Dae Soon Kim on Árpád Göncz

Dae Soon Kim on Árpád Göncz, Hungary’s First Post-Communist President

Dae Soon Kim submitted his PhD Thesis entitled „A Political Biography of Hungary’s First Post-Communist President, Árpád Göncz”  to the Department of Central and East European Studies of the University of Glasgow in January 2011. The following pages are excerpts from this Thesis. (Abstract and pages 201-222.)

Hungary's political transformation of 1989 has been generally regarded as a peaceful revolution negotiated between the ruling Communists and the opposition. During the National Roundtable Negotiations, the fundamental framework of governance - including the amendment of the Constitution - was decided by members of Hungary's political elite. Hungary's mode of transition to democracy was an elite-led transformation and this was distinct from Czechoslovakia and Poland where the interests of society had been represented - to a large degree - by the likes of Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa. In view of this, some critics argued that compared to Poland and Czechoslovakia, Hungary had no equivalent high-profile figure who could break with the Communist past and claim the ideas of a new democracy.

Hungary, however, had its own figure with democratic credentials. Árpád Göncz, who came to prominence during the inter-war period has been one time or another, a student resistance leader during Nazi occupation in Hungary, a steelworker, an agriculturalist, a literary translator and, he subsequently became the first post-Communist President of Hungary.

He experienced the major events of Hungarian history first hand, including the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. During this pivotal time, Göncz undertook a significant role in the resistance that followed the suppression of the Revolution; he was sentenced to life imprisonment as a result. His democratic activities were widely acknowledged by political elites and the general public alike. This, in turn, contributed to his election to the Presidency.

Significantly, however, much of the existing literature on Hungary's post-Soviet political development has not attached a high degree of importance to Göncz's role in Hungarian history or his political achievements. At present, there are no biographies of Göncz either in English or Hungarian. Dae Soon Kim’s PhD Thesis is the first English language scholarly biography, and it addresses a gap in the literature. This expansive account of Göncz's life is situated within a framework of the wider historical, political and social concerns of his generation.

It is argued that as a whole, Göncz made important contributions to the development of Hungarian democracy. Though not born into a political family and constrained by external forces beyond his control, Göncz attempted to address some of the key social and political problems of the age. It is also argued that the decade of Göncz's Presidency was crucial for the shaping of the basic institutional tenets of governance in post-Soviet Hungary. Despite his lack of experience of governance, Göncz created a template for the role of President and significantly affected the demarcation of powers between president and government in the ever-evolving context of the process of political transformation.

Göncz was the first post-Communist President. There was no established constitutional rule regarding the President’s role.There was a general rule in the Constitution but it was not clarified regarding the extent of the President’s powers. The Constitutional Court decided that „the President is not responsible for his action, so he cannot make a ’real’ decision.” The concept of a passive Presidency, a „comparatively weak presidential model” was born. There is a strong government but no dual executive. The President is not part of the Executive. The President is a symbolic figurehead. After the  clarification, Göncz said: „it is all right, I understood my role. ” and moved within his constitutional boundaries. In an interview, Göncz states that „The Constitutional Court narrowed down the scope of my jurisdiction .. I was allowed to make my decision with the counter-signatures of Ministers … With the passage of time, it became clear to me that the President has no power but only a voice [szó]…” In another interview, in response to a reporter’s question Göncz said „In my opinion, the President has no power.”  It is clear that the country’s lack of democratic experience remained as a question in Göncz’s political consciousness.

In the new democracies [in Central and East Europe] … nothing was settled: neither the powers of offices within the regime, nor the relationship among them --- especially among the major offices and institutions of president, parliament, and prime minister… Göncz, who had identified and located his own role and position within the new democratic constitutional order, became less involved in political frictions. „This is a weak Presidency” – Göncz agreed to a journalist’s question.

After having completed the initiation period that Hungary’s transitional democracy had to face, Göncz – along with other political players – gradually became familiar with their roles, functions and limitations of power which, in turn, contributed to the establishing patterns of political practice and behaviour. Göncz also pointed to the ”newness” issue as a fundamental question that Hungary’s nascent democracy had to address at the time.

