On Wednesday 10 July in Brussels, the Hungarian Minister for European Affairs, János Bóka, gave his assurance that the actions of his country’s Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán – who has been engaged in a ‘peace mission’ since the start of the Presidency of the Council of the European Union, aimed at finding a solution to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine – did not contravene any EU rules or principles (see EUROPE 13448/2).
The discussions held by Mr Orbán in Kyiv, Moscow and Beijing were not held in the name of the EU or with an EU mandate, said Mr Bóka.
Aware of the responsibilities incumbent on a country holding the Presidency of the Council of the EU, Mr Orbán informed his fellow members of the European Council of his discussions with the leaders of Ukraine, Russia and China. He did so in a spirit of “sincere and loyal cooperation” between Member States: “There was no obligation to do this”, noted the Minister, pointing out that there is no protocol at EU level on ex-ante or ex-post communication between Member States on the missions undertaken by European leaders. And, on the basis of the information provided by Mr Orbán, it is up to the EU27 to decide how to proceed.
Mr Bóka admitted that the Hungarian diplomatic initiative had offended certain Member States, insofar as the European Council, including Mr Orbán, considers that political dialogue with the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, has broken down as a result of Russian military aggression.
In this case, “we have to agree we disagree” with these countries, said the Hungarian minister, for whom any initiative that would help to end the war in Ukraine is “a political responsibility that must be assumed”. The question of substance is as follows, he added: “How could the European Union contribute to a lasting security architecture in Europe as a player, and not as an observer?”
Asked about the possibility of the Council of the EU acting to curb the Hungarian Presidency of the Council of the EU, Mr Bóka indicated that no Member State had officially tabled measures that could lead to this Presidency being cut short or to limiting the political presence of Member States at the informal ministerial meetings organised in Budapest.
“A political mistake”, according to Mr Michel
From Washington, where he is attending the NATO summit (see other news), the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, said that Mr Orbán’s ‘peace mission’ was “a political mistake”. And this is the position of the vast majority of Member States, who have pointed to the “serious risk” for the Hungarian Presidency of the EU Council.
“In 10 years, I have never seen that level of reaction against a rotating presidency only few days after taking presidency. It’s a clear sign”, noted Mr Michel, regretting “a deterioration of the level of trust” between Member States. In his view, the attitude of the Member States and the possible follow-up to Mr Orbán’s initiative will depend on “the weeks and months to come” and on “how the Hungarian Presidency learns the lessons” of this incident. But he considered it counterproductive not to take part in the informal events of the Hungarian Presidency.
Mr Michel has not scheduled a formal meeting with Mr Orbán in Washington alongside the NATO summit.
On Wednesday, the Member States’ ambassadors discussed the role of the rotating Presidency of the EU Council. (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion with Camille-Cerise Gessant)