Foreign interference in Hungary’s election? Fidesz campaigns with Orbán alongside US and a dozen other politicians – analysis

There is a basic rule in Hungarian public policy life that has been honed over the past few years: every foreign political statement is interference in domestic affairs — except those that are not. Defining the latter category is a task the Fidesz communications team has taken upon itself, as flexibly as needed.

The formula is simple to apply: if Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian president, tells an Italian newspaper that in his view Orbán will lose the election, that is, of course, interference — it violates Hungary’s sovereignty, undermines the purity of the voters’ will, and proves that the Tisza Party is a puppet show of foreign interests. If, however, US Vice President J. D. Vance flies to Budapest a few weeks before the 12 April election to demonstrate, by his very presence, the Trump administration’s commitment to Viktor Orbán, that belongs to a different category. That is friendship, alliance, geopolitics. That is not interference, but an honour.

The backstory of “foreign interference”: the billboard campaign that reveals a lot

For nearly a decade now, we have watched government-funded billboard campaigns targeting the enemy of the moment. A year ago, the series of anti-Ukraine, anti-EU posters began. Zelenskyy’s stern face, Ursula von der Leyen’s self-satisfied smile, and Manfred Weber’s cheerful laugh were each placed in a large red X. The message was clear: these are the people who want to meddle in Hungary’s affairs; these are the people who must be rebuffed; these are the people against whom Viktor Orbán stands firm.

That communications architecture is still in place. When Zelenskyy let something slip at a March press conference — a line that could be interpreted as a threat directed at Orbán — Fidesz immediately turned it into a campaign issue, and with some justification, because the remark really was unacceptable. When the European Commission withholds EU funds, that is interference. When Brussels criticises, that is interference. When Ukraine does not reopen an oil pipeline, that is blackmail and interference.

A crucial element of this logic is that “interference” is not treated as a neutral, legal category. It is a rhetorical weapon. What matters is not whether someone truly tries to influence the conduct of an election, but in whose name they do it — and whether it suits the taste of those in power.

The guest list: the interference of the interferers

Before turning to the American vice president’s visit, it is worth pausing for a moment over the guest list of CPAC Hungary on 21 March — because it is, in itself, instructive if we want to understand which countries or parties are directly intervening in the election.

The event features speeches in person by Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš, former Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, Martin Helme, a leader of Estonia’s radical right, Tom Van Grieken, president of the Flemish Vlaams Belang, and, of course, Eva Vlaardingerbroek, the Dutch commentator who has by now become a regular — to name only the most prominent figures.

As a parenthetical note, it is worth mentioning that parts of the press once again will not be allowed into the event — even though, in CPAC’s own “Free Speech Rating” assessment in January, Hungary was ranked among the best in terms of freedom of speech. If an event whose central message is the defence of sovereignty and a professed commitment to open society and transparent democracy is serious about those claims, this would be the place to prove it by letting in accredited journalists without discrimination.

But back to the guest list. If Babiš, as the Czech prime minister, is expected to express clear support for Orbán and Fidesz, and Morawiecki is likely to do the same, then why is that not foreign interference? If any statement from Zelenskyy is interference — even when he never mentioned Péter Magyar — then Babiš’s open endorsement should also qualify as interference by Fidesz’s own logic.

What is more, CPAC spells out its own reasoning openly: “Brussels and its attachments have decided to settle accounts with the Hungarian right once and for all” — and against that backdrop, CPAC gathers foreign guests in order to show that “the strength of the right is not only overwhelming in Hungary.” Placed next to each other, these two sentences complete a perfect logical circle: the enemy’s interference is interference; our interference is a demonstration of strength.

Grand assembly of patriots

We must not overlook another Fidesz event either: the first Grand Assembly of Patriots will be held in Budapest on March 23, featuring such figures as Marine Le Pen, Matteo Salvini, Santiago Abascal, Herbert Kickl, and Geert Wilders. Given Fidesz’s reactions so far, these politicians are openly getting involved in the campaign to influence Hungarian voters.

