On February 11, 1989, the Hungarian Socialist Workers Party (HSWP) approved the creation of independent political parties and agreed to support the transition towards a multi-party system. The creation of a multi-party system in Hungary was the first of an influential set of reforms against Communist power. By April 25, the Soviet Union decided that it would remove troops from Hungary. In June, opposition party delegates began successful negotiations for free and open elections, guaranteeing the HSWP no power unless it won at the ballot box. That same month, Hungarians re-buried the revolutionary leaders of 1956, giving them a hero’s burial. The burials were one of immense symbolic significance, depicting defectors as heroes during an era marked by violence. By October 25, Acting President Matyas Szuros formally declared Hungary an independent democratic nation. Notably, The creation of a multi-party state in Hungary was done simply by negotiations with the USSR, without massive strikes and violence.
The creation of independent political parties in Hungary had broad implications for other Soviet Satellite states. Hungary was the second Eastern Bloc country to allow free multi-party elections and it provided Eastern Bloc countries with a blueprint for how to become independent. In April, Hungary turned off its electric fences and began the symbolic end to the Iron Curtain. These notable reforms led to a “Friendship Picnic,’, where the Eastern Bloc countries showed “Solidarity and Friendship” to each other. In reality, the picnic served as a conduit for hundreds of East Berliners to flee the Soviet-controlled area. In June, Gorbachev pledged that the USSR would not become involved in the political breakthroughs occurring in Hungary, showing an important shift from the brutality of the Brezhnev doctrine that characterized the Hungarian uprising of 1956. In July, the United States pledged an aid package that included a $25 million dollar investment fund for private enterprise, demonstrating the beginning of market-style investments in the nation.
While Gorbachev gave up intervention into Hungarian affairs, the United States saw that it was on the verge of becoming a liberal, capitalist state and offered aid. The chain of events of Hungary in 1989 represented an important breakthrough in the fall of the Soviet Empire, marking a year that would create unprecedented change. These reforms culminated into the eventual fall of the Berlin Wall eventually fell in November of 1989, marking what is widely known as the symbolic end of the Soviet Empire.
Although the direct causes of the fall of Leninism in Eastern Europe cannot be known, there was an important interplay of economics, politics, culture, and social tension. These factors combined into a new vision for Europe, one that rediscovered democracy and civic duty, while also creating a crisis of values and authority in many of these states.
In the United States, the media reception to the reforms in Hungary was noticeably positive. On November 27, 1989, Henry Kamm authored an article in the New York Times titled “Hungarians Hold First Free Election In 42 Years, Shunning a Boycott”. In this article, Kamm discusses the referendum deciding when a presidential election would take place. He quotes a printer named Imre Loerincz, who says that people still showed up to have their voices heard despite a “silent boycott” by the ruling party in the country. Based on the pro-voter language and quotations used by Kamm, it can be inferred that the New York Times was not against the referendum. Another article in the New York Times published on December 3, 1989, titled “Eleven Months of Peaceful Revolution” echoes the same sentiment. In this article, the New York Times chronicles the momentous revolutions across Eastern Europe, describing Communist control as “A monopoly on political power” that was “hollow”. Based on these articles, it can be assumed that the media in the United States viewed the situation as largely momentous and positive.
In short, the creation of multi-party elections in Hungary was the beginning of an important series of events in the fall of the Soviet Union. Shortly after the elections, Hungary became independent and offered indirect and direct support for other Eastern Bloc countries to do the same.
Works Cited
Bruszt,Laszlo, and George K. Horvath. “1989: The Negotiated Revolution in Hungary.” Social Research 57, no. 2 (1990): 365-87.
Cato Institute. “Hungarian Revolution and Freedom: The Ides of October,” October 26, 2019. https://www.cato.org/commentary/hungarian-revolution-freedom-ides-october.
“Eleven Months of Peaceful Revolution.” New York Times (1923-Current file), Dec 03, 1989, pp. 1. ProQuest,
Goodman, Timothy. “Chronology of Political Developments in Hungary: May 1988-December 1989.” World Affairs 151, no. 4 (1989): 156-58.
HENRY KAMM. “Hungarians Hold First Free Vote in 42 Years,.” New York Times Nov 27, 1989: 2.
“How a Pan-European Picnic Brought down the Iron Curtain,” The Guardian, August 18, 2019. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/18/how-a-pan-european-picnic-brought-down-the-iron-curtain-hungarians-austrians.
Tismaneanu, Vladimir. “The Revolutions of 1989: Causes, Meanings, Consequences.” Contemporary European History, vol. 18, no. 3, 2009, pp. 271–288. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40542827. Accessed 28 Apr. 2021.
“1989 Twenty Years On: The End of Communism and the Fate of Eastern Europe | Origins: Current Events in Historical Perspective.” Accessed March 25, 2021. https://origins.osu.edu/article/1989-twenty-years-end-communism-and-fate-eastern-europe/page/0/1.