- From this interview, we learn what House Speaker Laszlo Kover thinks about whether Fidesz is in crisis.
- The politician voiced a strong opinion on the left’s past decade and a half.
- The head of Fidesz's governing board delved deeper into the Peter Magyar phenomenon.
- The discussion also touched on the serious challenges Hungary faces.
- Mr. Kover shared his thoughts on the clash between the central bank's president and the finance minister.
- The role of social media and "celebrity politics" was also discussed.
- The house speaker also gave an assessment of the state of democracy in the Western world.
- Laszlo Kover defined the stakes of the US presidential election and sent a clear message to forces attempting to influence Hungarian politics from abroad.
– We've faced crisis after crisis, having just moved past the pandemic, while a war has been raging in our neighborhood for over two and a half years. There's no economic boom, and recently, even some within the ruling parties have made notable missteps. Some, like Peter Tolgyessy, are now speaking of a crisis within Fidesz. Do you agree with this assessment?
– Not at all. I respect my old colleague and comrade-in-arms, whom I’ve known since the opposition roundtable, and who usually offers insightful analyses of Hungarian politics, but sometimes he overshoots reality. Neither Fidesz nor the country is in crisis, but the world is undoubtedly in big trouble. It’s one of history’s weird ironies that just as we were finally starting to settle our own affairs after more than a century, paying off the historical debts caused by the 20th century, external forces like COVID, war, and the resulting economic challenges came crashing down on us. Added to this are the cultural and value-related problems that threaten Europe’s identity. being a part of this world, we’re trying to defend our sovereignty, values, and way of life, while contributing what we can to help Europe rediscover itself and steer the world in a better direction.
– Some analysts may be exaggerating, but even within Fidesz’s camp, supporters are voicing concerns about the number of unforced errors. One such blunder—the clemency case—helped launch Peter Magyar’s political career, and now, with his Tisza Party, he leads the largest opposition force.
– There’s no need to panic. A new, previously unknown opponent has emerged on the political battlefield, gathering opposition voters long disillusioned with Gyurcsany, the clueless Momentum crowd, the nonexistent Dialogue (Parbeszed) Party, and loudmouths like Mr. Tordai or Timea Szabo. Not to mention the Jobbik party, which has become so entangled in its own contradictions that it no longer knows where it came from or where it’s heading. Nothing more has happened so far.
– So, should everyone just relax, as the saying goes, as there's nothing to worry about?
– Absolutely not. Governing is a constant challenge and, perhaps inevitably, it comes with human errors. However, given that we’ve been in power for 14 years, and looking at our record objectively - without arrogance - it’s fair to say this political community has achieved historic feats while at the helm of the country. After 2010, we resolved a financial and economic crisis, which was accompanied by a total collapse of governance and a moral crisis. The former was reflected in the breakdown of public security, while the latter culminated in a disgraceful referendum that humiliated Hungarians beyond our borders. All of this was bequeathed to us by Ferenc Gyurcsány’s left.
– Looking back to 2010, there was definitely room for improvement, and after clearing away the rubble, the country experienced a decade of growth.
– Indeed. From 2012 to 2022, we lived through a decade of unprecedented growth, as proven by statistical indicators, which hadn’t been seen in Hungary for a hundred years. We pulled the country back from the brink of debt slavery and saved hundreds of thousands of families from a foreign currency debt trap. Not only did we significantly reduce the national debt relative to GDP, but we also restructured it, converting much of it to forints. Another important change is that a large portion of that debt is now financed by Hungarian citizens through treasury bonds, bringing financial security to the country. This was made possible by the growing savings of Hungarian families. We created a work-based economic model instead of one reliant on welfare and, as a result, more people are employed in Hungary today than at any time since 1990. Alongside this, we also established a family support scheme that's used as a benchmark in many parts of the world.
– Hungary now being visible on the global political stage may be a consequence of the results you just listed.
– Undeniably, the past 14 years have brought the benefit of Viktor Orban's leadership positioning Hungary as a significant player in European and global politics, far beyond what its size and economic potential might suggest. However, it is also a fact that after February 2022, with the eruption of the Russia–Ukraine war and the EU's response through a disastrous sanctions policy, that momentum has been disrupted. We now face challenges for which we have yet to find effective solutions. The prime minister is exploring a way forward by advocating for a shift in economic policy, promoting economic neutrality, building broad relationships instead of getting trapped in bloc formations, and addressing critical issues such as how Europe can overcome the migration crisis and enhance its competitiveness.
– In the midst of such challenges, it’s unfortunate that the soon-to-be outgoing president of the central bank and the economy minister have been engaged in a fierce clash, exchanging tough messages publicly over the past year. How harmful is this situation?
– The independence of Hungary's National Bank (MNB) allows for occasional differences of opinion between the bank and the government, and this seems to be the case here. While it’s true that their harmony has been shaken, we can manage that. However, the public exchanges have been unnecessary. Personal grievances shouldn’t interfere with professional responsibilities. Both the minister and the bank’s president are sworn to serve the nation’s interests to the best of their abilities. Anyone allowing other considerations to influence their actions is making a grave mistake.
– Just as Balazs Orban (PM Orban's policy chief – ed.) did in that infamous interview...
– Compared to the international political and economic challenges we discussed, the hysteria over Balazs Orban’s comments is just a storm in a teacup, just as the events unfolding within the Tisza Party or the remarks made by the nearly irrelevant parliamentary opposition are no particularly intriguing either.
– As you mentioned earlier, the Tisza Party has merely gathered the opposition votes. So, in your view, is Peter Magyar's formation simply just a by-product of the left’s crisis?
– It's not us, but the left-wing press that's long claimed there's a mood for ousting the opposition in Hungary, and the same media even attampted to take over the opposition’s role. Despite all appearances, the Tisza Party was built by the "dollar media," handing Peter Magyar from one influencer to the next until he became a star on social media. But our opponents are not Gyurcsany, Marki-Zay and Peter Magyar, or whoever else who follows when this show blows over.
– Will the Peter Magyar show blow out?
– Not yet.
– So, do you think there's plenty of time until 2026, and it could blow out?
– For us, the time until the next election is short, but for Peter Magyar, it’s excruciatingly long.
– Nevertheless, it's a fact that his party achieved thirty percent in the European Parliament elections and current surveys indicate that the Tisza Party maintains similar popularity, while support for the left-wing opposition has nearly vanished. Consequently, you - as house speaker - find yourself in an unusual position, because the real opposition is now engaging in Facebook outside the walls of parliament.
– Let’s reflect on the opposition's career over the past fifteen years! In 2010, alongside the post-communists who brought the country to its knees, two new parties emerged: Jobbik and LMP. Jobbik presented its radical agenda in a rather rough style, while LMP articulated a more refined message, implying – as its name suggests – that politics could be different. At that time, many believed it truly could be. However, it took only a moment for both Jobbik and LMP to lose their confidence in maintaining an independent position as a third force between the two poles they identified. They entered the game of who could be the loudest, most radical and merciless opposition to the Fidesz government. They began opposing everything, regardless of the facts. Following this, we won three elections – in 2014, 2018, and 2022 – by a two-thirds majority, while Jobbik and LMP were basically left ruined by this struggle. The reason is because the contest of who could be the best Ferenc Gyurcsany could only be won by Mr. Gyurcsany himself. This was the master plan of the head of the Democratic Coalition (DK), who failed to account for the fact that there were other players beyond him - not on the government side but in the international arena - who found him unreliable due to his family background and strong ties through the old communist regime to Russia. So, these international forces were not looking for someone who would sell out his country to either the East or the West; instead, they aimed to build someone who would willingly hand over Hungary as their prize. Peter Magyar, having climbed up the back stairs and now standing on a platform crafted from Ferenc Gyurcsany's hatred, pushed aside the ex-leader. What happened is that 30 percent of voters, who are happy with the political message that Viktor Orban should not be leading the country have gathered around a man who has not yet failed and proven unsuitable to change the government.
– So you don’t see the need for Fidesz to change anything in its political strategy due to the new opposition force?
– The strategy does not need to change, but it is undeniable that the political communication must be modified, because Peter Magyar has transformed it.
– Evidently, even despite posting false statements on his social media on a near daily basis, things that are clearly proven to be untrue, these revelations do not seem to diminish his popularity among his supporters. What can be done about this phenomenon?
– This is a real threat, but not because of Peter Magyar. The real danger lies in the fact that, through the manipulation of social media, masses are losing their sense of reality. They no longer have the desire to learn the truth; they're only interested in having their desires – whether political or otherwise – served. "Celebrity politics" is an apt term for this phenomenon. The emergence of the celebrity world was the first gut punch to culture, a scandalous step downward, as no real performance was needed for someone to become famous and recognized. It was enough to publicly showcase their own emptiness and vulgarity in their bare reality. This celebrity style has seeped into politics, which poses a serious threat to the future of democracy.
– What do you mean?
– If we genuinely believe that democracy is a valuable form of governance, we should also reflect on how and why – over the past decades in Hungary and worldwide – the media and opinion-forming networks have undermined the credibility, authority, trustworthiness and morality of the leadership operating within democratic institutions.
– In defense of traditional media, we can note that the control in those outlets was still mostly in place; editors and journalists tried to convey the truth to the public according to their values. However, on social media platforms, lies are poured onto people through various algorithms and often fake profiles. How can politicians cope with this?
– Fidesz must maintain its old, tried and tested methods, its personal outreach to voters and fieldwork, which is not difficult because we have the most extensive organized political community. At the same time, we must take up the gauntlet on the online platforms as well, to fight the battle there as well. However, we cannot withdraw from the traditional battleground because we have the advantage there. Simply defending against the filth flowing on the internet will not lead to success. The so-called social media - whose very name is scandalously misleading - is only suitable for destruction; it is not really a place to build or present values.
– As we just discussed the crisis of democracy, it is also worth taking a look at Europe, where it seems that new winds are blowing: anti-immigration, nationalist, sovereignist parties are winning elections at local and national levels, while implementing measures such as border controls that the European Union continues to punish Hungary for. Is this a turning point or just the beginning of a process with uncertain outcomes?
– In my view, ideally, this is just the beginning, and it's uncertain whether this process will play out within the framework of democracy. The majority of people in Western Europe share the same views as the Hungarian government – on crucial issues such as migration policy, the handling of the Russia –Ukraine war, the sanctions and the LGBTQ propaganda. They, too, clearly see the problems in their own countries, but the ruling elite is trying to isolate voters from the parties that promise radical solutions. If these political forces achieve good results or win elections, like the AfD in Germany’s Thuringia or the Freedom Party in Austria, the traditional parties - both left and right - will try to isolate them, or place them in quarantine. They will attempt every trick in the book to sidestep the true will of the people. This is not a match with predetermined results because the stakes are enormous; we are not just talking about individual political careers. The goal is to transform and permanently subjugate Europe. A hybrid war is being waged on the continent - against Hungary as well. In this war, which is being fought between a global financial power seeking to dismantle nations and nation-states and countries and political forces fighting for their sovereignty, one side will either defeat the other, or Europe will collapse in a permanent stalemate.
– Does this mean that European sovereignists need Donald Trump's victory in the United States like a slice of bread?
– This is true, as there is a glaring difference between the far-left Democrats and the right wing led by Trump. For Donald Trump, America represents the homeland, while the Democrats view America merely as a tool for a global empire, in which democracy is just a currently necessary side circumstance. It is also questionable whether democracy still functions in a country where, first through legal means and then, when that failed, through physical means, they sought to eliminate Trump from the presidential race, and where a state can prohibit the verification of voters' identities. Revisiting Germany, the state of democracy is no better there either. The major parties – CDU, SPD, and the Greens – have jointly petitioned to ban the AfD, a party that has garnered millions of votes. If this elite believes that millions of Germans still sympathize with Nazism, then the democratic experiment of the last few decades in Germany has been largely meaningless.
– We see that the German elite is "working" hard to push more and more of their compatriots to the right and sympathize with the AfD. Expressing the will of the people is the essence of democracy. Or is that no longer the case?
– Those who profess to defend democracy in words are the very ones undermining its foundations. Throughout human history, both spatially and temporally, democracy occupies an extremely small portion. Therefore, it is baffling why anyone thought that the collapse of the Soviet Union would herald the worldwide victory of liberal democracy, and end to history resulting in an eternal state of idyllic harmony. Western countries are not in crisis today because they are under attack from illiberal, populist, or far-right forces, but because a corrupt oligarchy, composed of agents from globalist networks and calling itself a liberal democracy, distorts the democratic institutions of these countries and the European Union. A prominent German politician from the FDP aptly remarked that those advocating for the AfD's ban create the impression that they do not want to protect democracy; rather, they are afraid of it.
– Let’s return to the upcoming presidential election in the U.S.! The government is criticized by many for putting all their eggs in one basket with Trump. Could they have done otherwise?
– Absolutely not! Contrary to appearances, we are not seeking enemies. It's the current American leadership that is brazenly intervening in Hungary's affairs and threatening us in ways we never even dared to imagine from an ally. Anyone with doubts about whether this stems from accumulated grievances related to our policies over the years or whether we have been a thorn in the side of the globalist Democrat project from the very beginning should look up a statement from Charles Gati, a former foreign affairs advisor, from 2012. After a year and a half of our governance, he argued that the Orban government must be removed, “democratically if possible, or otherwise, if there's no other way.” He even mentioned civil war among the outlined scenarios.
– How can one defend against the aforementioned intervention attempts? The sovereignty protection law has come into effect, and the office has bagun its work. But isn’t this an uphill struggle?
– First and foremost, we will put an end to the idea that many believe they can do in Hungary what cannot be done in the United States, France, or many other countries without consequence. Every piece of legislation is only as effective as it can be upheld by the relevant authorities. If we find that voluntary compliance with the law is insufficient, we need to incorporate additional incentives into the legislation. We are prepared to defend our democratic institutions and state sovereignty from any manipulation or threat posed by external forces, because this is what guarantees our national existence in the 21st century.
