July 11, 2024 - 10:00am

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is making the most of his nation’s role holding the six-month rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union. This responsibility, typically a dry procedural concern, has now been elevated — in Orbán’s inimitable fashion — into a vehicle to further Hungary’s agenda in opposition to the prolongation of the Ukraine war.

As soon as Hungary assumed the EU presidency, Orbán jetted off on what he called a “peace mission” to Kyiv and the Kremlin. EU leaders poured scorn on his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, with Commission President Ursula von der Leyen claiming that “appeasement will not stop Putin”, while other EU leaders suggested that Orbán is “undermining” the bloc’s pro-Ukraine stance.

The prospect of a Hungarian EU presidency set stomachs churning in Brussels for months, but Orbán’s attempt to forward his agenda has been even more brazen than expected. Despite his making it clear that Hungary’s EU presidency gives him no additional negotiating powers, he will have been gratified by Putin’s words of greeting, declaring the Hungarian leader had come “not only as our partner, but also as the president of the Council of the European Union”.

In response to what they see as a debasement of the EU presidency, a trend of “quiet quitting” is reportedly emerging among EU representatives. “Faceless bureaucrats” are being sent to Hungarian-led EU debates in place of more consequential figures; only seven EU industry ministers turned up to Budapest’s first Council meeting on the important topic of tariffs for Chinese electric vehicles. EU officials say Orbán’s diplomatic trips abroad “certainly play a role” in this subtle form of protest.

This response is clearly counterproductive, and laced with unintended irony. Orbán’s emphasis on opening a dialogue about peace in Ukraine has led other EU allies to turn their backs. Poland has even demanded a discussion of the legality of Orbán’s “peace mission”.

The opening days of Hungary’s Council presidency have served as a microcosm of Orbán’s entire troubled relationship with the EU: fundamental ideological differences leading to disgust among partners in Brussels, refusal to engage with the Hungarian firebrand’s arguments, and threats of legal action.

Yet Orbán isn’t without supporters. Robert Fico — Slovakia’s populist Prime Minister who survived an attempted assassination in May — said that if his health allowed he would have “gladly joined” Orbán in the Kremlin. Former Czech prime minister Andrej Babiš, with whom Orbán recently formed a new EU parliamentary faction, also spoke out strongly in support of the “peace mission”.

For Orbán, “asking questions” of Putin — and Volodymyr Zelensky — is a prerequisite of peace. His stance accepts that the EU and — much more importantly — the USA are responsible for brokering a deal over Ukraine. Most other EU leaders, however, continue to publicly repeat the mantra that “no discussions about Ukraine can take place without Ukraine”.

Orbán sees such assertions as an abdication of responsibility; EU peers view his willingness to engage with Putin as betrayal. In highlighting this fundamental divide in attitudes to diplomacy, Orbán’s “peace mission” may have already achieved its goal. In any case, he has managed what previously seemed impossible: elevating the EU’s rotating presidency to something approaching a hot topic on the global stage.


William Nattrass is a British journalist based in Prague and news editor of Expats.cz