Rubio, then Vance — and the exception that proves the rule

In mid-February, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio visited Budapest. Rubio did not beat around the bush: Orbán’s re-election, he said, is crucial for US interests. He also hinted that Washington would be ready to provide financial support to Hungary if Fidesz wins the election. This was not diplomatic tact; it was an open campaign speech aimed at a foreign country’s domestic politics two months before an election.

Yesterday, it emerged that J. D. Vance is coming, personally, as America’s vice president, in the heat of the campaign. We do not yet know the details. Many believe he will speak at the CPAC event.

If the same had happened with the opposite sign — if Zelenskyy had visited Budapest, attended Péter Magyar’s rally, and declared that the opposition’s victory was crucial for Ukrainian interests — the Fidesz media machine would have run with it for days. Posters, press conferences, letters to voters, “national consultations”, perhaps even a referendum. Foreign influence! Sovereignty-violating interference! We will not allow it!

We are not fortune-tellers, but Vance’s visit will be proudly advertised by the government, and pro-government and state media will frame it as a geopolitical triumph.

The structure of the double standard

It is worth unpacking, once, what exactly this intellectual construction is that makes the double standard sustainable.

Fidesz’s “interference” rhetoric has an internal logic that is not entirely senseless — merely arbitrary. The skeleton of the argument runs like this: Brussels and Zelenskyy are interferers because they want political change in Hungary that serves their interests, not Hungarians’. The enemy’s interest equals interference. The friend’s interest equals non-interference — indeed, reinforcement.

The only problem is that this argument undermines itself. Rubio said Orbán’s re-election is crucial from the standpoint of American interests. Vance is likewise coming to appear at a partisan campaign event. The difference is not that one side intervenes and the other does not. The difference is that one side is, in Orbán’s narrative, a friend, while the other is an enemy. That is not political philosophy. That is team spirit.

If you take the principle of sovereignty seriously, you cannot apply a double standard. Either it is unacceptable for foreign politicians to arrive in the final days before an election and campaign in person in Hungary — regardless of whether it is Zelenskyy or Vance, Rubio or Weber — or it is acceptable. Only one of those can be true at the same time.

If you missed it – Hungary election 2026: A rare poll breaks the trend, showing Orbán’s Fidesz with a clear lead

Why can this still be maintained?

Any objective analysis requires us to ask: why does this work? Why don’t more voters immediately see through it?

Partly because the pro-Fidesz media environment does not allow for a parallel vision. Anyone who consumes only MTVA or pro-government outlets will see Zelenskyy and von der Leyen as enemies, while Vance and Rubio are allies — and those two pictures are never placed side by side, never compared, never made into a question.

Partly because emotional logic is stronger than conceptual coherence. Orbán and Trump’s friendship, Americanism, the MAGA world turning towards Budapest — that feeling is real and attractive to some Fidesz voters. Consistency of principles matters less than the victory of one’s own team.

And partly because the opposition is not immune to similar reflexes: Péter Magyar also rightly rejects Zelenskyy’s words. On both sides, the principle is the same; it is only the application that is inconsistent.

What remains

One fact remains that cannot be smoothed over: Fidesz, which has spent years campaigning against the spectre of foreign interference, is now welcoming with open arms the second most powerful person in the United States, who is clearly coming with the aim of influencing the outcome of a NATO member state’s election.

This is not an argument against the visit as a diplomatic gesture. Nor is it a claim that Hungary and the United States should not be close allies. It is simply an observation that Fidesz is inconsistent with itself: the principle of sovereignty, used for months to repel every criticism, suddenly becomes inapplicable when friends arrive.

The logic is simple. If foreign interference is what Zelenskyy does — remarks that he believes Orbán will lose the election — then foreign interference is also what Vance does: he appears at a campaign event, and by doing so conveys, up close, the Trump administration’s unmistakable message: this is the government we want to keep in Budapest.

Either both are interference, or neither is. But judging them differently depending on who is speaking is no longer a principle but marketing.

If you missed it: Even a government-affiliated expert claims Russian interference is unprecedented during the election campaign