Southeast Europe

Perhaps the most surprising thing is the homogeneity among Hungarians in Romania. It
would be reasonable to expect differences between Hungarians residing in different
regions of Romania. According to the Research Center for Interethnic Relations
(Centrul de Cercetare a Relaţiilor Interetnice, CCRI) in Cluj, however, this is not so. A
recently completed survey (RCIR, 1998) indicates an extremely high level of
homogeneity of the Hungarian minority in different regions of Romania, a fact that the
researchers themselves had not expected.
Hungarians in Romania therefore tend to be united, with a marked awareness of being
“different” ethnically, nationally, linguistically and culturally. Another aspect of their
homogeneity is expressed in the fact that members of the minority unanimously vote for
the DAHR. During the early 1990s some political leaders attempted to imply that the
party was not the sole representative of the Hungarian minority in Romania. Upon
examination of voting statistics, it is clear that this is not true. A further example of the
unity among the minority is the case of a DAHR campaign organised to collect
signatures supporting a Draft Bill on Education in Minority Languages, in 1994. In just
two weeks almost half a million Hungarians had signed in support of the bill – the
majority of these Hungarians being registered voters in Romania (Weber, 1998:231).
Regarding national issues, especially those concerning Romania’s Hungarians, the
opinions of the Hungarians are relatively homogeneous. The support for the DAHR is
pervasive on a national level, but at the local elections in 1996, and also in 2000, we
have to mention that in compact Hungarian territories (the region where the Szeklers
live, especially Harghita and Covasna counties) the DAHR candidates generally lost
against independent Hungarian candidates. This is a proof for internal heterogeneity.
Internal cleavages are divided along regional, generational, and ideological lines (Bárdi,
1999 and Kovács, 1998). However, if Hungarians vote in national elections, they vote
for the DAHR.
2.3 Actual political and social conditions
2.3.1 Relations with the state
With regard to how the state views the Hungarian minority, it is interesting to note the
composition of the Romanian Parliament as listed in the Blue Book on Democracy
(Cartea Albastră a Democraţiei) published by the Association for Democracy (Asociaţia
Pro Democraţia) in Bucharest. All minorities in Romania are permitted one
representative in parliament, but the separate listing of Hungarians serves to underline
the fact that not only do Hungarians in Romania perceive themselves as being somehow
different from other minorities in the country, but the state recognizes this difference
also. 2 The “difference” emerges not only from their number, but also from the fact that
they are the most organised minority in Romania, even with a political voice within the
former ruling coalition. The proximity of Hungary is another factor to be considered.
There has been suspicion levelled at the Hungarian minority. Since 1989 various
Romanian governments have questioned the loyalty to the state of members of the
Hungarian minority, and of the DAHR in particular. Some political parties have
suggested that all members of the Hungarian minority employed in the Romanian State
structures should take an “oath of loyalty” to the Romanian State. As Andreescu wrote
(Romania, Shadow Report: January 2000) “many political leaders, governmental
2
This difference is due to the electoral law. If not running as a party, the DAHR would have obtained one
seat in the Chamber of Deputies
29