Orban’s ‘peace mission’ exposes EU divisions
https://arab.news/bpaka
The EU is considering taking action against Hungary regarding its presidency of the Council of the European Union in the second half of 2024 due to concerns over Budapest’s adherence to EU values and the rule of law. The last European Parliament passed a resolution questioning Hungary’s ability to credibly fulfill the role of the council’s presidency, citing democratic backsliding and rule-of-law violations by Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government.
This issue was further ignited after the Hungarian PM this month made a series of visits to Kyiv (Ukraine), Moscow (Russia), Shusha (Azerbaijan), Beijing (China) and Washington (the US). The talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin were part of what Orban described as a “peace mission” over Russia’s war in Ukraine and also involved meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping and former US President Donald Trump.
The European debate is related to Hungary’s role as the council’s president. Orban’s foreign trips were ambiguous in terms of their goal, as well as their bilateral and/or European dimensions. EU member states were concerned that Orban appeared to use his country’s presidency to add weight to his diplomatic projects. The six-month presidency is temporary and does not mean the holder represents the entire bloc.
Despite the official explanation outlining the bilateral dimension of the so-called peace mission, the EU is pondering the option of suspending Hungary’s presidency of the council. Indeed, it appears that the Spanish and Belgian governments could act against Hungary’s presidency, as they form — together with Hungary — the presidency trio, with a common program. Moreover, following a request from Poland, the council’s legal service explained that Orban’s peace mission violated EU treaties and common foreign policy. For now, top EU officials have decided to boycott Hungary’s meetings as a result of Orban’s visit to Putin.
Some EU member states have complained about the European Commission’s decision to boycott the Hungarian presidency. The European Commission has announced that it will not send its commissioners to informal council meetings during Hungary’s presidency and that it has canceled its trip to Budapest, a routine visit that the commission undertakes at the beginning of each new council presidency. This decision was seen by some EU member states as an electoral move to support the candidacy of Ursula von der Leyen as president of the European Commission.
Political boycotts during the six months of the rotating Hungarian presidency are the most likely consequence.
Dr. Mohammed Al-Sulami
Other EU leaders criticized Orban for his peace mission because he had no official mandate from the EU. The most vocal criticism came from Poland, Germany, France, Italy, Czechia, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. All insisted that the Hungarian PM was not representative of the EU. According to former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas: “In Moscow, Viktor Orban in no way represents the EU or the EU’s positions. He is exploiting the EU presidency position to sow confusion. The EU is united, clearly behind Ukraine and against Russian aggression.”
The political boycott of events and meetings during the six months of the rotating Hungarian presidency is the most likely consequence of the widespread criticism from Orban’s counterparts regarding his peace mission. While some experts suggest options like suspending Hungary’s presidency or limiting its powers, concrete measures have yet to be decided. The debate continues within the EU on the best course of action to address these concerns, while maintaining the integrity and functionality of the rotating presidential system.
This broad European criticism directed at Orban had one important exception, namely Slovakia. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico explained that “there is no military solution to the conflict in Ukraine. I am among the politicians who support an immediate ceasefire and the start of peace negotiations involving Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the US, China and the EU.”
Hungary’s limited support inside the EU could change in the event of Trump’s reelection. After November, Budapest may have the confidence to use its presidency of the council to secure a rapprochement with a future Republican administration that is more supportive of strong peace efforts to end the war in Ukraine. Other EU member states should prepare for this scenario to avoid undermining the bloc’s credibility in militarily supporting Ukraine.
On the internal front, the rise of far-right political parties is also a signal that, even if Orban remains isolated among the European elite, his strategic thinking is popular among a significant part of the European public.
Most EU officials have not read the internal European scene well. Beyond the formal message of unity, with the notable exception of Slovakia, there is a state of disunity in the EU toward the Ukrainian crisis. Hungary is leading this rift and we will see more “peace efforts” with the rise of far-right extremists across the continent. Indeed, most of the European public does not see the need for a long war against Russia. In addition, there is a feeling that the economic cost of the war will not change the balance of power toward Ukraine in an asymmetric military confrontation.
The widespread official criticism of Hungary’s peace mission is therefore not so much of a sign of unity among EU member states but rather a manifestation of a widening gap between most European citizens and the Brussels technocratic elite.
- Dr. Mohammed Al-Sulami is the founder and president of the International Institute for Iranian Studies (Rasanah). X: @mohalsulami
