Because of his staunch support for Russia in the Russia-Ukraine conflict and his insistence on trade with the East, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has been called the "only sober person" in European politics in a certain arena of public opinion. However, in recent times, Orban and the Hungarian government seem to be a bit "worried about internal and external troubles", facing the "forced palace" of the opposition internally, and the risk of being "kicked out of the Western camp" externally.
First, the Orban government is facing a "forced palace" at home
In the current European Parliament elections, right-wing parties in other countries have more or less increased their share of the vote, but Orban's Fidesz won only 44.6% of the vote, and won just over half of the 11 seats (Hungary shared 21 seats), which is a significant decline from the previous election. To this end, the Hungarian Tiza Party, which emerged in this election, declared that Fidesz's era in power was over. Obviously, this is the rhythm of "forcing the palace".
Second, Hungary may be restricted from participating or even "expelled" from the "B9" organization
According to the Financial Times, on the 11th local time, the "Bucharest 9 Mechanism" (B9), composed of Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Hungary and Bulgaria, held a meeting in Latvia, the capital of Latvia. The meeting discussed issues related to assistance to Ukraine.
However, due to Hungary's "non-cooperation", the discussion of the agenda at the meeting was "difficult". After finally reaching a joint communique, Hungary proposed to revise it, which completely angered the other eight countries. To that end, they discussed the issue of restricting Hungary to future meetings of the organization, which, according to a diplomat from the group's countries, was discussed "very seriously" and suggested that this could be the last time Hungary would attend the organization's meetings.
In addition, the Visegrad Group (V4), a regional economic union in Central Europe consisting of Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary, is also preparing to "sideline" Hungary, arguing that Hungary's "maverick" has become intolerable for the other three countries. Moreover, they are concerned that if they continue to mix with Hungary, it may affect economic and trade relations with the United States.
Third, the European Parliament, the EU headquarters, and France and Germany seem to be preparing to "freeze" Hungary's "one-vote veto"
In October last year, the European Parliament passed a resolution on amending certain articles of the EU's basic treaty, which was seen as "paving" the way to limit the use of the "veto". And the EU leadership has criticized Hungary's approach on more than one occasion. More importantly, the EU's two "leading big brothers", France and Germany, also seem to have "can't bear it" anymore.
In mid-January this year, when the EU discussed the issue of Ukraine, Orban took up nearly seven hours alone, which made the voting process impossible and forced German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to "invite" Orban to another room very unceremoniously.
When Macron visited Germany at the end of last month, Scholz and Macron reached a consensus on "freezing the veto". To this end, they proposed that the EU use the "two-thirds majority principle" in decision-making in the two areas of diplomacy and taxation. Obviously, it was against Hungary.
Fourth, the United States questioned Hungary's "both want and want" strategy, and believed that it "will not work"
On June 11, local time, U.S. Ambassador to Hungary David Presman attended a conference on U.S. investment in Hungary, in which he questioned Hungary's strategy of "both wanting and wanting" in values and economic and trade relations, and believed that "it will not work".
"We all know that Hungary cannot be 'both and want' for a long time," the US ambassador said. benefiting from the family of democracies without being bound by them; Exercising power, but not being held responsible. It's not going to work. To put it bluntly, this is a "knock" and a "warning".
Fifth, having chosen "harmony without difference" with the West, Orban got the guarantees he wanted
With internal and external pressures multiplying, Orban had to make a choice: either continue to hold his ground and exercise his rights within NATO. Either align with Western organizations or take a "flexible" approach.
Needless to say, if Orban continues to hold his position on issues related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict and obstructs NATO, the European Union and other Western organizations from reaching agreement on issues, Hungary will most likely be "kicked out", but it is obvious that Hungary does not want to leave NATO and the EU, and does not want to offend "friends", what should we do? Orban chose the "expedient measure" of "harmony and difference" with the West.
On the 12th local time, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban met with visiting NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg in Budapest. At a press conference after the meeting, Orban said that he had received assurances from NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg that Hungary would not have to participate in military operations outside its borders on the issue of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, nor would it have to provide funds or personnel for the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and that Hungary's territory could not be used to participate in the war.
As the saying goes, "there are gains and losses". So, what has Hungary lost? In his speech, Orban said that Hungary has a different position from other NATO allies on the issue of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, but it does not have the ability and cannot influence and prevent their decision-making. "We have made it clear that we do not want to prevent NATO from making decisions that differ from our interpretation of the situation," Orban said. ”
It is obvious that Orban is "no longer exercising a veto power on NATO's decision to 'aid Ukraine and contain Russia'" in exchange for Hungary can still remain in NATO, that is, "peace but difference" with Western organizations like NATO. However, strictly speaking, this "harmony without difference" is actually "marginalization".
Sixth, how much more strategic value can a "marginalized" Hungary have?
For Russia and the Eastern Bloc, despite the small size and population of Hungary, a friendly country with a voice (veto) in the EU and NATO is naturally of inestimable strategic value. But to put it bluntly, once Hungary leaves the Western camp or is "marginalized", its strategic significance is a different matter.
And Hungary, as a landlocked country with a population of less than 10 million, knows very well what it means once it leaves the EU and NATO. Therefore, Orban had no choice but to be "marginalized".