troublemaker, or a visionary leader?An opinion by Árpád Krizsán
In his face-saving move, Hungary’s Prime Minister Orbán insisted on his Swedish counterparty, Mr. Kristerrson to visit Budapest. After the visit, Mr. Orbán had no other choice, but to “wholeheartedly” support Sweden’s NATO accession rubber stamped by the parliament controlled by Orbán’s party Fidesz. This two-year foot dragging left not only his critics, but even many of his devoted followers confused and puzzled about his true motivations for his bewildering positions.
So the question is what makes a person who once fought for freedom and democracy become the flag-bearer of the illiberal movement, slowly eroding the institutions and adherence to pluralism; who fought against the communist regime just to serve Putin’s interests now?
I would argue there were three principal reasons: Firstly, it was his humiliating defeat in 2002 ending his initial short-lived reign as prime minister, leaving him disgruntled and traumatized. Secondly, his messianic conviction to restore Hungary’s full sovereignty and former glory, and thirdly, his assumed role as a defender of traditional values.
Orbán is a natural politician who from the very beginning of his career had a clear goal to become the leader of the nation. During his first government, Hungary was seen as a reliable partner committed to joining the EU and NATO. But, in spite of his pro-American and Atlanticist stance he was largely ignored in the US and the EU clique, except maybe for the Germans. Domestically, too, Hungarians enjoyed a booming economic times.
Despite his successes, Orbán narrowly lost his reelection. He was a man with a mission, but without a position.
Following his unexpected defeat in 2002, Orban quickly changed his ideological stance turning from a liberal politician to a populist defender of Christianity, a staunch conservative upholder of traditional values. He instigated a grass-root movement bringing his politics to the street.
At the same time, people quickly became disgruntled with Fidesz’ successor, the reincarnated socialist party, led by Ferenc Gyurcsány, who had infamously declared that the government had cheated the populace. His widespread unpopularity coupled with the harsh austerity measures after the 2008 financial crisis implemented by the technocratic caretaker government that followed, gave further impetus to Orbán.
Orbán’s successful strategy and the dissatisfaction with the previous government resulted in Orbán’s landslide election victory in 2010. Fidesz gained a supermajority in parliament, which was a result of overwhelming support for Orbán combined with the peculiarities of an Anglo-Saxon type electoral system favoring the strongest party. He won fair and square!
The magnitude of the victory enabled Orbán to implement his grand plans without any major constraints. Based on the lessons from his first term, Orbán quickly moved to control the narrative and proceeded to revamp the bureaucracy and justice system that had hindered his previous administration. At the same time, Orbán found ways to channel vast riches to his own close circle of friends and family creating a system of National Cooperation (NER in Hungarian) comprised of his cronies and companies in the orbit of the ruling party. This system functions as the main funding source to secure Orbán’s ability to retain power.
Contrary to his predecessors, his government deployed unorthodox economic measures, dubbed Orbanomics. They were curtailing the banks, levying excess taxes on the banking and energy sector and stimulate growth by lowering corporate taxes and other initiative. His gamble succeeded! By 2013, two years into his second term as Prime Minister, the country was once again on a clear growth path.
Source: Hungarian Central Statistical Office, World BankAs a student of history, he must have also concluded that Hungary only prospered during two brief moments in its modern history, namely, the so-called peacetimes (békeidők in Hungarian) associated with the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the inter-war period from 1921 to World War II. Both periods ended with Hungary being devastated by wars as a result of its ties with the greater powers on the losing side. It seems to be his messianic conviction that he is called on to restore Hungary’s former glory with an unwavering trust in the power of the State and by establishing Hungary’s full sovereignty.
Orbán now blames the EU’s behemoth apparatus that undermines Hungary’s sovereignty. Yet, Hungary has vastly benefited from EU funding and Orbán’s government is highly dependent on the continues flow to bolster the economy, and thus, his popularity. Orbán’s actions have successfully forced the EU to release further installments of funds withheld without Hungary making any real concessions.
