Hungarian minister: Supporting Ukraine is not a strategy
The European Union is not a war project, the minister for European Union affairs, János Bóka, said on Facebook on Friday.
Commenting on an opinion piece by Mujtaba Rahman in the Financial Times, Bóka rejected the author’s position that “the EU must face down Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán to protect Ukraine.”
Noting that his letter was published on the FT website, Bóka said that Rahman was proposing to use “financial blackmail” to achieve that end, “or, if this approach fails, through the suspension of Hungary’s voting rights in the EU.”
“I fundamentally disagree with the author’s conclusions and his perception of the EU on which his conclusions are founded,” Bóka said.
“Admittedly, the EU is divided over a feasible strategy concerning the war in Ukraine. Currently, it doesn’t have one because supporting and arming Ukraine as long as it takes is not a strategy; it is a formulation used to cover up its absence.”
The Trump administration’s peace efforts aimed at embedding “this process in a normalisation of relations with Russia” create a new political context for the EU, Bóka said. “It is only natural that there is a political discussion on how to redefine our interests and objectives.”
Hungary’s “clear” position, he said, was that the conflict must be localised, de-escalated and ended. Meanwhile, the EU must start “a discussion on a new European security architecture with all global stakeholders; develop individual and collective capabilities for EU member states to be able to defend themselves; and create the necessary economic background by making the EU more competitive.”
Bóka said this was a “legitimate and sensible option” for the EU to extricate itself from the war and pursue peace. “It restores some of our competitive advantages and reinforces defence capacities burnt in Ukraine. It offers an exit strategy from the EU’s increasing global isolation.”
Not only did Rahman reject that approach, he also questioned Hungary’s right to defend it, Bóka said. He proposed using “instruments designed to protect the EU’s fundamental values and financial interests for an unrelated purpose: crush dissent within the EU. This would be an abuse of power. But more importantly the rationale behind it carries a disturbing perspective for the EU’s future.”
“If you believe that the EU is at war, then all dissenting opinions will become existential threats. If you believe that you are fighting an external enemy, you will end up finding internal enemies that must be equally disposed of. Now it’s Hungary but there will be plenty of other targets. The EU is not an external or internal war project. Let’s not allow it to become one.”
Read also: