| |
|
|||||||
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
| AHF and the Central East European Coalition (CEEC): Letter on Lukashenka | ||||||||
 01/24/11 - Central and East European (CEEC) submits letter to Secretary Clinton expressing concern over "brutal post-election crackdown by Lukashenka's (Lukashenko) regime on peaceful demonstrators, democratic activists, journalists and civil society."
The CEEC asked the Secretary to "take further, decisive and effective actions with respect to the regime of Belarusian strongman Alexander Lukashenka."
AHF, a lead member of the CEEC, is represented by it's President Frank Koszorus, Jr. who added, "One can see the ignorance, bias, political opportunism, absurdity or ill-will of those who compare democratic Hungary to the repressive regime of Lukashenka's Belarus, as we have sadly noted these past few weeks." The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton Dear Secretary Clinton: We are writing on behalf of the Central and East European Coalition (CEEC), which is comprised of 18 national ethnic organizations and represents over 20 million Americans. We wish to express our appreciation for the statements already issued, and respectfully ask you to take further, decisive and effective actions with respect to the regime of Belarusian strongman Alexander Lukashenka. As you are aware, the December 19, 2010 presidential election in Belarus was neither free nor fair. In addition, we remain deeply troubled by the brutal post-election crackdown by Lukashenka’s regime on peaceful demonstrators, democratic activists, journalists and civil society. We are concerned about the wider implications, if left unchecked, these actions may have for democracy and security in the region as a whole. Therefore, we strongly urge that the United Stated press for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners still being held in Belarusian jails as a result of the post-election crackdown. In addition, we not only concur with, but would like to underscore the recommendations set forth by prominent U.S. advocates for democracy and human rights in their January 14, 2011 open letter to you. In particular, we believe that the imposition of wider visa bans, targeted economic sanctions, reduced/waived visa fees for Belarusian citizens, support for/placement of students facing expulsion for their participation in the protests, and greater support for civil society activities will demonstrate our readiness to confront the dictatorial nature of this current regime, as well as help to safeguard the basic principles of democracy. Finally, solidarity with the EU and other European governments against Europe’s last dictator and in support of Belarusian civil society is critical. As so aptly stated in the January 14 letter, your leadership on this issue would send a powerful message about linking rhetoric with action to European foreign ministers. We appreciate your consideration of these recommendations, and would welcome the opportunity to meet with you as a Coalition to discuss this and other critically important matters. Sincerely, cc: Join and Support Us Online!
| [<< Go to all CEEC News] [Download] the AHF Statement
CEEC member organizations: American Hungarian Federation Related Articles
Letters included those from members Frank Koszorus, Jr., AHF President; Bryan Dawson, AHF Executive Chairman; and Geza Cseri, former Science and Technology Advisor to the Allied Supreme Commanders of NATO. The Post published a Letter to Editor from Geza Jeszenszky, former Ambassador to the United States and Foreign Minister. All four letters appear in that order below: Dear Editor: Based on erroneous assumptions and a casual understanding of the challenges confronting Hungarians, the editorial, "Hungary's strongest leader targets the media," [July 19], seems to equate the prevailing sentiment in Hungary in support for minority rights and the new passport law with extremism. Nothing is farther from the truth. Consequently, the editorial appears biased and falls short of the high standard The Post sets for itself. Dual citizenship is not uncommon in Europe and elsewhere. Romania, for example, grants dual citizenship to ethnic Romanians living in Moldova. Remembering the Treaty of Trianon, which transferred over three million ethnic Hungarians to foreign rule, is neither polarizing nor a concern of only the right, as the editorial also suggests. Rather it is an issue today because some of Hungary's neighbors discriminate against their Hungarian minorities. Slovakia, which adopted a language law prohibiting the use of Hungarian in public, or Romania, which refuses to re-establish a former Hungarian university, are examples. If these countries respected minority rights, Trianon would be relegated to the history books. Perhaps next time The Post will examine the facts a little more closely. Frank Koszorus, Jr. --- Dear Editor: I was confused by the editorial, "Hungary's strongest leader targets the media," [July 19]. The merits (or lack thereof) of government media controls has little or nothing to do with passports or citizenship which are matters of national identity, not nationalism. Dual-citizenship is a common practice throughout the world as is autonomy and respect for local, historic communities. Is the U.S. nationalist for allowing Americans to live abroad and keep their passports? Is the US extreme for accepting dual citizenship with Britain, France or Mexico? Is Hungary extreme for accepting dual citizenship for ethnic Slovaks living in Hungary? Slovakia accepts dual citizenship for some, but will not extend the same rights to ethnic Hungarians who have lived in their own communities for over 1,100 years. As such, it is clearly discriminatory. Unfortunately, the law to rescind Slovak citizenship for ethnic Hungarians who exercise their right to apply for Hungarian citizenship on Saturday, July 17, 2010. Is the concern for the basic human rights of an ethnic minority an extremist, extreme right-wing position? Are Catalonians extreme for wanting to speak Catalan with the postman in Catalonia? How about speaking French in Quebec? Spanish in Miami? Italian in Switzerland? Slovakia, under a truly nationalist government that include Jan Slota who called Hungarians, “the cancer of the Slovak nation,” passed a law making it illegal to converse in Hungarian with a Hungarian postman in a post office in an 1100-year old Hungarian village. For the 40 years of communist rule, it was taboo to discuss topics such as Trianon and asserting rights for ethnic minorities as to not disturb the “socialist brotherhood of nations.” Does the Post long for the brotherhood’s return? As the link you provided explained so well, any objective observer would see Trianon as a huge miscarriage of justice that continues to affect the lives of millions today. It is not a right-wing, extremist issue, it is an issue of human and minority rights that should transcend the political spectrum. The firm re-establishment of democracy in Hungary allows for a full examination of these topics, however uncomfortable for the West who bears the responsibility for creating these minorities and ethnic strife in the first place. Bryan Dawson --- Dear Sir: When it comes to the Treaty of Trianon, you are telling to the Hungarians to forget it. How can you forget that your arms and legs are cut off, and millions of your brothers are under foreign rule, because that is what happened at Trianon. The Treaty unjustly, with malice, deprived Hungary of 65% of her inhabitants and 72% of her territory, an area as large as Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio or Kentucky combined. The dismemberment also created 16 million ethnic minorities, including millions of Hungarians. This treaty totally altered the political balance of Central Europe which then led to the Balkanization of the area and created the political and economy hardships and turmoil to the country and the area. There are no extremists on this issue since practically the whole nation laments the injustice of Trianon. If there is revisionalism in Hungary, it is fueled by Slovakia, Romania, Ukraine and Serbia because of their oppressive and discriminatory policies. Slovakia, by the Benes Decrees and its language law prohibiting the use of Hungarian in public, or Romania, which refuses to re-establish a Hungarian university, or the continuous physical beatings of ethnic Hungarians by the Serbs in Voivodina are examples. I hope that in the future, The Post will be more mindful of the facts and reality. --- An unfair portrayal of Hungarian politics - 7/24/2010 The July 19 editorial "Hungary's rightward lunge" was as inaccurate as it was unfair. It also revealed a superficial understanding of Hungary and Fidesz, the party that just won a landslide victory in the parliamentary elections this spring. A few examples: In 2002, Hungary's prime minister, Viktor Orbán, did not cater to "Hungary's extreme right," as the editorial stated, but successfully opposed it and helped oust its representatives from parliament by defeating them during the elections. Although Washington did not welcome Hungary's decision to purchase fourth-generation Swedish-British Gripen fighter planes rather than used American F-16s, it did not make Mr. Orbán persona non grata and a pariah, as the editorial suggested. In March 2002, President George W. Bush telephoned Mr. Orbán and invited him to visit the United States following the elections, which looked like an almost certain victory for Mr. Orbán's Fidesz Party. As a staunch friend of the United States and an appreciative reader of The Post, I hope that the editorial policy relating to Hungary will be more balanced and factual in the future. Géza Jeszenszky, Budapest |
6/22/2010
The letters also pointed out the fact that