András Vas;
European Union;
2024-04-27 11:30:00
Viktor Orbán’s problem with the European Union is that as long as there are no walls, dams or obstacles in front of him, thanks to the two-thirds majority, the EU can somewhat force him to adhere to the rule of law norms, says foreign policy expert István Szent-Iványi. According to him, it is conceivable that the multi-speed EU will be realized, which, according to the current situation, we would not do well.
On Friday, April 26, it has been 20 years since the parliament voted on the law on EU accession. Two each voted no or did not participate in the vote. Do you remember who the “renitens” were?
I couldn’t say names.
The no button was pressed by the independent Gyula Balogh and Attila Körömi, who switched from Fidesz to Jobbik, while János Áder and Viktor Orbán were not present at the voting. The latter campaigned that day in Nagykanizsa and Kaposvár for the upcoming EP elections.
Really, now that he recalled it: many people blamed Orbán for skipping the vote. It was a sly thing from him.
It’s strange that nowadays, during the big Brussels bashing, he doesn’t bring up that even then…
He had already had strange manifestations regarding the union. Two years earlier, he uttered the much-quoted phrase “There is life outside the EU as well”.
After the election defeat in 2002, he apparently had a hard time bearing the fact that he was not the one who led the country into the union.
So much so that when Péter Medgyessy officially signed the accession agreement in Athens in 2003, he invited everyone who had something to do with the process, including former heads of government. Orbán did go, but he did not travel as a member of the official delegation, but on a different plane, and he showed himself separately the whole time.
Is this why Brussels has a thorn in its side?
As a personal reason, this certainly plays a role, but his problem with the union is much more that, while in this country, thanks to the two-thirds majority, there are no walls, dams or obstacles in front of him, the EU can somewhat force him to adhere to the rule of law norms. He didn’t start out that way, he showed himself to be absolutely pro-Union, as prime minister before 2002 he even envisioned the Hungarian euro in 2007, and we heard from him that freedom always came from the West, or that we would not be the most cheerful barracks for Gazprom.
In this country, almost no one remembers them. What’s more, József Szájer’s 2020 gutter stunt for the majority of Hungarians about the EU, the handshake and dictatorial behavior of the former president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, to Viktor Orbán, the poster campaigns in Brussels, and perhaps the Peace Procession We will not be a colony! his molino jumps in.
And that they don’t give money.
None of them are positive stories, yet according to surveys, support for the union is higher here than the EU average, even among pro-government voters it is more than 50 percent.
I’m just bringing up the money again. The basis of the whole thing is the unaccounted amount that has arrived in Hungary in the last twenty years. However, financial support is only one part of EU membership, the possibility of free travel, employment and study is at least as important, or that borders have disappeared. In this country, on the other hand, typically all political parties have slandered and still slander the importance of the money received.
Over the course of 20 years, we are in a surplus of around 65 billion euros, if we look at deposits and withdrawals. This amount is roughly two-thirds of this year’s budget, while it is 4.5 times that of 2004. They used to say that 3 billion forints came from the union every day, or rather that the union gave five out of 100 forints to the current Hungarian budget.
Just to make it clear: according to KPMG’s measurements, without EU support, Hungarian GDP would have decreased by 1.8 percent between 2010 and 2018. However, it increased by 21 percent. In other words, the money was needed, another issue is that it was used with very low efficiency.
Corruption, overpricing, senseless investments.
I think the rain of money has caused at least as much damage as it has been a blessing. Many good things were created, but it made the economy dependent on tenders, the moral level deteriorated a lot, and since many people lived on tender money, competitiveness decreased. The free money has no owner, there was no normal control of what it was used for.
This is how 40-centimeter-high lookout points could be built, canopy walkways without forests, and half the country was paved.
All this is overpriced by an average of 20 percent. In Germany, on the other hand, the Marshall aid was not distributed, but was disbursed as a long-term loan, so those who received it were interested in creating productive and prosperous value from it. And the repaid interest could be redistributed as loans. We did not manage to transform the economy even with multiples of Marshall aid.
There wasn’t much of a central strategy that a decision-maker could think of, and a tender was put out for it.
János Lázár also said: no matter what, let’s just call him and spend all the money. Increasing competitiveness was not a consideration, which can be seen now, as we slipped back to 47th place on the relevant list. However, we were also in 28th place. All this is seen and felt by the authorities. They are no longer talking about catching up to Austria by 2030, but about 90 percent of the EU average. The two are far from the same level.
