Thats not a simple yes or no question. Nations do not necessarily have to arrive as a whole. Conquestors can easily "unite" and enrich different cultures by force, but different local ethnicities might also form nations by themselves for various reasons.

All the mentioned nations are pretty new, and all of them formed for different reasons, but not all of them claim to be successor of an older civilization with a similar name. You have to research which nation considers itself to be a successor of an older culture.

So, more important question: what have the Huns ever done for us?

Different regions were visited/conquested by different tribes, so lets see who lived in the Carpathian Basin in the past:

cavemen -> homo antecessor -> homo neanderthalensis -> homo sapiens -> different hunter gatherer tribes -> different half nomadic tribes -> Scythians -> Illyrians -> Celts -> Thracians -> Sarmatians -> Germanic people (different tribes) -> the Roman Empire conquested parts of central-eastern Europe -> (a migration period started) Germanic people (different tribes) -> Huns conquested parts of Eurasia -> Germanic people (different tribes) -> Pannonian Avars united the local tribes -> Slavs (different tribes) -> Franks conquested parts of Pannonia -> Magyars (Conquest of Hungary) -> Ottomans conquested parts of the Kingdom of Hungary

Probably Huns (IV/V century CE). There is a HUGE discussion about whether Slavs are indigenous people of Central or East Europe and, if not, when did they come to Europe. "Allochtonistic" theory, which is IMO the more probable one, claims that Slavs came to Europe in VI century CE. Hungarians settled in Danube region in the beginning of tenth century, destroying Great Moravia state.