EP Elections Need to Relay Strong Signal to Brussels, Hungary's EU Affairs Minister Says (2024)

The two-day conference organized by the Danube Institute focuses on the rule of law. Why is it important to have an international discourse on this theme?

The European institutions and the NGOs funded by them do everything to create the impression that the rule of law procedures applied by the European Union are procedures of an objective legal nature, designed to protect the shared values of the European Union.

But this could not be further detached from reality, because these EU rule of law procedures are actually political instruments that serve tactical and strategic goals.

The tactical goal is to use political pressure to force certain member states of the European Union to align themselves, today first of all, with Brussels' pro-war position. The strategic goal is to take the definition of European values ​​and the enforcement of European values ​​out of the hands of the constitutional institutions in the member states and render them a monopoly of the European institutions, promoting the big European federative project.

It's very important to see these processes for what they are, to understand how they work, their impact mechanism, to see that they are political instruments, and to be able to give political responses to them.

In recent years, Hungary has had a number of conflicts with the EU's top institutions, which are concerned about the state of the rule of law in the country. The European Parliament elections are coming up next week. Can we expect a change in the relationship between the Hungarian government and the EU institutions?

This depends solely on the outcome of the European Parliament elections, but change is badly needed. The situation is that an extremely unhealthy political relationship evolved between the European Commission and the European Parliament on the one hand, and between the member states on the other. Over the last two institutional cycles, the European Commission has clearly seen itself as a political body and believed that it can use any means, even against the member states, to enforce its own political objectives. In addition, the European Parliament is putting increasing political pressure on the European Commission and is seeking to blackmail it into taking a more radical position on certain issues than envisaged. The European Parliament is thus clearly becoming a political actor, and the European Commission is losing its role as the guardian of the treaties, which it is supposed to be under the treaties. Whether the sovereignist forces will strengthen in the European Parliament depends on the results of the European Parliament elections. A European Parliament with a more sovereignist position could make a major contribution to restoring the institutional balance and thus increasing the efficiency of the European Union. This would be more favorable for the Hungarian government, but it would also improve the functioning of the European Union as a whole.

What is at stake in the upcoming EP elections?

The issue of war and peace is indeed at stake in the European Parliament elections. This formulation is neither an exaggeration nor a simplification. Since February 2022, the European institutions, either deliberately or by negligence, have let Europe drift towards the Russia-Ukraine war. If we do not send out a very strong signal in the EP elections that we do not support this process, that we consider it dangerous and even disastrous, then this will continue after the European elections.

The issue of war and peace is also a sign of a much more serious, comprehensive institutional crisis.

Apart from the flawed handling of the issue of peace and security, what we also see is that the European Union has failed to improve its competitiveness over the last five years, failed to solve the migration crisis, and failed to provide a perspective for European agriculture. Change is needed in the European Union, and if it is possible to keep the community out of the war, then these problems can be addressed. This, however, requires a change in the European Union.

Recently, the EU affairs ministers of the member states discussed in Brussels the state of the rule of law in Poland in the context of the Article 7 procedure against the country. At the meeting, the ministers took note that within days, the European Commission will withdraw its proposal made six and a half years ago to launch the process. Did Donald Tusk's government address the rule of law issue in such a short period of time?

Indeed, the Commission has announced its intention to withdraw its reasoned opinion, which triggered the Article 7 procedure against Poland. This decision exemplifies all the problems with the Article 7 sanctions, and one could not find a better illustration of why the Article 7 procedure is a purely political instrument. What happened in Poland is nothing more than the adoption of a one-and-a-half-page action plan, which does not even include a deadline for the measures. Incidentally, all the legislation cited by the Commission was drafted during the previous Morawiecki government. Personally, I am not surprised by the Commission's decision.

Earlier, before the municipal elections in Poland, the Tusk government already received a gift package when the Commission unblocked the EU funds the country was entitled to. Now, before the European Parliament elections, the Tusk government will receive another gift. It is quite obvious that those member states whose political direction is in line with the Commission's expectations can anticipate this kind of treatment.

On July 1, Hungary will take over the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union. What are the main objectives of the Hungarian presidency?

Hungary will take over the rotating presidency in a special period, in the middle of the institutional transition, so our most important objective is to ensure that the institutional transition runs smoothly. Hungary also has the objective of leading the Council as an honest mediator in a spirit of loyal cooperation between the institutions and between the member states. As less legislation can be expected in the institutional transition period, the Hungarian presidency will have the opportunity to try to orient the activities of the European Union in the most important areas, including competitiveness, tackling demographic challenges, halting illegal migration, and strengthening Europe's security and defense policy. The Hungarian presidency will also address the future of the cohesion policy: we want to ensure that the cohesion policy can operate along the traditional objectives in the coming budgetary framework period. During its presidency, Hungary wants the enlargement process of the European Union to go back to a merit-based, objective procedure, and we will also pay special attention to speeding up the accession process for the Western Balkans.

Hungary's EU Presidency comes at a very important and crucial time, as selecting the heads of the top institutions will take place after the EP elections in June. What aspects does the Hungarian government have in this regard?

It is perhaps premature to talk about names, chances, and support, but the Hungarian government has two very important aspects that it wants to enforce. One is credibility and the other is suitability.

Over the past five years, the European Union has made mistake after mistake - this institutional term has been a period of failure from an EU perspective. Change is needed because the policies that the institutions have pursued over the last five years cannot be continued.

It is hard to imagine that this change can be credibly represented or managed by the leaders who have run the European institutions for the past five years. The question of suitability is also important: the European Union has to deal with very serious political conflicts in a way that preserves the unity and operationality of the European Union. In my view, the top postion should be filled by someone who has already proven his or her suitability as a prime minister.