Disintegrating Alliances: Strategic Conflicts Among the States of East Central Europe
2009.04.23 16:00Prior to their accession to the EU, the states of Central Europe were able to cooperate to a large degree, a key factor in garnering advantageous conditions for these countries during the integration process. However, ever since EU accession, not only has this cooperation diminished in importance and the existing regional institutions become largely a formality, but the states of Central Europe now seem to consider each other their primary rivals.
Some participants disagreed with the view that the cooling relationships are due primarily to competition within the EU. There are three types of disagreements that characterize the relations between these states. First, the nationalist dispute, such as the Hungarian-Slovak relationship – yet this type of conflict is not at the root of the problems. More to the point the states are out of sync with each other in their phases of development, which is well-illustrated by comparing the Hungarian and Slovak, or the Hungarian and Romanian models. While the Slovaks and Romanians have been able to carry out many aspects of social reforms, Hungary’s ruling Left has been incapable of convincing society of the need for these reforms.
The third type of conflict stems from the countries’ varying geo-political standpoints and goals. While Poland and the Czech Republic are pursuing a well-defined trans-Atlantic policy and are taking a responsible part in the EU’s evolving Russia policy toward Russia, Hungary’s Gyurcsány government sought to make a separate deal with Vladimir Putin, neglected U.S. interests, and essentially placed the country on a path that in certain respects reproduced the role Hungary used to play as a Soviet satellite.
Participants in the discussion were in full agreement that the Gyurcsány government’s foreign policy was singularly irresponsible, and the Liberals did not have the strength to intervene in the process, though in the background they continuously criticized Hungary’s foreign policy goals. The achievements of former Foreign Minister Kinga Göncz were “a catastrophe”, the participants agreed. In view of Göncz’s lack of expertise and dilettante policy-making, the Kádár-era elements of the Foreign Ministry achieved decision-making power, a development supported by Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány.