Menu
The Prime Minister said there is no such thing as that everyone wants peace and there is no peace. The only possibility is – and that is the situation now – that everyone says that they want peace, but some in actual fact do not.
He summed the situation up by stating that the Europeans and the Ukrainians evidently want to continue the war, whatever they may say, the President of the United States wants peace, while what we do know for certain about the Russians is that they want to reach the designated territorial borders and want to prevent, even at the expense of a war, Ukraine from becoming a member of NATO or a NATO military weapons cache.
Mr Orbán highlighted that, in addition to the war, the Russian-US agreement should further include the development of energy prices, America’s access to Russian market and Russia’s access to the US market, the economic sanctions, and the issue of technology and arms control.
He also stressed that Hungary was “a dangerous example,” it showed in Europe that it was possible to take a stance against the war and to take a stance for peace, and “if you’re strong enough, you can stay out of the war.” Hungary is “an antithesis of everything that Europe is doing today, which while talking about peace, in actual fact, has a vested interest in keeping the war going,” he said.
He also said he regularly uses all his contacts to try to provide arguments and considerations for peace in the direction of both the Russian and US presidents.
He spoke about the fact that while it was true that Donald Trump had been unable to restore peace since his entry into office in January, if Biden had stayed or Kamala Harris had taken his place, then – in the Prime Minister’s view – “we would be in the middle of a World War.” There is no doubt, he continued, that Donald Trump is a man of peace, and he alone has a chance to mediate in a Russian-Ukrainian peace deal.
Mr Orbán was asked why he had stood for the position right from the beginning that Hungary must remain on the side of peace. Listing the reasons, the Prime Minister first mentioned the national interest. In his words, Hungary cannot possibly benefit from Ukraine arming 800,000 to a million people, and the coming into being of an army much bigger than Hungary’s weight and strength – given that “God only knows” what it will be used for and by whom in the coming decade – because that in itself is dangerous.
He highlighted that, in his view, none of the conditions existed for the Ukrainians to defeat the Russians. They are fewer in numbers, no matter how much money the West gives them, they will always have less money, their arms industry lags behind that of the Russians, and the most important argument is that Russia is a nuclear superpower, and no one has ever defeated a nuclear superpower anywhere in the world yet, the Prime Minister listed.
He added that he regarded the plan that Ukraine should defeat the Russians on the frontline, thereby potentially destabilising Russia, as crazy.
He said it is another argument for peace that the historical time that we are living in is not the time of the Russo-Ukrainian war; the coexistence of Christian and Islamic civilisations is a more important problem of a higher order. What is the point of Christian white Europeans killing each other by the hundreds of thousands on the frontline at the Russian-Ukrainian border, while in the other half of the continent, people in the millions coming from different cultures alien to our own, masses belonging to the world of Islam are being let in, he asked.
This is abnormal behaviour, political leaders are missing the beat of the present historical time, Mr Orbán said. The power issue of the Russo-Ukrainian war and its conclusion may be more important at this present time, but the historical time which will determine the lives of our children and grandchildren is not that because it does not revolve around this issue, he pointed out.
The question of the Mediterranean world that has existed for 1,400 years is whether the civilisations that have grown out of the Mediterranean, North and South of the region, will develop in a Christian or Islamic direction, Mr Orbán said. This issue was laid to rest for a long time, but now this is an open question again, processes are under way, and these processes will determine what kind of a world our children and grandchildren will live in. Therefore, we must put this question into the number one position, this is the Hungarian approach, he stated.
Mr Orbán believes that there is no threat of Russia attacking NATO Member States. He stressed that Russia had an approximate population of 140 million, while the European Union had a population of 400 million, 460 million with Britain included. His second argument was that the quantity of money that Russia could mobilise for war purposes is a fraction of what the West, even without the United States, would be able to mobilise.
He pointed out that he saw no reasonable argument for why Russia would attempt to engage in a war with Western Europe which it could only lose.
At the same time, there is an unspoken fear in the heads of the Baltic nations and the Polish, he said. They are afraid that they are members of NATO in vain, if the Russians attack them, NATO will not defend them, and from this point of view, it is understandable why they want to defeat the Russians now and “to bring the matter to a head because if you don’t believe that your allies will be by your side, if you think you’re a member of NATO in vain, then naturally, something else becomes a logical thought,” he said.
The Prime Minister pointed out that the solution to the problem was not to be found on the frontline. Forcing the continuation of the war is not the answer to their dilemma, reinforcing NATO is, he stated.
He recalled that the 2008 NATO summit had proved that the Russians had had the strength to prevent Ukraine and Georgia from becoming members of the organisation, and that from there on Russia had to be reckoned with again as a continuously strengthening world political factor also in the long term.
This is the reality on the ground, he said in summary, also mentioning that before the 2010 elections, he paid a visit to Moscow and China, too. By his account, he clarified Hungary’s relations with Russia and China, making offers regarding how we Hungarians envisaged cooperation beyond 2010, and also concluded agreements which have been in the process of implementation ever since 2010.
In 2009, at his meeting with the Russian President in Saint Petersburg, they agreed that upon the recommendation of the Hungarian Prime Minister, they should put historical debates to one side. They should be left for historians, and should not unnecessarily encumber Russian-Hungarian cooperation. The Russian President has adhered to this ever since, and so have we. Until the war, until the onset of the period of sanctions, Russian-Hungarian economic cooperation was good for the Russians and was very good for us. Not only in the energy sector, but also in other areas, Mr Orbán stressed.
The Prime Minister also said that if we jumped back a 100 years in time compared with 1990, we would see a Europe before our eyes where two intellectual trends debated about how to govern well and how to make countries free and happy. One position called itself liberal, while the other conservative, and this was the underlying structure of European politics all the way until the appearance of Hitler on the scene and the coming into being of the communist regime in Russia. After these became significant European factors, the intellectual structure of European political debates, too, swiftly changed because the conservatives and liberals as forces believing in democracy “combined forces.” Until 1990 – in European intellectual life, there was the alliance of liberals and conservatives on one side, and totalitarian regimes on the other. This, however, came to an end in 1990.
After this, the liberals very swiftly realised that the battle would again resume between them and the conservatives, and the order that existed in Europe before the totalitarian world, before World War I would be restored.
They built a theory, at the core of which lay the idea that anyone who is not liberal or does not accept essential elements of the liberal world view, but is, say, conservative or Christian, is outside the bounds of democracy. They fitted up this stage, and European politics was writhing “in this linguistic prison” for a long time, all the way until – with significant Hungarian assistance – it was freed from this cage, and it was demonstrated through the efforts of the Hungarian government, the example of Fidesz and the formation of the Patriots that democratic politics resting on Christian, conservative and national foundations was possible, he said. The liberals deny this to this very day, he pointed out, highlighting that after 2010 they rearranged the whole European political stage. “I’m not saying that we rearranged the whole stage, and it is now the way we would like it to be, but our approach, regarding the whole stage, life, the arrangement of intellectual debates in space, our impact is already tangible,” Mr Orbán said.
The Prime Minister also spoke about the fact that today Hungary was still much better off within the European Union, fighting for changes from inside, than leaving. He said there is no particular point that could be designated in theory beyond which it is no longer worth staying inside. He can promise Hungarian electors one thing: if he believes that membership is no longer worth it, he will say so.
Regarding the European Union’s draft budget, he said while it is called the budget of the European Union, it is, in actual fact, a Ukrainian budget because it is based on the underlying thought that Ukraine is a part of the European Union. This budget regards Ukraine’s accession as the top priority, “it is not just simply a pro-Ukraine, but a Ukraine budget,” he stated in summary.
The Prime Minister said 20 to 25 per cent of the total funds in the budget automatically goes to Ukraine, while another 10 to 11 per cent is allocated for interest payments on loans taken out previously. So, in actual fact, around 30 to 32 per cent of this budget – regardless of how large a sum they wrote on the cover – is non-existent money, “it’s already out there, so, it’s that much less,” he said. The budget appears to be larger in vain, the money inside it is much less than before, he underlined.
He said there is also a Hungarian problem in it, namely that the instruments of blackmail were left inside. If you do not support Ukraine’s membership or do not let migrants in or resist the gender issue, then you are blackmailed from Brussels with financial instruments, the budget allows for that, he said, stating that therefore, as long as he is prime minister, “never in a million years” will he vote for this budget.
There is a split within the transatlantic world, Europe is heading in a progressive, liberal direction, while America is following a national and conservative path, the Prime Minister pointed out, adding that this is also emerging in world politics: Europe is pro-war, while America is pro-peace. “I don’t see this split being mended,” he observed.
“I thought that a relatively harmonious common economic policy resting on a shared ideological approach to trade would survive between Europe and America until 2030. The tariff war indicates the very opposite of this, America now has its own economic policy,” he pointed out.
By 2030 the world will look completely different, we are facing major trials, and during these years, we will have to manoeuvre calmly, and cleverly, he stated.
He highlighted that in consequence of a series of bad political decisions, Europe could sink even lower. However, what is even more worrying is that Hungary could, in consequence of bad Hungarian decisions, lose 30 to 40 years’ worth of future.
He said the present European Union is not the one Hungary joined in 2004. At the time, there was not a word about migration, Brussels had no competence in gender issues, and the idea that they should want to force Hungary into a war did not even emerge. Today, we are in a political union, despite the fact that we entered an economic union. He took the view that there would be no pan-European, EU-level welfare; one country or another could succeed in creating welfare for their citizens as members of the EU, and Hungary is among the candidates.
In answer to a question concerning the fact that in January he spoke about the Hungarian economy getting off to a flying start, he said he meant the flying start that – he hoped – we would observe in the second half of the year. He thought that peace would be restored in the first half of the year, but at least, a ceasefire would be achieved in the Russo-Ukrainian war, that Donald Trump’s appearance on the scene would force the Ukrainians and the Europeans to retreat. This is not what happened, the Europeans gave Ukraine guarantees to foot the bills of the war, he said.
He said today what determines the environment of the European and Hungarian economies is that the war is ongoing. In order for a flying start to succeed, we have a vested interest in a ceasefire and the restoration of peace.
He stressed that the government had launched targeted programmes, mentioning that the Demján Sándor Programme offers SMEs multiple opportunities, while young people can take out loans at 3 per cent interest for the purchase of their first homes.
Regarding the 2026 elections, he said the question is not whether Fidesz has a chance to win, but whether someone else has a chance to win. Fidesz is the EU’s most successful political community, “meaning that we prepare for every election in the belief that we stand the best chance of winning,” he said.
“I promised to not allow the country to be pushed into the war, and that we would not be destroyed by migration, and Hungary has remained a migrant-free country. We promised pensioners to protect the purchasing power of pensions. I will stand before the Hungarian people with modest, but self-confident composure at the beginning of the campaign, telling them that we have accomplished what we pledged to do four years ago,” Mr Orbán said.
In response to Mr Király’s remark that while earlier it was very difficult to secure an interview with the prime minister, he has recently been to multiple podcast shows, Mr Orbán said it is not difficult to secure an interview with him, but he has a few conditions of agreeing to one. The first one is that there should be a chance for a reasonable conversation, meaning that he will not sit down in a studio “for the sake of a thrashing,” he said. The other condition is that he does not give interviews to “mercenaries in someone else’s pay,” meaning people about whom he knows they are paid from abroad. In answer to the question of whether mercenaries can only ask stupid questions, the Prime Minister said no, there are also clever mercenaries, and they are the most dangerous.
