Menu
Gábor Gönczi: I welcome Viktor Orbán, Prime Minister of Hungary, to the “Tények” studio. Thank you for joining us.
Good evening.
Let me start with the latest news. A few hours ago a recording was posted on the internet – an interview in which you weren’t being interviewed, but you were interviewing someone: Tibor Kapu, in the International Space Station. That role suits you well, by the way. We didn’t know you were an excellent journalist, Prime Minister.
It’s easier to ask questions than to answer them.
Asking is easier than answering.
I learned that yesterday.
You told Tibor Kapu that now everyone wants to be Tibor Kapu. Do you want to be Tibor Kapu now?
Everyone has childhood dreams – including me. It would have been nice, or it would be nice, to see it all at once: to see not only Hungary, not only our village, the capital or the country, not only our continent, but the whole Earth at once. I think it would be a fantastic experience. Perhaps we should say that once an enterprise gets going, it’s hard to stop it – because in the last year or two we’ve had two Nobel Prize winners and an astronaut. Among Hungarians that doesn’t happen every year. So we’re having a great year, and thanks to these outstanding people Hungary’s international recognition is higher today than it was earlier. And let’s not forget, because we’re obviously going to talk about politics, that at last we have a man whom all Hungarians look up to – literally. I always look up to him of an evening.
Yes. So we’re definitely making history, and we’ll be returning to this history. Let’s go to the battlefield. You’ve just come back from the NATO summit in The Hague, and then you went across to Brussels. You’ve said that the winds of change have reached NATO, and that more and more of us are in favour of peace. What are these changes?
Perhaps the simplest answer is to say that there’s a new sheriff in town. A year ago there was a NATO summit in Washington, and everyone – apart from us – was talking enthusiastically about Ukraine’s membership of NATO, about arming Ukraine, and continuing the war. A year later, everything has turned around: there was no talk of that at this NATO summit. The new US president has made it clear that he’s pro-peace. NATO wasn’t created to fight wars, it was created to defend itself, to make peace, and therefore there should be no question of Ukraine’s membership of NATO, there should be no question of NATO getting involved in the Ukrainian–Russian war; NATO should look after itself, it should make itself stronger and it should make our life safer. This is a completely new situation. Finally there’s a place – NATO – where we’ve won. So, from the isolated, losing position that we occupied earlier, we’re suddenly on the side of the majority – or at least on the side of the stronger position. We’re a serious group: the United States, Türkiye, Hungary and Slovakia.
Many people were afraid that if Donald Trump decided that NATO in its present form was no longer needed, then “My God, what will happen to us?” Well, that’s not what’s happened. In the end, what’s happened is what you said earlier: Donald Trump will be our ally, he’ll be a strong ally. I think that’s the most important thing.
The most important thing is that a majority has emerged in NATO that believes that any conflict with Russia could lead us into a third world war. So if NATO intervenes in the war on the side of Ukraine, it risks World War III. If it admits Ukraine, it will be in a permanent conflict with Russia, which will mean a permanent threat of world war. So this must be avoided. NATO hasn’t yet got to the point – and not even the new sheriff has said this – at which we have to sit down and come to an agreement with the Russians; because we not only don’t want war, but we don’t want an arms race either – at least we Hungarians don’t, and certainly not me personally. So if we don’t want to get into a trial of strength and spend all the money that could be spent elsewhere on armaments and army building, then sooner or later we’ll have to agree with the potential enemy or threat – which is how NATO sees Russia – on how much armaments we’ll keep in operation or in service, on how much we’ll devote to military expenditure. Because otherwise the sky will be the limit. So we also have to avoid an arms race. We have to strengthen ourselves, but we have to avoid an arms race. There’s no way to do this unless we Westerners make a deal with the Russians. That hasn’t happened yet, we’re not there yet. No one else apart from me is saying this.
And yet we’ve been watching this arms race since the 1980s, and what has the outcome been? Precisely nothing. And yes, we could be doing it all over again.
This is why I dare to get involved in the business of the big boys – because in the end it’s for the big boys to decide. But there are a few of us who share our own personal experiences with the big boys. Our world was once ruined by an arms race. Sure, it brought down the communists and ended the Soviet Union, and it had its benefits, but it also wasted an awful lot of money and energy on a profligate, unnecessary arms race. Now that we’re free and belong to the West, it’s not in our interest to repeat this. So for Hungarians it’s good if as much of the money we generate as possible goes to where it’s needed in everyday life: to the economy, health care, families, education, and so on. We need armies, we need armaments, but we don’t need a pointless arms race.
So, with the right allies, you seem to be succeeding in keeping Ukraine out of NATO. But in Brussels that’s not the case, or the battlefield looks completely different. Let’s move on to the EU summit, where what happened was completely different.
