{"id":1013,"date":"2025-05-02T18:26:51","date_gmt":"2025-05-02T14:26:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/?p=1013"},"modified":"2025-05-02T18:26:51","modified_gmt":"2025-05-02T14:26:51","slug":"hungarys-geopolitical-renavigation-a-new-reality","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/archives\/1013","title":{"rendered":"Hungary\u2019s geopolitical renavigation: A new reality"},"content":{"rendered":"

By zooming in on the foreign policy of an individual state one can reach a substantial number of verdicts with regards to the current \u2018state of play\u2019 in international affairs. Hungary is a useful example, with the country\u2019s foreign policy agenda showcasing multiple uncomfortable realities which now underpin the system of inter-state relations. The country, located in Central Europe and a member of the European Union since 2004, holds a strategically vital position for both the region and the EU specifically. However, it has regularly voiced its disapproval of the EU and has particularly highlighted the nonreciprocal way in which Brussels treats some of its member states<\/em><\/strong>,\u00a0writes Huseyn Sultanli<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

The country\u2019s anxieties, to be discussed below, reflect a general trend, the essence of which resonates with many countries around the world. However, rather than simply accepting the imposition of \u2018moral norms\u2019 and \u2018political righteousness\u2019 by Brussels, countries like Hungary are determined to not let this reality become a consolidated one. The origins of this \u2018fight-back\u2019 lay, to a significant extent, in the country\u2019s personal foreign policy personality, of which its national identity and key ideological dimensions are an inherent part. However, this is also facilitated by the fact that the international system in its previous form is now a thing of the past. This precisely concerns the end of the US-led engagement with the rest of the world under the broad slogan of \u201cthe West\u201d, the transatlantic alliance no longer serving as the bedrock of the international system and powers like China, described for years as being on the periphery of the \u201crules-based order\u201d, no longer being constrained to operating just within their \u2018traditional\u2019 spheres of influence. This has allowed an increasing number of countries, which are not \u2018great powers\u2019 per se, to more openly express their disapproval of how international affairs have been conducted in recent times.<\/p>\n

This \u2018new approach\u2019 concerns countries taking increasing ownership of their foreign policy agendas and operating towards achieving their national interests which are, crucially, determined nationally and not by external forces. In Hungary\u2019s case, Brussels institutions, confronted with this uncomfortable reality, have tended to double down on pointing out Hungary\u2019s unsuitability for the European project. However, and as outlined by Viktor Orban himself, this rhetoric is full of internal contradictions, something which led to the weakening of the European Union\u2019s credibility among countries like Hungary in the first place. Even though Hungary\u2019s confrontation with EU leaders is unique per se, the very essence of its disapproval of the \u2018status quo\u2019 is shared by countries in other regions. Before drawing this much needed parallel, it is essential to unpack an on-going and, most importantly, growing rift which might have serious implications for European unity and security.<\/p>\n

Hungary and the EU: headed for divorce?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Although Hungary is a fully-fledged EU member, it has consistently expressed its discontent with the organization and its political leadership. This, however, is not just regular discontent in the face of criticism of the EU\u2019s inability to consolidate itself in spheres like security and defence or generate cohesion among its members. It is a much deeper-rooted issue, with Hungarian leadership adamant that the interests of the country and the interests of Central and Eastern Europe more generally are inadequately addressed within the organization. Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Foreign Minister\u00a0P\u00e9ter Szijj\u00e1rt\u00f3<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>have repeatedly expressed their frustration at the inability of the European project to operate around common values, the implementation of which is consistent and is targeted at collective rather than exclusive benefit. This includes an array of areas, all united by the common denominator of Hungary\u2019s conviction that politicians in Brussels have unfairly deemed it (and some other states) responsible for all of the EU\u2019s internal and external wrongdoings.<\/p>\n

Since May 2010, which is when Viktor Orban became Prime Minister of Hungary for the second time, the country\u2019s relations with the EU have been engaged in a firm and persistent decline. The list of disagreements between the sides, despite being exhaustive, has tended to revolve around Hungary\u2019s feeling that in Brussels, a deliberate and targeted strategy of sidelining its independent agenda and interests is in place. In response to this, Brussels institutions are adamant that Budapest, despite its membership of the EU, carries out policies which are inherently contradictory to \u201cEU values\u201d. This has been comprehensively rejected in Budapest, with the country\u2019s political leadership pointing out that EU executives have made a habit of singling out smaller nations as a way of diverting attention away from the issues at the heart of the institution. Essentially, there is a feeling among the Hungarian leadership that the country\u2019s unwillingness to mirror the \u2018Brussels way\u2019 has led EU institutions to adopt prejudiced and unjust practices against the country. Notable disagreements between the sides include a deadlock over internal financial policies (specifically rules concerning the EU\u2019s budget deficit policy), the migration crisis of 2015 or, more recently, Hungary\u2019s unwillingness to join the EU\u2019s aggressive sanction policy towards Russia.<\/p>\n

Throughout its presidency of the European Council (July-December 2024), the Hungarian leadership has characterized the EU as a\u00a0\u2018failing\u2019<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>project that has been unable to work towards peace in the way that it had envisioned and its normative status was suggesting. In a speech assessing the outcomes of his country\u2019s presidency, Viktor Orban openly stated that Hungary (and other states) are simply against\u00a0\u201cthe Brussels system\u201d<\/a><\/strong>,<\/a>\u00a0which has been hijacked by an influential group of individuals that has turned the EU into a\u00a0\u2018global\u2019<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0rather than \u2018European\u2019 organization. This unease lies in the EU\u2019s supranationalism spinning increasingly out of control, becoming increasingly \u2018unconservative\u2019 and infringing more intensely on matters that have profound and direct implications for the sovereignty and national interests of its \u201csmaller\u201d member states.<\/p>\n

Widespread geopolitical implications<\/strong><\/p>\n

The platform that is the presidency of the European Council provided Hungary with a unique opportunity to justify its position, as opposed to just voice its discontent and act as a \u2018disruptor\u2019, as alluded to in Brussels. This is essential in contemporary international affairs, especially given the tendency of powerful actors to organize disinformation campaigns targeted at a country and its leadership in the case of misalignment with the \u2018expected way\u2019 of operating. This \u2018retreat\u2019, however, is not unique to Hungary \u2013 several states, with Azerbaijan being one of the most notable examples, \u2018think alike\u2019 and have made a point of adopting a similar approach to its foreign policy activities. Both countries, despite the important distinction of Azerbaijan not being a member of an organization like the EU, feel that their interests, which in Azerbaijan\u2019s case includes something as basic but essential as the principle of territorial integrity, are insufficiently respected. The abovementioned disinformation tactic paints such countries as inherently contradictory to certain standards which have, by now, been eroded by their own creators, delegitimizing their credibility in the first place.<\/p>\n

This situation undoubtedly contains an ideological dimension. In the speech cited previously, Viktor Orban repeatedly linked the failure of the EU with its excessively \u2018liberal\u2019 turn. The conservatism that underpins both the Trump and Orban governments has united their positions on several fronts, including on the highly sensitive matter of migration. This is a response to the EU\u2019s use of such sensitive matters for political purposes, adopting a policy of conditional cooperation (on\u00a0LGBT<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0issues, for example). This form of self-inflicted \u2018isolationism\u2019, which is paradoxical as the EU\u2019s aim is actually to promote economic and political integration, does not satisfy the likes of Hungary and Azerbaijan because of their emphasis on the importance of conducting inter-state relations via trust. However, trust is not something that can be imposed in international relations. It has to be mutually constructed over a certain period of time, something that has not happened in Hungary\u2019s relationship with EU institutions and even leading individuals.<\/p>\n

From a geopolitical perspective, Hungary has distanced itself from the EU\u2019s categorization of China as a\u00a0\u2018strategic rival\u2019<\/a><\/strong>, something it considers a fatal mistake that will only exacerbate the region\u2019s economic challenges. It has refused to support the complete breakdown of relations with Russia. It has not supported the EU sanctions programme and has not agreed to contribute to the supply of\u00a0weapons<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>to Ukraine, citing both factors as key catalysts for the continuation rather than the prevention of conflict. By describing his vision for an\u00a0ideal<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>world order as being composed of \u2018friends, cooperation, economic ties and business benefits\u2019, Orban has made it clear that the EU is ill-equipped to deliver security, prosperity and harmony for Europeans.<\/p>\n

