EU Parliament: Open fight after Orbán’s Council of EU Presidency speech

Having followed the several hours long debate in the European Parliament (Strasbourg, France, 9th October), the author of this article, who in the past had the opportunity to often visit the beautiful country Hungary and enjoy its culture, was deeply shocked about the EU debate, that was conducted at times on an “embarrassingly” incompetent level. Rather than openly debating the program which Hungarian PM Victor Orbán presented in his excellent speech as new President of the Council of European Union, the debate at times turned into a “tribunal” against Hungary in which the speakers showed a level of “hysteria” that is unheard of in the history of the European Parliament (EP). This is also partially true if one looks at the performance of Commission President von der Leyen, who even left the debate after one and a half hours, stone faced and apparently incensed. Manfred Weber, faction leader of the EPP (Christian democratic and conservative party block within the EP) seemed to be infuriated, whose diatribe against Orbán was full of insults.

There were however also some reasonable members of the EP (MEP) interventions coming from some newly elected representatives in the EU, such as from Slovakia, Hungary and Poland as well as from Italy and Germany, who thanked Orbán for his courage to call for a reform of the sclerotic EU institutions and who remembered the role which Hungary played in paving the way for German Reunification. This however was in stark contrast to several MEPs (from the Left wing, Liberal Parties, and from the Greenies) who in an “orchestrated” show were accusing the Hungarian PM as “corrupt dictator”, that is only enriching himself, as well as an “autocrat” who is close friend of Putin. The most disgusting show was performed by the German Greenie, Michael Freund, a Soros stooge, who greeted Orbán with “Hello Mr Dictator” while another German Greenie, Terry Reintke (longtime member of the EP, one of the heads of the Green Faction in the EP) who was badly smashed during the recent European elections, made a plea for the “suppressed minorities” in Hungary, such as the LGTB. She was flanked by a left-wing extremist, Ilaria Salis, who in 2023 had been arrested and thrown into jail in Hungary for having beaten up Hungarian citizens with iron sticks in Budapest (supposedly “Nazis”). Only because the Italian Greenies nominated her for the EP, she as MEP was freed 2024. As MEP she attacked personally viciously Victor Orbán, but she was trying then to lecture the EU Parliament about the virtues of the “Rule of law”.

Lessons to be drawn from the EU parliamentary debate

1. The EU parliament is obviously increasingly divided between those newcomers who came into the parliament after the European Parliament Elections, including the Patriots for Europe (pro- Orbán group with 84 deputies, the second strongest on the conservative side after the EPP with 188 deputies), the ECR (78), the BSW, in contrast to the Liberals, Greenies and some left- wing parties. All of the latter ones had suffered significant losses during the June European Elections.
2. There was no objective debate but “hypocracy”, hysterical defense of the “liberal worldview” and “cancel culture” against those who think differently, that manifested itself on the side of the top EU bureaucracy. They live in a “fantasy bubble” and their aim is to keep the “bubble” alive and its administrative procedures “non- transparent” from the European public. It’s a “bureaucratic monster” (NZZ) that because of the personal engagement of von der Leyen is still blocking f.i. any diplomatic effort to end the Ukraine-Russian war.
3. It has become clear, that EU representatives like Ursula von der Leyen or Manfred Weber have forced Europe into adopting a policy of sanctions as well as endless military support for Ukraine and thus carry also the responsibility for the damaging economic consequences this has for the European Union. It is clear that the war in Ukraine aside the Green Deal, is at this moment the most “divisive issue” for the European peoples and that the war will n o t end successfully on the battlefield, but can only be resolved diplomatically and peacefully.

Orbán: “We want to be a catalyst for change”

PM Victor Orbán who already had been once President of the Council of the European Union in 2011, underlined in his speech that the situation today is far more serious than at any time during the history of the EU. Among the many conflicts which we are facing he mentioned the “war in Ukraine, in other words in Europe”, the “serious conflicts ravaging and affecting us in the Middle East and in Africa” where “each of these conflicts carries the risk of escalation.” He also spoke about the “migration crisis” that has reached unprecedented proportions since 2015: “Illegal migration and security threats now threaten to tear the Schengen Area [the Schengen Area is an area encompassing 29 European countries that have officially abolished border controls at their mutual borders EH] apart… while Europe is losing its global capacity. Mario Draghi says Europe is facing a slow agony. And I can quote President Macron who says Europe could die because it will be squeezed out of its markets in 2-3 years.”  (Speech in Berlin, October 2, EH)

According to the new Council of EU president, Hungary is committed to be a “fair broker” and open to “constructive cooperation with all member states and institutions. At the same time the Hungarian presidency will defend the Council’s treaty-based powers, for example with regard to the interinstitutional agreement between the European Parliament and the commission.

The “Hungarian presidency wants to be the voice and catalyst for change,” Orbán stated. “The decisions must be taken by the member states and the institutions of the Union, not by the Hungarian Presidency. The Hungarian presidency will raise issues and make proposals for peace, security and prosperity of the Union,” he said.

Three most important challenges of EU

“1. The problem of competitiveness: “I share almost completely the assessment of the situation from the reports by Presidents Letta and Draghi. In short, the EU’s economic growth has been consistently slower than that of its competitors. Our share of world trade is falling. EU companies face electricity prices two to three times higher than in the US. Natural gas prices here are four to five times higher. The European Union has lost significant GDP growth as a result of the divorce from Russian energy, and in the meantime had to reallocate significant financial resources to energy subsidies and to building the infrastructure needed to import liquefied natural gas. Half of European companies see the cost of energy as the main barrier to investment.  Energy intensive industries, which are important for the EU economy, have seen production fall by 10-15%. “

“Green Deal” is no solution

Directly addressing Commission President von der Leyen, Orbán warned that “we should not delude ourselves into believing that the green transition alone offers a solution to this problem (…) The European Green Deal (….) was based on creating new green jobs. However, the meaning of the initiative will be called into question if decarbonization leads to a decline in European production and job losses. The car industry is one of the most glaring examples of the lack of EU planning, where we are applying climate policy without an industrial policy(!).”  European companies would be losing significant market shares, he stated, and the “the main reason for the productivity gap between the European Union and the US has been digital technology, and it seems that our gap- Europe’s gap -is widening. Our companies spend half as much as US companies on research and development as a proportion of GDP. This is compounded by adverse demographic trends. As the figures show, migration is not compensating for the natural decline in the EU’s population. In other words, this means that for the first time in Europe’s modern history, we are entering a period where our output growth will not be supported by a steady increase in our labor force. It’s a huge challenge (…) Please consider that it is much harder to bring back declining industrial capacity than to keep it.”

In order to solve this problem, Orbán proposed: “We expect a reduction in administrative burdens, we expect a reduction in over- regulation, we expect affordable energy, we expect a green industrial policy, we expect a strengthening of the internal market, we expect a capital market union and the Member States expect a broadening of trade policy, that increases connectivity instead of blocking it”. Orbán emphasized to the commission president that “the dynamically developing battery industry in the EU” is a major success where public funding for battery industry has increased by an average of 18% over the last decade. The aim of the Hungarian presidency is to “adopt a new European Competitiveness agreement at the informal European Council in Budapest on 8 November, a new competitiveness pact… I propose to put this at the heart pf the action plan for the institutional cycle ahead.”

Migration crisis

Orbán stated that one of the biggest crisis, placing an enormous burden on the member states, particularly those at the union’s external border, is the migration crisis: “We cannot protect Europeans from illegal migration without “external hotspots” (!), he said. (…) “Only those who have been given permission in advance should be allowed to enter the territory of the Union, and entry to the Union is only possible with a permit. (…) Let us not delude ourselves, the EU asylum system does not work today. Illegal migration in Europe has led to an increase in antisemitism, violence against women and homophobia (…) As new council president he proposed the creation of a “system of ‘Schengen summits’ – “Let us convene regular Schengen summits with the participation of the heads of state and governments of the Schengen area,” he said. This should then be followed by “institutionalization through an international treaty.” Aside the need to strengthen and extend the Schengen area, the Hungarian president also proposed that “Bulgaria and Romania should fully join before the end of the year.”

European security

Given the many security challenges which Europe is facing, Orbán referred to the “European Political Community Summit” in Budapest on 7^th November, two days after the US presidential elections, which would “a suitable forum for discussing these issues. “We need to institutionalize European security and defense policy,” he stated. “The Hungarian presidency sees one of the best ways of doing this, to strengthening the European defense industry and technology base. The Hungarian Presidency is therefore focusing on the European Defense Industrial Strategy and the Defense Industrial Plan.”

Enlargement of the EU

“The Hungarian presidency is convinced that accelerating the accession of the Western Balkans is a key issue for European security (…)  We must pay particular attention to Serbia. Without Serbia’s accession, the Balkans cannot be stabilized.” He recalled that twenty years ago the Union made a promise to the Western Balkan countries for a European perspective.  The Hungarian presidency believes that it is time to deliver on that promise. A convention of a “European Union- Western Balkans summit, would give opportunity to make progress.”

The final point was on “agriculture” and the future of the EU cohesion policy. Orbán mentioned that around a quarter of the EU population lives in regions with a level of development below 75%(!) of the EU average. It would therefore be essential for Europe to reduce the development gap and a policy with a balanced functioning of the internal market.

He ended his speech by emphasizing that “we are looking for a Europe that fears God and defends the dignity of its people. A Europe that is at the pinnacle of culture, science and the spirit….We are interested in a successful European Union through the Hungarian presidency and I am convinced that the success of our presidency will be the success of the European Union as a whole. Let’s make Europe great again!”

Ursula von der Leyen: Attacks on Orbán

Looking carefully at the speeches given by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and the faction leader of the EPP, Manfred Weber, one could witness a “reaction formation” that could barely conceal the immense rage that the commission president as well as EPP faction leader Manfred Weber felt about Orbán’s vision for the EU. Rather than seriously discussing Orbán’s plan, the two EU bureaucrats decided to “shift the subject” and launch a diatribe against Orbán’s policy in Hungary.

Von der Leyen began her speech by focusing on Ukraine and by drawing a comparison between the 1956 Hungarian revolt against the Soviets in Hungary and the Ukraine war, in which she deliberately twisted the historical truth. “The world has witnessed the atrocities of Russia’s war. And yet there are still some who blame the war not on the invader but on the invaded. Not on Putin’s lust for power(!) but on Ukraine’ thirst for freedom. So I would like to ask them: Would they ever blame the Hungarians for the Soviet invasion of 1956? Would they ever blame the Czechs and Slovaks for the Soviet repression of 1968? Would they ever blame the Lithuanians for the Soviet crackdown in 1991? We Europeans may have different histories and different languages, but there is no European language in which peace is synonymous with surrender. And sovereignty is synonymous with occupation. The people of Ukraine are freedom fighters, just like the heroes that freed Central and Eastern Europe from Soviet rule”, von der Leyen stated in her blatant attack.

She argued that “there is only one path to achieve a just peace for Ukraine and for Europe. We must continue to empower Ukraine’s resistance with political, financial and military support. Last month in Kyiv, I announced that we will provide EUR 35billion in loans to Ukraine as part of the USD 50 billion pledged by the G7. This loan will be paid by the windfall profits of the immobilized Russian assets [up to now an unresolved issue among banking experts E.H.]  And it will flow directly into Ukraine’s national budget. We are making Russia pay for the damage it caused. And we will stand with Ukraine through this winter and for as long as it takes.”

Rather than competently responding to Orbán’s different proposals, the commission president preferred not to be “neutral” as is obligatory according to the EU treaty, but instead singled out Hungary as the “o n e Government in the EU (that) is heading in the opposite direction, drifting away from the single market: How can a government attract more European investments, if at the same time it discriminates against European companies by taxing them more than others? How can it attract core companies of the EU and at the same time impose export restrictions overnight? And how can a government be trusted (!) by European businesses if it targets them with arbitrary inspections, blocks their permits, if public contracts mostly go to a small group of beneficiaries? All of this when Hungary’s GDP per capita has been overtaken by its Central European neighbors?” von der Leyen said in her speech.

Speaking about the Green Deal she referred to a Versailles conference of EU leaders (March 11, 2022) which took place several days after the Ukraine -Russia war had begun. In Versailles all 27 European leaders had agreed not to “further stick to dirty Russian fossil fuels,” von der Leyen said. “Europe has indeed diversified…  We invested in cheap and clean energy that is made in Europe and this with success. In the first half of the year, 50% of all our electricity generation came from renewables that are homegrown, from our energy which created good jobs in Europe and not in Russia,” she said.

At the same time she blamed Hungary which unlike all other states who had acted on the Versailles commitments has been “o n e  member state that has looked for alternative ways to buy fossil fuels from Russia. Russia has proven time and again, it is simply not a reliable supplier. There can be no more excuses. Whoever wants European energy security, first and foremost has to contribute to it. That is the r u l e (!) we have to follow.”

In terms of migration policy, the President launched a personal diatribe against Orbán: “You said that Hungary is protecting its borders, and that ‘criminals are being locked up’ up in Hungary. I just wonder how this statement fits with the fact that last year your authorities released from prison convicted smugglers and traffickers before they did their time. This is not fighting illegal migration in Europe. This is not protecting our Union. This is just throwing problems over sour neighbor’s fence.” (…) And speaking about whom to let in: “How can it be that the Hungarian government invites Russian nationals into our Union without additional security check? 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. This is not defending Europe’s sovereignty. This is a backdoor for foreign interference.”  She ended by referring to a quote which Orbán had made 2011 when he had stated that “we will follow in the footsteps of the revolutionaries of 1956, and we intend so serve the cause of European unity. We have to stand up to this ground and Europe must stand united.”

Stupid attack by Manfred Weber

Even more shocking during the EU debate was the response that was given by EPP faction leader Manfred Weber, to Orbán.  Weber had demonstratively seated beside himself Peter Magyar (Tizsa party, Hungary) who now became member of the EPP. The Hungarian Péter Magyar, built up as leader of the Hungarian opposition, being on rampage against Victor Orbán, has recently been accused for having been involved in the theft of a cellular phone, that had been used by someone in a Night Club who was taking pictures of Magyar with potentially compromising content. Magyar, who is desperate in keeping his parliamentary immunity at all costs, stole the cellular phone and threw it into the Danube River. At the moment a legal inquiry is ongoing that tries to lift his parliamentary immunity.

The honorable Manfred Weber made a statement which reveals his state of mind, that is not excelling by extraordinary lucidity and competence, when he stated: “I have a hard time to understand why you, as a former freedom fighter, ignore the will, the desire of the Ukrainians to live not only in peace but also in freedom. I have hard time to understand that you collaborate with the aggressors (!) (…)  And I have hard time as also von der Leyen said that one of your advisors said publicly that Hungarians made a mistake in 1956 to stand up against Russian occupation.” This was followed by a direct attack on Orbán for having visited President Putin, first in February 2022, shortly before the Russian invasion and the brutal attacks against Ukraine.  “What did you tell him?  Has he shown to you his military deployment plans?” Weber asked.  He continued by referring to Orbán’s recent visit to Putin during summer of this year, which received a lot of respect from experienced military analysts and well-informed political observers.  As Weber said: “This summer, again, you visited Putin and only 48 hours later he bombed a children’s hospital, killed innocent children in Ukraine…Prime Minister, those are the facts. That is the outcome of policy you are representing. Your trip was never a peace mission (sic), it was a big propaganda show for the autocrats and those who are defying our European way of life”(!)( …) .Your trip was never a peace mission. It was a war prolongation mission, not a peace mission.”

He personally “insulted” the Council of EU President Orbán by stating that while Orbán met in 2022 all EU institution leaders, “today no one really wants to see you. Today, no one wants to come to Budapest. Back then (2011) you were in the center of Europe. Today, you are alone. You are sidelined. That is the question you have to answer; why nobody wants to speak with you.”

He added that Hungary didn’t win the European elections. “Fidesz is not winner of the elections,” he boasted, “so don’t create this image that you have the support. The EPP has won the elections.” He ended by saying the we should finally focus on the Hungarian reality, and that “corruption is killing Hungary’s future. We see the consequence every day. 4000 Hungarian teachers left their jobs last year, due to terrible working conditions and nearly 400.000 Hungarians emigrated in the last decades. They are fed up of corruption.”  He completed his diatribe by emphasizing that Peter Magyar “is the future of Hungary, while Orbán will be a man of the past.”

Weber’s speech which struck in in terms of “bajuvaric vileness” (Weber is member of the CSU executive board in Bavaria) set the tone for many “frivolous” speeches that were given by MEPs – among them for example  some German Greenie MEPs, such as the very unsuccessful Mrs. Reintke MEP who lashed out against Orbán for suppressing the minorities, such as LGTB; but there was also the notorious German Greenie Michael Freund, a devout Soros stooge (Orbán called him a paid Soros agent), who called Orbán a “dictator,” an “autocrat” and the “most corrupt man in Hungary” who is impoverishing the population.

The EU “credibility gap”

It is not PM V. Orbán that has lost his credibility during the EU parliamentary debate, which given the tremendous turmoil, showed very clearly that it was the EU and its leaders like von der Leyen and Weber who rather than acting like “Guardians of the European treaty” exhibited their personal anger against Orbán and that means against all those in Europe that argue against the war and Europe’s irresponsible war course.

After one and a half hours of speeches and debate PM V. Orbán had the chance to give a response, in which he expressed his great surprise. Instead of a discussion about the major aspects of his presidency program, he accused the MEPS to “stage a party-political witch- hunt” and spoke about the “pure propaganda” in terms of what he had heard. He expressed regret that the President of the Commission “is imposing differences of opinion on the work of the President,” which in the past never happened. (…)  “In the past, as the treaty says, the Commission, the Guardian of the Treaty, was a neutral body whose job it was to guard the Treaty. Its job was to put political disputes aside and deal with differences in the field of law. But unfortunately, I see the president changing that and turning the Guardian of the treaty into a political weapon, a political body that attacks us right wingers, patriots and European patriots.”