Because – excuse me if I may – as I said to you, the NATO meeting was different because there was a new sheriff in town. But he didn’t come over to Brussels, as that was an EU meeting. Suddenly everything changed: there were just Europeans there, and they want war. So the situation changes immediately as soon as the Turkish and American counterweight, which were present in NATO, aren’t in the system: the Europeans – apart from the Slovaks, together with us, so almost everyone – want to continue the war. While in NATO together with the US president and the Turks we’ve successfully prevented Ukraine from being admitted, we no longer have that power in Brussels. In Brussels I’ve had to fight alone. That’s not quite right: I had to fight on behalf of more than two million Hungarians. If I count them, there were a lot of us; because [the consultative referendum] Voks2025 supported me in this battle, in which I had to speak clearly, I had to use my veto. I had to say that for fundamental and strategic reasons – not for bilateral reasons, but for fundamental and strategic reasons – Hungary doesn’t support Ukraine’s membership of the European Union, either now or in the future.
You said that this was one of the ugliest European Union summits – or perhaps the ugliest. Why did you say that?
These are, after all, internal matters – how such a meeting is conducted. It’s not like a locker room…
We don’t know about that, we don’t see it.
…you can’t give away the secrets of the locker room. But I can tell you that if it were possible to kill people by looking at them, I’d have been killed by multiple assassins.
You had the results of Voks2025, didn’t you? In that vote 2.1 million people said and confirmed that Ukraine must be kept out of the European Union.
Yes, because the Hungarians don’t want to be dragged into a war. We have a very clear position, and I see that this is a general opinion among the Hungarian people. If we admitted Ukraine to the European Union, we’d also be admitting the war with it. The European Union isn’t a security organisation, and it has no military capability. If we admit Ukraine to the European Union while it’s at war with Russia on its eastern border, we’ll immediately be at war with Russia. This isn’t so difficult to see, the Hungarians recognise this, and this is why we don’t want to take the war into the European Union. We understand the Ukrainians, they’re a country under attack, they’re in a lot of trouble, we’re trying to be fair to them, and we’ll help them where we can – but we cannot help them by destroying ourselves. Don’t ask us to do that! Ask for help, but don’t ask us to destroy ourselves. If we admit them into the Union, we won’t be helping them, we’ll be destroying ourselves and dragging ourselves into a military conflict with Russia. Not to mention the other unpleasant economic consequences of admitting them, which would also put the whole European economy in a difficult situation, or destroy it. So we have a very clear position. What really hurt the others there is that the Hungarian position isn’t an emotional or impulsive position, but a cold and rational one. And I’m the longest-serving among the prime ministers in Brussels – where, I’m honoured to say, I negotiated the entire final phase of Hungary’s accession to NATO. And I also had the honour of negotiating the opening stage of Hungary’s membership of the European Union. So I know the ins and outs of both negotiations, but the others sitting there don’t. And I know exactly how things happened. What happened was the introduction of a rule, first applied to the countries of the former Soviet bloc: “You have to get into NATO first. Because your eastern borders must be secured militarily, because we cannot secure your eastern borders.” This is the case for Ukraine now. Ukraine wants to get into the EU without us knowing the size of the country or where its eastern borders are. In our case, this was solved by promising us that we’d be admitted to NATO, by presenting us with a realistic scenario, by implementing it, by getting us into NATO, and then into the European Union. But we don’t see this guarantee now, because we’ve said that we won’t admit Ukraine to NATO, because that would mean world war. So the European Union cannot secure the eastern borders of a future Member State. Therefore Ukraine can’t be absorbed, we don’t know how many people it has, how big its territory is, when and with whom it will be at war. So it’s impossible to absorb a Member State under these circumstances. Our case was different. And I said this calmly and with composure, as an eyewitness, saying that this is how it was and this is how it should be. And for the former Eastern Bloc countries, if there’s no membership of NATO, there will be no membership of the European Union.
What would happen to Hungarian families if this were to happen and Ukraine were really to be admitted to the EU under a fast-track procedure? What would happen to us, what would happen to our utility bills, what would happen to our lives? What would happen to agriculture?
We have Voks2025 behind us, in which the whole country was able to think about this. I myself attended several campaign events, I met a lot of people, we were able to tell everyone, partly with your help – I mean through the media – and partly directly. Our peace would be at risk. Ukraine’s membership is tantamount to going to war. We’d see the creation of a European Union at war. Because there’s free movement within the European Union, and if there were free access for everyone from Ukraine to Hungary, citizens of a country armed to the teeth with well-developed mafia networks would be coming in and out of Hungary – we’d be a gateway country. I think our security, our internal security, would also be at risk. And finally, there is the question of money. Well, there’s still a lot of money going to Ukraine that we need here in the European Union – in Hungary, for example. A lot of money is already going there. If we take them in, all that money will go to Ukraine. The Hungarian people don’t know this, although I try to tell them that today we’re sustaining the Ukrainian state. So today the Ukrainian state wouldn’t function without Western money. Pensions wouldn’t be paid, state employees wouldn’t be paid. The Ukrainian economy doesn’t have the capacity to sustain itself. So we maintain the whole Ukrainian state and we maintain a Ukrainian army. And Zelenskyy is demanding that we not only maintain it now, but also in the future: a Ukrainian army of one million would need to be financed by the European Union. He also says that we should give Ukraine a certain percentage of our domestic national product, so that his country can function. I don’t think that’s a good idea. So what I’m saying is that after its membership of the European Union went through, it would be impossible to limit the amount of money that went to Ukraine; because then under membership they’d be entitled to it, and all our money would go to Ukraine. Let’s not do that! I have a different proposal: let’s conclude a strategic agreement with Ukraine, and how the European Union will support it, but let’s not create a legal basis for Ukraine to suck money out of the country, for its businessmen or mafia figures from dubious backgrounds to come here to Hungary and the European Union; and let’s sign an agreement to definitively rule out any kind of involvement in the war by the European Union. So I’m not saying that we should forget about Ukraine. Nor am I saying that we shouldn’t support them. But let’s not support them in a way that leads to us destroying ourselves in the process.
