A scandal has erupted in Hungary caused by a unique opinion belonging to an aide to the Hungarian president and strongman, Viktor Orbán. Viktor Orbán has already been a highly controversial figure both in Hungary and throughout the western world. However, the statements made by Balázs Orbán (no relation to Viktor) have managed to offend everyone across the political spectrum. Balázs Orbán was quoted as saying “considering 1956, we would have probably not done what President Zelenskyy did 2.5 years ago, as it is irresponsible, as we can see that he led his country into a defensive war, many lives were lost and territories lost.” This statement seems perfectly crafted to offend literally everyone. Let me explain why.
Hungary was a part of the Axis Powers during WW2. In the dying days of WW2, as the Soviets moved through on their way to Germany, they set up a Stalinist puppet government, as it did in the rest of what is now referred to as the Warsaw Pact. In 1953, Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, died. His successor, Nikita Khrushchev, would begin a process of de-Stalinization culminating in a secret speech in 1956 condemning Stalin within the Soviet government. This liberalization within the Soviet Union paired with economic suffering in Hungary itself inspired the citizens, led primarily by students, to protest for an end to Stalinism in Hungary and an end to Soviet Occupation. The Stalinist government fell to intense fighting and a new, more liberal communist government was created under Imre Nagy. Soviet forces left for a time but would eventually return, crushing the revolution and executing thousands. The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 remains of intense political significance within Hungary and Eastern Europe as a whole. It even led to the coining of the term for authoritarian communists as “Tankies” in relation to their support of the Soviet Invasion (led primarily by tanks). However everyone except “Tankies” left, right and center oppose the action to this day, and see it as an inexcusably brutal crushing of the people’s self-determination.
Returning to Balázs Orbán, his implication that Hungary should not have resisted the 1956 invasion is akin to saying that the USA should not have resisted at the Alamo. While arguably true on a purely strategic level, the moral element is the most important thing. Understandably, this upset the Hungarian right-wing, to which Viktor Orbán belongs just as much as it upset everyone else. It hits especially close with Viktor Orbán’s initial popularity having sprung largely from his active role in the 1989 Soviet withdrawal from Hungary.
However, the second part of his statement is far more important and is something of a mask-off moment for the administration: “We would have probably not done what President Zelenskyy did 2.5 years ago, as it is irresponsible, as we can see that he led his country into a defensive war, many lives were lost and territories lost.”
If it is not clear, Balázs Orbán just admitted that his country would not have resisted a Russian invasion in 2022. This is a massive problem equivalent to a cessation of sovereignty. Again, to put this in American terms, imagine America “choosing” not to resist a Chinese invasion and advertising that fact before it is even a serious concern. Balázs Orbán is understandably being called a traitor to Hungary and as a liability to all of NATO. However, Balázs Orbán is not some nobody–he is a significant member of the Hungarian government. The fact that a government official would feel comfortable to make this kind of acknowledgement indicates that a similar mindset exists within the government as a whole, potentially as far up as Viktor Orbán himself.
What does this mean for Americans? It means that one of our military allies and a nation which we have vowed via our membership in NATO to protect as if it was our own is unwilling to defend itself. This is very dangerous and means that Hungary must be considered a serious military liability. Hungary’s recent drift to authoritarianism and cooperation with Russia has already forced the US and NATO planners to question their loyalty and plan accordingly. However, with this massive admission, not even natural self-preservation can be truly counted upon. Hungary must now be considered an active security risk to all of NATO and Europe especially. As it is now, there is no guarantee that Russian military assets will not be allowed to pass through Hungary unfettered as they go on to attack NATO itself. Hungary is now the backdoor to NATO, someone we cannot fully trust so long as the current government persists.
As I was writing this, Viktor Orbán attempted damage control but has done so in a half-hearted way, which does not soothe any of the serious concerns raised. Viktor Orbán has claimed the statements were ill formulated and mistaken, with himself and Balázs Orbán stating that they would be the first to defend their country. Making a specific reference to the Corvin Pass, the area in which Hungarian revolutionaries resisted the Soviet invasion at a strategic chokepoint. Its American equivalent would be the Alamo. However, these statements are carefully crafted but say little of substance. You cannot say that your government should not and would not protect itself from invasion and then shout “Remember the Alamo” and expect to soothe your citizens’ and allies’ fears.
At this point Hungary should be expelled from NATO and the EU. However, there is as of now no way to expel a NATO member and the EU can only suspend but not expel a country either. This means that we must do the next best thing: we must keep a watchful eye and consider Hungary a de-facto Russian asset. In the long term we must hope that the Hungarian people will elect a government that actually cares to protect its people and fulfill its obligations.
