Toward a New Central Europe

PRONOUNCEMENTS ON FEDERALISM IN THE DANUBIAN AND CENTRAL EUROPEAN AREA

The Mid-European Research Institute

Professor C. A. Macartney says in his "The Danubian Basin" (Oxford, 1939) about the "Future Possibilities" (last chapter): "For ultimately-the only true solution lies in a readjustment of the relationship between nationality and State... If the Danubian nations have much that divide them, they have also much in common. A settled and united Danube, not directed against any outside Power nor the puppet of any, would be infinitely more satisfactory to all Europe, including Germany herself, then either the position of today (1939) or that of ten years ago" (p. 30-32).

The American Peace Delegation of 1919 was originally inclined toward federalism. What Really Happened at Paris. The Story of the Peace Conference, 1918-1919 is the account of the American delegates edited by Col. E. M. House and Charles Seymour (N. Y. Scribner, 1921). Charles Seymour, Yale University professor, chief of the AustroHungarian Division of the American Peace Commission, wrote "The United States and Great Britain would have been glad to create a federation of the Danubian nationalities which, without the vices that had led to the fall of the Habsburgs, might have accomplished the economic integration and preserved the political order, so essential of the tranquillity and prosperity of Southeastern Europe... The Conference lacked the right, as well as the power, to impose union upon them."

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on regional federations and on a Danubian Federation.

In the summer of 1941, after Poland, the Baltic, Danubian and Balkan small "national states" fell victim, one following the other to

276

aggressive Germany and Russia, President Roosevelt received Otto von Habsburg in Hyde Park to whom he disclosed some of his ideas concerning the reorganization of the world on a regional, federalist pattern (a fuller text in French, published in "Federation" (Paris) Aug.-Sept. 1951, pp. 443453.):

"The President studied the conditions of a world composed of viable units with America could trade. To arrive at such a world, he thought of creating semieconomic, semi-political units. These would be the Western Hemisphere, the British Commonwealth, Europe, the USSR, the Middle East, Southeast Asia. Within these spheres custom duties and internal commercial barriers should be abolished, such basic units created which are large enough to give cohesion to the whole, and finally to organize political councils which would harmonize international relations... The President wanted to base these units on regional federation-Danubian Federation, Balkan Federation, German Federation-and on the other States, which like France and Spain form a real unit by themselves, to create a common and Supreme Council."

Karl Renner, President of the Austrian Republic, advocated as early as 1906 "eine demokratische Schweiz im grossen," a transformation of Austria-Hungary into a Switzerland on a large scale in his "Grundlagen und Entwicklungsziele der Oest. Ung. Monarchie (Wien. 1906, p. 248). Some of his "zweidimensionale Foderation" (Federation with two dimensions) is still useful because he distinguished between the territorial federal structure and the national cultural sphere (Nationsuniversitaet) which latter should be organized on personalindividual, not territorial basis.

In the July 1948 issue of the American quarterly "Foreign Affairs" Karl Renner explained in an article entitled "Austria, Key for War and Peace" the double mistake of the Paris peace conferences in creating small-scale "national states"; "The other possible course" says Renner, "for the Peace Conference of 1919 would have been to decide that this well-balanced economic territory with the unified system of money and credit and communications should remain an entity... components not enjoying complete sovereignty would have the highest possible measure of national autonomy within a federal constitution."

The Polish minister-president Sikorsky presented the federal plan of the London Danubian Club to President Franklin D. Roosevelt early in 1943 and Sikorsky sent the following information to emigrant organizations (Sikorsky's letter dated March 9, 1943):

"Concerning the Central-European Federation, the Government of the United States of America is of the opinion that the Russian government should be informed of these current plans. No action should be concealed from Moscow."

Somewhat later, on June 1,1943 the Hungarian emigrant politician

277

Tibor Eckhardt sent the following message from America to the underground leaders at home:

"Roosevelt is in favor of a Central European Federation. Churchill considers a larger common Danubian-Balkan Federation which necessarily means a looser construction... Stalin is opposed to federation of any kind."

Count Pal Teleki, Hungarian prime minister, in his last days became convinced that nothing short of a Danubian Federation could save the small nations for South Eastern Europe. His last message to his American friends is printed in the volume of Cornish, Louis C.: "Transylvania. The Land Beyond the Forest", Philadelphia. 1947, pp. 166-168, and how it was transmitted to America is told in this source as follows:

"Count Paul Teleki, Hungarian Prime Minister had been working on plans for Danubian Federation, and the night that was to end all his hopes was falling. In those dark days of 1941 he was under the espionage of the German Gestapo, there were a thousand of their agents in Budapest known to the Hungarian police, yet he managed to receive an intimate friend very late at night, and through him he sent the following information to his friends in the United States. (Footnote: So far the author can learn it has not been published before.)

