How Hungarian leader Miklos Horthy tried to reclaim lands lost after World War I, fought on Hitler's side, and why evaluating his rule is still key to Hungarian politics
The rise of Miklos Horthy's regime was largely predetermined by the country's historical experience. For four centuries Hungary was only part of other states. For the first time, the Kingdom of Hungary lost its independence as a result of the Turkish conquests, and then became an integral part of the Austrian Empire. Numerous uprisings (the most serious in 1703 and 1848) were unsuccessful. Only in 1867, after the defeat from Prussia, the Austrian emperor was forced to make concessions and grant Hungary the broadest autonomy: this is how the kingdom of Austria-Hungary was formed. But nationalist sentiments in the country did not weaken, as did the desire for complete independence. The defeat of the dualistic monarchy in World War I and its subsequent disintegration marked a turning point in Hungarian history.
As a result of the war, Hungary suffered territorial losses, incomparable even with the losses of the German and Russian empires. Under the Trianon Treaty, the country lost two-thirds of its pre-war territory, and three million Hungarians ended up on the territory of other states, primarily Romania, which received Transylvania and part of Slovakia. As historian Deborah Cornelius notes, "Hungarians still have not recovered from the sense of injustice caused by the division of their kingdom." It was the Treaty of Trianon and the subsequent partition of the country that predetermined the emergence of the Horthy regime and the subsequent foreign policy of the country.
The Trianon became what the American sociologist Jeffrey Alexander called cultural trauma. That is, the future is determined by the past, which remains deeply in the memory of the community (people, ethnic or religious group). The Hungarian nation became the victims of the tragedy that occurred under the Trianon Treaty - this is how it is perceived in the country, and the international community bears responsibility for this. This is reflected in all spheres of the country's public life - from political to cultural.
It was his stay in a state of "cultural trauma" that determined the high support of the revanchist Miklos Horthy, which was greatly facilitated by his key role in the harsh suppression of the Hungarian socialist revolution of 1918-1919. Having come to power, Horthy immediately identified himself as the successor of Hungarian history. His title was not President or Prime Minister, but Regent of the Kingdom of Hungary. Continuity with the old Hungarian kingdom and the desire to restore the country's lost greatness became the main leitmotif of Horthy's domestic and foreign policy.
During the signing of the Treaty of Trianon. Photo: AFP / East News
In the state "Kingdom of Hungary" there was no monarch - he could not be elected because of the threat of war with neighboring powers. Therefore, Horthy became "regent in a kingdom without a king." Considering that the Hungarian ruler retained the title of admiral, which he received while serving in the Austro-Hungarian Navy, in the complete absence of the country's navy, the title of Horthy looked strange in the eyes of the European community, but embodied the ambitions of the new state.
Khortism as a political platform
Unlike other authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, Khortism was focused on specific tasks: the return of lost lands and the fight against communism. The upbringing of the younger generation was carried out in accordance with them. So, teaching geography in schools was carried out on maps with the pre-war borders of Hungary. Every day, students took an oath:
I believe in God!
I believe in one homeland!
I believe in eternal divine truth!
I believe in the revival of Hungary!
As the historian Laszlo Curti notes, "the loss of territories was perceived as a harbinger of the death of the nation, which could only be prevented by the revival of Great Hungary." But here a problem arose for the country's authorities: they set the task of returning territories with a predominantly Hungarian population, and a significant part of the revanchist-minded society demanded the return of all the so-called "Crown Lands", that is, the ancient Hungarian kingdom. It included all of Slovakia, parts of Serbia and Croatia, and about half of Romania. The symbolic embodiment of these aspirations was the crown of the first Hungarian king - Saint Stephen, the country's national relic. The Hungarian Catholic Church played a significant role in shaping these radical demands.
The next major problem for the country was the Jewish question. And again, there was a certain split between how Horthy saw this problem and public opinion. After the collapse of the monarchy and defeat in the war, the country was going through a severe economic crisis, the search for the "guilty" began in society, which eventually became the Jewish community. But despite generally anti-Semitic sentiments in society and numerous attempts by extreme right-wing political forces led by the Nazi Crossed Arrows party to outlaw Jews, the only serious defeat of the latter in rights was the law on proportional admission of students to universities. According to it, the Jewish minority, which constituted 6% of the country's population, could count on only 6% of places in universities, while the real share of Jewish students in some faculties was almost 50%. Khortism did not provide for ethnic cleansing or, moreover, genocide. The Regent tried to balance between various conservative political currents, clearly giving preference to moderate nationalism and appealing to the idea of returning the lost lands, which united the whole nation.
