Foreign Relations of the United States, 1981–1988, Volume X, Eastern Europe

363. Telegram From the Embassy in Hungary to the Department of State¹

8734.

Budapest, August 25, 1988, 0841Z

SUBJECT

• Romanian Refugees in Hungary.

REF

• State 274171² and Previous.

1. Embassy appreciates Department’s response on the Romanian refugee situation here. This subject is attracting increasing attention, both here and in the U.S. especially by Americans willing to “sponsor” Romanians for resettlement in the U.S. Embassy has found it increasingly difficult to respond to inquiries with the information that there is no/no avenue available to those refugees who cannot or do not want to settle in Hungary.

2. Following information is provided in reference to questions posed reftel:

A) The FRG Embassy according to confidential information provided by Consul (please protect), has been authorized to issue travel documents to Romanian citizens of ethnic German origin who may have a claim (under the very generous terms of FRG citizenship law) to German citizenship. Such citizenship documentation is normally issued only when a refugee arrives on German soil, but in the special circumstances now prevailing here the Embassy has received permission to issue them here. The GOH allows people with these documents to leave freely. So far this procedure has been used to move approximately 120 Romanian passport-holders to the FRG. The FRG reports no ethnic German able to prove his German background has been refused under this procedure, in effect since April 1988.

B) It is impossible to say with any certainty how many Romanian citizens want to move on or to where. We have seen very few ethnic Germans, indicating perhaps that they prefer the FRG. However, we, as well as the Canadians and Australians, see many ethnic Romanians and Hungarians. Almost all have either gone to the trouble of obtaining affidavits of support from U.S. friends or relatives or say they can obtain such affidavits.

C) GOH is providing substantial support to the Romanian refugees, as is the Hungarian Red Cross (HRC). According to recent newspaper accounts, the HRC has received eleven million forints (approximately 200,000 USD) in donations from Hungarian citizens and from abroad. So far eight million has been disbursed. In addition, the GOH helps refugees find jobs and housing (a considerable effort in this housing-poor country). The official and Red Cross assistance does not distinguish between ethnic Hungarians and other Romanian citizens, but we have had many reports of the more serious difficulties non-ethnic Hungarians face. First is the very considerable language barrier, since virtually no non-Hungarians speak this language, which is essentially unrelated to any other in Europe, including Romanian. Another serious problem is the historical animosity many ordinary Hungarians feel toward their southern neighbors.

D) Most of the refugees we see are ethnic Hungarians. A very rough estimate would be that perhaps 10 percent of them would be interested in going to the U.S. or another refugee-accepting country. This would be based on a refugee population estimated at 10,000 or more.

E) Most Romanian refugees have Romanian passports, though some have crossed the border without documents, or having arrived here in group tours on group passports, have no passports now.

F) GOH response to the refugee inflow has been to support them generously (given Hungary’s difficult economic situation) and try to integrate the ethnic Hungarians into this society. However, they have not as yet decided to give any refugees permanent permission to remain or citizenship. (The fact that staying permits must be renewed every month or two makes the life of a refugee here very uncertain, since he knows he can be sent back at any time to Romania to face a long prison term.) The GOH has publicly made a distinction between ethnic Hungarian and other Romanian citizens by saying that non-Hungarians would be allowed to leave if they have a “statement of acceptance” from another country. So far we have not seen ethnic Hungarians receiving permission to depart on the same basis. (This policy has been confirmed with the GOH. If addressee posts have been seeing such refugees we would appreciate being informed of how they say they departed Hungary. See Budapest 6672. Repeated to Bonn as Budapest 8677.) It is clear to all concerned that Hungary cannot absorb many non-Hungarians, nor do we think the GOH wants to. They appear to feel considerable responsibility toward the Hungarian ethnic minority in Romania (as evidenced by the extraordinary public criticism the GOH has levelled at the GOH over the plans to raze villages in Transylvania), but we have seen no such concern over the plight of Romanians in general. We do not anticipate that the latter will have any success in building new lives here.

3. In the Embassy’s view, this is a problem that will not go away but that will be very difficult for the USG to help resolve. At the present time, because the GOH treats differently the ethnic Hungarians and the others as regards permitting them to depart, it appears that the potential refugee population who would be able to travel to the West should we or others accept them for resettlement is relatively small—probably no more than one thousand. Of this population, perhaps twenty percent will want and be able to go to West Germany. We hope that a means can be found to assist the others, at least as far as having their cases heard.

Palmer

1. Source: Reagan Library, Rudolf Perina Files, Romania—Substance 1988 (2); NLR–422–3–36–5–5. Confidential; Immediate. Sent Priority for information to Geneva; Sent for information to Vienna, Bucharest, and Bonn.
2. Telegram 274171 to Budapest, August 23, noted that the Department was reviewing the Embassy’s “request to devise a means of allowing Romanian refugees in Hungary to apply for refugee resettlement” and requested additional information on the treatment of Romanian refugees once they reached Hungary. (Department of State, Central Foreign Policy File, D880739–0257) For the Embassy’s request sent in telegram 6672, see Document 352.