The gloves were off as Viktor Orbán appeared before the European Parliament in Strasbourg and faced off with Ursula von der Leyen.
Viktor Orbán and Ursula von der Leyen clashed head-on during a fiery debate at the European Parliament on Wednesday that saw both leaders portray opposing visions for Europe’s future and lay bare their strong dislike for each other.
Russia’s war in Ukraine, how best to tackle Europe’s growing competitiveness issue and migration were among the many areas of contention between the two.
The Hungarian premier dismissed the EU’s response to the Ukraine war as “poorly planned and poorly implemented” and called on the bloc to resume communications with the Kremlin, something he attempted to do in a controversial visit to Moscow in July.
“The European Union has mistaken policy when it comes to this war,” he told MEPs. “If we want to win, we need to change this losing strategy.”
The European Commission president honed in on Orbán’s Moscow trip to say “There are still some who blame this war not on the invader but on the invaded. Not on Putin’s lust for power but on Ukraine’s thirst for freedom.”
“I want to ask them: would they ever blame the Hungarians for the Soviet invasion of 1956? Or the Czechs and Slovaks for the Soviet repression of 1968?” von der Leyen said. “The people of Ukraine are freedom fighters, just like the heroes that freed Central and Eastern Europe from Soviet rule.”
Orbán reacted badly to the comparison, calling it a “mistake” and saying the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 had “nothing to do” with Ukraine’s resistance against Russian troops.
“In the past, as the treaties say, the Commission was the guardian of the treaties, it was a neutral body,” he said. “Its job was to put political debates aside and deal with differences in a legal manner, but this has now changed.”
“Rather than being a guardian of the treaties, it’s a political body, a political weapon,” he added, directly addressing von der Leyen.
Orbán takes the stage
Expectations were high ahead of Orbán’s address in Strasbourg, amid complaints from progressive lawmakers.
Orbán, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU, opened his speech by saying the EU “needs to change” as it faces “the most serious period” in its modern history.
The premier raised the alarm about the bloc’s economic stagnation and called for strong action to boost competitiveness and close the gap with the United States and China, in line with the findings of the Mario Draghi report presented last month.
He then assailed von der Leyen’s Green Deal for failing to consider “industrial policy” in its design, a grievance that has extended beyond conservative circles, and directly blamed the EU’s sluggish growth and high energy prices on the common strategy to “move away” from Russian fossil fuels in the aftermath of the Ukraine war.
Orbán also denounced what he described as stifling “trade restrictions,” an apparent reference to the tariffs on China-made electric vehicles the EU approved last week after intense deliberations and that Hungary firmly opposed.
But while the premier played it relatively safe on the economy and climate, he drastically raised the debate’s temperature when he tackled the topic of irregular migration and claimed, without offering evidence, that the arrival of asylum seekers from low-income countries was “increasing antisemitism, violence against women and homophobia.”
“The facts speak for themselves,” Orbán, whose government has been partially denied EU funds for passing an anti-LGBT law, said amid boos from centrist MEPs.
As a solution, he proposed, the EU should focus on establishing “outside hotspots” in neighbouring countries to process asylum applications. Only those whose requests have been approved should be allowed into European territory, he said.
“Without outside hotspots, we cannot protect Europeans from irregular migration,” he told MEPs. “Other solutions are quite frankly an illusion.”
The idea of offshoring migration procedures has gained traction in recent months. In May, 15 member states signed a letter pitching several proposals to advance the project, which remains controversial due to potential violations of fundamental rights.
Von der Leyen replies
In her reply, Ursula von der Leyen sought to expose Orbán’s contradictions.
On the economy, the Commission chief said Hungary was “heading in the exact opposite direction, drifting away from the single market” by raising taxes against European companies and imposing export restrictions “overnight.”
“How can a government be trusted by European businesses if it targets them with arbitrary inspections or blocks their permits, if public contracts mostly go to a small group of beneficiaries?” she said.
“This creates uncertainty and undermines investors’ trust.”
On energy, she defended her track record reducing the bloc’s dependency on Moscow and accused Hungary of chasing after “alternative ways” to buy Russian fossil fuels.
Budapest is currently exempted from the EU’s ban on Russian oil.
“Russia has proven time and again, it is simply not a reliable supplier. So there can be no more excuses. Whoever wants European energy security first and foremost has to contribute to it,” von der Leyen said.
On migration, she censured Orbán’s government for extending its National Card scheme for Russian and Belarusian citizens, which Budapest contests poses no risk, and signing a security deal with Beijing that allows Chinese police officers to be stationed in Hungary.
“We all want to better protect our external borders. But we will only be successful if we work together against organised crime and show solidarity among ourselves,” she said.
“And speaking about who to let in: How can it be that the Hungarian government invites Russian nationals into our Union without additional security checks? This makes the new Hungarian Visa scheme a security risk, not only for Hungary but for all member states. And how can it be that the Hungarian government would allow Chinese police to operate within its territory?” she went on.
“This is not defending Europe’s sovereignty. It is a backdoor for foreign interference.”