Crown of St. Stephen. Photo: ekai.pl
For the politician Horthy, the far-right pro-German forces were no less a threat than the communists, since, because of their radicalism, they threatened to drag the country into a protracted conflict in which it would not pursue any personal gain. As a pragmatist, Horthy strove to use diplomacy and refrain from using military force, given the fighting capacity and size of the Hungarian army.
Hungary and World War II
Given the situation in Europe by the end of the 1930s, Hungary had no options when choosing a side in a future conflict. Nazi Germany was a state that could help at least partially satisfy the territorial ambitions of Budapest. Moreover, due to its geographical position, Hungary found itself bordering on all sides with countries either occupied by Germany or became its allies. Under these conditions, Horthy agreed to an alliance with Berlin in exchange for Hitler's promise to return those territories where the majority of the population were Hungarians, which was formalized by the Vienna Arbitrations in 1938 and 1940. As a result, South Slovakia and a significant part of Transylvania were ceded to Hungary. After the German invasion of Yugoslavia, the Hungarian army occupied Vojvodina. Hungarian Prime Minister Pal Teleki, who signed the Treaty of Eternal Friendship with Yugoslavia in 1940, committed suicide, being unable to resist the invasion of Yugoslavia.
Hungary did not immediately enter the war with the Soviet Union - the bombing of the city of Kosice by the Soviet aviation became a formal sign. It is still not known exactly which aircraft struck. There are versions of both the Soviet bombing and the German (or Romanian) provocation. But the attack was used as a pretext to declare war on the Soviet Union, Horthy joined on June 27, 1941.
Hungarian cavalry entering Satu Mare, Transylvania, 1938. Photo: Gamma-Keystone / Getty Images / Fotobank.ru
Almost the entire Hungarian army was destroyed at Stalingrad. Horthy began to try to get out of the war and began secret negotiations with the Western powers. However, the attempt to secede from the alliance with Germany led only to the introduction of German troops into the country, followed by the genocide of Hungarian Jews and ultimately the arrest of Horthy and his replacement with the leader of the pro-German Arrow Cross, Ferenc Salasi. After the war, Hungary found itself in the sphere of interests of the USSR.
Khortism in today's Hungary
Horthy's ideas still largely determine Hungarian political and intellectual life. The period of his reign did not become a taboo topic in Hungarian society, unlike Nazism in modern Germany.
First, unlike Hitler's political program, Horthy's program is based solely on the principles of conservative nationalism. Until recently, he tried to resist the strengthening of extreme right-wing political parties, since he believed that the latter harm the national interests of the kingdom.
Secondly, before the occupation of Hungary by Nazi troops, there was no genocide in the country, which allowed Hungarian public opinion to shift the responsibility for the extermination of Jews to German National Socialism.
Third, the problem of "cultural trauma" after the First World War did not disappear after 1945 either. The success of the right-wing political parties FIDES and For a Better Hungary (Jobbik) is largely due to revanchist rhetoric, which almost literally copied the statements of politicians of the Horthy era. “Cultural trauma” is aggravated by the fact that it is not adequately covered and not reflected by the European community. “The mistake of the Hungarians was that they still failed to make the tragedy of Trianon part of the narrative of the pan-European catastrophe of the 20th century,” says the Hungarian philosopher Peter Bendek.
The Horthy era definitely cannot be considered a historical phenomenon for modern Hungary. As long as the problem of a divided nation remains relevant, the ideas of revanchism will resonate in the political preferences of the country's citizens. The vows that Hungarian schoolchildren repeated in the 1920s and 1930s are reflected in the new constitution, according to which the people of Hungary are united by God and Christianity. Contemporary intra-Hungarian discourse returns to the discussion of the problems of the Trianon over and over again. The fact that the EU countries ignore the fundamental issue for the country of granting autonomy to the so-called Trianon Hungarians, who live primarily in Transylvania and southern Slovakia, only adds to the advantages of the extreme right, such as Jobbik.
Hungarian nationalists during the opening ceremony of a bust of Miklos Horthy in Chokakyo, 2012. Photo: Bela Szandelszky / AP
The figure of Horthy, who became one of the incarnations of Hungarian nationalism, is one of the main myths of the modern Hungarian cultural space and is actively promoted by the ruling Fidesz party. According to the regent's personality, there is a split in history between the political forces advocating a renewed Hungarian nationalism and those who focus on the liberal European integration promoted by Brussels. On the side of the latter, the argument about the counterproductiveness of a policy aimed, albeit in the long term, at changing borders in Europe, and endangering relations with Europe. Right-wing forces rely on the pain of old trauma and the desire to restore historical justice.
Miklos Horthy is not just a historical figure. He is the embodiment of a dilemma that still faces Hungarian society. The path he chose to restore the greatness of his country led her to another loss of independence. The choice of the future path remains with the current generation of Hungarians.
