Mailer: Elm [revision: 66.25]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.slovak-l
Date:         Sun, 8 Nov 1992 18:20:09 PST
From:         Joe Pannon <pannon@BCSFSE.BOEING.COM>
Subject:      Re: Slovakia's Hydro-energy Potentials
              "UBVM.cc.buffalo.edu!PMUZILA@MACALSTR.BITNET" at Nov 7, 92 4:46 pm

Dear Patrik:

I just mailed another message in which I thought I was addressing you,
but now, seeing this message from you, I am no longer sure if I got the
name right in my other response.  If I didn't, I apologize.

As to your ethnic heritage ...

>         Half of my family is Hungarian and I have almost learned Hungarian
 when
> I was small. Unfortunatelly my grandmother did not teach me. Therefore I
> consider myself to be an observer without any nationalistic hate against
> Hungarians, but in the last weeks I am getting annoyed with what Hungarian
> politics do and the way they act. I have to say that both sides have their
> share of guilt on what is happening now but I cannot deny that Hungarians
 where
> the initiators of Slovak problems. I would advice you to revise the history of
> 1930 - 1950 and especially the treaties on national problems.

I don't think that heritages mean much in such an ethnicly mixed area as
the Carpathian basin, but since you started it, let me assure you, that
my background is almost a mirror image of yours, for I, too, have some
degree of Slovak blood in me, besides Hungarian and German.  My Slovak
ancestors settled in central Hungary in the mid 18th century to
replenish the Hungarian population devastated there during the Turkish
occupation.  So, you see, I also have no inherent hostility toward
Slovaks.  However, I resent vague insinuations such as you made with that
"1930 - 1950" reference, without spelling exactly out what your beef is.
I think you owe it not only to me, but to others, less familiar with
Central-European history what you meant by that veiled reference.
I hope you wont't do like one of the other regulars here did the other
day, when he posted similarly vague references in the hungary list, but
when he was called on carpet with it, he disappeared.  So, if you want
to discuss something about 20th century history, let's do it, but
preferably citing Western sources.

>         Secondly, the sign. Please open your atlas and check the flags of
> Poland, Malta and San Marino. Than open the page of national and regional
> signs and count the signs having lions and eagles. And just afterwards ask
> yourself the question about the right part of Hungaian emblem. I advice you to
> read the passage in Encyclopedia Britanica on Austrio-Hungarian Empire.

Oh, another of those vague references!  I would think that Slovakia's
relationship to Hungary was and is a littel different than Poland's to
Malta, don't you?  Considering that Slovakia used to be part of the
Kingdom of Hungary, the Slovakian emblem with the apostolic cross
strikes me as seeing the Union Jack on the flags of countries belonging
to the British Commonwealth.  Seeing the anti-Hungarian rhetoric
emanating from Slovakia is somehow incongruos with that kind of common
symbolism, in my opinion.

Not having the Encyclopedia Britannica handy, I would appreciate if you
filled us in, what it writes about the Austro-Hungarian Empire where
Hungarians were only junior partners to Austria.  Of course, knowing a
little bit about Benes and Masaryk's effective propoganda in the West
prior WW I, I wouldn't be surprised if much of it still survives in EB.

>         When thinking about the Gabcikovo dam please try to think logically
> about this fact:

I am glad that we have at least one logically thinking person around
here.

>         - The effect of floods in Slovakia usually retard and reduce the
 floods
> in Hungary. After finishing the dam, Slovakia will have absolute power upon
 the
> regulation of the flow of water in the river. I do not consider this to be
> right, but imagine : the floods in Slovakia will be reduced, while Hungary
 will
> have to face even stronger floods. You can also imagine how strategically
> important can be this "weapon". Simply, Slovaks will have the tap.

Ah, now at least we are getting a frank response!  So who is threatening whom?

>         After looking at these points you will probably understand better why
> is the dam politicaly so important. I think Hungarians would do a very clever
> economical move if they decided to finish the Nagymaros part of the dam, that
> would allow them to profit from the dam at least partially. But of course this
> is in politics and unacceptable; imagine how would Hungarians react.

And all this time you guys were talking about Hungarians politicizing
the Gabcikovo issue!  Great!  After hearing you, I tend to believe the
theory which holds that Variant C is just a Slovak ploy to force Hungary
to build the Nagymaros dam in order to have a defense against the "tap"
being controlled in Bratislava.

Thanks for making that crystal clear!  (BTW, does that Crystal Bar
still exist in Bratislava?  It used to be my favorite drinking hole
in the 60s.  ;-)

Regards,
Joe Pannon
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU