ELECTIONS-HUNGARY: Socialists Headed for Two in a Row

By Zoltán Dujisin Reprint | | Print |

Zoltán Dujisin

BUDAPEST, Apr 8 2006 (IPS) - For the first time in post-communist Hungary, a government may win re-election. Opinion polls for Sunday’s parliamentary contests indicate the MSZP (Hungarian Socialist Party) are headed for a second term in office, with 43 to 45 percent of the vote.

Since the communists first called for multi-party democratic elections in 1990, Hungary has seen conservative and socialist governments alternate in power, with the electorate showing constant dissatisfaction with the social costs of transition.

The only party in a position to challenge Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány’s rule is the national-conservative Fidesz, led by former prime minister Viktor Orbán. The party assumed power in 1998, but its defeat by the socialists in 2002 was a serious and unexpected blow to Orbán, who is now hoping for a comeback.

Fidesz is likely to win 39 to 44 percent of the vote, but even if they outbid the socialists they will have to hope the Alliance of Free Democrats (SZDSZ) won’t clear the five-percent threshold needed to enter Parliament.

Yet polls indicate the SZDSZ liberals will manage to do so, even if narrowly. The party has been an ongoing coalition partner of the MSZP, and has made sure its liberal economic beliefs are taken into account in socialist policies.

However the first round elections will probably not bring definitive results, and the Hungarian voters will have to wait for the second round on Apr. 23.

The campaign has so far been marred by dirty tricks, personal attacks and exaggerated promises from both government and the opposition. Populism is on the rise in Hungarian politics, media expert János Horvát told IPS. “Populism is a characteristic for all of Europe, but in Hungary the mass media amplified it, as 10 or 15 years ago it could not have the same impact.”

But Horvát distinguishes between the main contenders, arguing it was Orbán’s former government that took populism to a new level. “The socialists could not avoid it, and had to respond. But their promises are slightly more realistic,” he said.

With the two parties presenting similar programmes, the campaign is “less about parties and more about personalities”, with the socialists finally finding in Gyurcsány “a strong personality who can match Orbán,” Horvát said.

Gyurcsány became prime minister a year and a half ago in a bid to rejuvenate the socialists, after Péter Medgyessy, a former communist official, grew increasingly unpopular among voters.

Fidesz, on the other hand, has long relied on Orbán as its leading figure. The politician enjoys an almost cult following among a segment of supporters.

Since its foundation as a young and liberal anti-communist movement, the party has evolved into a patriotic conservative organisation, aimed at attracting voters from the centre to the extreme-right.

Orbán’s nationalist rhetoric in the past years has meant a radical distancing from left-wing and liberal voters, and a sharp division in Hungarian society. This time around the candidate’s rhetoric has cooled down, perhaps realising that the focus on nationalism is unlikely to bring in additional votes.

“During the previous elections, families and friendships broke up,” sociologist Ágnes Losonczi told IPS. “Whoever voted socialist was (portrayed as) an enemy of the nation, an agent of multinational corporations or foreign powers.”

Ever since the fall of communism, “nationalism has served as a dividing line in Hungarian politics,” Losonczi says, and much of this dates back to the “communist regime’s heavy suppression of nationalism.”

Most analysts agree the socialists, aware of voters’ nostalgia for the past, have failed to distance themselves from the previous regime, allowing the right to appropriate the national symbols.

Under János Kádár, communist leader of Hungary from 1956 to 1988, unlike in other countries of the Eastern bloc, the regime underwent a constant and gradual political and social liberalisation, beginning in the 1960s.

“A great part of the Hungarian population didn’t see Kádár’s regime as oppressive,” economist András Nagy told IPS. “This is why pro-Kádár elements remain very strong within the socialist party.”

But even the right has realised Kádárist nostalgia brings benefits, and is increasingly attacking the socialists “for not being real socialists”, while maintaining their anti-communist stance, says Nagy.

“They are in some respects more socialist than the socialists,” he adds. “Fidesz is generally against privatisation, especially in the healthcare system, which is one of the sectors in most need of serious reform.”

Much of Fidesz’s campaign has focused on reminding voters of Gyurcsány’s enrichment through shady deals during transition, and Orbán has accused the socialist government of “savage capitalism” and of increasing social inequalities.

However, Nagy points to the socialists’ 50-percent increase in public sector salaries in 2002, saying they had decreased inequalities “at the lower-middle class level,” but admits “the extremely rich remain extremely rich.”

The socialists, who have sustained four percent economic growth, insist on the importance of foreign investment, while Fidesz generally leans towards economic protectionism and reviewing suspect privatisation deals.

Some consensus remains, nevertheless, as both parties have vowed to control the growing deficit, reform the healthcare system and adopt the euro in 2010. But many worry their populist and high-spending promises are unlikely to solve Hungary’s structural problems.