Göncz stressed how significant the first four years [1990-1994] of the post-Communist democratic experience were: „Previously, Hungary was not a Republic, so there was no tradition of the Presidency and no example of the President’s role or what power the President possessed”.  It is fair to suggest that the first transitional period of post-Communist democracy carried an importance, as it would pave the way for establishing a fundamental framework and blue-print for the next generation of political elites to follow. By the end of the Antall government (1990-1993), politicians eventually learned by experience and understood the scope of manoeuvre available to them…. It became clear that the only effective instrument of power that remained available to the President was his voice.

It appears from Göncz’s statements that he wished to suggest that the life course he chose was forged as a result of the external pressure he experienced and the circumstances which surrounded him, as he merely drifted into the situation he now occupies. Perhaps, to some extent, this was true as Göncz’s life has been marked by the many twists and turns of his career. By his mid thirties, he had already experienced the life of a student in the resistance movement, a junior politician, a steelworker, an agriculturalist, and a1956 revolutionary. For this varied career, the social and political circumstances such as the oubreak of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution were certainly an important factor which influenced his subsequent life course (imprisonment and the pursuit of a literary career thereafter).

The important decision that Göncz made, however, were neither coincidental nor simply a result of a nebulous external pressure. As an intellectual, he had his own principles and beliefs and there was always room for Göncz to make his own decisons. It is apparent that he strove after his ideals throughout his life. The practical application of these ideals resulted in his attempts to address different social issues of the age. Göncz sought to realize his ideals by finding and applying himself to, specific roles in the key social and political movements.

Göncz’s political ideals did not originate in the traditions of his family. The genesis of Göncz’s political beliefs was in the circle, the clubs and the social movement in which he participated, and his first hand experiences of the struggle against the autocratic rule of the age. The first important activity in which he was engaged, and which had a crucial impact on his social and political outlook was his scouting experience.

Born in Budapest, Göncz had not had an opportunity to observe the situation of rural society and discover the living conditions and social milieu in which the vast majority of Hungarian population (landless peasants) lived during the inter-war period. Göncz’s scouting experience in rural areas, and more importantly, his access to the literature of populist writers had a crucial impact on him. The peasant populist literature Göncz accessed suggested that the structure of Hungarian society was largely semi-feudal in character and the rural areas particularly fell outside the scope of modernization. The peasants had no land to cultivate and no access to credit and social benefits. ’The land of three million beggars’ was well representative of the unbearable living conditions of the pauperized peasantry and the indifference of the ruling elite towards the issue. Göncz realized that there was a moral imperative for a radical social change and land reform to resolve pressing social need. The impact of the ideas of peasant populism on Göncz’s political views remained enduringly significant, leading him to pursue peasant populist ideas threafter.

The origin of Göncz’s liberal values goes back to the circles, clubs and the social movement in which he participated. His first-hand experiences of the struggle against Nazism during the inter-war period and the Hungarian variant of Communism led to Göncz’s resistance to these extreme forms of political ideology, and contributed to the shaping of his liberal political beliefs. Göncz’s conception of liberal values was universal; his desire to pursue liberal values in the resistance activities remained of utmost significance, while his earlier political preference for the ideas of peasant populism receded into the background. In turn, the process of the shift in his political orientation towards liberal values was visible.

By the late 1980’s, Göncz was able to draw his own conclusion that, for him, peasant populism had lost its contemporary relevance, although his emotional attachment to its ideals remained in his political beliefs. Instead, Göncz’s preference for liberal values over peasant populism became more marked. According to Göncz, liberal democracy refered to an institutional system in which different political visions and varied values could co-exist.

At the core of his conception of democracy, pluralism based on mutual understanding and tolerance of varied values appreciated by members of society was thus deeply entrenched  within it. It is apparent that populist-liberal elements were entrenched in Göncz’s political beliefs, and his desire to pursue its ideals was expressed through his actions.

In practice, this means that the co-existance of populist-liberal values gave rise to an image of Göncz the image of him not as the figure who represented the narrow interests of a party or its porgramme but who might act as a mediator between the two oppositional camps. Göncz was a person who had a link to the populist and liberal camp. He had the link to the sub-culture of the populist intellectuals and that of the liberal intellectuals  This perceived image was one of the most important contributory factors that led to his election as President of the Republic.