The average person, on the other hand, only sees Austria that they don’t even have to slow down at Hegyeshalom.
And that hundreds of thousands were able to go to work or commute without any difficulty. Or they can study anywhere in the EU under the same conditions as the locals. And they are free to start a business and move to where they hope to prosper. Also, due to the large number of investors, there is normal work here too. By no means incidentally, we owe the union not only western companies, but also eastern ones, because if we were not an EU member state, we would not be interested in China either. Because through us, they can be present in one of the largest internal markets in the world.
The country has apparently benefited from joining the EU, despite this, government communication paints an increasingly harsh picture of “Brussels”, and the relationship seems to be increasingly sour.
Since the booth revolution of 2010, Fidesz and Viktor Orbán’s relationship and attitude towards the EU have really changed drastically.
“Since the invasion of communism in Europe, the Hungarians have fought more than any other European nation and made more sacrifices for freedom and independence. That is why it was not tolerated and cannot be allowed to dictate to us anywhere from Vienna or Moscow, and now from Brussels,” said the Prime Minister on March 15, 2011. It was the first time that he openly confused the union with the oppressive Moscow.
This was the reaction to Brussels condemning the country for the media law and the special tax. Then Orbán announced the fight for freedom, and the give-and-take began: the National Bank Act, the retirement of judges, Lex CEU, the civil and pedophile law here, the Tavares report, a plethora of infringement procedures, the Sargentini report, the implementation of Article 7 there.
The situation really worsened after the 2015 migrant crisis.
As early as 2006, the pink fog began to dissipate from the top contender Hungary, the economic and political problems were revealed, and in 2008 only loans from the Union and the IMF saved the country from total collapse. We kept losing our prestige, but really, 2015 was a dividing line. Until then, Orbán was seen as any “strongman farming on the eastern steppe”, but he stood out from the rest with the refugee crisis, as he was able to appeal to the far right in the West, linking migration with terrorism and integration problems. Previously, the head of government of an EU country did not talk about such things, and the EU realized that it had to deal with Hungary.
It came down quite slowly in Brussels that a departure from the canon could have a serious price.
The mills of the union have always grinded commodiously, which is why the real answer came rather late with the rule of law procedure, the withdrawal of funds or the stopping of the Erasmus programs.
How can the decade-long streak come to an end?
The outcome of the EP elections in June will be decisive, and how the parliamentary elections in some countries will turn out. According to the current situation, a breakthrough of the extreme right is not expected, and the parties that have been in the mainstream until now will continue to determine the direction of the EU. Of course, this will affect the situation in Hungary as well, the country may be completely marginalized, but if things turn out according to Orbán’s hopes, we can get out of the various procedures.
Can the perception of the union change drastically back home?
For the time being, the propaganda that has been circulating for many years has not been able to override reality, even though this type of communication is extremely successful in other areas. But pretty much everyone can see that, overall, EU membership is not bad for us. As I said, EU money is a huge attraction.
And what happens if the source runs out?
For the time being, the government does not dare to campaign with withdrawal, because the end would be a clear failure. But it is no coincidence that Finance Minister Mihály Varga has already waved it off: if the country becomes a net contributor, should we consider whether we should remain in the EU? Another question is that he predicted this for 2030, which seems unimaginable according to the current situation. Anyway, in principle, the majority would not have to be convinced to withdraw, because a referendum does not need to be held on the intention, a government decision is enough.
It is reassuring that the government apparently does not dare to take on the odium of this at the moment.
Not a bit incidental, if only because the two eastern partners, Russia and China, are only interested in EU Hungary. The former for political reasons, the latter for economic reasons. And this is also a serious argument in favor of membership, even if Orbán is visibly frustrated that the EU sometimes forces him into humiliating positions. Like the ominous Ukraine-related vote, the awkward coffee stir. However, he has a strong instinct for life, and he knows that he still needs the union, so it is not unthinkable, especially for such a chameleon, that another turn will come and he will try to get closer to Brussels. Another issue is that the EU has now formed an image of him that he is not a credible person, which of course makes them willing to cooperate with him.
In other words, is there a serious hope that in ten years we will be able to celebrate the 30th anniversary of membership?
The EU is needed, and not only for us. Individual member states would not be able to meet the world’s challenges, not even countries like Germany or France, let alone Hungary. On the other hand, it is conceivable that the multi-speed union will be implemented, which, according to the current situation, we would not be able to do well.
Tags: moral level deteriorated lot money rain caused damage Hungary blessing
-
