Endre Csapó : Peace to end Peace

War is not the right source of peace

Nationalism cannot be fought by means of propaganda, not even by logical arguments. There is no way of fighting it while the current international order has a tendency to re-generate nationalism. Fascism finds its base and support in the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of a "sovereign" state. It is even helped by the very concept of national states and their inviolable borders.

Minority status is not an act of God, but the unfortunate outcome of human negligence. As such, it should be possible to resolve satisfactorily the problems it engenders. First of all, a solution by war ought to be excluded, because wars do not improve the situation, only add more injustices. Arbitration by larger nations or the great powers cannot provide the necessary solution either. A particularly good example for this is the case of Transylvania. In 1940 it was divided between Hungary and Rumania by the arbitration of the two Central European powers of the time, Germany and Italy. (That was the so-called Second Vienna Award). The only result was the acquisition by both parties, Hungary and Rumania, of roughly equal ratios of minorities, an unpopular acquisition. At the end of World War II, as a result of decisions made by the victorious Allied Powers, the Transylvanian situation reverted to its interwar state, whereby Rumania again became the multi-ethnic state, while Hungary remained the country deprived of her former territories and populations. Therefore, let us exclude from the available solutions the declaration of war, transfer of whole populations, slicing up of territories and arbitrary shifting of millions of people.

The present developments in East--Central Europe demonstrate a further significant point: whether the borders and the national minorities should stay as they are (maintaining the status quo), or undergo modification, because those differing ethnic populations which have been feeling hostile to one another for the past 75 years will continue to feel the same in the future as well. By now, the very existence of the current borders is the cause of hatred. Even the confederation concept would not work any more, as is amply demonstrated by the federated Yugoslavia, which has already desintegrated into its former constituent parts.

The manifold difficulties associated with minority popula-tions reached their peak during the period of dictatorships. To be in minority status in a community which is planned to be homogeneous in the interest of uniform governing-capability, or some kind of racial theory, means being in the way of a power which quite willingly would awaken and maintain general public animosity against this minority. What type of action is taken by the rulers in such a situation? All ills and lack of success are singled out as having been caused by the minority. In this way, the eventual destruction of the minority becomes a national and patriotic matter, and the more primi-tive the given ruling community in a particular country, the worse is the condition of the minority, with its different language, religion and culture. If, on top of this, the minority section of the population happens to be culturally and edu-cationally on a higher, more advanced level, it could even be surrounded by hatred. This kind of hatred transforms the members of a minority, sooner or later, into a community of persecuted individuals.

The qualitative index of democracy in a country is the nature of its treatment of minorities. Democracy can only exist where even the smallest ethnic group speaking a different tongue and following a different religion or sect has the constitutional right to use its own language, live according to its own culture and worship according to its own religion. If the aim of democracy is harmony in the whole population of a state, then the fundamental aspect of democracy is its capacity for tolerance. It may be that a dictatorship is capable of some grand achievements by sheer concentration of force, but the purpose of human existence is not the realization of grand schemes but life itself, individual life. Every individual has a right to live, a fundamental human right. Each individual has the right to a particular, self-chosen mode of life, so that the desired quality of life can be attained according to an individual's abilities and personal wishes.

We wish to sound a warning --though we do not know precisely whom we should warn-- that a new settlement of the minority problems in East--Central Europe is both timely and urgent while the current reforms and rearrangements are in process. The rearrangements must be all-encompassing, over the entire continent, and at the same time they must be suffi-ciently radical, embedded in such an overall, general change that the very reason for, and possibility of, expansionist policies which lead to one country occupying or conquering another would be removed.

Europe is on the threshold of momentous changes. A Uni-ted Nations of Europe appears to be in the making. However, at the same time the present boundaries of states seem to be regarded as valid for all times. These two concepts are in conflict with each other, because either the existing division into sovereign states is perpetuated, and the significance of the borders thereby maintained or the present significance of state borders lessened by transforming them into purely administ-rative boundaries.

The European wars over the past few centuries could almost without exception be described as conflicts over territories. Every "peace" (i. e. peace treaty) was really a perpetuation of conditions imposed by force of war, i.e. by military conquest, or by expansionism. The present "peace" in Europe, despite its 50 years' duration is in actuality a peace arbitrarily maintained by force of arms. Human souls have not yet achieved peace, but it is now timely that they do so. In Europe, and particularly in multi-ethnic Central Europe, the state boundaries were fashioned not only from barbed wire but also out of animosity. It is not sufficient to cut the barbed wire. Real peace can only come if the accumulated tensions of the past 75 years are relaxed as well.