"He foresaw clearly the complete defeat of Nazi Germany, and the European chaos that would result from the war. He believed that no future was conceivable for any of the minor nations in Eastern and Central Europe if they tried to continue to live their isolated national lives. He asked his friends in America to help them establish a federal system, to federate. This alone could secure for them the two major assets of national life: first, political and military security, and, second, economic prosperity. Hungary, he emphasized, stood ready to join in such collaboration, provided it was firmly based on the complete equality of all the members states."

"To the question, which nations should usefully federate, he gave two answers. A minimum federation would considerably improve conditions. It would be within the strategic triangle of Europe formed by Budapest, Vienna and Prague. It would combine those nations living in the Carpathian Basin formed by the Carpathian and Sudeten mountains and the Alps. It is a dire mistake, he held, to believe that the peace of Europe can be defended on the Rhine. The Danube, not the Rhine, is the European river. Only by solving the Danubian problem can the peace of Europe be established."

"Desirable as Teleki believed this minimum union to be, he favored a larger federation. Besides the nations just mentioned (Hungary including Transylvania, Austria, Czechoslovakia), he believed all the Balkan nations could be wisely joined. He did not fear lowering the Danubian higher price level, social standards, etc., by allowing

278

unhampered Balkan competition. He pointed out that the Balkan peoples-Yugoslavs, Romanians, Bulgarians, have made great and rapid progress since their comparatively recent liberation from Turkish domination. They have developed an intelligent and progressive middle class, intensified their agricultural production, and started successful industrialization. While elimination of all tariff barriers within the proposed federation, Teleki agreed, would involve readjustments and temporary losses, these would be soon compensated by free access to raw materials. and a far larger market."

"The greatest, the most important advantage to the member states is the larger federation, in Teleki's view, would be their greater security. They would then enjoy in Europe a standing equal with the great powers and they could successfully resist undesirable interferences and intrigues from outside, which in the past have made life intolerable throughout this whole Danubian region. The young nations would be free to develop their energies and talents. The region would show the quickest development in all Europe."

"This is important testimony"-concludes Mr. Cornish his ac count on Teleki's last political message to his American friends. Later, on p. 185 Mr. Cornish repeats it: "Count Teleki wanted federation. Dorothy Thompson, in 1941 supports the statement of others." "I took from Count Teleki's office a monograph which he had written upon the structure of European nations. A distinguished geographer, he was developing a plan for regional federation, based upon geographical and economic realities." úJohn Pelenyi, minister of Hungary in Washington between 1933 and 1940 published in the Journal of Modern History (Chicago, June 1964) Prime Minister Teleki's last messages to him:

"Teleki directed me: Tell the American government that with war approaching all the small states in this part of the world must a look for shelter, and the only way to obtain it is to join in some form of federation. Tell them that Hungary is willing and ready to form and join such a federation with her neighbors." When I asked whether he meant a federation with all of Hungary's neighbors, he replied: "Yes, Hungary is ready to join a federation with all her neighbors."

"Upon my return to Washington I found in the Department of State only a faint academic interest in these messages" says Mr. Pelenyi in his recollections deposited at the Baker Library of Dart mouth College, Hannover (New Hampshire).

Pal Teleki had the intention of leaving Hungary and forming a government in exile in order to work for a new Central Europe on a federal basis. Mr. Pelenyi testifies that "In August 1939 during my last leave of absence in Budapest Teleki told me, The memorandum (in which Pelenyi advocated forming a Hungarian government in exile) has my closest attention and if the situation envisaged should

279

arise, I myself will dash abroad, provided that I can still get to a plane."

Students of diplomatic history may discuss the problem of what would have happened if Teleki-instead of committing suicide in his crucial dilemma-had left Hungary for London and Washington in order to work with representatives of other East European nations for a Danubian federal union, accepted by the Allied Powers and presented to Stalin as a precondition to Lend-lease aid. The tragic consequences of the years after World War II could have been avoided. Instead of an Iron Curtain and other antagonisms, the Danubian nations would now enjoy peaceful federalism and economic prosperity.

Mr. Royall Tyler, an internationally known scholar and financial expert, who represented the Financial Committee of the League of Nations in Hungary during the years between the two world wars, made some inquiries in Budapest, whether a trend exists towards political federation. At that time ( 1940) false hopes blinded public opinion so much, that he regretfully reported in his memorandum, which he handed over to Mr. Moffatt, chief of the Division of European Affairs in the State Department on March 11, 1940: "Plans for a future federative state of the Danubian region are looked at askance by Hungarians... They feel they have given proof of their own will to be independent."

History of recent decades has proved sufficiently that real independence of any state in the Danubian area is not possible except within a free federation. See further documents of the negotiations of Mr. Royall Tyler in Switzerland with representatives of the Hungarian government towards the end of World War II in The Hungarian Quarterly (New York, 1962. No. 1-2, pp.5-16).

Dr. Stephen Kertesz, expert in international law, secretary of the Hungarian Peace Delegation in Paris, 1947, later Minister to Rome and at present professor at the University of Notre Dame, Indiana, proposed the following principles in one of his lectures: "The Danube Valley calls for its own organization, which can be built securely only on voluntary collaboration of its independent but complementary national units. Lasting peace in the Danube Valley can only be brought about by a system providing for a common defense of the area, strong enough to repel any outside interference, and constituting an effective barrier against Germany's and Russia's imperialistic ambitions. At the same time, economic prosperity can only be attained by eliminating the artificial barriers erected against the free flow of trade among the complementary national units of the Danubian area.

To insure the security, friendly collaboration, and economic prosperity of all Danubian peoples, bound indissolubly by a common destiny to each other, the following are necessary.

280

a.) To organize a Danubian Federation or at least a Danubian Economic Union. Such federation, or union, would be able to protect and promote the welfare of the Danubian peoples, who will no longer be a burden on the Western World.

b.) Within the Danubian federation the boundaries must lose their importance, and should have rather an administrative character. Intercourse and communication must be entirely free.

c.) Nevertheless, to eliminate all possible national frictions, the State boundaries should be drawn according to the wishes of the population concerned, in conformity with the principles of President Wilson and of the Atlantic Charter.

d.) Within the member states of the Danubian Federation a large autonomy should prevail to assure a complete freedom and equality for the so called island minorities. The cantonal system of Switzerland could be taken as an example in this respect.

e.) Apart from the indispensable limitations, imposed by Danubian cooperation, every state must be independent and free to choose its form of democratic government. A totalitarian or antidemocratic system of government, for obvious reasons, cannot be tolerated within the Danubian federation.

f.) A truly international control of the Danube and internationalization of all rivers and canals in the Danubian Valley is considered as indispensable.

g.) The highest organ of the Federation (Union) could be a Council of Danubian States, composed of one representative for each member State.

h.) A Permanent Committee for Economics Affairs has for its principal purpose to work out plans for the promotion of the economic and social welfare of the Danubian peoples, that is, plans for common utilization of natural resources, for developing the agriculture and industries, and particularly for improving the water system of the Danube Basin, and developing irrigation, having in view the improvement brought about in the Tennessee Valley, etc.

i.) An Inter-Danubian Cultural Committee should revise all textbooks used in the schools of the Danubian countries with the aim of advising the governments in eliminating from the teaching all inaccurate facts and tendencies detrimental to the true friendship and cooperation of the Danubian nations. This committee should further the spread of ideas of common interest and interdependence of the Danubian peoples, with the aim of promoting friendly relations and mutual understanding. A system of educational, scientific, and cultural exchange will also be enacted.

j.) Besides the necessary executive organs, a Danubian Supreme Court will be erected to settle all differences among the Danubian States.

281

k.) A general system of European collaboration would promote the success of a Danubian Federation. The basis of a new European system could be the regional federations or unions. The integration of these regional entities into a continental organization would be the guarantor of a lasting peace, terminating a long period of senseless wars.

The Danubian Federation accepts the obligation for human rights and fundamental freedoms assumed both in the United Nations Charter and in any further Conventions recommended by the United Nations for the implementation of these primary obligations.

Brutus Coste, former Rumanian diplomat published an article in "Public Opinion Quarterly" 1951 Winter issue (Princeton University) in which he says among others:

"What they ( the Eastern European nations ) need, are some lessons on the practical working of a true democracy. The discussion of such problems as that of the reorganization of these nations on a democratic basis; the working of national and local government in the United States..." The task of furthering regional and European solidarity. "There is today an inarticulate awareness that purely national solutions cannot protect Eastern Europe against the recurrence of the tragedy which has been its lot not only in the past of its history. This awareness has to be fostered and made more articulate. Any effort in this direction would bring benefits not only after liberation but would also make for synchronized action when the time for action comes, since it would make people conscious of the strength for over 80 million people who are morally united"... "the necessity of building a powerful federation that would assure them a long period of peace in which to develop cultural and economic potentialities; talks on the advantages of joining a European federation when and if such federations should take shape. Such talks would have to stress that an Eastern European federation will be established even if Western Europe has not merged by the time. The new approach in the teaching of history can greatly assist such efforts, as would reports on any plans of federation worked out, in common, by exiles from these lands."

