Organization: UAKOM SAV Banska Bystrica, CSFR
Priority:     normal
X-Mailer:     Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R4).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.slovak-l
Date:         Tue, 10 Nov 1992 07:53:22 MET
From:         KUBASKA@UAKOM.CS
Subject:      Re: Slovakia's Hydro-energy Potentials

> Date:          Mon, 9 Nov 1992 09:57:06 PST
> From:          Joe Pannon <pannon@bcsfse.boeing.com>

Dear John,
I hope you would not mind some of my next comments.
First of all I think you missed the point I had in mind. All the
issues I stated are understood by lot of Slovaks as Hungarian's
effort to annect southern Slovakia when the situation will be
appropriare for such action. I can not help myself but all those
issues I wrote about, are meant to create the kind of situation when
hungarian interference into slovak internal affairs will be excused.
Now to some point:

> >   1 In the treaty about Gabcikovo dam system the Hungary recognized
> >     the borders set up by trianon treaty. It was the first and only
> >     time they do it.
>
> Yes, and the Trianon treaty defined the borders as the MAIN SHIPPING
> CHANNEL in the Danube.  By diverting the main shipping channel into
> Slovakia, that treaty is unilaterally violated.

Don't forget that the treaty about G says that borders remains into
original Main shipping channel and not in the new one. This is the
place where Hungary indirectly recognized the borders. There is no
other document where Hungary recognizes it's borders with Slovakia.
The treaty about Gabcikovo is still valid.


> >   2. PM Antal cals himself to be "the prime minister of all magyars
> >      regardless the country they live in".
>
> Most Hungarians understood that statement to be symbolic; an expression
> that finally there will be a government in Budapest that will no longer
> keep quiet when the human and ethnic rights of fellow Hungarians are
> violated in the successor states.  This is in marked difference from the
> previous communist governments in Hungary.
> No Hungarian in his right mind understood that Antall statement
> literally.
  For most of Slovaks that statement has to be taken literally.
Because of precedences in the past. May be Horthy also wished not to
be quiet when the human and ethnic rights of fellow Hungarians were
"violated". Don't you think that there are existing multilateral
europian institutions to judge any violation of human rights? If Mr.
Antall knows about any violation of human rights in Slovakia he would
better inform such institution instead of claiming to be prime
minister of slovak citizens.

>
> >   3. The defence minister said that he will defend all magyars in
> >      surrounding countries.
>
> I am not sure of what exactly he said,
  So do I and because of this I'm taking this back. Sorry.
>
> >   4. Another hungarian offitials speak about "calm changes of the
> >      borders"
>
> As you know, the Helsinki Accords do not prohibit peaceful changes in
> borders, only those made by war.  The official policy of Hungarian
> government however does not advocate even peaceful changes.  So what
> difference does it make if some officials (and I don't even know what
> officials?) speak about anything.  Talk is cheap, and besides, it's a
> free country.  I am sure there are some Slovaks who also talk about
> things that contradict official policy there.  So what?

  Yes some Slovaks have different oppinions. But not those Slovaks
that  took part in Slovak goverment and those bound by responsibility.
In some of my previous posting I put down the name of official who
told it. I don't remember it, but I'm sure the contribution is
avaiable on the listserv.

> >   5. Mr. Duray (boss of Egyutelles- magyar party in S) speaks about
> >      ethnic supression everywhere he goes.
>
> The boss???  I thought he was elected into his position.  Can we call
> Mr. Meciar a boss, too?

  Sorry. You can call Mr. Meciar boss. I have no obligation. This is
just a play upon the words.

> What's wrong talking about the ethnic suppression, anyway?

 Just the same as to tell lies. Or do you know about any kind of
ethnic supression in Slovakia?

> Why is it wrong for ethnic Hungarians ask similar things for
> themselves vis a vis the Slovaks, as the Slovaks wanted for themselves
> vis a vis the Czech (minus the separate state, of course)?  As they say
> around here: What's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.

  Can you specify it closely. I don't understand what you exactly have
  in mind.



 Regards,

Marian Kubaska
Banska Bystrica
Czech and Slovak Federal Republic
E-mail: KUBASKA@UAKOM.CS
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.slovak-l