U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–687PDF 2015

THE FUTURE OF U.S.–HUNGARY RELATIONS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, EURASIA, AND 

EMERGING THREATS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MAY 19, 2015

Serial No. 114–45

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

TOM EMMER, Minnesota 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, EURASIA, AND EMERGING THREATS

DANA ROHRABACHER, California, Chairman 

TED POE, Texas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Mr. Hoyt Brian Yee, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and 

Eurasian Affairs, U.S. Department of State ...................................................... 8

The Honorable Kurt Volker, executive director, The McCain Institute for 

International Leadership, Arizona State University ......................................... 27

Mr. Tad Stahnke, vice president, Research & Analysis, Human Rights First ... 29

Andras Simonyi, Ph.D., managing director of the Center for Transatlantic 

Relations, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University (former Hungarian Ambassador to the United States) ........................ 57

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Mr. Hoyt Brian Yee: Prepared statement .............................................................. 11

Mr. Tad Stahnke: Prepared statement .................................................................. 33

Andras Simonyi, Ph.D.: Prepared statement ........................................................ 60

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 76

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 79

(1)

THE FUTURE OF U.S.–HUNGARY RELATIONS 

TUESDAY, MAY 19, 2015

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EUROPE, EURASIA, AND EMERGING THREATS,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:18 p.m., in room 

2200, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Dana Rohrabacher 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I call to order the Europe, Eurasia, and 

Emerging Threats Subcommittee for this afternoon’s hearing on the 

Future of U.S.-Hungarian Relations. And after our ranking member and I each take 5 minutes for opening remarks, each member 

will have an opportunity for a short opening statement. And what 

we have now, I will wait to proceed. Well, maybe I should go ahead 

with my full opening statement now, and then when Mr. Meeks 

gets here, hopefully he will be getting here momentarily, he will be 

able give his opening statement. We will then proceed with a briefing by the Ambassador, and then the hearing will commence after 

that. 

So everyone will be given a chance for an opening statement, but 

especially Mr. Smith has asked for permission today, and without 

objection, to be able to join our meeting and our hearing today and 

give an opening statement as well. So with that said, we will then 

proceed with our, okay, first panels and questions in for moment 

after we have this briefing from our Ambassador. 

As we begin our—as we begin our conversation about Hungary 

today, let me underscore that Hungary is a NATO ally and a democratic country. The people of Hungary and the United States share 

a mutual respect for one another, and have a friendship built on 

shared values and democratic principles. My motivation for calling 

this hearing is not to bash any particular entity or take sides in 

Hungary’s internal politics. I personally came up with the idea for 

this hearing. Those who suggest otherwise just don’t know what 

they are talking about. 

It is certainly not being done to support or oppose the current 

Hungarian government. We have taken every measure to ensure a 

diversity of perspectives and make sure that they are heard today. 

The relationship between Hungary and the United States is vital 

to both nations. Hungary’s key geographic location in the heart of 

Europe makes it a critical crossroads between Eurasia and Europe 

and between the Baltics and the Balkans. 

2

This hearing is part of the subcommittee’s work to ensure that 

the bonds between America and our key allies remains strong and 

durable. Both of our nations have fought for our freedom, and we 

each work to perfect our democracies. We should be able to speak 

frankly and honestly in the spirit of mutual benefit. Since Minister 

Orban returned to power in 2010, Hungary has adopted a new Constitution and seen major changes in its electoral system. Those and 

other actions have led some to believe that Hungary is out of step 

with European values and damaging the checks and balances of 

Hungarian democracy. 

Such accusations cannot help but cause concern, but I remain 

mindful of the political motivations and hidden agendas that may 

lie behind such charges and behind those who are making those 

charges. Last October, the tensions, which had grown between the 

government in Budapest and our own, reached a crescendo when 

six current former Hungarian officials—current and former officials 

were made ineligible for U.S. visas, ostensibly because of corrupt 

activity. The media storm which followed was not in the interest 

of either side. 

I had the opportunity to visit Hungary last September, and I was 

impressed with much of what I saw. I was happy to hear the report 

from Hungary’s Ambassador to the United States. I hope she can 

work well with our newly-appointed Ambassador in Budapest to 

make sure that we have progress in the future. 

As we hear from our witnesses today about the bilateral relationship, where it stands and where it is going, I will be listening for 

any recommendations about how the United States can reach out 

to a better mutual understanding and determine how the United 

States Congress can play a productive role. During this hearing, 

undoubtedly, there will be some constructive criticism of the current Hungarian Government. I view this type of openness as a sign 

of a mature relationship that we have with Hungary. 

Ironically, two witnesses with more positive views toward the 

current Hungarian administration withdrew from their commitment to me to testify. This reflected the sandbox turf mindset, read 

that stupid politics, that undermine—and I saw this same thing 

when I worked in the Reagan administration, it undermined the 

anti-Communist effort to get together and get the job done during 

the whole cold war, and I was very disappointed to see that same 

type of nonsense going on now when two people could have been 

up here giving their best to help us understand what is going on. 

And they are not here now, so their point of view isn’t going to get 

as well represented. 

But whether the criticism or praise, the people, the government, 

and the elected leaders of Hungary deserve our respect and our 

evaluation, an honest evaluation. So regardless of what is said 

here, the kinship between the citizens of Hungary as manifested in 

their government, which they elected, and the people of the United 

States is of great value to us all and of great value to western civilization. The United States and Hungary are allies and friends, 

and that will not change. 

And with that said, I am sorry that Mr. Meeks is not here at this 

moment, but Mr. Sires, you have a——

3

Mr. SIRES. I just have a short opening statement, if you don’t 

mind. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Short opening statement. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding today’s hearing. Since the fall of communism, Hungary has proven to be a key 

U.S. ally in eastern Europe. As Hungary broke free of the Soviet 

grip, Hungary has contributed hundreds of troops to western peacekeeping mission, particularly in Afghanistan. 

Most recently, Hungary’s Parliament overwhelmingly authorized 

the use of Hungarian troops to support the fight against ISIS in 

the Middle East. Unfortunately, like many of other countries in the 

region, Hungary has found it difficult to find other energy sources 

to diversify their supply beyond Russia. Until Hungary and the 

rest of the eastern Europe gain energy independence from Russia, 

the Kremlin will continue to have an influence in the region. It is 

imperative that we continue to engage with Hungary to ensure 

that democracy, human rights are protected, as well as encourage 

Hungary to continue engagement with the West. 

I look forward to hearing from our esteemed panel, the one panel 

member, and how the U.S. can bolster their relationship with Hungary. Thank you. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. We will have a few more opening statements, 

and then the Ambassador will give us a briefing, and which will 

be a 5-minute briefing, and then the hearing will commence. 

Mr. Meeks, with your permission, we have had a unanimous consent before you arrived, we have given Mr. Smith the right to have 

a short opening statement. 

Mr. MEEKS. Absolutely. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. And then you will proceed with your opening 

statement. Mr. Smith from New Jersey. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me just 

note that I will be—come back to the hearing. I am actually part 

of a investment in nutrition seminar with Melinda Gates. I have 

a prime—or a bill on global nutrition that has passed out of the 

Foreign Affairs Committee and will be focusing on the first 1,000 

days of life from conception to the second birthday as a transformative time, so I regret that I will have to leave, but I will try 

to get back as quickly as possible. 

Mr. Chairman, in written testimony of Deputy Assistant Secretary Hoyt Yee submitted for this hearing, the Obama administration has returned to its previous pattern of criticizing the domestic 

policy of the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, which has 

proven to be both counterproductive and hypocritical in the past. 

Many of us had hoped that the Obama administration policy had 

changed. We were concerned that his prolonged and sometimes extremely outspoken public campaign against the Orban government 

had permanently alienated many Hungarians from the United 

States. 

In February, the administration seemed to take a new tact. This 

started after the recall of Andre Goodfriend, our deputy chief of 

mission, whose politically charged behavior gave him the reputation of the leader of the opposition in Hungary. And I would ask 

the distinguished Deputy Assistant Secretary why was he recalled? 

4

Since the arrival of our new Ambassador in Budapest, Colleen 

Bell, it was reported that the atmosphere was improving. DAS Yee 

will testify that Hungary has proved to be a reliable partner in 

helping to address challenges such—in places such as Afghanistan, 

Iraq, and the Balkans, and then Hungary supported sanctions the 

EU imposed on Russia over its sanctions in Ukraine, their actions 

in Ukraine, and has provided assistance to the Ukrainian Government, and that our security cooperation with Hungary has been, in 

his words, excellent. 

Yet with the testimony of Mr. Yee, it seems that the administration has gone back on the offensive. Many of Mr. Yee’s criticism, 

for example, about centralizing executive authority, weakening 

checks and balances, deepening the investment climate, making 

changes that advantage entities that support the governing party 

and using a super majority to make sweeping changes would more 

accurately describe the Obama administration. 

Again, when the Obama administration had the super majority, 

that is when ObamaCare was passed. You have the votes. Do it. 

When you didn’t have the votes, you couldn’t get it done, but when 

you had the votes, you did it. And then it was also the IRS scandal, 

the Benghazi coverup, and a myriad of other executive orders that 

bypassed the Democratic process. 

As I said before, the administration needs to be a lot more humble in its dealings with Hungary and the Orban Government. Otherwise, it creates the impression of hypocrisy and fosters an environment in which anti-Westernism thrives. Right now, that is represented in Hungary by Jobbik, a disgusting anti-Semitic and proIranian party. This should be the administration’s chief concern. 

As chairman of both the Human Rights Subcommittee and as 

chairman of the Helsinki Commission, I repeatedly met with foreign leaders and diplomats who privately expressed amazement 

and bewilderment at the administration’s obsession with attacking 

the Orban government, or shake their heads in disbelief or irony 

or worse. They are reacting to what they perceive to be a disproportionate double-standard, misrepresentations, and inaccurate information in that campaign. 

Once again, the conversation between two countries must be a 

conversation between friends and equals. So I urge the administration to conduct that accordingly. This is a conversation between 

equals. There is a lot we can learn from the Orban government, for 

example, the constitutional cap on public debt as our careens out 

of control. 

Finally, I have dedicated my life to ending human trafficking. 

Anti-human trafficking bills are often difficult to pass. Ted Poe just 

had an important bill passed yesterday, and it took a long time to 

do so. When I first introduced the Trafficking Victims Protection 

Act in 1998, the legislation was met with a wall of skepticism and 

outright opposition. My bill’s key provisions were opposed by the 

Clinton administration. Howard Coble testified right here at my 

committee against almost every provision in the bill, including the 

establishment of the trafficking in persons office; namely, sanctioning countries that failed to meet minimum standards prescribed in the bill, and even the comprehensive TIP report itself. 

5

People both inside of government and out, sought the bold new 

legislation that included sheltering, asylum, and significant protections for the victims, long jail sentences and active confiscations for 

the traffickers and tough sanctions for the governments that failed 

to meet those minimum standards was merely a solution in search 

of a problem. 

So as prime actor of that landmark Trafficking Victims Protection Act, as well as reauthorizations in 2003, 2005, I am encouraged by the important anti-trafficking efforts and leadership by the 

Orban government. As a matter of fact, most recent U.S. Department of State TIP report, June 2014, the new one will be out soon, 

while you urging increased efforts noted that—on prosecution, ‘‘The 

government of Hungary sustained anti-trafficking enforcement efforts.’’

A new criminal code with anit-trafficking provisions came into effect in July 2013. On protection, the government of Hungary increased efforts to protect trafficking victims, and, of course, more 

can be done, should be done, but they have made progress. And on 

prevention, the government of Hungary sustained prevention efforts by utilizing multiple platforms to prevent human trafficking. 

Inexplicably, DAS Hoyt Yee makes no mention of this. I thank the 

chair and yield back. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Might I add that Mr. Smith is a man who is 

always a voice of courage and morality when people belittle some 

of the issues that you talk about. They are of utmost importance, 

and you are a person I dearly respect for the energy and time you 

put in on things like this, so thank you for sharing your thoughts 

with us today. 

Mr. Meeks, who I also admire deeply and am very grateful that 

he is part of our subcommittee and our ranking member, Mr. 

Meeks, do you have an opening statement? 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Chairman Rohrabacher, for holding this 

hearing to provide us with a status update on America’s relationship with Hungary. With the West’s attention justifiably being 

focus on the Ukraine and our larger strategy, vis-a`-vis, Russia, we 

must not overlook the importance of NATO allies that have different concerns than we do and simultaneously, have changing domestic political landscapes. 

In recent years, I have traveled to Hungary and I met with leaders, many who are still in the party in power of Fidesz. But times 

are changing, and to Fidesz’s right, we see an increasingly popular 

Jobbik party, a party that overly uses anti-Semitic and anti-Roma 

speech. As Jobbik rises in the polls, Fidesz must address the far 

right and not appease it in my mind. The Hungarian government 

and its people should understand that we support our common 

democratic values that are also reflected in the NATO alliance. 

This is essential. 

When I think of Hungary, I think of 1956 and the uprising 

against Soviet policies during which over 2,500 brave Hungarians 

lost their lives. I think of Goulash communism and the quiet reforms that Hungarians pushed through until the ultimate fall of 

communism. I think of NATO allies who sent 150 troops to join the 

fight against ISIS. Hungary paid a high price for its freedom from 

fascism and communism and ultimately for its ability to live in a 

6

democracy. Yes, in a democracy. Even in older ones, including our 

own, freedoms are not always given, and it is up to the political 

leaders and the media and the civil society to advance these liberal 

ideas. 

Today, we are looking at U.S.-Hungarian relations, and I am interested in discussing Hungary’s role as a reliable NATO partner 

and member of the EU. Now, there are things that gives one concern, of course, when you hear the prime minister praising illiberal 

democracies, and we have got to figure out how we work collectively with Russia and also with China, and China and energy 

deals that puts Moscow’s economic sphere. How can we make sure 

that we are working together with Hungary so that we can also 

make sure that we have Hungary’s cooperation and their ours? 

This is especially important as European and our Transatlantic 

unity is being tested by Russia, and I understand our different geographies and histories and economic realities, but it is imperative 

that we maintain unity when we are talking about someone taking 

over sovereign property as Russia has done in the Ukraine. 

Also, in today’s hearing, we will hear about human rights and 

democracy issues that are of concern. I particularly am concerned 

about the treatment of the role of minority either in the justice system or as a forgotten minority is extremely troubling. A healthy democracy includes and protects all of its citizens. New media laws, 

along with new Constitution, are, in my opinion, some of it is questionable, if not in their spirit, then definitely in their implementation. 

This comes, as I mentioned before, with the rise of the ultra right 

in the backdrop. The Hungarian Government, along with its European partners, have to work together to obviate this threat. Just 

today, the European Parliament held a plenary debate with Prime 

Minister Orban on the situation in Hungary. Now, this is not, and 

I am clearly—want to be clear on this, this is not an attack on 

Hungary. For surely I would want individuals to also talk about 

the situation, for example, currently that we are having here in 

America with African Americans throughout. So this is not something that is isolated in Hungary. 

I am just going to speak out just as I speak out about situations 

here in the United States. I am going to speak out about issues 

that I think that are taking place in others, and this is what I 

think friends should do with friends. We have got to be honest with 

one another and talk to one another to try to resolve issues that 

we may have, and this is what a democracy should allow us to do 

so that we don’t have to, you know, hold back words. This is what 

maturity is all about, that we discuss these matters. 

And so I would love to discuss—like I said, I think that there is 

some problems here in the United States with minorities, and them 

being taken care of properly, and I also think, from what I have 

seem with Roma and others, minorities in Hungary, I think this is 

dialogue that good friends should have honestly if we are going to 

move forward. 

So I hope to hear from our experts about your opinions on Hungary’s progress and its difficulties. Transatlantic unity, whether it 

is on trade, whether it is on Russian sanctions or protecting the 

common values that we fight for everyday, is something we must 

7

work hard at deepening. I look forward to the fruitful discussions 

that we can explore what Congress can offer, and to do to help 

guarantee both economic growth, a healthy democracy, and peace 

for all in the region. 

You know, right now in Washington we are looking at trade deal 

with—in Asia with TPP, but there is no real pivot just to Asia. We 

got to make sure that we focus on our old friends in Europe and 

right across the Atlantic and come closer together, and we can only 

do that with honest dialogue between the two of us. And I yield 

back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Meeks. 

And now we have the chairman of another subcommittee who 

just was courteous enough to allow me to have my statement and 

my time period today. Judge Poe, you may proceed with any opening statement that you have got. 

Mr. POE. I want to thank the chairman for having this hearing. 

As already been said, I think the United States and Hungary have 

a unique relationship for a lot of reasons. It concerns me that we 

seem to be meddling in domestic affairs of one of our close partners. Surely the United States needs to have a dialogue regarding 

international foreign relations. I am not so sure the United States 

would likely take kindly if other countries decided to meddle in our 

policy and tell us how we should change our policy, and we will discuss that with the witnesses. 

The new Constitution is not like the United States Constitution, 

but it is a Constitution, and Hungary is operating under that Constitution. It seems to concern a lot of people, this is just my opinion, that Hungary’s major party is center right, and the second 

strongest party is far right, being a center right government or 

population. That is the choice of the Hungarian people. That is not 

the choice of the United States, nor should it be the choice of the 

United States what type of government, either left of center, far 

left, right, right of center should be made. I frankly don’t believe 

that that is any of the United States’ business. That is meddling 

in a domestic relationship situation that we—or domestic situation 

that concerns me as an American where we take the—maybe the 

approach that we know better than the people of Hungary. 

I don’t know that we do in certain domestic issues which we will 

explore later with the witnesses. So I do want to thank the witnesses for being here and the chairman for holding this. I value the 

relationship that we have with the nation of Hungary, and we need 

to work together on a lot of issues. We should be careful in pushing 

the American agenda, whatever that is, on other countries, whether they are friends or not friends, and I will yield back. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Your Honor, Judge 

Poe, and now call as our first witness—actually no. I will now call 

to brief us 5 minutes for our hearing, the Ambassador from Hungary to the United States, Ambassador Szemerkenyi, and you may 

proceed for as long as you would like to talk, and then thank you. 

[Whereupon, the hearing proceeded to a briefing.] 

[Hearing resumes.] 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Madam Ambassador, 

and that was the briefing portion of our hearing, and you could be 

8

excused now. We now have witnesses that we will proceed to the 

podium. Thank you, Madam Ambassador. 

Ambassador SZEMERKENYI. Thank you very much. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. So if we could have our panel of witnesses. 

Please proceed. It is my pleasure to welcome back Deputy Secretary of State Hoyt Yee. He was appointed to his current post in 

the bureau of Europe, Eurasia, and in September of last year. He 

is a career foreign service officer and previously stationed in such 

places as Afghanistan, Greece, and most recently in—he was the 

DCM in Croatia. All right. 

And Andras Simonyi is the managing director of the Center for 

Transatlantic Relations at the School of Advanced International 

Studies at Johns Hopkins University. He is the former Hungarian 

Ambassador to the United States, serving in that capacity from 

2002 to 2007. 

We have Kurt Volker, who is the executive director of the 

McCain Institute for International Leadership. He is a career member of the U.S. Senior Foreign Service. He has held a number of 

positions with the State Department, including at our Embassy in 

Budapest, speaks fluent Hungarian, and before leaving government 

service, he was U.S. Ambassador to NATO. And Tad—and I am 

going to have to pronounce his name. Stahnke. 

Mr. STAHNKE. Like Eddie Stanky, sir 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Stahnke. Is vice president for research analysis at Human Rights First. Prior to that, he worked for the United 

States Commission on International Religious Freedom. He is an 

expert on international human rights law. 

I just introduced four people, but there is only three people here; 

is that right? And here he is. Mr. Yee, you have just been introduced. All right. I tell you what we are going to do. I would like 

to have the other witnesses, let Mr. Yee just testify, and then we 

will have the final team of witnesses come forward, and that gives 

Mr. Yee a little bit more time to get questions from everybody. So 

here we go. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Yee, I have already introduced you, and 

I had—was singing your praises. Yeah, that will be the day. So 

with that said, Mr. Yee, you go right ahead. 

Mr. YEE. Thank you. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You got to punch that button. 

STATEMENT OF MR. HOYT BRIAN YEE, DEPUTY ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY, BUREAU OF EUROPEAN AND EURASIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. YEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Rohrabacher, 

Ranking Member Meeks, members of the subcommittee. Thank you 

for inviting me to appear before you today to discuss HungarianU.S. relations. 

Hungary is a valued ally, partner, and friend of the United 

States. The strong bonds between our nations are rooted in our 

shared commitment to democratic values. Hungary has been a reliable partner on such issues as Afghanistan, the Balkans, and 

Ukraine. Hungary supported Europe Union sanctions on Russia 

and has provided gas by reverse flow to Ukraine. 

9

Our security cooperation has been excellent. Our economic and 

people-to-people ties are strong, and the friendship between the 

American and Hungarian peoples is enduring. Recognizing the 

many areas where cooperation is strong, even the best of friends 

have differences, and when we do, we can and should speak openly 

about them. 

As a member of NATO, the European Union, and the organization for security and cooperation in Europe, Hungary is committed 

to upholding democratic values. Over the past 5 years, as we have 

witnessed the Hungarian government take such steps as weakening checks and balances and undermining institutional independence, we have spoken out in private and in public. We have 

seen, including recently in eastern Europe, the disastrous consequences of failing to uphold the principles and values that underpin democracy. 

As Assistant Secretary Victoria Nuland has said, we can only be 

strong when we protect political pluralism, civil society, and the 

right to dissent within our own borders when our governments are 

clean, transparent, and accountable to the people they serve. 

Since 2011, we have made clear to the Hungarian Government 

our concerns about how it has used its two-thirds majority in Parliament to push through a range of legislative and constitutional 

changes that have centralized executive power, diminished checks 

and balances, and restricted freedom of the media. 

The 2014 parliamentary elections illustrated how the government changed the rules to its advantage. The OSCE’s Office for 

Democratic Institutions and Human Rights reported that the main 

governing party enjoyed an undue advantage because of restrictive 

campaign regulations, biased media coverage, and campaign activities that blurred the separation between political party and the 

state. 

Also, in 2014, the government undertook a campaign against 

nongovernmental organizations that have served as independent 

voices and have received funds from Norway. The NGOs are still 

waiting for their names to be cleared. Their confiscated equipment 

to be returned, and their tax identification numbers restored. 

I would also like to highlight the problem of corruption, which 

degrades institutions and saps the will to protect them. Instead of 

responding forcefully and transparently to allegations of corruption, 

the Hungarian government has allowed the problem to fester, has 

protected certain accused officials, and has punished the accusers. 

Perhaps most troubling, from the highest levels of power in Hungary, we have heard rhetoric about building an illiberal state on 

national foundations and praise for autocracies. Such comments do 

not do justice to the democratic values that Hungary has pledged 

to uphold. 

In 2014, the U.S. Government raised its concerns about Hungary’s democracy at the OSCE and in the President’s speech in 

which he cited Hungary’s intimidation of civil society. In addition, 

we applied Presidential Proclamation 7750, suspending the right of 

certain Hungarian official suspected of corruption to enter the 

United States. Ambassador Bell, in country since January, has 

made clear that our concerns persist. 

10

The United States Government has not been alone expressing 

these concerns. As the European Union, counsel of Europe, and 

OSCE have also spoken up, as have independent organizations 

such as Transparency International and Amnesty International. 

And importantly, concerns about democracy in Hungary are 

shared by many Hungarians themselves. The United States has 

also expressed concerns about the rise of ethnic nationalism. The 

problem is, of course, not unique to Hungary, but increasingly 

prominent there. We hope to see greater efforts to strengthen the 

climate of tolerance more consistent with the Transatlantic values 

to which Hungary has subscribed. 

In recent months, we have seen some positive signs. For example, leading up to the vote on deploying troops for the anti-ISIL coalition, the coalition and governing party leaders consulted with 

other parties and relevant parliamentary committees. We look forward to additional steps and more substantial ones by the Government of Hungary to address the issues I have raised here today. 

I would like to reiterate, in conclusion, that Hungary remains a 

friend, partner, and ally that we have expressed our concerns—and 

that we have expressed our concerns in that spirit. It is important 

for Hungary to represent transatlantic values not only for its own 

future, but also for it to be a strong, reliable partner on global challenges for the United States and its other allies. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Yee follows:]

11


94687a-1.eps
12


94687a-2.eps
13


94687a-3.eps
14


94687a-4.eps
15

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, thank you very much for your testimony. We will proceed with questions for the Assistant Secretary, 

and I will start it off with, if you had to compare Hungary to, let’s 

say, Bulgaria, Romania, all the neighboring, those neighboring 

countries, the criticisms that you just leveled, would you say that 

Hungary is worse than they are in these areas? 

Mr. YEE. Well, thank you for that question, Mr. Chairman. I 

think it would be difficult to generalize across the board whether 

Hungary is worse in all the categories. I think in some ways——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let’s be specific then. Is there any gerrymandering going on in Bulgaria and Romania? 

Mr. YEE. I am not aware of a gerrymandering process ongoing 

now, sir. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I guess we have to look closer to home to find 

gerrymandering, don’t we? Not very far. I seem to remember that 

happened in our first election as a free country. 

The—is there bias in the news media in those countries against 

candidates that may be running for office? You know, you have the 

out party, does—is there a bias against them in Bulgaria and Romania against those candidates? 

Mr. YEE. I believe it is possible to find bias in the media against 

political candidates, party leaders in any country. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Right. So there is bias in the media. My 

gosh——

Mr. YEE. I would include——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. There is no bias in media here, of course. All 

right. 

What about the NGOs? The NGOs that were put out of business 

that you mention, were these NGOs made up of people from Hungary, or we talking about foreign NGOs involved in their system? 

Mr. YEE. They were Hungarian——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Hungarian. 

Mr. YEE [continuing]. Citizens. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Okay. Well, because it is hard to tell. Sometimes what we have today are NGOs that end up being financed 

by outside interest groups in these countries, and we don’t know 

whether they are local, and certainly everybody has a right to express their opinion and they should not be repressed. And the Ambassador suggested that the NGOs that were attacked were basically engaged in some sort of economic fraud. Was that—is there 

any truth to that? 

Mr. YEE. We understand there is an ongoing investigation, Mr. 

Chairman, but the impression that the United States Government 

has and the overwhelming consensus of the international community is that the manner in which the investigation or the police 

raid on these NGOs was conducted was far in proportion to what 

it should have been. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Okay. So they just weren’t open about their—

the charges that they were charging them with or——

Mr. YEE. There was a police raid on the headquarters of NGOs 

which equipment was seized. Tax identification numbers of the 

NGOs were confiscated. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You know, I had a friend here. Unfortunately 

he is not here now. His name is Curt Weldon, and you know, his 

16

daughter’s home was raided just 2 weeks before at the election by 

the FBI. Hmm, I wonder if these things happen in different countries, too. I mean, maybe even right here. So let’s put it in perspective. That doesn’t make it right. That does not make that right, but 

that may mean that what we are talking about here is not so much 

out of the ordinary that it deserves to be a cornerstone or a reason 

for specific policy decisions. 

And of course, did—you know, we do have a situation where Lois 

Lerner here in our own country was—did some investigations of 

their opponents, their political opponents, is that right? Did that 

happen here with our administration? I think it did. And, of course, 

here we have had a huge coverup of that, and over there, I guess 

they can have lots of criticism and the international community 

comes down on them. 

With that said, I think that people shouldn’t raid NGOs. I don’t 

think there should be gerrymandering. I certainly think—don’t 

think there should be corruption in these societies, but when we 

are dealing trying to decide what the foreign policy of the United 

States is going to be all about, where we are going to put our pressure, it better not be singling out a country that is so friendly to 

the United States as Hungary is, because if they are not doing 

something uniquely bad, we are singling out friends rather than 

trying to seek truth and make things better. 

With that, I will yield to my friend, Mr. Meeks. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and it is always good following you. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You got my back. 

Mr. MEEKS. Actually, some of the things, you know—I think, as 

I said in my opening, and you missed that, Mr. Yee, unfortunately. 

I think that when you have friends, you can be honest with friends, 

and you can talk back and forth. I think there is room for criticisms in various democracies. Surely in ours, there is room for criticisms. 

As I stated in mine that when I look at the scenario that is going 

on in this country now as reflected with African Americans, and 

what is taking place across with the shooting of young African 

American men, and the criminal justice system, that is questions 

that I will take, and just as I will ask questions about the treatment of minorities in Hungary and other places, I think that is 

where we need to talk so that we can work collectively together so 

that we can try to figure out how this system works better. 

I also think that it is important that we try to work as a group 

in unison, and I know that with our NATO allies, we have got concerns that we have got to work there collectively together. So in the 

spirit—and I should have said earlier, because anytime I am here, 

and I can think of my recent visit to Hungary, one of the individuals that come to mind who was born in Hungary but was a great 

American who dedicated his life to being a champion of human 

rights was the former chair of this—of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Tom Lantos, and so I can’t help but raise his name and his 

life’s legacy to the great relationship that we now have with Hungary. 

But Tom, when I hear of Tom, and as I visited Budapest and 

looked at, you know, what has been and what is the relationship 

17

today, we have a great—a great relationship of which can only get 

better if we are honest with one another and we talk back and 

forth. 

With that, you know, where my questions will go around, because I am really concerned about Russia and what has taken 

place in the Ukraine, and the taking of territory, and I know, and 

I think Hungary voted for sanctions, although it expressed reservations about sanctions, so my question is—there is going to be a new 

vote soon to renew the sanctions this summer that is coming closely. Have you got any feelings or have any indication, I should say, 

as to what we can expect in regards to Hungary with the renewal 

of sanctions against Russia coming shortly? 

Mr. YEE. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Meeks. I have 

heard from my Hungarian colleagues, including from the Ambassador here today, that Hungary intends to maintain consensus 

with other EU members and maintaining sanctions, and have not 

heard any indications that that is in—is going to change anytime 

soon. 

We do, as you mentioned, sir, we have heard some reservations 

expressed by political leaders in Hungary about the consequences, 

economic consequences of the sanctions upon those countries which 

are enforcing them. And it is certainly a fact that the sanctions 

have an impact on countries in the European Union, on the United 

States of America, in applying these sanctions, but so far, we still 

have a consensus that it is essential to make sure that Russia continues to pay a cost for what it is doing in Ukraine. 

Mr. MEEKS. So—and there is no question in my mind that Russia—excuse me, Hungary is a very important member of NATO, 

and the EU, and I want to make sure that we are maximizing our 

relationship because of energy concerns and because one1 of the 

things that we are hearing, that—and this is not just true of Hungary, this is true of some other countries, you know, when I hear 

of America’s involvement in NATO, especially with reference to defense budgets and the amount of money that needs to be put up 

in NATO for all countries, I wouldn’t—are we leveraging or encouraging Hungary and other countries like it that are not putting up 

its fair share into defense spending for NATO so that I don’t have 

to go back to my constituents and saying it is just the United 

States that is putting up all the dollars into NATO? 

Mr. YEE. Thank you. Thank you, Ranking Member Meeks. We 

agree completely, of course, that it is essential that NATO remain 

strong, and I think that is one of the central messages that I wanted to make today is that we are concerned about and eager to help 

Hungary because it is a NATO member, and as Hungary relies on 

us and other allies, we rely on Hungary to be a strong member of 

NATO, and that is why institutions are important, democratic institutions which are the backbone of the strength of any democracy 

As far as ensuring that our allies do meet their obligations to 

NATO, whether it is financial or in terms of military capabilities, 

that is an important part of our dialogue with all of our NATO 

countries. Hungary is one of the NATO allies that is not meeting 

the goal of spending 2 percent of its GDP on defense. Like other 

NATOs at the Wales Summit last year, Hungary committed to increase its spending toward the 2 percent target, and we are also 

18

encouraging Hungary to spend more on modernization of its military. So this continues to be one of the important points we raise 

with Hungary and will remain so. 

Mr. MEEKS. My last question is this. And it is a concern that I 

just have in a number of different countries, but I just like to get 

your viewpoints. I always get extreme—whether it is in the United 

States or anyone else about extremes. Extreme left, extreme right, 

either way, I am concerned about extremes. And it seems to me, 

and you can correct me, I am just really just trying to figure this 

out, that there is a rise in popularity of extreme right in Hungary 

that have basically an anti-immigrant and an anti-Semitic, and you 

can correct the language that I have been hearing coming out of 

there, it seems to me to be alarming. 

So is that—am I right, is the administration concerned about the 

growth of the extreme right in Hungary? Am I incorrect? Is that, 

from your viewpoint, not happening? Would you give me your opinion in that regard? 

Mr. YEE. Thank you, Representative Meeks. We do share your 

concern about the apparent rise of the extreme right, not only in 

Hungary, in other countries in Europe. But we do, as I mention in 

my statement, notice that there is a—an ascendence of the far 

right. According to latest polls, the far right party, Jobbik, may be 

reaching, if it hasn’t already reached, the number two position 

among parties in popularity in Hungary, which is alarming, considering it is a not only anti-immigration, it is anti-Semitic, anti-foreigner party at least in the views and policies it espouses. 

So while we certainly believe that—in free speech, in the right 

of all parties to be represented, and the people of the citizens of 

Hungary to choose whom they want to represent them, we do believe it is important to watch trends, especially alarming trends in 

either anti-Semitism or xenophobia or anti-immigration in a way 

that is at odds with democratic traditions and democratic values 

that—on which the European Union and NATO are based. 

But we do think that as long as there is a government in Budapest that respects basic democratic principles of plurality, of democracy, of rule of law, that the space for such extremists for right 

wing extremists or any extremists will be narrowed. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. And now Colonel Cook. 

Mr. COOK. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I want to go back to some 

of the comments about NATO, and I am a little concerned about 

this because obviously, it is a very, very fragile organization, and 

you talked about, you know, where we start singling out particular 

countries. We could, you know, make criticisms about the Erdogan 

regime, if you will, the swing to the far right, the Muslim Brotherhood situation may be changing in Spain with the—their new government, and I won’t even go into Greece. So I think you always 

got to be careful when you hold this organization together. 

And you talk like Hungary is—didn’t make their obligations. But 

who has met that 2 percent obligation? What, three countries, if I 

remember correct, out of 28. Do the math. It is not very good. And 

I am very, very worried that this—an ally such as Hungary, if a 

scenario develops, and we have talked about this in House Armed 

Services Committee where you had a situation where Putin and 

19

Russia decides to pick off the weak link in their minds, and that 

might be Estonia or Lithuania or Latvia, because of its geography 

and proximity to the old Soviet bloc, and the question is: Will certain countries not support NATO? And in your opinion, would Hungary be there for us in such a scenario, which has been discussed 

by many of our military leaders? 

Mr. YEE. Thank you, Representative Cook. I would like to put 

into context——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Could you push the button. 

Mr. YEE. Apologies. Thank you, Representative Cook. Just to put 

in context briefly. The concerns that I expressed about Hungary 

would apply to many other countries. We are not simply isolating 

Hungary. 

Mr. COOK. I agree, but right now we are focusing on that, and 

a part of me wants to say, well, wait a minute, they committed 

troops to Afghanistan as opposed to other members. My fear is that 

if you have one member that does not support this action, then 

NATO is going to fall apart. So that is why specifically, what we 

can talk about all the other 27 countries, and whether they would 

do it or not, and I am trying to figure out, perhaps I am worried 

about the weak link and they are a lot closer to the geography than 

we are and some of the other countries. 

Mr. YEE. I would agree, Representative Cook. The alliance is 

only as strong as its weakest link. 

Mr. COOK. That is right. 

Mr. YEE. And what we are trying to talk about today, the point 

I am trying to get across today is that we need to look beyond the 

immediate and into the future about where the alliance will be if 

we do not address some of weaknesses. So I would say the alliance 

is strong today and will be for the foreseeable future if we don’t see 

new problems, new challenges to alliance, strength. 

Mr. COOK. And I understand that. I am trying to put you on the 

spot, if it is not obvious, and I just want your opinion based upon 

your experience, whether you thought Hungary would support the 

alliance. I think they will, but from your testimony here today, I 

get the feeling that you think they won’t. I just want you to—it is 

your opinion. You know, it is—of course you are also the assistant 

secretary. I guess it might make a little difference. 

