Ukraine – The eyes of Europe’s forefathers fixed on Orbán

Ukraine – The eyes of Europe’s forefathers fixed on Orbán

by Panayiotis Zolotas

EastMed Strategic Studies Institute Associate

 

An unexpected meeting took place last Tuesday, 2nd: Hungarian Prime Minister, currently also exercising E.U.’s Presidency, Victor Orbán, visited his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, in Kiev, as unofficial mediator. The primary purpose of his visit was to achieve a ceasefire and start peace talks, secondly, the relations between Budapest and Kyiv, following the continuous violation by the latter of the rights of the Magyars, the Hungarian minority in western Ukraine (Orban in Kyiv for meeting with Zelensky amid Ukraine war, Thehill.com). V. Orbán is Russia’s closest ally in Europe -still receiving Russian natural gas via TurkStream- and so declared to President Zelensky being at his disposal to implement such an agenda. Prime Minister Orbán’s initiative is of paramount importance, at a time when the West has literally cut off every bridge of communication with Russia.

In specific, the aforementioned Hungarian minority is located in Transcarpathia. There are also other minorities, such as the Romanian, the Slovakian etc. Of course, the most important one is the Russian. Apparently, the Hungarian minority also became victim of the persecution of the coup government that emerged from the violent demonstrations of EuroMaidan, in Kyiv, on 22.02.2014. Its mistreatment, reaching, by some, the point of violent oppression –including banning the official use of the Hungarian language (in high schools at least and local government) and the establishment of the Ukrainian as the sole official one (Orbán: We will not support Ukraine in any way until the rights of Hungarians in Transcarpathia are restored, Telex)– compelled Budapest to repeatedly address the issue before competent European organizations (What is the current situation of the Hungarian minority in Ukraine?, Fuen.org), ultimately requesting the autonomy of the Hungarian minority (Orbán to Ukraine: Give Hungarians autonomy, Politico). Given the above, Prime Minister Orbán also prohibited the transfer of Western weapons to Ukraine via Hungary. One of the aspects of Hungary’s and Russia’s close relations lies precisely in the fact that both were fighting for exactly the same goal where their minorities in Ukraine is concerned, namely their equal treatment and respect of their fundamental rights on the part of Kyiv.

 

Prime Minister Orbán had already, since his 24.05.2023 interview within the Qatar Economic Forum, ruled out any victory for Ukraine (see also Orbán is telling Ukraine to quit, Politico). A comparison of the casualties between the one camp and the other is enough to give reason to that a conviction. According to respectable analysts, the most valid source for assessing the deaths caused by the conflict, based on the methodology followed (obituaries), is Mediazona, managed by the Russian Opposition, in collaboration with B.B.C. (Mediazona). According to estimates deriving the aforesaid source, the death ratio between Russians and Ukrainians is 1 to 10, i.e. 1 Russian for 10 Ukrainians (Jacques Baud – Hungary’s Orban visits Kyiv 1st time since War, point 15:05 επ.). These estimates are also embraced by American colonel Dr. Douglas McGregor, as well as French Political Science Professor Caroline Galacteros. (P&G 25: La Russie à la croisée des chemins, point 17:45).

 

Nonetheless, some argue that the war has affected Russian President Vladimir Putin’s popularity. According to Russia’s polling center Levada (Levada.ru) -which, for some time, was considered an American agent, as financed by the American National Endowment for Democracy, backed by the U.S. government-, President Putin’s popularity before the launching by Kremlin of the Special Military Operation (24.02.2022) amounted to ~60-65%; since the launching of the Operation to ~80% and most recently to >85% (Jacques Baud, op. cit., point 23:05 επ.). Besides satisfying the popular sentiment of protecting Russian populations abroad, the above-mentioned rise in popularity is further attributed to the terrorist attacks suffered within Russia itself (assassination of Daria Dugin, attacks on Crocus, Dagestan, etc.), rendering justice to the idea, that the Ouest ought not to be trusted.

 

Prime Minister Orbán’s initiative comes at an opportune moment given:

  1. The invitation by Swiss president, Viola Amherd, addressed already before the failed summit in Switzerland (Bürgenstock, 15-16.06.2024), about such a peace attempt in the presence of Russia (Viola Amherd dévoile ses objectifs au sommet pour la paix en Ukraine, Blick.ch).
  2. The exhaustion of Ukraine’s, as well as of the West’s reserves of related inanimate material, to the extent of asking Israel to deprive itself of its U.S. Patriots, already used against Hamas, eventually needed for the fight against the Hezbollah, to satisfy Ukraine’s needs, which may also put Israel in a difficult position vis-à-vis Russia (US in talks to send Israel’s Patriot systems to Ukraine, Ft.com).
  3. The growing discontent within Ukraine, as opposed to Russia. On the eve of Prime Minter Orbán’s arrival, another coup attempt was thwarted by the Ukrainian secret services, the second within three weeks (Coup attempt thwarted in Ukraine, Security Service says, as Hungary’s Orbán arrives in Kyiv for talks, Nbcnews.com). According to Ukrainian sources, during demonstrations within the Ukrainian capital, a group of activists headed towards the Rada, the Ukrainian parliament, to seize power. According to Professor Galacteros, such manifestations are reflective of the awakening on the part of Ukraine’s political and intellectual society, that the current regime is deterrent to any peaceful settlement (P&G 25, op. cit., point 9:35).

 

The above attempt, therefore, can hardly be attributed to any Russian intervention, as argued by some. Also, for the following reason: When President Zelenksy took office, on 20.05.2019, he promised to come into terms with Russia. Dmytro Yarosh, leader of the far-right paramilitary Pravyi Sektor (Right Sector) in the days of EuroMaidan violence (2013-2014), later and until today of the Ukrainian Army of Volunteers, in support of Ukraine’s Armed Forces, threatened the Ukrainian leader with his life (Zelensky: Yarosh assessed his threat, Obozrevatel.com). Furthermore, in the wake of Russia’s Special Military Operation, on 25.02.2022, President Zelenky asked the Swiss foreign minister to organize a peace meeting, the first round of which began on the border with Belarus. Then, Ukrainian negotiators were murdered in cold blood in the middle of Kyiv by agents of Ukraine’s security service S.B.U., as admitted by Ukraine’s chief of military intelligence Kyrylo Budanov.

 

Admittedly, President Zelensky is situated between a hammer and an anvil: On the one hand, he’s faced up with the discontent of his people, including his army’s, given cases of refusal of the latter to carry out orders, as in the case of the 3rd Assault Brigade, formerly the Azov Brigade; on the other, he’s confronted with threats against any peace approach and his own life. Such a dire situation may also explain the controversies and contradictions reflected on his latest appearances (Zelensky Reversal: Too many Wounded & Dead), when, on 28.04.2024 he speaks as a warmonger and on 27.06.2024, he confesses the number of victims allowes no perpetuation of the war.

 

  1. President Putin’s unwavering will to make such an effort a success. As he recently stated in Astana (Kazakhstan), on 3-4.07.2024, referring himself to the candidacy of former President Donald Trump (Poutine prend au sérieux la “volonté” de Trump d’arrêter le conflit en Ukraine, Latribune.ca): “The fact that Mr. Trump, a presidential candidate, says that he is ready to put an end to the war in Ukraine, is something we cannot but take very seriously. I don’t know what he has in mind as to how exactly he intends to pursue this -a key question regarding the matter-, but I have no doubt that such a statement is sincere and we cannot but support it.”

 

On a previous occasion, Prime Minister Orbán appealed to the American people to re-elect President Trump to bring an end to the fighting (Hungary’s Orbán urges U.S. to “call back Trump” to end Ukraine, A.P. News), convinced manifestly, that had President Trump remained in office, the crisis would have been avoided (Hungary’s Viktor Orbán is Ally to the real U.S. and real Democracy, Newsweek). It’s not just a matter of demonstrating enough vigor or applying Rome’s “si vis pacem, para bellum”; by reading President Trump’s tweets referring to President Putin, one clearly sees the former may well have regarded the latter as a worthy competitor, but by no means an enemy. And that saved us a lot, in blood and money (Trump’s best foreign policy? Not starting any wars, W.S.J.).

 

Finally, it seems, that President Zelensky’s deputy chief of staff, Igor Zhovka, stated that the Ukrainian Government is not interested in any ceasefire, as long as it’s not part of a wider negotiating framework (Orban unveils Zelensky`s response to ceasefire suggestion, Menafn.com). During his subsequent visit to Moscow, Prime Minister Orbán seemed to not have denied the above statement. Prime Minister Orbán’s peace mission, however, has so far demonstrated a dynamic resolve, setting up a stone, which by no means should be wasted.