Prime Minister, the Pride parade took place at the weekend. What do you think about the fact that it took place, that it happened, that it could happen, and what did you see there?
I wasn’t there, so I can’t speak with the credibility of an eyewitness – because what the heck would I be doing there?! I’m one of those people who don’t consider what happened to be a matter of pride. We don’t see that as pride. If I’m in Felcsút, I’ll say it’s a disgrace, and if I’m here in Budapest, I’ll say it’s misjudgement. It’s not pride, it’s prejudice. Moreover, the country has already decided on this matter once. Not everyone remembers it, but in 2022 there wasn’t only a parliamentary election, but also a referendum in which the Hungarian people were able to express their opinion on the issue of Pride, on the issue of sexuality for its own sake in general, on the issue of bringing up children, of child protection, and on the issue of unconventional lifestyles. And 3.7 million people said “no” to what Pride embodies, “no” to gender. So Hungary has a decision, a decision made with great force. Not in any other referendum – including those on NATO and European Union membership – have so many people ever taken part and expressed their opinion in the same direction as they did on the issues of family protection, child protection and Pride. Of course, a few tens of thousands of people will take to the streets, because already in 2022 they dissented. There were about 190,000 who voted for gender anyway – and many didn’t vote at all, or spoiled their ballots. So in Hungary there’s support for gender, for gender reassignment surgery, for same-sex marriage, for their right to adopt children; so in Hungary a certain amount of support exists for the issues associated with Pride. But there are many more who reject it. We decided this once in 2022, and no demonstration or Pride parade will change my position on this issue. So now the whole country has seen – and I hope many have also understood – how this system works. The way the system works now is that it was decided in Brussels that there must be Pride. It was decided openly – not secretly, but openly. They found the people who organised it here. Since the capital city is now governed by the opposition, this was the capital. Brussels decided it, the capital decided it, and the opposition implemented it. Then they rallied their supporters behind it, because there are a good number of people behind every cause. What I’m saying is that it would be the same on other issues. So this is what happened with Pride. But this would also be the case with migration. It will be Brussels that decides on it if there isn’t a national government, as there is now, but a Brussels government; if there’s a Brussels government it will implement it, and people will applaud it, as there are many people who feel sorry for migrants. But if we didn’t have a national government that would also be the case with Ukraine: it would be decided in Brussels, the puppet government here would implement it, those who sympathise with Ukraine might even take to the streets, and that would be that. Then we would be finished: the country would be finished. There’s gender, there’s migration, and we’re up to our necks in the war. So what I’m saying is that now, regardless of Pride, everyone can see that they’ve manufactured a test model for us. This is how European politics – led by Brussels – works. This is why Brussels wants to ensure that Hungary doesn’t have a government that defends national sovereignty, but a pro-Brussels and pro-Ukraine government. Because then they can implement everything, as they did with Pride.
I promised to return to Tibor Kapu for one more sentence. You spoke to him, and that interview is now on the internet – a very good conversation, by the way.
Thank you.
What do you think was the most important thing?
Not thanks to me, but to him…
The reporter was good.
Yes, but some games are already a foregone conclusion. So, after forty years or so to talk to a man orbiting in space, there you can hardly fail…
What was the most important thing that Tibor said to you?
What struck me most was that he said that they have sixteen days and nights for our one. And he told me that at dawn for them yesterday their orbit was such that it was morning for them just when it was morning for Hungary. So he was just above Hungary, and he saw it. And he saw Lake Balaton, he saw Lake Fertő [or Neusiedl], and he saw the Danube. So there was a Hungarian man up there, with the whole world down below him, and what was he interested in? Hungary!
And Lake Fertő and Lake Balaton…
I think it’s a big thing.
Yes, yes, yes. So Tibor Kapu is watching us from above, Donald Trump is watching us in NATO and from America, and you’re here.
And I’m trying to do so from the Carmelite Monastery [Prime Minister’s Office], yes.
Yes. Thank you very much for joining us.
It’s been a pleasure.
More news