Mr. YEE. Well, sir, the answer to the question is yes, Hungary 

has been a strong NATO ally. I am sure it will remain one. 

The question I am raising today is how do we ensure that Hungary and our other allies continue to be strong not only in terms 

of their military capabilities and the financing they are providing 

to support NATO, but within internally strong, their democratic institutions, the values and principles on which the alliance and the 

commitments that we make to our allies is based. 

Mr. COOK. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Sires. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You know, it has been difficult for nations in eastern Europe, like 

Hungary to completely turn away from Russia when the majority 

of their energy comes from Russia. And we don’t seem—Europe or 

us, we don’t seem to be working very hard trying to provide an alternative to Russia. And I am just concerned that bashing Hungary 

20

or keep talking about Hungary, when we become very selective in 

the countries that we talk about with corruption and undemocratic 

ways, it is just going to drive Hungary more toward Russia. 

And do you have any concern about that? And I know, look, we 

are friends and we should talk. We should be able to sit down and 

talk about differences and everything else, but I think that is B.S. 

You know, this is hard-core politics here. I mean, they got Russia 

right next door, you know, putting a lot of pressure on this country. 

We, quite frankly, keep losing friends, and I am concerned that if 

we go down this road, we are not going to be able to count on Hungary. 

Can you talk a little bit about that? 

Mr. YEE. Thank you, Representative Sires. 

I would answer that it is precisely for that very reason, our 

shared concern about Russia’s maligned influence in Eastern and 

Central Europe that we need to have these kinds of candid conversations with our allies about how to be strong together, individually, in facing the threat that Russia poses. So that includes, for 

example, on energy where Hungary is—I think Hungary would 

admit is overly dependent on Russia for its energy. Over half of its 

gas, 80 percent of its oil, it depends on Russia——

Mr. SIRES. Well, we have known that for a long time, and we 

don’t seem to make the effort to wean them away from this dependency, either by us or by Europe. 

Mr. YEE. Sir, I would respectfully say that we are trying very 

hard to help Hungary, specifically in the area of energy security. 

My colleagues from the Department of State who work in the Energy Bureau, Special Envoy Hochstein has devoted a lot of time 

working with the Ambassador in a previous capacity and in her 

current capacity in trying to find ways to help Hungary diversify 

its energy and to increase its energy security by finding alternative 

routes, supplies, a better mix of energy types, and to cooperate 

with other countries in the region who have similar problems, and 

to better interconnections, new routes, can lessen their dependence 

on Russia. 

I would agree—I fully agree that we have not so far been successful, as successful as we need to be, but we are working very 

hard to find solutions to that energy dependence. 

We are also working very hard together, as we discussed earlier, 

in maintaining a common front against what Russia is doing in 

Ukraine, pursuing its aggression in Ukraine. By standing together 

Hungary, United States, other allies, EU members, we are exacting 

a high cost on Russia. We are having an impact on Russia’s economy, and we believe this is the right course. 

So I guess the short answer would be, Representative Sires, that 

we believe we need to do both. We need to work together in these 

areas such as energy security and in pushing back against Russian 

aggression in Central and Eastern Europe. And we also need to 

have the hard conversations with each other about what we need 

to do to strengthen our base, make sure that internally we are also 

strong. 

Mr. SIRES. But sometimes, you know, this conversation doesn’t 

have to be so public like we do with other countries. You know, I 

21

don’t see us bashing China as, you know, as we bash Hungary. 

And, you know, and other countries, quite frankly. 

Mr. YEE. Sir, what I would say to that is that we always begin, 

in any of our diplomatic discussions, with private conversations, 

private discussions, in Budapest or in Washington, and the importance, we believe, needs to be placed on results. If we get results 

with the quiet diplomacy, then we should proceed in that direction. 

If we don’t get the desired results, we have to try something new. 

In this case, we felt it was important that we ensure the public, 

and Hungary also was aware of the U.S. concerns, that it was not 

the United States itself that took this discussion public. In some 

cases it was Hungary itself that made the discussion public about 

the corruption, for example, and the pursuit of the visa travel bans. 

The OICE European Union, those organizations also brought these 

concerns to public discussion. So I completely agree. It is better to 

do it behind closed doors, but sometimes we need to go to a different mode if it is not working in the first——

Mr. SIRES. I just think the European Unions have to step up a 

little bit more to assist some of these countries on the Eastern part 

because it just can’t be on us. You know, it always falls on us and 

the taxpayers of this country. Thank you. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Well, thank you very much. We have—Judge 

Poe just—just one question we were making sure that we aren’t 

having a double—what we are hearing is we think we are having 

a double standard against somebody who is our friend, and that is 

sort of the spirit that is coming out of this questioning, and, you 

know, you push our friend away if you have a double standard to 

judging him. 

Let me ask you, have we pulled the—any official recognition or 

have we pulled the visas for any Bulgarian or Romanian officials 

for corruption? 

Mr. YEE. I can say, Mr. Chairman, I am not sure whether we 

have in those countries. We have in many other countries. The 

7750 authority applies to——

Mr. ROHRBACHER. I really want to focus—the reason I am focusing on Romania and Bulgaria is because they are right there. They 

are neighbors. And if they don’t have the same—if they are not the 

same type of policy toward them as we have toward Hungary, it 

would seem like a double standard, not if say—let’s say maybe 

countries like Tibet or some other places are different, but—or 

maybe England, but—so we need to know whether or not this is—

whether or not this government is being picked upon because of 

ideological reasons by this administration or whether or not this 

administration is upholding a standard that we can be proud of. So 

that is what that is all about. 

Mr. YEE. So thank you, sir, for the question. The short answer 

is there is no double standard. We apply the same standard in all 

countries. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Well, the question actually was whether you 

had done it in Bulgaria or Romania, and the short answer would 

be yes or no. 

Mr. YEE. Well, actually, sir, if I could just say that we do ban 

people from Bulgaria and Romania from traveling to the U.S. for 

reasons of corruption, but we don’t use necessarily the same auVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:08 Jul 09, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_EEET\051915\94687 SHIRL
22

thorities in Hungary and other countries. I would have to get back 

to you on what authorities we use. But I can tell you for sure that 

there are people from both those countries who are not allowed to 

travel to the U.S. because of corruption. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Yeah, sure. But top government officials is 

what we are asking about here because it is not just citizens——

Mr. YEE. And I do mean—sir, just to clarify so I don’t—I’m not 

misunderstood. There are government officials or former government officials from Romania and Bulgaria who are not allowed to 

travel to the U.S. because of reasons of suspected corruption. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Could you send us that list? That would be 

great. If you could make sure we have a list of those people. 

Mr. YEE. I can’t send you a list, sir, but I can send you the numbers. I can send you the numbers. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. You can’t send us the names? 

Mr. YEE. The information—well, I will have to check to see if I 

can. It is not publicly available. The names can’t be released publicly, just as we didn’t publicly release the names of the people in 

Hungary. So not to apply a double standard. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Good. That is a great answer. 

Judge Poe. But now you are up against Judge Poe. 

Mr. POE. Thank you for being here. You weren’t here for my 

opening comments, and I—let me preface everything with this. I 

have been called a lot of things in my life, but I have never been 

called a diplomat. So I am not very diplomatic, and I would hope 

that you would just give me candid answers and not explain your 

answer unless I ask you to. 

The Russians and the Ukrainians—or, excuse me, the Hungarians are coming up upon a time table to get gas from Russia. Russia holds Hungary hostage like they do many other countries, 87 

percent of their gas comes from Russia. This contracthas been coming up. They don’t sign the contract. The Russians are going to 

double it unless there is an alternative. 

Has the United States done anything to sell American gas or to 

get it to Hungary either directly, indirectly, whether it is LNG, 

helping them develop their own energy so they have gas? I am not 

talking about green energy. I know it has been the policy of the 

U.S. telling Hungary you got to go to green energy. Set aside green 

energy. They need gas. This is contracts coming up, up the 

governmenthas got to make a decision. Have we said: Here is an 

alternative. You can buy some gas from Texas. They got more than 

they can use. 

Now, I am serious about this. Have we done anything to make 

sure they can get gas from America instead of Russia? 

Mr. YEE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. POE. What? Are they going to be able to get gas from the 

United States when this contract comes up? 

Mr. YEE. We are doing two things, sir, to help Hungary and 

other countries in Europe get more gas. 

One, as you, sir, know better than I, we are authorizing the export of LNG, and that is a process that could begin, as I understand it, as early as 2015 exports. 

Mr. POE. But that is too late. They have got a contract coming 

up now. If they don’t sign the contract, the Russians are going to 

23

double the price of natural gas down the road, 2015 is too late. It 

is not like we knew this was coming up last week. We knew the 

contract was coming up 15 years ago. 

So the answer is no, we have not done anything to give them an 

alternative immediately from Russian gas. Is that right? 

Mr. YEE. Sir, I would respectfully disagree. Just the fact that the 

U.S. is producing more gas now has lowered the price of gas worldwide. That has helped Hungary. That has helped all the countries 

of Europe that import gas. 

Mr. POE. But Russia sets the price of gas that they are going to 

sell to Hungary. 

Mr. YEE. Yes, sir, but it is a lower price because they have to 

deal with the market prices worldwide. So we are doing something, 

sir. 

Mr. POE. So you say that the United States has affected the price 

of natural gas and the Russians are not going to double the price 

if they don’t sign this contract? 

Mr. YEE. Sir, I don’t know what the Russians will do. 

Mr. POE. Well, I think fair guess is that since it is a monopoly 

that Gazprom has on all of Europe, and the United States has been 

diddling on selling natural gas to other countries because of our 

regulatory process, they are going to be held hostage and they are 

going to have to buy Russian gas. Now, that is my opinion. 

Did the United States support or not support the new Constitution in Hungary? 

Mr. YEE. We have serious concerns with the Constitution. 

Mr. POE. So did we support it or not support it when it became 

the law of the land? 

Mr. YEE. We expressed concerns when it became the law of the 

land. 

Mr. POE. Why? 

Mr. YEE. For a number of reasons, sir. 

First, we believe that the Constitution and the amendments and 

the number of laws that were passed between 2010 and 2013 centralized executive authority——

Mr. POE. Okay. Let me interrupt right there on that one question. 

Is it true that the socialist party did not participate in the debates on the new Constitution? Is that true? 

Mr. YEE. I don’t know. 

Mr. POE. Well, I think maybe you should check that out. They 

did not participate in the new Constitution. The Constitution and 

a new government has been elected under the news Constitution. 

You mentioned that you are concerned, that we are concerned, 

about the government being right of center, far right. 

Would we be just as concerned if they were left of center or far 

left? 

Mr. YEE. Sir, I didn’t say that I had concerns about the government being right or left. It was the extreme right parties who seem 

to be growing in popularity, anti-Semitic, anti-foreigner, anti-immigration parties that seem to be growing more popular. That is not 

my concern with the government. 

Mr. POE. So you are not concerned with the government. 

24

Mr. YEE. My concern with the government is about its tendency 

to consolidate power, to not leave space for an opposition, to weaken the judiciary, to weaken freedom of the media, to weaken civil 

society. 

Mr. POE. So we are trying to make a democracy in our image 

with one of our neighbors. Isn’t that basically it? We want to import whatever our policy is about democracy. We don’t want a centralize government over in Hungary, although we seem to have a 

pretty centralized government in the United States. We don’t want 

one in Hungary. We want them to change their immigration policy, 

even though they have had a 20-fold increase of illegal immigration 

in just 2 years. So that is what the United States is really doing. 

We want a democracy in our image. 

Isn’t this just meddling into their domestic relationship, and isn’t 

that causing ill will for us arrogantly to go to another country and 

say: We don’t like the way you are doing things domestically. We 

wouldn’t like it if some other country came over here and said: We 

don’t like the way your democracy is. 

For, after all, the Constitution, are you familiar with the first 

phrase in the Constitution? I have heard that this was objectionable to the United States. You know what the firsts phrase in the 

Constitution of Hungary is? Do you know? 

Mr. YEE. No. 

Mr. POE. God bless the Hungarian people. I have heard that we 

have had problems with that in the United States because it mentions a deity. 

I am out of time. 

I will put all my other questions and then I will get answers in 

writing. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Thank you very much, Your Honor, and unfortunately, Mr. Yee, you are going to have another Texan following 

another Texan here. 

Mr. WEBER. Or fortunately, depending upon your point of view. 

Judge Poe, just slide your notes over here for me. Would you? 

Mr. Yee, when you were discussing with Congressman Meeks 

about the extremes, and the Congressman said he was concerned 

about extremes, it looks like he is extremely cautious, you responded to him by saying that you were concerned about the extreme right. But you didn’t mention the extreme left. I just want 

to mention that for the record. You can go back and listen to your 

comments. 

You said that you were concerned about the anti-immigrant 

trend over there. 

Do you have examples? Can you quote going back 2 and 3 and 

4 years their immigration flow? Can you give us proof of that? 

Mr. YEE. I am sorry, sir, I don’t understand the question. The 

numbers of immigrants. 

Mr. WEBER. You were saying they are becoming anti-immigration. Is that right? 

Mr. YEE. There is a rise in popularity of a far right extreme 

party named Jobbik which among other——

Mr. WEBER. Gotcha. Has that affected the flow of immigration 

into Hungary? 

Mr. YEE. I don’t know. I don’t know. 

25

Mr. WEBER. So you don’t really have any numbers to back that 

up in terms of how it is affecting immigration, you are just seeing 

a bunch of rhetoric out in the public. 

Mr. YEE. Sir, I didn’t make any comment on immigration itself. 

My concern is about the presence of an extreme right party which 

is anti-Semitic, anti-foreigner——

Mr. WEBER. But not an extreme left party. 

Mr. YEE. If there were a problem with it, an—I am against extremism, sir, of any kind. Any extremist party. 

Mr. WEBER. But you don’t really have any facts to back that up 

on immigration itself. 

One of the other members had a good—compare it to its neighbors. It might have been the chairman. 

How do you compare Hungary’s, let’s just say, stance against 

Russia with Crimea, for example? How would you make that comparison? 

Mr. YEE. The comparison between Hungary’s position on——

Mr. WEBER. Well, Crimea, Romania, Bulgaria. You really didn’t 

answer that question. Well, we are going to say Crimea because 

there is a history there. 

So is Hungary in a position to be favorable toward Russia? And 

if so, would you say the natural gas played a role in that? 

Mr. YEE. Sir, I have to say I don’t understand the question. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. I think the chairman asked you. You are not 

making a comparison. You are saying a lot of bad things about 

Hungary, and yet you have got other countries right there, Romania, Bulgaria, and I would even add Crimea, that you are not making any comparison to those neighboring countries. You are just 

singling out Hungary. Why? 

Mr. YEE. Well, sir, I would be happy to talk about the other 

countries because I also cover them. I came prepared to talk about 

Hungary. That was the topic I thought——

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Is Hungary more favorable to the United 

States than those other countries are? 

Mr. YEE. I don’t believe it is possible to make that generalization, 

sir. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. All right. Well, let me move to my next question. 

You said they are working very hard on energy, and the judge 

over here had a good—and I have LNG plants in Texas. 

You said that importance is placed on results. Those are your 

words. 

Okay. How about the speed with which—by which those results 

are reached? Would it be better for Hungary to get natural gas 

from us sooner or later? 

Mr. YEE. Sooner. 

Mr. WEBER. That is pretty easy. Isn’t it? 

Okay. So on LNG permitting, and I have got a lot of it in my 

district on the Gulf Coast of Texas, have you been pushing the administration, the Department of Energy, FERC, to really get on top 

of this and make sure that we can get as much LNG? 

Now, you did mention the fact that there is a lot of it, but I 

would argue that it is in spite—gas is very, very plentiful, in spite 

of this administration, not because of. Okay. And have you really 

26

been pushing the administration to release that LNG and get those 

permits in gear high speed? 

Mr. YEE. Sir, I have not my answer——

Mr. WEBER. That seems to contradict your position here. 

Mr. YEE. My answer was in response to the question what is the 

United States doing to help Hungary. And these are the two areas 

where we are trying to help. But I would never say, sir, that we 

very exhausting all possibilities——

Mr. WEBER. Is that a product more of the private sector, or is 

that of the government sector, all the gas that we have now? 

Mr. YEE. I wouldn’t dare to speak on behalf of the private sector, 

sir. I am talking about U.S. policy and what we are trying to do 

with our partners in Europe. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. But in your opinion, you are an American, do 

you think that that gas has been produced because of the administration or because of the private sector? 

Mr. YEE. Sir, it has got to be a combination. 

Mr. WEBER. It has to be a combination, 50/50, 60/40, 70/30? Put 

a ratio on it. 

Mr. YEE. I am not competent to answer that. 

Mr. WEBER. You are not competent to answer that. Okay. Well, 

you have an opinion and you know the answer. It is more about 

the private sector. 

Do you think that Putin is on the March? 

Mr. YEE. Sir, well, thank you for that question. 

We do believe that Russia is interested in expanding its influence 

in Eastern and Central Europe. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. 

Mr. YEE. And it important that we find ways to——

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Is Hungary enough of a friend and an ally 

that we need to help protect them? 

Mr. YEE. We have an obligation under a treaty to defend Hungary and our other allies. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Will you leave here and go back to the administration and push for getting the gas permitted process as soon as 

possible? 

Mr. YEE. Sir, I will carry the message back and do my best. 

Mr. WEBER. All right. Thank you. I appreciate that. 

I yield back. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Thank you very much for joining us today, and 

it was a lively discussion, and we appreciate you putting yourself 

here with us and being really ready to answer these, and these 

were very tough questions for you, but thank you for being here, 

and don’t think because we are asking tough questions that we 

don’t admire you as a person and are grateful for the job you are 

doing for us, for our country, in the State Department. So thank 

you very much, and this witness is now excused, and we will be 

in recess for 2 minutes while the next panel comes—steps forward. 

Thank you. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. We have permission from the ranking member 

to proceed. He is out making a phone call and will be back momentarily, but he gave his permission to proceed with the hearing, and 

the witnesses have already been introduced, and so I would just 

27

ask if you could keep your testimony to about 5 minutes apiece, 

and let me note that we had planned to have one more—we plan 

to have sort of a positive witness—two positive witnesses and two 

critical witnesses, and that didn’t work out. 

The two positive witnesses that we had in fact cancelled precipitously on us, and that type of foolish behavior, people end up hurting their own cause when they do stuff like that, and, unfortunately, we tried our best. We have now at least got somewhat of 

a balanced panel because that is what we want—that is what you 

want to have. In my committee meetings we always struggle to get 

both sides and every argument on both sides presented, and that 

is the way I think you make decisions and are able to get to the 

truth, and that is what this is all about. 

So we will start with Mr. Volker and just work our way down 

the line. 5 minutes apiece, and then we will go into the last round 

of questions. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE KURT VOLKER, EXECUTIVE 

DIRECTOR, THE MCCAIN INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL 

LEADERSHIP, ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY 

Mr. VOLKER. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

members of the committee for having me. 

I have worked with Hungary in one way or another for about 27 

years. I started studying Hungarian in 1988. I remember the first 

phrase my teacher taught me was [speaking foreign language.] 

Which is: Don’t be mad at me because I am late. 

I served in Hungary at the U.S. Embassy in the mid-1990s when 

we moved the U.S. Army from Germany to Bosnia and had to set 

up U.S. bases in Hungary. I worked very closely with Major General Jim Wright, who was the commander of the 21st TAACOM. 

He was a Texan, and I remember him saying as he left Hungary 

after all of this that, ‘‘I am proud to be an American. I am proud 

to be a soldier. If I weren’t an American soldier, I would want to 

be a Hungarian.’’ And that is the kind spirit that I see between our 

countries and between our values and what I believe we should 

represent together as an alliance. 

I want to make three basic points. One about the context that 

we are working in; two, about Hungary itself; and, three, about 

U.S. policy. 

Context is important. Russia is on the move, as you asked. Putin 

is imposing authoritarianism at home. He has invaded Georgia, he 

has invaded Ukraine. He has annexed Crimea. He is putting a lot 

of pressure on countries in the neighborhood, including through energy policy. We have a very weak EU at the moment. Europe is 

more divided today than at any time since it was forcibly divided 

by the Iron Curtain. It is divided east/west over things like Russia 

and Ukraine. It is divided north/south over things like immigration 

and the Eurozone. We have an EU that is looking inward. We have 

the United States that is much less engaged in Europe today than 

it was in the past. And when you travel in Europe these days, that 

is all you hear. Whether it is in the Baltics, in Germany, in Poland, 

in France, in Southern Europe and Central Europe, they are looking for more U.S. leadership and they don’t see it. 

28

That is the context in which forces rise up that we don’t want 

to see. And we see this across all of Europe, not just Hungary. We 

see parties on the far right gaining in strength like the National 

Front in France. We see the Alliance for Deutschland in Germany. 

We see Jobbik in Hungary. We see a pro-Russian Czech President. 

We see a Slovak Prime Minister who in the past has been very oriented toward Russia. We see the nationalist parties in the Balkans 

digging in on their positions. We are seeing a Europe where the 

forces that we would like to see not be strong actually get strengthened in the face of a weak Europe and a retreating United States 

and a tough Russia. And of course Russia throws a lot of money 

around to try to influence these developments, paying for political 

parties, bribing politicians, taking advantage of corruption, corrupt 

business deals, mafia, intelligence services, foreign language propaganda, the whole works. So that is what we see in context here. 

Within that, then, so, okay so what about Hungary? Hungary is, 

as has been pointed out here, a democracy, a market economy, an 

ally, a member of the European Union, and we have seen since 

1989 a lot of development in Hungary over time. And if you visit 

there, you will see it is a great place. 

There are things—and I should say I have known the Prime Minister, members of cabinet for 20 years. I have known the opposition 

leaders, current and former. I have got lots of friends there. Some 

who are very opposed to the government, some who are very supportive of the government. It is a place full of great people, smart 

people, people with strong opinions who disagree. People say if you 

put two Hungarians in a room you get three opinions at least. And 

that is the nature of Hungary. That makes it a robust democracy 

with a lot of disagreement. 

Now, I look at many of the policies that the Prime Minister has 

undertaken in the course of his time as Prime Minister. I disagree 

with some of them, as anyone would. I have variously in private 

conversations described them as arrogant, capricious, self-centered 

or bone headed. But that doesn’t mean he is tearing up democracy. 

It means he is a politician, and he is doing what he believes is 

right, and he has the votes in the country to sustain that. He is 

a very effective politician, very aggressive—I view him much more 

like a Chicago politician with a country instead of a city than a dictator or someone who is imposing something on the whole society. 

Now, that being said, there are important issues in Hungary, 

and I think that they all deserve discussion and debate. But I 

think that they get discussion and debate inside Hungary from the 

different political parties, from opposition media, opposition television, opposition newspapers, friends of mine there—it is a very 

robust debate. There are protests outside the Prime Minister’s 

house. That is okay. And that is how I think of it. So I don’t think 

we should be accusing him of tearing up a democracy. I think we 

should have a partnership where we are trying to work on big challenges together. If we have points of view, we can certainly express 

them, but we have got to do it in a respectful way where we are 

not telling them how to run their domestic politics just as we would 

not accept if they were telling us how to run our domestic politics. 

The third point, then, is about U.S. policy. On U.S. policy, I think 

the key thing is to focus on is what do we want, and how do we 

29

get it? What we want is to stop Putin from disrupting Europe, imposing authoritarianism at home, invading neighboring countries, 

tearing up Ukraine. We want to stop that. We want to stop 

Islamist extremism like ISIS, and we want our allies helping to do 

that. And we want our community, our Transatlantic community to 

be democratic and market economic, with good rule of law, good respect for human rights, and secure so that we don’t have to worry 

about it for the future and future generations. That is what we 

want. 

I think the way in which we have singled out Hungary and gone 

after areas where we do have some disagreements has actually 

caused more anti-Americanism inside Hungary. It has led the government to feel that it can’t necessarily work with us as closely as 

it could because of domestic perceptions. It has driven them to 

want to get back at us in some ways. And so it is just not a constructive way to get what we actually want. 

Now, we may have these disagreements, but we really got to 

think as a matter of U.S. policy how do we do that. I think that 

in the last 6 months or so I have seen some improvement in this. 

I think we have been working a little bit better with Hungary. I 

respect our new Ambassador from Hungary as well as our new U.S. 

Ambassador there. I think they have made an improvement, and 

I think that if we are working together as allies based on shared 

values with common perceptions about what is going on around us, 

we will be able to forge a very strong partnership with Hungary. 

Thank you. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Thank you very much. 

[Mr. Volker did not submit a prepared statement.] 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Mr. Stahnke. 

STATEMENT OF MR. TAD STAHNKE, VICE PRESIDENT, 

RESEARCH & ANALYSIS, HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST 

Mr. STAHNKE. Stahnke, yes, sir. Thank you. Like Eddie Stanky 

the baseball player. 

Thanks for holding this hearing. It is very important, the future 

of U.S./Hungary relations. Hungary is an important country. It is 

an important ally to the United States, and it should be a concern, 

we believe, to the United States when an ally is taking steps that 

call into question commitment to democratic governance and the 

rule of law. And so I appreciate the opportunity to be here. 

I will say a few words about Hungary and then say a few words 

about recommendations. 

And since 2010 the government of Prime Minister Orban and his 

Fidesz party has made sweeping changes to Hungarian constitutional and legal systems. And a number of these changes have 

eroded the rule of law, human rights protections, and checks and 

balances. This is not a human rights first unique interpretation of 

what is going on. We have looked at it. Hungarian human rights 

groups have looked at this. Hungarian human rights groups that 

have criticized governments from the fall of Communism. So not 

groups that have a special problem with this government, but 

groups that are—who are looking at holding the Hungarian government accountable to its international obligations, they have. Freedom House. The European Commission. The European Parliament. 

30

The Fundamental Rights Agency of the European Union. The 

Council of Europe. The Organization of Security and Cooperation 

in Europe. All of these bodies have expressed concerns. And our 

own government has begun to express those concerns, as been mentioned. President Obama raised concerns about the treatment of 

civil society, and I will come back to that in a moment. 

Also at the 10th anniversary of the OSCE Berlin Conference on 

anti-Semitism Samantha Power expressed concerns about the situation for anti-Semitism and related problems in Hungary. And, finally, Prime Minister Orban himself, who famously in the summer 

called on Hungarians to help build a non-liberal state. And that is 

not, you know, liberal in the U.S. political terms. He is talking 

about an illiberal democracy and looking toward Russia and China 

and Turkey as models. And that should be concerning, I think, to 

the United States for the reasons that we have mentioned. And 

that Mr. Orban’s actions in some respects are not inconsistent with 

his words. 

So a few points about that. The harassment continues of nongovernment organizations receiving foreign funding. This is a—and 

we can talk more about it if you like in questions, but, you know, 

Orban himself has singled out civil society organizations for particular criticism, calling them paid political activists who are trying 

to help foreign interests. And then the government launches an investigation, the details of which—the basis of which is still not entirely clear, and then police and special forces raid offices. They 

come with search warrants, and they search not only the office 

which is written on the warrants, but they demand to go to the organization head’s home to search their home, which is not written 

on the warrant, but the woman is told that this is, you know, the 

new way that we are going to—we are allowed to implement our 

warrants in that way. So there are issues here. 

And it was mentioned that the—a court, yes, reversed and said 

that these raids were not done in accordance with law, but there 

is still a cloud hanging over these organizations and still their tax 

ID numbers are being held—are being challenged, which would 

force them to shut them down. And it is not for the whatever underlying financial irregularities there might have been, but for a 

noncompliance—alleged noncompliance with the investigations, and 

it seems as though the groups have been compliant. 

And needless to say, restricting NGOs because of their foreign 

funding only, which I am not saying necessarily has been adjudicated in this case, would be a violation of international standards 

and something of concern. 

Also in the area of religion/state relations, the government has 

yet to change a 2011 law which deregistered hundreds of previously registered churches and required them to reapply under a 

politicized procedure, not my words. It is the European Court of 

Human Rights words, which required a two-thirds vote in the Parliament rather than a decision in the courts. They took the decision 

whether or not to recognize religious institutions from a court and 

gave it to the Parliament. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Could I ask you to repeat that last point that 

you just made. I was trying—did it something—what did they do 

with the churches and——

31

Mr. STAHNKE. Sure. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. If you could just—I have trouble——

Mr. STAHNKE. Yeah. So in 2011, the government passed a law 

that changed how they were going to recognize religious organizations for the purposes of granting them privileges. Like many European countries, they have a system of recognizing religious institutions in order to allow them to get state subsidies or allow them 

to get tax—from the—you know——

So they changed it. There was—it was an administrative procedure that was governed by a court. They changed it to a administrative procedure that then would be ratified by the Parliament. 

Right? As though Congress was going to be the ones actually recognizing religious institutions or not, and they forced all of the recognized institutions to go through this new process. Hundreds of 

them. 

This was challenged. It was brought to the European court of 

Human Rights. The European court said that this was a politicized 

procedure that violated the rights. These were groups who did 

not—who were recognized and were no longer recognized. It violated their right to freedom of association and freedom of religion. 

The government under that judgment is bound to revise its procedure. It has not yet done so. There are religious organizations who 

still remain unrecognized. 

My third point has to do with anti-Semitism, nationalism, and 

political extremism. Elie Wiesel in 2012 returned an award to the 

Hungarian government expressing the following concern: Hungarian authorities are encouraging the whitewashing of tragic and 

criminal episodes in Hungary’s past. That is the governmentstates’ 

involvement in the deportation of Jews. 

Since that time, the current government has pursued controversial historical projects in Hungary, including a new museum, a controversial monument that 30 Members of Congress asked him not 

to go forward with without consultations with the Hungarian Jewish community. Two days after the government—Obama was reelected, they started building the monument amid protests. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. And it was a monument to again? Do you 

want to repeat that. 

Mr. STAHNKE. It was a monument to the so-called victims of a 

German occupation of Hungary, and it portrayed a weak compliant 

Hungary being attacked by an aggressive German eagle. And the 

complaints of the Jewish community was that—and others was 

that it did not adequately recognize those victims, and it caused 

some segment of the community to withdraw its support for the 

government’s 70th anniversary commemorations of the Holocaust. 

And I want to be clear. President Orban has said there is zero toleration for anti-Semitism in Hungary. He said it recently. It is very 

important, very welcome, that he said it. Senior government officials have also recently said that the Holocaust was a disaster for 

all Hungarians. Very welcome. And, nevertheless, concerns remain. 

There is a 2013 poll by the Europe Union Fundamental Rights 

Agency that said 50 percent of Hungarian Jews were concerned. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. You know, excuse me. You are only supposed 

to have 5 minutes. You got about 6 or 7, and you are going on 10 

now. 

32

Mr. STAHNKE. I am sorry. If I can just make a couple points 

about recommendations, sir. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Be very quick because otherwise there will be 

no time for questions. 

Mr. POE. Votes are——

Mr. STAHNKE. Yes. And I think that some combination of smart 

diplomatic pressure supporting embattled civil society and independent journalism, holding Orban to a zero tolerance pledge on 

anti-Semitism, and launching a better effort—U.S. Government 

launching a better effort to demonstrate the benefits to the Hungarian people of close ties to the United States and a democratic 

Europe is very important. And, finally, I think as we have been 

talking about, Congress should look more closely at Russian influence throughout the region and the pernicious effect that that has 

had on human rights and many other—many other things so we 

can get a better handle on that. 

Thank you very much. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Stahnke follows:]

33


94687c-1.eps
34


94687c-2.eps
35


94687c-3.eps
36


94687c-4.eps
37


94687c-5.eps
38


94687c-6.eps
39


94687c-7.eps
40


94687c-8.eps
41


94687c-9.eps
42


94687c-10.eps
43


94687c-11.eps
44


94687c-12.eps
45


94687c-13.eps
46


94687c-14.eps
47


94687c-15.eps
48


94687c-16.eps
49


94687c-17.eps
50


94687c-18.eps
51


94687c-19.eps
52


94687c-20.eps
53


94687c-21.eps
54


94687c-22.eps
55


94687c-23.eps
56


94687c-24.eps
57

Mr. ROHRBACHER. And for our lasts witness, Mr. Simonyi. 

STATEMENT OF ANDRAS SIMONYI, PH.D., MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR TRANSATLANTIC RELATIONS, 

SCHOOL OF ADVANCED INTERNATIONAL STUDIES, JOHNS 

HOPKINS UNIVERSITY (FORMER HUNGARIAN AMBASSADOR 

TO THE UNITED STATES) 

Ambassador SIMONYI. Thank you very much. I don’t know which 

category I am supposed to fall into, but you will tell me after I have 

spoken. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. As long as you are absolutely truthful, it is 

okay. 

Ambassador SIMONYI. Okay. Good. Well, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, Iwould like to say I am a Hungarian patriot 

who—I have spent half my lifetime working on building and 

strengthening the ties between our two countries, and I am determined to do that. So when I come here in front of you, and I will 

be critical, it is because I see this as an important part of what this 

relationship is supposed to be about. 

I see today’s hearing as a desire by the United States Congress 

to send a strong message that it cares about Hungary, its people, 

and the state of its democracy. My friend and mentor, former chairman Congressman Tom Lantos would have approved. However, he 

would have—he would not be happy about the worries which have 

been prompted by this meeting, or the worries which prompted this 

meeting. But I would also like to tell you that I was so proud to 

serve my country under President George W. Bush, and I worked 

very closely with the President and with members of his—members 

of his administration, and I would also like to say that I am a certified honorary Texan. 

In 2014, for the first time since the fall of the Iron Curtain, Hungary was labeled as a defective democracy by the respectable 

Berkland Foundation. In the country report we just heard the dismantling of democratic institutions. This is worrying. In my written testimony, which I ask you to attach to the report, I deal in 

detail with the 52.7 percent win of votes achieved by Prime Minister Orban’s party in 2010, which resulted in a two-thirds super 

majority in Parliament, a feat repeated in 2014 when only 44.5 percent was enough to achieve the same results. 

In my books, in democracy a super majority should not be interpreted as a license to do whatever you want even if it is legal to 

do so. As a result, there is no other democratic country in the Europe Union where power is a not concentrated as much as it is in 

Hungary today. 

In the wake of the 2012 new Constitution, and approved by 

Fidesz, the ruling party, which has since been repeatedly amended 

in its image by the same super majority, control over governmental 

power, checks and balances have been weakened. 

Unfortunately, a number of legal initiatives struck down by the 

constitutional courts as unconstitutional were immediately and 

hastily incorporated into the Constitution. 

The government has, thus, restricted the competence of the constitutional court to examine the constitutionality of financial, budgetary, and tax laws. In the Prime Minister’s own words, the conVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:08 Jul 09, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_EEET\051915\94687 SHIRL
58

cept of checks and balances ‘‘is a U.S. invention that for some reasons or intellectual mediocrity Europe has decided to adopt and use 

in European politics.’’

I beg to disagree. In my view, this is a universal principle of democracy. The Prime Minister believes in a strong all-powerful state 

that has the right to interfere in the function of the markets, determine the curricula in every single public school in the country, and 

create a hierarchy among religious groups. This restricts competition and freedom of choice. 

Mr. Chairman, the overwhelming majority of Hungarians are not 

extremists. I am, therefore, worried about the way the prime minister has adopted some extremist rhetoric in recent months. His 

comments that are outright anti-immigrant, centerphobic, overtly 

homophobic, are dangerous in a country that has still not fully recovered from the terrible human and intellectual losses it has suffered exactly because of exclusion and hate under authoritarian regimes of the past. 

Mr. Chairman, the Prime Minister has dramatically modified his 

previously unqualified pro-Western stance in the last years. He has 

most recently suggested that autocratic regimes are more efficient 

than democracies, which in his view tend to get lost in debates. 