Finally, as a defender of traditional values he and many of his autocratic peers can rant against the progressive policies of the elite as clashes of values caused by massive immigration and social change are not being addressed. This vacuum opens the door to characters like Orbán, fueling the many increasingly extreme views present in many of countries, not just Hungary.
Many commentators argue his policies have yielded no results. I would argue the opposite: the Hungarian Prime Minister regularly featured in the international press, unlike any time before. Orbán has also found strong allies and forged cordial relationships with many leaders, mainly on the right, but even with the likes of the French president. Former President Trump recognizes him as an asset and just invited him to Mar-a-Lago. Orbán has become a force to be reckoned with, like no other Hungarian leader before him.
The question remains about the opportunity costs. Could Orbán have achieved far better results improving Hungary’s standing in the world instead of denigrating it? On the other hand, could a better understanding of his motivations and more engaging approach be more effective than to ostracize him?
The policy to isolate Orbán diplomatically is backfiring. Increasingly, Hungary is turning to the East building stronger ties there instead with its traditional allies. Little diplomatic effort is made to cajole him into acting in a more constructive way. Instead, America sent an ambassador to the country who rather than improve relationships, publicly criticizes Orbán’s domestic policies and placates him as an autocrat. While this might be the morally correct position, it has not been a winning strategy. Maybe President Biden, like Macron, would be better off to invite Mr. Orbán rather than allowing his presumed contender to leverage this moment. Catering to Orbán’s ego seems to be working!
I wish I could be more hopeful! Unfortunately, Hungary is once again erring on the wrong side of history. Orbán’s perplexing stances and his hesitation and outright opposition to supporting Ukraine are hard to explain. At the same time Hungary remains heavily reliant of oil and gas from Russia and is forging new friendships with totalitarian or autocratic regimes.
Meanwhile, Orbán – without any true coercion – enjoys the solid support of a majority of the electorate. The reason is that most are better off than in any previous period since the fall of communism and the prevailing conservatism of the nation. It doesn’t matter either that those in the orbit of the ruling party have prospered disproportionately; accusations of wide-spread corruption have not eroded his popularity. There are no serious contenders who can challenge Mr. Orbán domestically either. The opposition is fragmented, but more damningly, unable to articulate a coherent and clear message that speaks to the people. The only sliver of hope is that for the first time since 2010, real wages have decreased last year highlighting the economic disparities that exist.
Public opinion has a tendency to change fast. Maybe some charismatic figure might emerge who can craft a message that resonates with the electorate. However, Mr. Orbán is a survivor and has so-far masterfully deflected any real threats to his reign. It will require a true shift in sentiment and disgruntlement with the current government to affect real change.
Given Hungary’s lack of economic or any other meaningful influence, and in absence of any radical shift, either domestically or internationally, Orbán’s only option is to continue to be a disruptor to achieve his objectives.
AboutÁrpád Krizsán was born in Sweden of parents who escaped Hungary in 1956. He completed his undergraduate studies in political science and international law at the University of Vienna, Austria and earned a Master’s degree in International and Public Affairs from Columbia University in New York City. Following some years in the financial industry including as Vice President at J.P. Morgan’s Investment Banking unit in London, where he was the country manager for Hungary and other countries, in 2005, he co-founded and is a Managing Director of ERG Partners, an independent financial and strategic advisory firm based in Miami, Florida and New York City. Their clients include major public and private companies advising them on a broad range of corporate finance and strategic matters. Mr. Krizsán is an active member of the Hungarian community in the United States. He serves as the President of the Hungarian House and the American Hungarian Library and Historical Society in New York City. He is also a Board member of several non-profit organizations and charities. He currently lives in Miami, Florida.
As the editor in chief of a Hungarian periodical aimed at students published in Vienna from 1986-1990 he met many members of the opposition and followed the formation of various parties, including Fidesz, closely. He was present at many of the events at the time leading up to the fall of communism 1989.