The Foreign Service Journal, September 2008

icate strategic questions regarding Moscow’s dealings with its Balkan neighbors. First, there is the ongoing Russian confrontation with the European Union and the United States over their decision this spring to recognize the independence of Kosovo. Moscow was a strong opponent of the secession of that province from longtime ally Serbia, so Western backing for the independence of Kosovo has turned many Serbs against European inte- gration and allowed Russia to strengthen its influence. Meanwhile, Belgrade joined Moscow’s South Stream Project to build a pipeline to carry Russian gas to Europe. The Russian-Serb agreement, signed in January, gives majority control to Russia over the Serb section of the pipeline. What is more, Russia also gained control over the biggest Serb oil company. It thus cemented a very strong presence in the backyard of Hungary, whose cur- rent leaders — their critics say — do not even try to resist Moscow’s growing influence. To the disappointment of the United States and the European Union, Hungary also joined the project at the end of February. Both Washington and Brussels favor another pipeline, the Nabucco, which would bring gas from the Caspian Basin and the Middle East to Europe without crossing Russian territory. The concerns about Hungary’s eastern shift have trig- gered a campaign within the ranks of the largest opposi- tion party, Fidesz-Hungarian Civic Union, to improve its own ties to the United States. Bilateral relations between 1998 and 2002 under the conservative government of Viktor Orban were not always unclouded. The main bone of contention was Hungary’s decision in 2001 to buy Swedish Gripens for its air force instead of American- made F-16s. Even before the Hungarian-Russian agreement on the South Stream Project, Orban had denounced what he called an undue amount of Russian influence in Hungary. During a 2007 visit to the United States last year, he cited Russia’s huge role in some of his country’s key industries, and also criticized the government’s deci- sion to nominate someone who had studied at the acade- F O C U S S E P T E M B E R 2 0 0 8 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 31