by István Tarrósy
It is good to read Dr. Kemedjio’s comments, which may allow us to continue thinking about the topic raised in my original piece. To be able to further our discussion, let me provide some clarifications and additional thoughts here:
Although Hungary as an EU member state is a net receiver of European funds (not aid), it has been – as I wrote – a net contributor with 125 million euros to a very important community policy in the field of development cooperation via the 10th European Development Fund, most of which is used across Sub-Saharan Africa. The intention of the Hungarian state is to work with the funds in a more efficient way, as the stakeholders believe that “Hungary and Africa have a lot more to offer each other in their cooperation” (see more: budapestafricaforum.kormany.hu). This is one of the reasons why an Africa Forum will be held in the capital city, Budapest, in early June this year.
The EU is certainly not a ‘patron’, and definitely does not replace the Soviet Union. It is a value community, and if we take a closer look at the history of Hungarian political culture, we realize that Hungary has always thought that it had belonged there – not to the Eastern bloc, but to this community of ‘Western values’. This is the reason why many Hungarians have always felt ‘stuck’ between East and West – forcibly ‘belonging’ to the Soviet Bloc, but feeling that they belong (more) to the Western world. Hungary applied for accession and by its own will joined the community. The European Union has rather transparent rules and regulations, and it is a ‘tough game’ to get membership after having met all the criteria the community had determined long time ago. It is a community of values, mainly focusing on economic cooperation. Having been struggling with the reform of its institutions for the sake of more supranational capabilities in the global arena, its members want to serve their own individual national interests and those of the community at the same time (these two sometimes naturally are in conflict). If you follow the recent political events in terms of Hungary–EU relations, you can be convinced that the word patronage cannot apply (there has been a current series of political ‘skirmishes’ between the Hungarian government and the central institutions of EU decision-making, which you would not be able to imagine in a system of patronage). Hungary, in general terms, has experienced enough of ‘patronage’ in its history of being oppressed several times – this time I doubt it is the right term to use for characterizing the relationship.
Humanitarianism is not new to Hungary, but something to learn more about so that it also results in more “society-wide repercussions”, as Hyden (1989) also pointed out in the African context when arguing about the involvement of any party in development activities. Getting involved in humanitarian projects surely means that Hungarian society learns more about how to help, contribute, learn and develop together with others in need – certainly with a critical eye on the ‘aid industry’, but fostering the development of a “culture of humanitarianism”. This latter one should be visited and re-visited many times.
The Foundation for Africa has been working hard in this field, so far without substantial EU funding (some of their minor projects have been successful, in particular their youth voluntary program at the European Voluntary Service), but mainly with individual donations. It is to support these that they get more opportunities and sources from the contribution of Hungary to the EDF because they have been working closely with the local population in that particular district of Kinshasa and have been critically developing their school project so that it may offer benefits for local society. More emphasis here can be laid on how critical they can and should be – but this is the ongoing learning process, which I intended to underline by saying that “the Foundation for Africa at least tries to avoid some of the problems researchers mean to draw attention to.”
This NGO has founders who are from local Congolese society, offering the basis for a closer and potentially better understanding of where aid money should be spent. Given this and that the country in which it is based (Hungary) contributes a substantial amount of money, in my view it is quite reasonable that this NGO (as well as others in Hungary) want to take part in humanitarian projects, including in collaboration with EU programs.
István Tarrósy holds a PhD in Political Science and is Assistant Professor of the Department of Political Studies of the University of Pecs, Hungary. He is Director of the Africa Research Center. He is currently Fulbright Visiting Research Scholar at the Center for African Studies of the University of Florida in Gainesville, FL. He was on field research in the DRC in December 2012. You can contact him at tarrosy@publikon.hu.