 

Prime Minister Orbán’s initiative couldn’t unfold without U.S.’s consent, an approach, however, that doesn’t withhold the latter from playing on two boards, considering U.S. Secretary of Defense’s recent announcement of providing Ukraine an additional military aid of $2.3 billion (Defense Secretary Austin says the US will provide $2.3 billion more in military aid to Ukraine, A.P.). From a certain point onwards, such a tactic, paradoxically resembling to playing Russian roulette, may resolve to producing counter effects, eventually forcing the Russians not to hesitate to devastate Ukraine entirely (Jacques Baud, op. cit., point 37:00). President Zelensky is not unaware of such a development, nor is the U.S., presumably considering the finding of a political solution a one-way ticket. In the meantime, the Russians have the upper hand on the battlefield. They’re also firm as regards (a) the recognition by Ukraine of its former oblasts of Zaporizhia, Lugansk, Donetsk and Kherson as now part of Russia, since the legal referendums of 23-27.09.2022 (Article 1, par. 2 of the UN Charter on Self-determination), including Crimea, following the referendum of 16.03.2014 and (b) the neutralization of the rest of Ukraine. Prime Minister Orbán remaining the sole channel of communication between the West and Russia, since the unfruitful mediations of Turkey (Lviv, 16.08.2022) and Israel (prime minister Naftali Bennett), is, in our view, the parties’ to the conflict last resort towards a peaceful settlement as long as Hungary exerts E.U’s presidency.

 

France, unfortunately, European unification’s precursor and forerunner, instigator of a rapprochement between France and Germany allowing for turning the page to their eternal antagonisms, causing worldwide unrest once and for all (Panos A. Zolotas, European Integration – From Coal and Steel to the Eurobond, ESTIA), falls nowadays far below the expectations of its Europeanist forefathers, when building bridges for a common future 75 years ago. France also fell short of expectations given its historic and special relation with Russia -apart from the Napoleonic campaign (1812)-, allowing it to further enhance its role towards a peaceful settlement (Panos A. Zolotas, France’s major slide in foreign policy, Slpress.gr).

 

Instead, French president, Emmanuel Macron, chose to wear the warmonger’s robe, announcing the sending of French troops to Ukraine, embarrassing other European leaders (Macron faces E.U. backlash after suggesting sending troops to Ukraine, The Guardian) and of course the European public opinion (Sondage: 76% des Français contre l’envoi de soldats français en Ukraine, Ampproject.org), after having ostentatiously scorned his Russian counterpart as regards the Minsk Agreements (12.02.2015), stating, on 30.06.2022, that he doesn’t care less about the separatists (“On s’en fout des propositions des séparatistes!”: Quand Emmanuel Macron téléphonait à Vladimir Poutine pour éviter la guerre en Ukraine, Francetvinfo.fr), meaning the Russian speaking population of the Donbass. These Agreements, by the way, advocated for the autonomy of the Russian speaking population WITHIN the very Ukraine, a formula that many today long for in the West, but which has been superseded by later developments (referendums of 23-27.09.2022).

 

Prime Minister Orbán’s initiative makes him seem, as Winston Churchill once described Greek Prime Minister Eleftherios Venizelos, when he offered to help the Allied effort by providing 5 divisions located in Smyrna (Asia Minor), to occupy among others Bursa, Eastern Thrace etc., by virtue of which peace became possible, by the Treaty of Sèvres, on 10.08.1920 (Winston Churchill, La crise mondiale, vol. IV: 1919, ed. Payot, Paris, 1931, p. 371), like the “good fairy”! Brussels dared declare, that Hungary does not have such a mandate. Prime Minister V. Orbán replied (Hungarian PM Orban faces criticism for visit with Putin, calls it “first steps toward peace”, Just The News): “You cannot make peace from a comfortable armchair in Brussels. (…) (…) we cannot sit back and wait for a miraculous ending of the war. We will serve as an important tool in making the first steps towards peace”. That’s how Robert Schumann and Konrad Adenauer thought on May 9th (1950), when it all began (Schuman Declaration)

 

Εν Αθήναις τη 10η Ιουλίου 2024.

 

Παναγιώτης Α. Ζολώτας

No Comments Yet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.