Hungary is unfortunately too dependent on Russian energy supplies, some 80 to 90 percent, which has its dangers. This government has done little to abate the situation. It is in the interest of 

Hungary the Russian pressure is resisted and that agreements are 

fully transparent, avoiding the slightest hint of graft or political interference by Mr. Putin short and long term. 

And here I would like to tell you that in my day job I spend 

about 85 percent of my time trying to get the United States to get 

LNG gas to Europe. Specifically, most importantly, to Central and 

Eastern Europe. 

The relationship between Hungary and the United States is that 

of allies, based on mutual respect and friendship which carries obligations and responsibilities. The government’s recent decision to 

support the war against ISIS on the ground must be lauded. It was 

abysmal petty politicking by some members of the opposition not 

to support the government’s decision. Meeting our security obligations, however, cannot only be a tool to disarm U.S. criticism. Our 

Transatlantic alliance is about a lot more. U.S. diplomacy is right 

to continue to call on the government to meet its obligations of 

shared values and democracy. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, why waste precious time of talented Ambassadors. And here I must say that Hungary has chosen one of 

the most talented Ambassadors to serve in it Washington. Why 

waste the precious time of talented Ambassadors and diplomats in 

Washington on trying to explain away decisions of the government, 

statements by its Prime Minister, a confusing foreign policy instead 

of focusing on new forward-looking opportunities for investments 

and trade innovation, business, and science across the board. Why 

waste taxpayers’ money on K Street lobbyists? I know from experience that there is an easier, more efficient, and cheaper way. Revert back to the fundamental values of democracy of consensus, of 

inclusion at home, and clarity in foreign policy abroad. 

59

Mr. Chairman, finally I really want to take this opportunity to 

thank you and the members of the subcommittee for your interest, 

but also all the American friends of Hungary for their unwavering 

support for the democratic future of my country. Thank you. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. And thank all of you, the witnesses, for laying 

a good foundation for a discussion. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Simonyi follows:]

60


94687b-1.eps
61


94687b-2.eps
62


94687b-3.eps
63


94687b-4.eps
64


94687b-5.eps
65


94687b-6.eps
66

Mr. ROHRBACHER. You know, first of all, just about a couple of 

points you made, and then I have got some questions for the other 

panelists as well. 

So a government without checks and balances like the United 

States is itself more authoritarian. Is that right? Is that what you 

are saying? So the parliamentarian system in England, which has 

no checks and balances, is authoritarian. 

Ambassador SIMONYI. Checks and balances is about the institutional guarantees that a one party, whether it is a majority or a 

minority, does not have an overwhelming concentrated power. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. So you are against the British system and all 

the other democracies——

Ambassador SIMONYI. I am not against the British system. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Well, but let me say what you just described, 

to be very fair about it, when you have a parliamentary system, 

which the United States doesn’t have, but many other countries do, 

if you have a consensus among the population that something has 

to be done, they end up electing a Parliament which concentrates 

power, and in these countries, basically, like Great Britain, they do 

not have the checks and balances that we have in making sure that 

you have three layers of government, et cetera, et cetera. And our 

Founding Fathers had a different thing in mind. 

I will have to say that your testimony in that end is not impressive that they—that that makes him in some way an authoritarian 

because he redid the Constitution to make sure what? Quite often 

what happens when they follow the American example, you get 

governments that don’t work because they are not Americans. And 

it doesn’t work in what we have heard in our testimony today is 

that since Orbanhas come in, we have had a major success in their 

economy. The country, more than anything else, is strengthening 

and able to help us in Afghanistan and elsewhere and have a higher level of growth. Maybe that is because they decided to go with 

democracy in a different way than our checks and balances. 

You may answer that. 

Ambassador SIMONYI. Mr. Chairman, let me just add, I do not 

believe in illiberal democracy. And illiberal in this sense does not 

mean illiberal in the American sense. It means Western style. I believe in Western style democracy. I do not believe in Russian or 

Asari-style democracy, and I am very much disturbed that my 

country has started——

Mr. ROHRBACHER. We are not talking about Russian——

Ambassador SIMONYI [continuing]. Started in that direction. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Okay. So how is the parliamentary system 

that has been set up by Orban different than Great Britain’s Government? 

Ambassador SIMONYI. Sir, I think what you have to understand 

is that this super majority has also resulted in limiting the possibilities for other parties to compete on a level playing field. I do 

not believe that the last election, which, as I said, 44 percent was 

enough to produce a two-thirds majority, that the parties were 

competing on a level playing field. 

Mr. ROHRBACHER. Okay. I would just have to say that the idea 

that there is going to be no gerrymandering, we have had gerrymandering in our country for a long time, we are not an authoriVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:08 Jul 09, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_EEET\051915\94687 SHIRL
67

tarian country. Although we don’t like it, we don’t think it is a good 

thing, but I can tell you in California we have 15 Members of Congress now who are Republicans. When I came here, there were 25 

and somebody redistricted it in a way—but I have never claimed 

that our government in California was not a democratic government. 

Let me just go back to some of the super majority which you 

mentioned here, and I will actually at this point go to Judge Poe, 

and maybe ask few more questions at the end, but go right ahead. 

Mr. POE. Thank the chairman. Thank you all for being here. 

I just want to follow up on my previous comments that my concern is that the United States is trying to get another country, an 

ally, a friend, close friend, to have democracy in our image. That 

is really the concern that I have and that Hungarian bashing by 

our government seems to reflect that. I certainly don’t agree with 

a lot of things that are taking place in Hungary or the United 

States or anyplace. I can find—as somebody said, I can find a problem in every solution, and I can. In every country I can give you 

a list of those. 

But, Mr. Volker, I will first turn to you, and we will see how far 

we can go down the line. 

Do you see, based on your knowledge of the Hungarians, this attitude of the United States about these issues toward Hungary, has 

that made the United States closer friends, buddies, workers, or 

have we pushed the Hungarian people and the government away 

based upon these actions that we have been taking? 

Mr. VOLKER. I have had conversations with cabinet members in 

Hungary who has said that it has pushed away, that they feel more 

distant. I have had conversations with private citizens who support 

the government who feel upset at the United States. And I have 

had conversations with opposition figures and private citizens who 

oppose the government who are grateful for the United States for 

intervening. 

So it is exactly as you would think in intervening and domestic 

politics. Depending on where you sit is where you stand. 

Mr. POE. And that is my point exactly. Is the United States 

interfering in domestic politics? 

Mr. VOLKER. I think that the fundamental issue here is exactly 

that. That we are getting drawn into differences over policy as opposed to differences of whether a democracy is functioning. 

I think we have a reason as the United States, as a great democracy in the world, to speak up when we see things—democracies 

really under threat. But if is really policy differences and choices 

that a country is making in its own internal politics, I think we 

have to hang back. 

Mr. POE. And with the bigger—I am just going to try to go down 

the row on all these questions. 

Would the bigger issue be that we ought to be concerned about 

foreign relations, foreign problems, like the Russians, for example. 

They are the big elephant in the neighborhood. 

I was in Hungary over the weekend as a member of the U.S. 

NATO Parliamentary Assembly, and they spent a lot of time talking about the Russians. They are worried about the Russians. 

Shouldn’t we be more forthright as the United States? We are 

68

going to help you with your concerns about the Russians, like sending them natural gas as soon as we can. I mean, are we missing 

something in our relationship——

Mr. VOLKER. No. I think that is exactly it, that Hungary, as we 

have established, is a democracy. It is an EU country. And, most 

importantly, it is an American ally. And we have real problems 

with Russia. We have problems in the Ukraine, we have problems 

with ISIS, and we should be gathering, working with, and leading 

our allies, and we should be tackling these challenges. 

Mr. POE. Not to justify any of the criticism or to support any of 

the things that have been critical, I am not saying anything of 

those things are right or wrong, it just seemed to me that we ought 

to be dealing with a foreign country on foreign relations as opposed 

to telling them what to do in a domestic situation. We certainly 

wouldn’t like it if they tried to tell us what to do. 

Mr. VOLKER. Yeah. I think if—sir, I think if it crosses a real line 

where it is—you know, it is no longer a democracy, it is a dictatorship, then we would have a reason, but we are not there. 

Mr. POE. All right. And just a question or two that—Hungary is 

operating under a new Constitution. Why did they get rid of the 

old Constitution? 

Mr. VOLKER. Because the old Constitution was seen by the government as a compromise with the Communists in 1988 and 1989, 

and they felt that that compromise led to a document that could 

only be changed when you had a two-thirds majority, and it favored over a course of a long period of time socialists in the administrative structures, in the party financing, and the judiciary, and 

all these things. 

So the current government believes that their only chance to 

amend that Constitution that emerged from the Communist period 

was to put through these sweeping amendments. 

Mr. POE. And it was intended to be a temporary Constitution 

anyway. Wasn’t it? 

Mr. VOLKER. It was stated at the time it was meant to be a temporary Constitution. 

Mr. POE. Communism light, as I call it. 

Mr. VOLKER. Right. And you can argue the merits of what was 

put in its place, but it was a policy judgment by the government 

that got elected with two-thirds, for the first time, enabling themselves to make those changes. 

Mr. POE. All right. Thank you very much. I will yield back. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. And Mr. Weber. 

Mr. WEBER. Mr. Stahnke, you mentioned you were concerned 

about our allies’ style of doing away with democratic governance, 

rule of law, and since 2010, you said there have been sweeping 

changes, and of course, you just heard that exchange about the 

change in the Constitution. 

You said you were concerned about Hungary becoming in 

illiberal state like Russia and China, and then you mention Orban 

had bashed some paid political activists helping with foreign interests. You recall make those comments? 

Mr. STAHNKE. Not exactly the way you describe them, sir, but I 

do make those comments, yes. 

69

Mr. WEBER. Orban didn’t make those comments. Would you say 

that that is akin to a Senate majority leader coming over on the 

floor of the Senate here in the United States of America and bashing the Koch Brothers, or lying about a Presidential candidate not 

paying income taxes for the last 10 years and then refusing on national media to say that was wrong? So would you say that politicians often make negative comments about those that oppose 

them? 

Mr. STAHNKE. So——

Mr. WEBER. That is yes or no. 

Mr. STAHNKE. Yes. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. 

Mr. STAHNKE. However, if I may, I think it has gone beyond that. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Well——

Mr. STAHNKE. I mean, he can make these comments, and then 

the government has taken steps——

Mr. WEBER. That’s—but I don’t want to contend with you because I have got a very limited time. They are going to call 

votes——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. It is yours. 

Mr. WEBER [continuing]. Any second. That is right. 

So then you said they took steps to shut down tax ID. Is that 

different, in your view, than the IRS over here not even allowing 

tax IDs for conservative groups? Is that somehow worse—or worse 

in your opinion? 

Mr. STAHNKE. Shutting off tax IDs because the groups receive 

foreign funding which——

Mr. WEBER. But you agree that happens over here as well, and 

when they do even allow the tax IDs, right, would there have been 

a difference in political opinion? 

Mr. STAHNKE. Sir, I am not aware that—I think groups in the 

U.S. can receive foreign funding. 

Mr. WEBER. But you are aware that the IRS over here has denied tax IDs to conservative organizations. 

Mr. STAHNKE. Sir, I am not expert on what——

Mr. WEBER. You are aware or unaware? Let me move on. And 

how about the 2010 national healthcare law that is—that is absolutely making companies, individuals make health abortion choices, 

if you will, or reproductive health choices that are against their religious objections. So if you have a group over here that is passing 

laws that says you are going to do this against your religious, your 

conscientious objection, is that somehow different than what a majority over there might do under Orban? 

Mr. STAHNKE. Yes, sir. 

Mr. WEBER. It is different? 

Mr. STAHNKE. It is different. 

Mr. WEBER. How? 

Mr. STAHNKE. Because of some of the changes that have been put 

in the Constitution. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. 

Mr. STAHNKE. But we got a Supreme Court that will eventually——

Mr. WEBER. And they can overcome some of that, especially in 

the Green case. 

70

Mr. STAHNKE. And they—excuse me, please. 

Mr. WEBER. Excuse me. I am running out of time. Then you said 

that as long as it was ratified by Parliament, and the chairman addressed that, that one particular comment because—to Dr. 

