European Security: Hungarian Interpretations, Perceptions and Foreign Policy

  • László J. Kiss


In Hungary, debate on the forms and substance of European security; on questions of alliance; on international security; and on the distinctions between ‘common’, ‘mutual’, ‘equal’, and ‘cooperative’ security, is effectively non-existent, whilst alternative notions such as non-offensive defence have yet to acquire real intellectual currency. Nor is there public discussion by the various social or political groups of alternative security policies. It is nonetheless possible to piece together a specifically Hungarian approach to European security, and to security in general, from the history of Hungary’s relation to Europe, from the shifting perception revealed by opinion polls of the image of the adversary, and not least from Hungarian foreign policy itself, in which considerations of security are paramount. Clearly, the homogenising effect of systems of alliance is felt predominantly in the military sphere. The specificity of the Hungarian approach to European security is thus best sought in the non-military sphere.


Foreign Policy Security Policy International Security North Atlantic Treaty Organisation European Security 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 1.
    See Zsigmond Pál Pach, A nemzettudatról napjainkban (On National Identity Today), Társadalmi Szemle (January 1986) 28;Google Scholar
  2. Elemér Hankiss, A megkésett ipari forradalom kényszerpálydja (Pressures of a Bélated Industrial Revolution), in Elemér Hankiss, Diagnózisok 2 (Diagnoses II) (Budapest: Magvetó, 1986) 360–4;Google Scholar
  3. Iván T. Berend, Felzárkozás vagy lemaradás (Catching up or Lagging Behind), in Iván T. Berend, Szocializmus és reform (Socialism and Reform) (Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1986). 140;Google Scholar
  4. Péter Hanák, Gab és eine mitteleuro-päische Identität in der Geschichte?, Europäische Rundschau, no. 3 (1986)115–25.Google Scholar
  5. 2.
    Gyula Horn, Társadalmi-politikai tendenciák Európában és hatásuk a nemzetközi kapcsolatokra (Socio-Political Trends in Europe and Their Impact on International Relations), Külpolitika, no. 3 (1984) 34. As early as 1984 the author made the point that the duel of the two opposing social systems was impossible to decide by weapons and hence the concept of ‘just war’ stopped being meaningful.Google Scholar
  6. 4.
    See Jenó Szücs Európa három történeti régiójá-ról (On the Three Historical Regions of Europe), Történelmi Szemle, no. 3 (1981) 313–60.Google Scholar
  7. 5.
    Ivan T. Berend, Kitörési pontok. Dilemmák a gazdaságról (Points of Sally. Dilemmas about the Economy), Magyar Nemzet, 24 December 1984.Google Scholar
  8. 6.
    See Mihály Simai, Az európai béke ötödik évtizede (The Fifth Decade of Peace in Europe), Valóság, no. 12 (1985) p. 7.Google Scholar
  9. 7.
    See T. Csaba Szanki, Gondolatok a kelet-nyugati kulturális kapcsolatokról (Reflections about East-West Cultural Relations), Külpolitika, no. 2 (1986) p. 19;Google Scholar
  10. Béla Köpeczi, Magyarország és Európa a kulturólis együttmüködés folyamatában (Hungary and Europe in the Process of Cultural Cooperation), Külpolitika, no. 3 (1984) p. 62;Google Scholar
  11. József Bényi, Európa és a Kulturális Fórum (Europe and the Cultural Forum), Külpolitika, no. 2 (1986) p. 3.Google Scholar
  12. 8.
    See Iván Vitányi, Az ‘Európa-paradigma’ (The ‘Europe Paradigm’) (Budapest: Magvetó, 1986) 83;Google Scholar
  13. Kálmán Kulcsár, A modernizdció és a magyar társadalom (Modernization and Hungarian Society) (Budapest: Magvetó, 1986).Google Scholar
  14. 9.
    See Guy Lázár, Foreign Policy Information and Peace, in Studies on Peace Research, Centre for Peace Research Coordination of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (Budapest, 1986) 223–4.Google Scholar
  15. 10.
    See Peter Bender, Das Ende des ideologischen Zeitalters. Die Europäi-sierung Europas (Berlin: Siedler, 1981) 114.Google Scholar
  16. 12.
    See Tibor Palánkai, A gazdasági háboru néhány kérdése (Some Questions of the Economic War), Külpolitika, no. 1 (1985) 59–81;Google Scholar
  17. Béla Kádár, Gazdasági-müszaki fejlódés és stratégiai gondolkodás (Economic-Technological Development and Strategic Thinking), Külpolitika, no. 4 (1981) 36–65.Google Scholar
  18. 14.
    See András-Nötzold Inotai and Klaus Jurgen-Schröder, Szakaszhatár vagy fordulópont a keletnyugati gazdasági kapcsolatainkban? (End of Stage or Turning Point in Our East-West Economic Relations?), Külpolitika, no. 2 (1987) 34–65.Google Scholar
  19. 15.
    József Balázs, A biztonság értelmezéséról (On the Perception of Security), Külpolitika, no. 5 (1983) 7–8.Google Scholar
  20. 16.
    Janos Berecz, A nemzetkozi biztonság kérdései napjainkban (Questions of International Security Today), Külpolitika, no. 1 (1982) 13.Google Scholar
  21. 19.
    Gyula Horn, Enyhülés és konfrontáció a kelet-nyugati kapcsolatokban (Détente and Confrontation in East-West Relations), Külpolitika, no. 1 (1986) 8.Google Scholar
  22. 20.
    See Mátyás Szürös, A magyar külpolitika a nyolcvanas évek közepén (Hungarian Foreign Policy in the Mid-1980s), Külpolitika, no. 4 (1985) 10;Google Scholar
  23. Gyula Horn, A békés együttélés uj dimenziói (New Dimensions of Peaceful Coexistence), Külpolitika, no. 1 (1987) 12.Google Scholar
  24. 21.
    Mátyás Szürös, Interaction of National and International Interests in Hungarian Foreign Policy, in Studies on Peace Research, Centre for Peace Research Coordination of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (1986) 10.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Centre for Peace and Conflict Research 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • László J. Kiss

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations