Introduction

The purpose of my thesis is to analyse the diplomatic relations between Romania and Hungary in the 1980's. I designed this research as a case-study that can be a part of a more general debate regarding the role of the national ideology under the communist rule.

Katherine Verdery made the famous statement that "during the 1980's and 1990's, the scholarly industry, built around the concepts of nation and nationalism, became so vast and so interdisciplinary as to rival all other contemporary foci of intellectual production" #1;. Considering that this extended literature is a sign that the topic is already becoming out-of date, Eric Hobsbawn decreed that nationalism is headed for the exit. But, surprisingly enough, over the last ten years, nationalism experienced both a resurgence and a regeneration, having as point of climax the 1989 revolutions in Eastern Europe. Then, many scholars perceived the nationalist upsurge of 1989 in Eastern Europe as the victory of national identity against Marxism, "the finest hour of East European nationalism" #2;, the "Springtime of Nations" #3;. Their conclusion was unanimous: nationalism is expected to remain a dominant force, at least across Eastern Europe, for the foreseeable future. But since 1989, this triumphal nationalist interpretation has come under sustained attack. Some proponents of an anti-nationalist school of thought claimed that the recent cataclysm has exhibited so many original and novel stimuli, as to constitute an essentially fresh phenomenon. Raymond Pearson #4 and George Schopflin #5 identified some of the new stimuli which lead to the nationalist upsurge associated with 1989: the demographic flux, the media revolution, the bankruptcy of supra-national authority and the environmental threat.

The primary objective of this study is to analyse the new forms of manifestation of nationalism under the communist rule in a particularly relevant period: the 1980's; and to explore the mechanisms of constructing self-identity and perceiving ethnicity into a communist system.

I chose for study a historical-rooted conflict: the relationship between Romania and Hungary, one of the most troubled in the Danubian region in the twentieth century. This conflict encompasses a broad set of problems, which I tried to focus on in my paper:

In the first chapter I analysed the relation between nationalism and internal political development in Romania and Hungary during the 1980's; I tried to point out the specific role of Transylvania in the national ideology of both peoples

In the second chapter I tried to picture the great changes in the international relations during the 1980's; and to point out the international ramifications of this conflict. I took into account two main directions: the American policy toward the socialist camp in the 1980's on the one hand, and the role played by USSR in the Romanian-Hungarian conflict on the other hand.

In the last chapter I analysed the terrain and the manifestations of this conflict:

a) unsolved historical problems, which find their expression in historiographical debates, historical resentments, and even territorial problems, b) the debate on the minority's status, c) ideological conflict, and d) the impact of this relationship on the domestic policy of both countries.

I chose for analysing a particularly relevant period: the 1980's - one of the most dynamic and complex decade of the century. In my research I tried to use a double perspective: the historical background of the conflict on the one hand, and the phenomena and manifestations that occurred in the 1980's, on the other hand.

Methodology

My study assumes that the nation is a construction, whose meaning is never stable but shifts with the changing balance of social and political forces. I will focus on the analysis of how ideas about nation and identity are produced and reproduced as central political elements. A single symbol, the nation, takes on multiple meanings, as a form of legitimising the political regime or, on the contrary, as a form of resistance to communism.

In analysing the historical background of the conflict, I was greatly influenced by E. Gellner's theory of nationalism. I consider that his parabola of Ruritania offered a very useful framework of analysing the Romanian-Hungarian conflict in Transylvania; this perspective was further developed by Irina Livezeanu #6 in analysing the process of "nationalising the state" that occurred in Romania during the 1918-1930. I tried to use this framework to analyse the communist project of modernisation of the society. I considered the implementation of this project as the last phase of the process of homogenisation of social body; and I tried to explore its influence on the majority-minorities relationship.

I also used the interpretation of texts as a method for my research. I focused on the analysis of the nature of the political discourse, its capacity to create in people an experience and a consciousness of a certain national identity. In this attempt I followed the approach of M. Foucault and Raymond Williams, used also by K. Verdery, on the nature of discourse, of intellectual work and its relation with power.

The works of K. Verdery deeply influenced my theoretical perspective and understanding of the subject. I followed Verdery's theories about the relation between political power and cultural production; about nationalism and legitimation in the communist society; and about the mechanism of perceiving identity under a communist rule. Michael Shafir's book: Romania, Politics, Economy and Society #7, has also helped me in analysing the dialectic of Romanian internal and external policies. Michael Shafir used the "simulating change-simulating permanence" framework, arguing that internally, the regime created a facade of mobilisation and change (expressed by the demagogic use of formulas like 'new economic mechanism' or 'revolution in agriculture') in order to facilitate its control over society; externally, N. Ceausescu's policy of "simulating permanence" allegiance to the Soviet bloc was a permanent reassurance of West of the Romanian autonomy, while skilfully avoiding a Soviet military intervention.

I tried to use a diverse range of sources, in the attempt to gather all the factors that worked to put Romania and Hungary on a collision way: historical texts- signed by G. Schöpflin, K. Jowitt, Charles Gati, and A. Ludanyi; periodicals, especially The Hungarian Quarterly; official party documents. The archive materials from the Radio Free Europe Archives were a valuable source of information for my research: background reports signed by M. Shafir, V. Socor; newspaper and interviews, etc.