There is a wide gap between the scholarly literature on East-Central Europe during the Cold War, which was dominated by émigré writers, and the broader scholarship of Cold War history, which was produced largely by Western writers who focused mainly on the great powers. In the first category, Hungarian émigré scholars were amply represented. A partial list would include István Deák, Charles Gati, Peter Kenez, Béla Király, Arthur Koestler, János Kornai, Bennett Kovrig, John Lukacs, János Rádványi, George Schöpflin, Iván Szelényi, Rudolf Tokes, and Iván Völgyes. Writing from within Hungary, writers and scholars such as Miklós Haraszti, János Kis, and George (György) Konrád likewise contributed to our understanding of Hungary and the region during the Cold War. This scholarship spawned two generations of experts on Eastern Europe who were both analysts and advocates, trained to see the peoples and countries of this region as international actors in their own rights. Yet the dominant literature of the Cold War was written from a largely Western and particularly U.S. perspective, in which the countries of East-Central Europe were objects but rarely subjects of history. In similar fashion, with a few notable exceptions, students and scholars of Western Europe rarely knew or much cared about Eastern Europe. Even now, 25 years after the end of the Cold War, with most of the countries of this region having joined both the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU), the study of East-Central Europe tends to be lodged in centers for Russian, Eurasian, and East European Studies (with the Hungarians often adrift in a Slavic sea). This is what makes László Borhi’s volume such an important contribution to closing this gap in our understanding of Cold War history. Not only does Hungary take center stage, but it takes its place alongside the United States in a richly documented parallel history. Borhi nicely captures the tension between the aspirations of a small country, focused on navigating amid large and powerful neighbors, and those of a dominant power, which must balance a larger array of often conflicting objectives. This asymmetry of power, interests, and perspectives gives Borhi’s book its narrative thrust. The Czech writer Milan Kundera, in his celebrated essay “The Tragedy of Central Europe,” published in The New York Review of Books in April 1984, wrote that “the small nation is one whose very existence may be put in question at any moment.” Indeed, he began the essay with the closing words of a message from the director of the Hungarian News Agency at the time of the 1956 Soviet invasion: “We are going to die for Hungary and for Europe.” This perspective naturally lends itself to a national narrative of betrayal and victimhood. It is a predisposition—call it the Trianon syndrome (named after the 1920 treaty that ceded large parts of formerly Hungarian territory to neighboring countries,

中文翻译：

---

与独裁者打交道：美国、匈牙利和东中欧，1943-1989

冷战期间由流亡作家主导的关于东中欧的学术文献与主要由主要关注大国的西方作家产生的更广泛的冷战史学术之间存在很大差距。在第一类中，匈牙利移民学者有充分的代表。部分名单包括 István Deák、Charles Gati、Peter Kenez、Béla Király、Arthur Koestler、János Kornai、Bennett Kovrig、John Lukacs、János Rádványi、George Schöpflin、Iván Szelényi、Rudolf Tokes 和 Iván Völgyes。来自匈牙利境内的作家和学者，如 Miklós Haraszti、János Kis 和 George (György) Konrád，同样有助于我们了解冷战期间的匈牙利和该地区。该奖学金催生了两代东欧专家，他们既是分析家又是倡导者，他们接受过培训，将本地区的人民和国家视为拥有自身权利的国际参与者。然而，冷战的主要文学作品主要是从西方，尤其是美国的角度写成的，其中东中欧国家是历史的对象，但很少成为历史的主题。以类似的方式，除了少数显着的例外，西欧的学生和学者很少了解或非常关心东欧。即使是现在，冷战结束 25 年后，该地区的大多数国家都加入了北大西洋公约组织（NATO）和欧盟（EU），对东中欧的研究趋于寄宿在俄罗斯、欧亚、和东欧研究（匈牙利人经常在斯拉夫海中漂流）。这就是为什么 László Borhi 的著作对缩小我们对冷战历史的理解的差距做出如此重要的贡献。匈牙利不仅占据了中心舞台，而且在有着丰富记录的平行历史中与美国并驾齐驱。博尔希很好地捕捉到了一个专注于在大国和强大邻国中航行的小国的愿望与一个主导国家的愿望之间的紧张关系，后者必须平衡更广泛的经常相互冲突的目标。权力、利益和观点的这种不对称性使博尔希的书具有叙事主旨。1984 年 4 月，捷克作家米兰昆德拉在他的著名论文《中欧的悲剧》中发表在《纽约书评》上，写道：“小国是一个其存在随时可能受到质疑的国家。” 事实上，他以 1956 年苏联入侵时匈牙利通讯社社长的一封信息的结束语开始了这篇文章：“我们将为匈牙利和欧洲而死。” 这种观点自然适用于背叛和受害的民族叙事。这是一种倾向——称之为特里亚农综合症（以 1920 年将前匈牙利领土的大部分割让给邻国的条约命名，”这种观点自然适用于背叛和受害的民族叙事。这是一种倾向——称之为特里亚农综合症（以 1920 年将前匈牙利领土的大部分割让给邻国的条约命名，”这种观点自然适用于背叛和受害的民族叙事。这是一种倾向——称之为特里亚农综合症（以 1920 年将前匈牙利领土的大部分割让给邻国的条约命名，