Feb. 11, 1951 an important Declaration of Liberation was accepted, signed and solemnly promulgated in Independence Hall, Philadelphia. This "Declaration of the Aims and Principles of Liberation of the Central and East European Peoples" set forth the fundamental Bill of Rights of the peoples concerned and contains the following statements about their federalization:

"The reconstruction of Eastern Europe involves problems of a political, economic and social order beyond the capabilities and powers of nations to resolve separately; the dangers to which they remain exposed have prepared them to seek salvation through union. This tendency toward close international collaboration is in harmony with

282

the present order of events: the federal principle, signifying union in liberty and implying the creation of organic ties, is the most appropriate and sure means of uniting the states; the peoples of the East are resolved to apply this principle to the regional organization which they envisage; these same peoples proclaim their right and their desire to take part in a United Europe on a federal basis, which they regard as the realization of all their prayers, and in spirit these continental and regional unions signify further steps along the road to the indispensable organization of the free world as a whole."

"The peoples of Central and Eastern Europe are eager to take their natural place in the great movement of free peoples toward better relationship and closer union. They are desirous of establishing among themselves strong ties of a federal character and of joining in the formation of a United Europe. Such a fraternal federation must prize and respect the distinctive values of each nation for the common good of our European civilization and for the cultural heritage of mankind throughout the world."

Signed by: Dimitar Matzankiev, member of the Bulgarian National Council, former member of Parliament; Gen. Alexander Todorov; Luben Vichegorov, Metropolitan Opera singer, and Kiril Z. Fournadjiev, fellow of the Mid-European Studies Center.

Dr. Stefan Osusky, former Ambassador to Paris; Vaclav Majer, Dr. Josef Cerny, Dr. Jozef Lettrich and Dr. Hubert Ripka, all former Cabinet members, and Dr. Jan Papanek, former Ambassador and chief delegate to the United Nations.

Ferenc Nagy, former premier; Tibor Eckhardt, former chairman of the Smallholders Party; Zoltan Pfeiffer, chairman Hungarian Freedom Party; Charles Peyer, chairman, Social Democratic Party; Dr. Bela Fabian, former member of Parliament; Msgr. Joseph - Kozi Horvath, chairman, Christian Democratic movement; and George BakacsBessenyey, member, Hungarian National Council.

Gen. Nicolae Radescu, former Premier; Constantin Visoianu, former minister for foreign affairs; Charles A. Davila, former Rumanian minister to Washington; Emil Ghilezan, former Under-Secretary of State; Brutus Coste, former Charge d'Affaires in Washington, and Dr. Augustin Popa, former member of Parliament.

Dr. Vladko Macek, former vice-premier and chairman of the Croatian Peasant party; Dr. Milan Gavrilovic, former ambassador to Moscow, Constantin Fotic, former Ambassador to Washington; Dr. Miha Krek, former Vice-Premier; Ivan Mestrovic, sculptor; Dr. Slobowan Drashkovic, member of the Serbian National Central Committee, and Dr. Bogdan Radica, history professor, writer, and others.

"Constitutional Resolution of the Central-Eastern European Committee" adopted on April 16, 1951 in Washington, DC, USA: ". . .Whereas the mutual understanding among the nations of Central

283

Eastern Europe is an indispensable requirement for the establishment of a system of international unity, democratic process of government, religious and individual freedom and social justice-

Be it resolved by the undersigned democratic representatives of the main popular political movements of the nations of CentralEastern Europe-

That the Central-Eastern European Committee for planning an organized cooperation be constituted-

That the Committee lay the foundations for the unification of the nations of Central-Eastern Europe into a regional union as soon as this harmonious co-existence of nations, will be possible and contributing thus to the unity of Europe-

That for the attainment of this aim, the Committee shall institute expert studies and research concerned with the international and national as well as legal, political, economic, social and cultural aspects of the problems connected with the creation of a Central-Eastern European Federation.'...

Signed by George Assan, Constantine Visoianu, Augustin Popa and Iancu Zissu (Rumanians), Istvan Barankovics and Ferenc Nagy (Hungarians), Josef Cerny (Czech), Vladko Macek (Croat) and Miha Krek (Slovene), Milan Gavrilovic (Serbian), George M. Dimitrov (Bulgarian), Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, Karol Popiel, Marian Seyda (Poles), Adolfs Blodnieks (Latvian), Kazys Pakstas (Lithuanian), Vaclovas Sidzikauskas (Lithuanian) .

Full text of the resolution was published in the "Monthly Bulletin of the International Peasant Union" May, 1951, Washington, DC

284

Toward a New Central Europe