Simonyi.I think you are against the English form of government 

with the Parliament. Just because it is ratified by the Parliament, 

is that somehow worse than being ratified by the United States 

Congress in 2010 and then unilaterally changed by the executive 

branch some 30-something times? I think all this talk about Orban 

being such a devilish character, I mean, you can see some 

semblances over here. I mean, I am just—I am looking—trying to 

look at it in the 30,000-foot view. 

Mr. STAHNKE. I understand. I would just disagree, sir. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Now, you also said there was a whitewashing 

of historical events against the Jews. 

Mr. STAHNKE. I don’t believe I said that, sir. 

Mr. WEBER. Three examples. 

Mr. STAHNKE. Yes, I quote Elie Wiesel when I said that. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Can you give us three examples of what he 

is talking about? 

Mr. STAHNKE. Yes. Southern monument was one. 

Mr. WEBER. All right. 

Mr. STAHNKE. There is a controversy on a museum. Hungary has 

a perfectly good Holocaust Memorial and museum in their capital, 

to their credit, right. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. 

Mr. STAHNKE. But the government wanted to open—wants to 

open an additional museum——

Mr. WEBER. All right. So you have got——

Mr. STAHNKE [continuing]. To the victims of the occupation. 

Mr. WEBER. Three examples. So would you—would you agree 

with me that when a country starts to exhibit anti-Semitismor 

snubbing of any other country for that matter, but let’s say Israel 

in this case, it is a bad thing and sometimes it even begins with 

snubbing of their leaders. I mean, witness what happened with 

Benjamin Netanyahu coming over here and couldn’t be received at 

the highest level because he wasn’t welcome. So could you agree 

that that is along those same lines? 

Mr. STAHNKE. I don’t see the connection, sir. 

Mr. WEBER. You don’t see the connection. 

Mr. STAHNKE. No. No. 

Mr. WEBER. So it is okay. In other words, if that doesn’t rise to 

the level of your concern, that there is no connection. If it rises my 

concern, that doesn’t matter. 

Mr. STAHNKE. No, I don’t think that is what I am saying, sir. 

Maybe I don’t understand your question. 

Mr. WEBER. Well, I am just saying that that happens in multiple 

countries. It is not just over in Hungary, right? 

Mr. STAHNKE. Anti-Semitism is a feature of many countries; that 

is correct. 

Mr. WEBER. Would you categorize the snubbing of Netanyahu as 

anti-Semitism? 

Mr. STAHNKE. I don’t have a view on that, sir. 

Mr. WEBER. You don’t have a view. Okay. Just curious. 

71

Mr. STAHNKE. So my—what I am looking at here——

Mr. WEBER. I have got 30 seconds left. 

Mr. STAHNKE [continuing]. Is a international commitment, sir, 

and a compliance with international standards, not promoting U.S., 

how the U.S. does a——

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Well, I am sorry, I am out of my time. I want 

to go back to Simonyi. You said no other country in the EU had 

the power concentrated as in Hungary. 

Ambassador SIMONYI. True. 

Mr. WEBER. Okay. Give me country number 2 and country number 3, and who is number——

Ambassador SIMONYI. I wouldn’t want to make this comparison, 

but what I would like to say, and which is—which dovetails—or is 

related to a comment that you—the chairman made earlier. I remember my conversations with President Bush when he would 

compare—compare and ask me questions about Hungary in the 

same group as Denmark and Sweden and Norway, and I am very, 

very saddened by the fact that now you are asking about a totally 

different group of immature democracies. 

Hungary used to be a very up on the top of the list of most advanced democracies in central Europe, and that is really my concern. My problem is that we have not made real progress. And I 

would also—I would also like to—like to come back to anti-Semitism. I do not believe Viktor Orban is anti-Semitic, but I do not believe that he has done enough to push back on anti-Semitism open 

or covert in my country. 

Mr. WEBER. Mr. Chairman, I am going to yield back because I 

know they are calling votes any minute, and you have more questions. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you. We are going to have votes pretty 

soon here. Let me just follow up with a few final questions. 

Let me just say, this bandying around the word ‘‘anti-Semitism’’ 

is a travesty. I think anybody doing that should be—I mean, hang 

your head in shame. You know, anybody who is saying—I have listened to what you are talking about. I have found no evidence of 

anti-Semitism in the testimony today. That they didn’t build a statue that expanded upon the victims of Hungary during the Second 

World War to specifically include Jews instead of everyone who suffered, that is not anti-Semitism, and you should be ashamed of 

yourself for suggesting that it is. 

Mr. STAHNKE. Sir, I did not call that anti-Semitism. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Sir, you may have some very important other 

points to make that are legitimate, and this is your—your colleague 

over here has just admitted Orban that has no anti-Semitism in 

him now, and he said he might appealing or somebody might be 

appealing to it. This—this charge that—of anti-Semitism, I tell 

you, of all the things came out today, has shown the type of malicious untruths and lies that are being told because this is not true 

from what I have heard today. 

We have asked you for evidence, and you have come up with 

things that are nonsensical. The fact is that they have museums. 

They completely are recognized, that the Jews were murdered during World War II. They completely understand that. There are museums to that end. There are synagogues—are through not synaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 15:08 Jul 09, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_EEET\051915\94687 SHIRL
72

gogues operating in Budapest? So with that said, I think—I am 

going to give you—I am going to actually give you a chance to answer that, so——

Mr. STAHNKE. Thank you, sir. I appreciate that. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Number 2, homophobic—it is a good—you are 

the only person who had courage enough to really pinpoint where 

a lot of people are upset with the Orban government, and it is that 

they don’t like gay marriage and they don’t want abortion. They 

are more traditional Catholics, and they were elected by a huge 

majority so they would pass laws that reflected the culture and values of their people. 

And I know that some people can’t—you know, their policy toward gay marriage should be something they determine by their 

culture, their values, and their parliamentary and democratic system, and I don’t consider—although I personally have—if someone 

who is up castigating someone saying bad things about someone’s 

personal life, I think that is wrong. I personally think that is unChristian, but people have a right to set their standards in terms 

of what they mean by marriage and by what they mean by some 

of their religious—their own religious convictions. 

I do not think that requiring two-thirds majority is in some way 

anti-democratic. I think it is pro-democratic to not to require twothirds majority. I would suggest, Mr. Weber, you pay attention to 

the type of things that he is talking about that have happened here 

in the last 6 years, blatantly happened here in the last 6 years, and 

you are claiming that we should question that whether Hungary 

has this democratic government or whether their government is 

dedicated to democracy, when they are doing worse things here 

than what you have charged with. 

And I mean, we have had out—people in our political party targeted by the administration by the IRS. We have seen friends of 

ours like Curt Weldon have his home invaded by the FBI, and then 

he lost his election by a few hundred votes. We see these things 

here. They are not right, but it doesn’t make us a non-democratic 

country. It means we got to start working together and perfect it 

and not have tolerance for basically the type of abuse that you are 

talking about. 

So—and that we are talking about. So let me just finish it up, 

and I will give each one of you 1 minute to summarize and to actually disagree with me or cut me down or whatever you have to say 

is fine, but let me just say that I think that what has come out 

of here, this hearing today, is there is a double standard, a heavy 

double standard going on here treating Hungary differently. And I 

think that it flows directly from these values, these traditional values that their government has—has embraced, and I think it is 

wrong, and we—they are not perfect. They are certainly not perfect, but I haven’t seen hardly any evidence to suggest that charges 

made against the Orban government are real, but are, instead, are 

based on politically motivated attacks based on double standard. 

With that say, we will go 1 minute apiece. 

Mr. VOLKER. Great. Mr. Chairman, members, thank you very 

much. I could go around the alliance and find in every single allied 

country policies I disagree with. I could find practices I disagree 

with. I could find evidence of corruption. I could find all sorts of 

73

things. I don’t think that is what I would like to do with our allies. 

I would like to work with them, try to improve what we can, and 

deal with our common external challenges 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Okay. Mr. Volker, thank you, and one last 

little point here, and that is, anti-immigrant. I don’t know the details. We didn’t get into that here, but you are sitting with three 

Members of Congress who are very upset that we have millions of 

illegals in this country and do not want to give them amnesty. We 

do not want to encourage more people to come here illegally. 

We have heard so many times—we have been called racist so 

many times just for that, for watching out for the interests of the 

American people in terms of who is going to come into our country. 

I don’t know if that is the same thing, and I am going to give you 

2 minutes to include that answer. Go right ahead. 

Mr. STAHNKE. First of all, sir, with all due respect, I do not 

bandy about the term anti-Semitism, and my organization does not 

either. For 12 years, Human Rights First, unique among international human rights organizations, has had a campaign to combat anti-Semitism, particularly in Europe and throughout the 

OSCE countries. 

So I take that very seriously, sir. I said that Prime Minister 

Orban had expressed their tolerance for anti-Semitism in his country, and that was a very important statement, and I welcome that. 

I did say that he has engaged in policies and actions that have 

promoted a different historical understanding and that there are 

major segments of the Jewish community in Hungary who have objected to that, and that is true. And this is—this is cause for concern. 

And Jobbik, right, which is extremely anti-Semitic, I think we 

would both agree on that point, is growing in power. And I am not 

suggesting the United States should create a situation where it 

makes it more likely that this extremist anti-Semitic racist party 

comes to power. Quite the opposite. It should be promoting a situation where there is more adherence to international standards. 

This—I am not looking at this in terms of what the United States, 

you know, promoting how the United States does things. 

One quick example, sir, that constitutional amendments, there 

are five of them, once they put through that Constitution, one of 

them cut down the jurisdiction and removed the case law of the 

constitutional court. I think the international community supported, in countries transitioning from Communism, rights in their 

Constitution and a constitutional court to protect those rights. This 

government has cut back the jurisdiction of the constitutional court 

and removed—that court had done important things to protect people’s rights. 

That is an example, sir, of checks and balances. It is not about 

how we do things in the United States. It is about universal principles and a chance for the Hungarians to see that their rights are 

protected. Thank you. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. All right. Thank you. 

Ambassador SIMONYI. Mr. Chairman, I want to——

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You have the last say of the day. 

Ambassador SIMONYI. Thank you. I want to be very clear. This 

is not about gay rights, and I don’t want to go into it. It is just very 

74

important that the leader of the country chose tolerance and acceptance to all its citizens, whatever their sexual orientation. That 

is all about. I don’t want to—the rest is really not important here. 

I want to make another—the next comment is really about I do 

not believe Hungary should be—should be this close to Russia, this 

close to Vladimir Putin. I think it was wrong, and I—personally I 

was saddened by the fact that Hungary was the first ally to give 

Vladimir Putin recently the red carpet treatment in Budapest. And 

I think it was wrong, it was the wrong message, and it was kind 

of breaking, breaking the solidarity and the unity of our alliance, 

and I think that is very important. 

And then thirdly, last—lastly, I would—I would say that, you 

know, what I really hope you understood from this conversation. I 

don’t—I don’t care about the system that the Brits have. I really 

don’t care about the system that the United States had. You have 

had a long run of your democracy. U.S. Democracy is mature and 

strong. All I am saying is concentration of power, to the extent it 

is concentrated in Hungary today in the hands of one party and 

one person is dangerous when the country is so immature in its 

democratic institutions where the democratic institutions have 

been weak. This is really what I wanted to say. 

And a final word. I have no doubt, Mr. Chairman, that Hungary 

will get through this phase, and I do believe that Hungary will figure out a way to stabilize its democracy because only a democratic 

country, only a democratic Hungary has a serious and real future. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Okay. I want to thank all the witnesses. 

There is a vote on right now. 

Mr. POE. Yes, sir 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Okay. So we are going to have to run out, but 

thank you very much. I turned off the mic. Thank you very much. 

We have a vote on, and let me just say that I deeply appreciate 

all of you. I think it is very good back and forth. I sort of enjoyed 

this. I think that is part of what we are supposed to be all about, 

and I especially, your last statement, understand your concerns. 

That is what you are talking. You are saying you are based on concerns, and okay. And we are all—we are all rooting for the good 

guys, which is everybody who believes in tolerance and treating 

people decently and having a democratic government. We are all 

rooting for the good guys wherever they are, so thank you all so 

much for testifying today. 

[Whereupon, at 4:20 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(75)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

76

f


94687n.eps
77

Æ


94687m.eps