It is of paramount importance to depart from the concept of the nation state. It may be replaced by a new concept of cultural state to reach all parts of a nation irrespective of state borders, without restriction. Furthermore, it must be recog-nized that there are certain natural regional units, which are intrinsically indivisible, which cannot be divided without the region as a whole suffering.

One such unique natural geographic unit is Transylvania, with its diverse nationalities, mixed cultures, one uniform history and one destiny. If it could not belong to Hungary (as it does not since World War I for reasons given above), it should not belong to Rumania either, and for the very same reasons. But there is another significant reason for denying Rumania the possession of Transylvania. This land is the classic cradle of the principle of religious tolerance, which in 1557 was enacted as law by the Diet of Torda. Thus Transylvania --(at that time the real centre of Hungarian culture, because of the Ottoman conquest of the middle part of Hungary )-- became the first country in Europe to introduce the practice of religious tolerance. But Transylvania was also the classic country of the toleration of all nationalities on its soil. All the various ethnic groups that appeared and then disappeared over many centuries were able to enjoy their folk-cultural life undisturbed. This peaceful coexistence of various nationalities, the indigenous Hungarians (incl. Székelys), the German settlers and the refugee-settler Rumanians from the Balkans, was disturbed by the emerging nationalism of the 19th century.

Another integral part of the Carpathian Basin is the so-called "Upland" (the present-day Slovakia) which historically forms a cultural entity with Hungary. It was in this region that Prince Rákóczi's War of Independence (1703--1711) was mainly fought against Austrian absolutism. Slovakians, too, fought enthusiastically on the side of the Hungarians under Prince Rákóczi's banner, the two ethnic groups showing conspicuous solidarity. Many Slovaks also supported the 1848--49 Revolution organized by the Hungarian patriot Louis Kossuth.

In the southern part of the Carpathian Basin, just north of the Sava -- Danube line (the present Vojvodina area), Hun-garians fought against the Ottoman Empire together with Serbs and, to some extent, Rumanians for centuries. As the Ottoman Turks advanced northwards, many Serbs, and also Rumanians, had to migrate north of the Danube and settle in what was Hungarian territory at the time. The centuries-long occupation by the Ottoman Turks devastated Serbia, as well as Wallachia and Moldavia (in parts of present-day Rumania), making them relatively backward.

Transylvania, this beautiful gem of land, with its medieval villages and famous universities was taken over and crushed by the intolerant attitude and barely endurable colonization policy of the invading Wallachian-Rumanians at the end of World War I. This was crowned by Ceausescu's plan of "homogenization" and "systematization": a program which was planned to be carried out with ultra-fascist methods to create the "homogeneous Rumanian people".

It is in the interest of all Europeans to have the whole of Transylvania nominated for World Heritage Listing, not only because of its natural beauty and richness, but also that Transylvanian culture and its centuries-old model of ethnic and religious tolerance may be restored and preserved. Yes, indeed, this is in the interest of all mankind, for the Transylvanian model promises every country in the world a solution for her nationality/minority problems, problems which are a nagging source of conflict everywhere.

The need for an Intracontinental Charter

There is a need for a dual constitution in every European country. Firstly a European Constitution (as the common land of nations) and, secondly, a Constitution for the Nation. The two together may form the administrative constitution of the region, and this will have to form the preliminary conditions for acceptance into the European Community of Countries.

While Transylvania and other parts of the Carpathian Basin taken from Hungary are only the birthplace of the Hungarians and not their caring and beloved fatherland at the same time, nobody should be surprised about the attitude of Hungarians demanding a sufficiently adequate expanse of land to accommodate all the ancestral Hungarian ethnic groups. The fate of four million ethnic Hungarians outside the borders of today's Hungary is likely to seriously burden the conscience of the political and spiritual leaders of Hungary and to make them question the justification of the present state boundaries.

The anniversary of the Treaty of Trianon has to be commemorated, because it is a 75 year old burden of reparation in international law. Let the present anniversary of the Treaty be the occasion for calling for the lifting this seventy-five year old burden on the moral conscience of the world. May man-kind also draw a lesson from the past seventyfive years and avoid the occurence of another Trianon-type settlement, not only in the Carpathian Basin, but indeed anywhere in the world.

Endre Csapó : Peace to end Peace