This is the impression I drew from Peter Magyar’s speeches delivered in Szarvas and Bekescsaba.
It is important, however, to clarify a fundamental misunderstanding. Zelensky’s controversial statement in question was not directed at Hungarian society as a whole, as Peter Magyar interpreted it, but referred exclusively to Viktor Orban. If the political practice of presenting criticism directed at one individual as an attack on the entire nation sounds familiar, that is hardly accidental. This communication method has long been present in Hungarian political discourse, particularly when the prime minister or the government faces criticism.
Author: Balazs Lang
Reading the reactions to President Zelensky’s unfortunate and poorly worded statement, it is striking that in many cases the narratives of Peter Magyar and Viktor Orban almost completely coincide. Several commentators and opinion makers have emphasised that the Ukrainian president’s remark was unacceptable or irrational. What these criticisms rarely add, however, is that Viktor Orban has, for the past four years, consistently opposed the international political approach taken in response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and has regularly criticised the Ukrainian leadership. In this sense, the conflict did not emerge without prior context.
In this matter, a cautious or relativising position is difficult to justify. Peter Magyar’s message addressed to Zelensky does not appear simply as a skilful communication move or a tactical response to attacks from Fidesz. Rather, it seems to represent a serious misjudgment that obscures the real causes of the conflict and the question of responsibility.
Ultimately, Peter Magyar will have to decide how he interprets Viktor Orban’s political role. Is he a leader who bears responsibility for the country’s current situation, or a politician who should be defended against external criticism in certain circumstances? The same question arises regarding the deterioration of Hungarian Ukrainian relations. To what extent can the current situation be seen as a consequence of Orban’s policies, and to what extent is it the result of external factors?
Many of the prime minister’s critics associate his policies with serious abuses, corruption and the weakening of democratic institutions. In this context it is particularly noteworthy that Peter Magyar has now articulated a political message suggesting Orban’s personal defence against criticism from President Zelensky, even if this was primarily intended as a rhetorical gesture.
Many argue that Peter Magyar should instead focus his criticism on the causes of the current situation rather than on the Ukrainian president’s remark itself. The debate could instead centre on the role Viktor Orban has played in the deterioration of Hungarian Ukrainian relations and on the extent to which the Hungarian government’s policies have contributed to the current tensions.
According to some critics, Orban’s policies over the past years have helped create the present conflictual situation. The view has also appeared in public discourse that maintaining tensions may serve political interests if they can be used for domestic political mobilisation.
Peter Magyar went a step further, however, when he suggested that they should travel together to Ukraine and jointly examine the condition of the Druzhba oil pipeline. For many observers this proposal creates the impression that on certain strategic issues the positions of the government and its main challenger may be closer than previously assumed.
The debate is in fact not about whether Viktor Orban should be defended from Zelensky’s criticism, but about which political direction best represents Hungary’s interests in the current geopolitical situation. The key question is whether the greater risk to the country lies in external conflicts or in the consequences of domestic political decisions.
As the political campaign approaches its final stage, the image of Peter Magyar previously appearing within Orban’s political environment is increasingly being recalled. The fact that he had earlier spoken appreciatively about the prime minister on certain occasions has now once again become part of the political debate.
Cover photo credit: CEA Magazine
Balazs Lang is a journalist, a political communications expert, a former editor, producer and Budapest correspondent at the BBC World Service.
Support independent analysis and journalism at CEA Magazine: https://centraleuropeanaffairs.com/donation
For more insights on Central European political risk, EU institutional developments, and transatlantic relations, follow CEA Magazine and the CEA Talk podcast.