The Hungary-Azerbaijan dynamic: shared unease<\/strong><\/p>\n

Both Hungary and Azerbaijan suffer from a similar issue \u2013 powerful institutions or actors use their economic and political superiority to impose conditions on the countries, \u2018expecting\u2019 them to marginalize their nationally-determined interests and adopt externally-established models of operation. In Azerbaijan\u2019s case, this includes something as fundamental as the country\u2019s right to restore its territorial integrity, a process it had to pursue on its own given the passivity of relevant international institutions to adequately condemn Armenian occupation. Azerbaijan\u2019s foreign policy approach is described by\u00a0experts<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0as a multi-vector strategy that deliberately avoids\u00a0\u2018big brother\u2019<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>relationships and builds mutually beneficial cooperation based on trust and unwavering respect. Hungary has been able to similarly balance between major geopolitical actors \u2013 with Russia, the country shares important energy ties, importing Russian oil and gas which helps uphold its economy; with China, the country recently signed a\u00a0strategic partnership agreement<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>spanning multiple industries; with the US, the country\u2019s leadership is in close and respectful contact with the Trump administration, in stark contrast to the Biden administration; with Turkey, the countries are united by strategic ties facilitated by ethnic proximity and historical ties, enhanced by Hungary\u2019s active engagement with the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) as an\u00a0observer state<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Azerbaijan\u2019s mirroring of this pragmatic approach in its own foreign relations confirms that international affairs have entered a new era with a new component – mutually beneficial cooperation, which is, vitally, underpinned by trust and political good-will. This appears to be the way forward and will shape regional agendas. Hungary has demonstrated this approach in its relations with Azerbaijan, rejecting all attempts to undermine the country\u2019s territorial integrity. Recently, it blocked the provision of\u00a010 million euros<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>worth of aid to Armenia on behalf of the European Peace Facility. In its official objection, the country stated that to ensure this step does not unsettle the stability of the region, the same amount has to be allocated to Azerbaijan for the country\u2019s on-going de-mining efforts on its liberated territories. This demonstrates, despite portrayals from influential powers of the opposite, an adherence to common sense and principles of international law as basic but foundational as territorial integrity and non-interference.<\/p>\n

In addition to legal and political matters, agreement on which is a key prerequisite for fruitful ties, diplomatic trust is constructed through regular and mutually beneficial projects. Bilateral relations between Hungary and Azerbaijan touch upon issues as important as energy affairs. This includes forward-looking projects that are designed to adapt to the \u2018green transition\u2019. This cooperation takes place both in multi-lateral settings, such as the\u00a0joint venture<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>established in 2024 to construct an electric transmission line beneath the Black Sea, but also bilaterally with Hungarian and Azerbaijan oil and gas companies in regular, comprehensive cooperation.<\/p>\n

The \u201cnew normal\u201d \u2013 looking ahead<\/strong><\/p>\n

The resolute position adopted by Hungary and its widespread acceptance by other states confirms the fierce intensity of change in international affairs. As the United States modifies its global position and the European Union pursues new strategies, which tend to be contradictory and actually discourage some of its members, the intensification of regionalism (regional cooperation in new formats) is unlocking new \u2018centers\u2019 of power and influence. Hungary\u2019s role in driving this change is undisputed, with the country acting to confront rather than accept conduct that turns the international arena into a prejudiced and unfair space. The country\u2019s recent\u00a0exit<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0from the International Criminal Court once again emphasizes that international institutions that were once categorized as \u2018standard setters\u2019 are facing increasing backlash, urging a profound reflection.<\/p>\n

In the words of Warren Buffet, a famous American investor, one\u2019s success should always be measured through \u201chow many people they brought with them\u201d in whatever they were pursuing, rather than solely how far they reached. If one were to apply this thinking to Hungary, the country\u2019s battle against unfair practices in its direction is certainly succeeding, something that should only be welcomed.<\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.eureporter.co\/world\/hungary\/2025\/05\/01\/hungarys-geopolitical-renavigation-a-new-reality\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By zooming in on the foreign policy of an individual state one can reach a substantial number of verdicts with regards to the current \u2018state of play\u2019 in international affairs. Hungary is a useful example, with the country\u2019s foreign policy agenda showcasing multiple uncomfortable realities which now underpin the system of inter-state relations. The country,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1014,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[52,24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1013","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-air-center","category-articles"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1013","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1013"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1013\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1015,"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1013\/revisions\/1015"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1014"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1013"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1013"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/think-tanks.az\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1013"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}