Orbán took the occasion to attack what he sees as “false assumptions” and allegations made by von der Leyen during her speech: “Madam President of the Commission, I reject in the strongest terms what you said. Any analogy to the Hungarian freedom fighters of 1956 with Ukraine is wrong and a desecration of the memory of the Hungarian freedom fighters!  There is nothing in common between the ’56 and the Ukrainian- Russian war.”  He referred to a phrase in the Anglo-Saxon press which says ‘if we are to win, we must first have the courage to admit that we are losing.’ (….) The fact is that we are losing on the Ukrainian front. And you (v. d. L) are pretending that we are not. The reality is, that thanks in part to the President of the Commission, the European Union has entered this war recklessly (!), on the basis of miscalculations and with a flawed strategy. If we want to win, the current losing strategy must be changed.  It is a badly planned and badly executed strategy. If we continue this path we will lose.  If we want the Ukraine not to lose, we need to change strategy. I suggest you consider this (…) In every war there must be diplomacy. There must be communication, direct or indirect contacts. If we fail to do this, we will go deeper and deeper into the pit of war, more and more desperate situations will arise, more and more people will die, hundreds of thousands are dying as we speak, thousands are dying in Ukraine. There will be no sudden solution to this conflict in the battlefield with this strategy. This is why I suggest you should instead stand up for peace, argue for a ceasefire and let us make a different strategy, because we are all going to lose out on that!”

He furthermore rejected the EU Commission president’s statement in which she accused Hungary of simply letting “people smugglers” out (of prison) … “We have rid Europe of more than two thousand smugglers, Madam President of the Commission, so we should be receiving praise rather than criticism.”

EU: Unity in Diversity

In a further response to EPP faction leader Manfred Weber, Orbán emphasized that Hungary is “in favor of Unity in Diversity.” We will never accept that European unity means that you order us to shut up if we do not like something. European unity must not mean shutting up everyone who disagrees with the majority or with the President of the Commission (…) In Hungary, despite the fact that the governing party (Fidesz) has two third majority, all the opposite parties have always been given the Committee positions that they are entitled to. But you have deprived the Patriots for Europe (in the EU parliament) of this and you want to lecture us on democracy? This is nonsense.”

He mentioned that before travelling to Moscow (July 5. after visiting Kyiv July 2), he had talked to German Chancellor Scholz and French President Macron as well to PM Meloni in Rome.  “Are they nobody? Are they nobodies Mr. Weber?”  Weber would have also said that the Hungarian government party did not win the European elections. In Hungary we got 45%, in Germany you got 30%. So who won here, Mr. Weber?”

In respect to von der Leyen’s and Weber’s intervention in the debate, as well as in reference to the (often unbearable and primitive) from MEP’s from the “Liberal Renew” group (77 seats) a French MEP and from the Spanish “Socialist Party “as well as from others, Orbán noted that their arguments are driven by tremendous “anger” and personal “grievances,” that cannot be a guideline for any honest debate. He pointed to the Hungarian constitution, in response to those MEP’s who in the debate accused Hungary for discriminating certain ethnic groups in Hungary according to their way of life. “The Hungarian constitution gives everyone the right to live according to their own way of life. However, there is one thing that the Hungarian constitution undoubtedly does, and you may not like it, it protects children, it protects marriage. And indeed, the Hungarian Constitution says that marriage is one man, one woman. It even says that the father is a man and the mother is a woman. We have the right to these regulations. Do not deny us this!”

Concerning the various accusations against Orbán’s alleged “corruption” he simply noted that “we are in a meeting of a body with expertise in corruption, are we not? Does this body want to lecture any Member State on corruption? Are you serious?” he stated. He rejected von der Leyen’ s accusation who had stated during her speech that between 3000 Russians are working in Hungary. He called it pure “hypocrisy”.  “What is happening in Germany Mrs. von der Leyen?” he asked. “There are 300.000 Russian people working in Germany. Are you accusing me? And you criticize Hungary with our 7000 Russian workers? Is that fair?” Another obvious illustration for EU hypocrisy, as he stated, “is Europe’s trade covertly with Russia through Asia, bypassing sanctions. (…)  You also talked about energy. The Western countries, you have actually bought USD 8.5 billion worth of Russian oil from Turkish or Indian refineries since the outbreak of the war, and you are criticizing us? For 8.5 billion. In 2023, you Westerners bought 44% more Russian oil than a year earlier. The tax revenue your companies paid into Russia’s budget was $1.7 billion. And you, you accuse us of being Russian friends? Well, you are financing it.”

(with Anno Hellenbroich)