Crown Home for 25 Years

Interview with Ambassadors Nancy G. Brinker and András Simonyi

 

László Szőcs

 

 

 

 

"The day after tomorrow it will be twenty five years that the U.S. delegation led by Secretary of State Cyrus Vance brought back to Budapest the symbol of Hungarian statehood. On account of the anniversary, but not only about that, we talked to U.S. Ambassador to Budapest Nancy Goodman Brinker and Hungary's Ambassador to Washington Andras Simonyi.

 

Népszabadság: On January 6, 1978, the ice broke in Hungarian-American relations: President Carter returned St. Stephen's crown and the crown jewels. Do you have a personal recollection of the event, and how do you see its significance after 25 years?

 

A.S.: I know several people personally of those who returned the crown: John C. Whitehead, who later became a Deputy Secretary of State, or Ambassador to Budapest Philip M. Kaiser, who soon will be 90 years old and who wrote a beautiful chapter on this event in his book. The return of the crown is often mentioned during my discussions in the U.S. In the United States, everybody says that as early as that, Hungary was already trying to get out of the Soviet times. The move was a very strong message from the Americans. What is interesting about it is that it had been arranged in such a way that it took place as an act between peoples, not governments.  It was the American people who returned the crown to the Hungarian people. I think that was the beginning of a time when Hungary wanted to make clear that it eventually wanted to become a full-fledged democracy.

 

N.G.B.: I think there has always been more emotion and compassion in Hungarian-American relations than in some other ones. For us, what Hungarians achieved in high culture, in arts, in economy, has always been the symbol of Hungarian independence, and it provided a foundation for our shared values.

 

NSZ: Still, 1978 was a year of the cold war. Today, as President Bush put it last fall, the two countries are "close allies." According to analysts, the probability that the U.S.-led allies will attack Iraq is very high. America emphasizes that there has been no decision - yet, in the meantime, there is a huge mobilization going on in the Gulf region. Hungary has assured the U.S. of its support. How far is Washington willing to go, and Hungary to support the strike?

 

N.G.B.: On our part, we are grateful to the Government of Hungary for letting us use the Taszár Airbase. Here again, I may refer to our shared values. As far as allied commitments are concerned, there is even a surplus to what was requested. By the way, there is, indeed, no decision yet.

 

A.S.: In September, after President Bush's address, MFA László Kovács spoke at the UN Assembly in New York. He said that, as regards Iraq, all of us were interested in the peaceful liquidation of the weapons of mass destruction. However, he also made it clear that in case it was not possible to achieve that through peaceful means, the U.S. and its allies, under the aegis of the UN, might decide for a military action. And on this issue Washington has the support of its Hungarian ally. Look, nobody wants war. At the same time, nobody wants to live under the shadow of a permanent threat. And that's what we are talking about. This problem must be solved, and Europe and America will do it shoulder to shoulder.

 

NSZ: Isn't there a point where you would say, "this is too much, we don't want to pay this high a price, we'd rather not go any further?" The UN High Commissioner for Refugees Ruud Lubbers said the other day: In the case of a military attack, we could reckon with a humanitarian disaster, especially if biological and/or chemical weapons are deployed.

 

A.S.: I do not wish to comment on that. It is mere speculation. There is no decision on military action.

 

N.G.B.: I agree with this evaluation.

 

NSZ: Taszár has been mentioned. Many are afraid and have reservations. What can you tell them? That there will be no problem at all? Or that there no such thing as a free ride -- you must take some risks for the sake of the "Big Defense"?

 

N.G.B.: Let's separate the two questions. At no time in history could a country have acquired protection without accepting some risk. We accept a certain amount of risk in NATO. This cannot be eliminated. At the same time, as we have mentioned, our goal [in Iraq] is disarmament, and not war. We must guarantee our protection and that of our allies. We cannot live exposed to the danger of someone manufacturing weapons of mass destruction, or resorting to bioterrorism.

 

A.S.: This is not the first time the people of Taszár have faced the fact that their base plays an important role within the alliance. It did so during the crises in Bosnia and in Kosovo. It is important, though, for the locals to understand what's going on around them. That's why the government is consulting with the mayor and the municipal government. It is indeed so that if Hungary does not want to be a mere beneficiary of security, but rather a contributor to it, it must do certain things. We can be proud of having made this important decision.

 

NSZ: When observing Hungarian-American relations, one gets the impression that Hungary has to earn the flattering title of reliable ally over and over. Recently, Parliament approved sending a medical unit of maximum 50 to Afghanistan. We are well aware, however, that it was neither the original government offer (it was a guard contingent), nor what the German-Dutch command in charge had requested in the first place. Will we continue to keep a low profile?

 

A.S.: Look, democracy is democracy. What's important is that - just like the rest of the allies - Hungary should not be missing from Afghanistan. The lesson we learnt from that, as from Taszár, by the way, is that there is no military role without seeking a greater consensus. And if the Hungarian doctors do a good job out there, everything will be perfectly all right.

 

N.G.B.: It is important for Hungary as a member of NATO to let its voice be heard and be actively present on the stage of global politics. It will be true even when you soon become a member of the European Union, on which I sincerely congratulate you.

 

NSZ: Warsaw recently announced that the Polish air force would acquire 48 F-16 fighters. This U.S. plane had had good chances in the Hungarian tender, too. Then, at the last moment, it lost. You, who are building Hungarian-U.S. relations on a high level, did not blink at all when you heard the news?

 

N.G.B.: Obviously, we were glad to hear the Polish announcement. As regards the tender here, the Hungarians had the opportunity to make a decision, and they eventually did so. And we respect that decision.

 

A.S.: I would not want to comment on the aircraft. A friend of mine said that one could not shape the past, but one could shape the future. On the other hand, let me tell you something. Specialization is becoming more and more important these days. In defense, the so-called niche capabilities are coming to the forefront in which Hungary, with its possibilities and skills, can best contribute to the joint defense.

 

NSZ: Many expect that, with membership in the EU, Hungarian tourists would not have to apply for visas if they want to travel to the United States. First, however, the country has to be taken off Washington's visa list.

 

N.G.B.: Since September 11 we have to be more careful about whom we allow to enter the country. In Hungary, we issue visas in large numbers but at this point we can only hope that travel between the two countries will become completely free of obstacles. It is an important issue for all of us. Fortunately, in Tom Lantos, this issue has a serious supporter in Congress.

 

A.S.: On my part, I do not give up the fight and continue to lobby in the State Department. I can clearly see the difficulties.

 

NSZ: Prime Minister Peter Medgyessy has been criticized for not raising the visa issue with President Bush in the White House last November.

 

A.S.: It would have been almost ridiculous for him to raise it. High-level state visits are opportunities with which bilateral relations can be promoted. There was enough to be discussed; I do not think it would have been useful to go into the details in the meeting with the President. There are appropriate fora to do so. And although the visa question is a problem, it is not an "issue."

 

(Népszabadság, January 4, 2003)