Northern Winds Upset Hungary’s “Illiberal Revolution”

In his most recent flamboyant sign of making a clear break with the past, Viktor Orbán, Hungary’s Prime Minister, has taken the unexpected step of moving out of the Hungarian equivalent of the White House, choosing instead a not-too-shabby castle in the historical Buda Castle District, the former place of residence for Hungary’s kings of yore. A hefty $6 million investment for the renovation of the future residence was also earmarked from the exceptional provisions reserve fund. From this future abode, Orbán will seek to steer his society through the treacherous waters of finding out how exactly an “illiberal democracy” looks like.

His critics maintain that the first steps have already been taken. Riding high on the wings of the April elections, when his party secured a crushing victory that prompted observers to declare the birth of a new European nation – Orbanistan, a divisive Orbán sought to stifle one of the last bulwarks of democracy: foreign-backed NGOs.

In a series of calculated moves dating back to May, on Sept. 9, the Hungarian police raided the offices of two such organizations, Okotars and Demnet, confiscating computers, hard disks and documents. It started with a group of NGOs that were part of the Norway Grants, an agreement between the EU and several Nordic countries, meant to strengthen civil rights groups and transparency. Allegedly, these organizations embezzled the funds and used them to secretly fund political opposition groups, more precisely the green opposition party LMP. Oslo is accused of “meddling in Hungarian politics” to the tune of $15.5 million in the past five years.

The crackdown drew parallels with Vladimir Putin’s crusade against “foreign agents,” with the opposition E-PM party accusing Orban of “Putinism” and intimidating civil organizations, which “defend what is left of Hungarian democracy.” A fuming Norwegian government quickly lashed out against Orbán as well, calling on the EU to sanction this grave attack against the bloc’s values and punish Budapest by freezing the disbursement of European funds. To Oslo’s consternation though, Brussels turned a cold shoulder and refused to get involved, issuing instead a damp squib of a communiqué, stating that the Commission will follow developments “closely” – Brussels-speak for, well, doing nothing.

As I have argued in a previous article, international aid and government-allotted grants have a long and established history of political bias. USAID has been banished from a number of Latin American countries, Azerbaijan, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia, Sudan and Venezuela have all passed laws in the past two years affecting NGOs receiving foreign funds. It is no secret for anyone that Orbán’s regime, perceived correctly as cozying up with Putin, distastefully right-wing and unabashedly nationalist, has become less trustworthy as a reliable partner.

Revelations, earlier this month in a wide-reaching New York Times feature that foreign powers buy influence at American think tanks, with Norway being one of the key donors, should raise some eyebrows. As the article states, “the line between scholarly research and lobbying can sometimes be hard to discern,” essentially arguing that funds can be also be used as a means of influencing the political agenda of a certain country. A nationalistic government would quite rightly be loth to allow such developments to proceed unchecked. This is not to say that the Hungarian NGOs are necessarily guilty of the crimes they are accused of, but that there is enough reason to suspect that Budapest’s claims might not be so graceless and may hold a modicum of validity.

Singing dirges for democracy

A lot of ink has been spilled since Orbán’s August announcement that democracy has outlived its purpose and, as a consequence, he will try to emulate the rulers of China, Singapore or Turkey by forging a new societal consensus – the so-called “illiberal democracy.” Speaking in neighboring Romania in a cozy but rundown mountain resort, Baile Tusnad, Orbán set out this vision for a more prosperous Hungary, arguing that the promises of economic growth and prosperity have not been fulfilled by Western-style liberalism. Pundits everywhere were appalled.

While indeed the crisis and malfunctioning of liberal democracies is evident for anyone reading the news, it is still unclear how it can be amended. Orbán’s speech, outlandish as it was phrased, has raised though some sensible points. Why? Because it is important to point out that democracy’s failure lies not in concept but in execution. For example, although functional on paper, the West suffers now from what Huntington called “political decay,” a phenomenon occurring when institutional developments are outmatched by social modernization. Existing institutions and international forums have been unable to address the problems associated with rising inequality and lower economic growth that have served as catalysts for a resurgence of nationalism and extremism.

Nonetheless, this is not to say that democracy is on its deathbed, because, to borrow a page from Amartya Sen, democracy remains the “default setting” with even totalitarian leaders paying tribute to it by masquerading to be democrats. Orbán’s “illiberal” speech should be read in this key, as a blunt way of questioning the status quo and proposing an alternative path to development that breaks tradition with the decayed political values proffered by the West. Unfortunately, by taking this unwarranted hard line against Europe, Orbán has managed to damage his international standing to such an extent that even if his recipe ends up proving successful (a claim hard to make at this point), it will be unusable elsewhere. Sitting atop the Castle Hill of Budapest in his new imperial residence, Orbán is increasingly looking like one.