– According to the Prime Minister, Hungary’s presidency is not the end of something but the beginning of something new. In your experience, which areas reflect this the most?
– Hungary and the Hungarian people remained the focus of our world even during our EU presidency. Advancing our national interests did not begin with the presidency, nor did it end when the presidency concluded. We aimed to show that change in the European Union is both necessary and possible because a genuine patriotic and conservative European alternative exists. This is an aspiration that far surpasses the framework of the presidency, and its success will only be assessed long after our tenure. Of course, change will not happen on its own. Member states, including Hungary, must - with their persistent push - force European institutions into bringing it about.
The most crucial issue remains war and peace. The presidency’s room for maneuver was extremely limited in this regard because there is no consensus among member states on the Russia–Ukraine war. Consequently, our initiatives remained at the level of bilateral diplomacy. The presidency’s half-year term was framed by two major events: the peace mission in July and the Christmas proposal for a prisoner exchange and ceasefire. These efforts received mixed reactions, but strategically, we succeeded: today, no one doubts that there is no military solution to the Russia–Ukraine war. A diplomatic resolution requires direct communication and the involvement of all affected parties. However, we cannot be completely satisfied, because apparently, it is still unclear to some that without peace, no measures we take will make Europe competitive, secure, or a serious global actor.
The presidency’s historic achievement is the Budapest Declaration, which aims to strengthen the European Union’s competitiveness. The declaration sets specific expectations with deadlines.
These include the reduction of administrative burdens and reporting obligations, with a 25-percent reduction expected from EU institutions within the next six months, and addressing affordable energy prices, for which we expect an action plan from the European Commission in the coming weeks. The essence of the presidency’s work is only now unfolding. Member state leaders must continuously pressure the Commission to ensure that implementation truly begins. We already see that the Commission is falling behind. It is unclear whether the delay stems from a lack of political will, professional shortcomings, or merely administrative issues.
The internal and justice strategic guidelines adopted under Hungary’s presidency also chart new directions for addressing the migration crisis. With the current tools, curbing illegal migration is impossible, and flawed migration policies are beginning to undermine the very foundations of the Schengen system. The EU's migration policy will only work if entry to the European Union is limited to those who have legitimate authorization. This entry screening must take place outside the EU’s borders. However, EU institutions are displaying immense resistance to a real migration shift, with the European Court of Justice leading the charge. Member states must take up the fight in this area as well.
– To what extent has the mood in Brussels changed after the European Parliament elections, given the strengthening of patriotic voices across Europe? Can any change be felt at all? And how much momentum does Trump’s return give to this shift?
– The message of the European Parliament elections is that Europeans want change. Political forces campaigning for change have strengthened, while those insisting that everything is fine as is have suffered significant losses.
The Patriots are worth watching. They will not only become one of the new poles of European political life, but also its new organizing principle.
The dividing line now stretches between those who are ready to participate in European decision-making in cooperation and alignment with the Patriots, and those who define themselves in opposition to the Patriots, and thus refuse cooperation. Patriots represent the opposition to Brussels’ bureaucracy and the entrenched political elites of the European People’s Party, Socialists, Liberals, and Greens.
Moreover, the consolidation of the right, with the Patriots now being its central organizing force, is far from over. The emergence of a new right-wing majority, which represents a genuine alternative to mainstream European political trends, is now within reach, and this new power's first show of force was the European Parliament debate of the Hungarian presidency's program.
Trump’s arrival offers both reassurance and inspiration in the struggle, but we must fight our battles ourselves. Repeating his name will not part the Red Sea for us to cross dry-shod.
– Do you expect, as PM Orban put it, that the Brussels elite will sober up? Could Trump’s actions serve as a wake-up call for them?
– I have no illusions. The European institutional framework, in its current form, can only give what is inherent to its nature. Brussels is quietly executing a coup in Europe. Over the past two decades, it has transformed from a community of values into a power center, and from a single market into a federal state-in-the-making. It systematically strips member states of the ability to control their own futures. Hoping for self-restraint from Brussels would be naive. Genuine constraints, checks and balances do not exist within the system. Change must be achieved externally, through political means and by engaging in conflicts with EU institutions.
Trump is fundamentally reshaping the transatlantic relationship. In his worldview, international organizations, including the European Union, lack significant weight. This, of course, has implications for the EU. Trump does indeed serve as a wake-up call for the Brussels elite, although not necessarily in the way we might hope to see it.
Trump won the presidential race on the promise of placing the United States at the center of his policies. His assumption of office could potentially accelerate the European Union's process of maturing, provided the Brussels elite draws the conclusion that they should prioritize Europe in their policies and build a pragmatic, mutually beneficial relationship with the U.S.
Unfortunately, this isn't the conclusion that they'll reach, as Brussels is dominated by an oligarchy organized by the leftist-liberal transatlantic elite. Its barely concealed aim is for Europe to become a refuge for the woke ideology, Democratic operatives, and left-liberal policies that have been ousted from the United States—using European resources and taxpayers' money in the process. This inherently carries the seeds of further ideological and cultural conflict in Europe and the opening of a new front against the United States. Even until now, we've always found it outrageous that Brussels engages in a culture war against its member states, but waging such a war against a Republican-led U.S. administration is nothing short of a suicidal mission. We can only avoid this grim scenario if we weaken and dismantle the left-liberal transatlantic network and ensure that the European people reoccupy Brussels.
– One of the EU presidency's major achievements was securing Romania's and Bulgaria's Schengen membership. How did Hungary persuade the opposing member states?
– It is a historic success that Bulgaria and Romania have become full members of the Schengen Area. Negotiations on this began during Hungary's previous presidency. Several member states harbored political reservations about the expansion of Schengen for decades, largely fueled by concerns over illegal migration. Hungary’s presidency succeeded where many others failed because all parties involved accepted us as both a fair mediator and a credible reference point in the fight against illegal migration. Our years-long successful border protection cooperation with Austria and joint efforts against human smuggling networks created a foundation of trust that we could leverage in these negotiations.
– What tools are Brussels’ pro-war forces preparing to deploy to prevent the change?
– They've never hesitated to use every tool at their disposal against us, and this will continue in the future. Since the European Commission openly became a political body, it has shown that it is willing to use the resources and mechanisms at its disposal, even against member states, to achieve its political objectives. The arsenal of tools continues to expand, and member states remain powerless because EU law does not provide them with effective protections against institutional overreach. The struggle in Brussels follows a well-known choreography: threats of lawsuits, fines, funding cuts, and the suspension of voting rights. If we retreat even once, they will conclude that the method is effective, and the cycle of blackmail will never end.
But, let's not forget that the battle is not only being waged in Brussels, but also within the member states. Hungary has been under the spotlight for nearly a decade and a half. Here, when necessary, they offer jobs, scholarships, recognition, fame, power, and money. So, there will always be current favorites who ready to join their ranks.
However, the alignment of stars under which 2025 has begun is significantly more favorable than it was in 2024. We look to the year ahead with hope and readiness for the fight. 2024 was a year of transition; 2025 could be the year of change in Europe.
Cover photo: Hungary's EU Affairs Minister, Janos Boka (Source: Facebook)
