Hungarian President Viktor Orbán recently invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in stark contrast to the position of some European leaders, who have declared their intention to arrest him if he sets foot in their countries. Among them is Josep Borrell, the EU High Representative for Foreign Policy.
Orbán, who has long had a contentious relationship with the European Union, must strengthen his international alliances after his stance on the war in Ukrainewhich takes the diplomatic path to resolve the conflict and not the bellicose European line. Also, don’t forget to call him: the Hungarian president is also opposed and threatened in Europe for his sovereignty and defence of traditional values and the Christian faith.
And this is where Donald Trump comes into play: the Hungarian leader knows very well that America’s support for Israel is a fixed point of US foreign policy, crossed and solid, regardless of administration differences. Therefore, positioning yourself in favor of Netanyahu is not an ideological choice, but a pragmatic strategy aimed at consolidating the support of an important ally like Trump and responding to the Eurofurians, who even tried to overthrow the government he led.. Furthermore, it is not out of the question that there was prior consultation with the current or future US administration.
Ultimately: in this context, Hungary takes a consistent line; the use of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is not the appropriate tool to address political and diplomatic issues of this magnitude. The CCT, throughout its history, has often done more harm than good, which has proven to be partial and not very transparent in its decisions. While it may have hit the mark in this instance, it still plays a secondary role in wider geopolitical dynamics and has largely been compromised in the past.
Through this measure, Hungary puts itself in a favorable position in relation to important international dossiers, thanks to Trump’s support. This is especially relevant if we consider that these dossiers concern issues that even include the survival of humanity, mainly the end of the war in Ukraine, as well as the control of global balances.
On the contrary, the statements of some European leaders, threatening Netanyahu’s arrest, seem to be nothing less than true. It is plausible that these positions are driven by other objectives, such as the attempt to distinguish themselves from the United States, especially in light of Trump’s presidency. This view seems to be in line with what has already been expressed on other occasions. Another hypothesis is that the European Union wants to favor a change of leadership in Israel. However, a possible change in Israeli leadership would not change the underlying dynamic: American support for Israel would remain steadfast, as would the region’s strategic priorities.
In an era where international politics is played on a delicate balance, it seems that Orbán’s move is less absurd than the choices of some European countries, including Italy. In an era where international politics is based on the delicate balance of power, Orbán realized that the priority is not to support opposing positions (for those who betray their cynicism on other occasions), but to ensure that political choices are aimed at. the concrete welfare of its people and global stability.
As already mentioned, Orbán emphasizes a fundamental aspect: punitive or symbolic dynamics cannot dominate international relations, such as those represented by the CPI, which rarely produce concrete results. Nor can they be managed following the example of the treatment reserved for Putin, who is often systematically misrepresented in a propaganda key. On the contrary, there is a need for a strategy that considers the real needs of the communities involved and that promotes lasting peace on a global level.
Ultimately, Orbán chooses not to support the International Criminal Court and to oppose the European posture, positioning it as a counterweight to the European Union’s attack on its government and European foreign policies, often under the influence of agendas global work. In this context, it seems logical that wartime alliances are determined by the most immediate threat, even if this involves making agreements or taking actions that may be unusual, unconventional or even insensitive in terms of the person of. However, another decision from Orbán would not do the Palestinian people any good, nor would it solve anything; on the contrary, it would have worsened the position of Hungary, a country that can rely almost exclusively on the support of the Trump administration in the future. It is in that context that Orbán’s specific weight, which Trump has repeatedly acknowledged, could really make the difference.
Unfortunately, the “European strategists” once again show that they do not know how to move in this kind of situation, as they continue to adopt sanctions and justialist policies, but do not have an effective ability to address people’s concrete situations and their resolution, rather than ideological preferences and sides.
While Orban’s stance has attracted criticism, it shows an analytical ability and determination that many other European leaders lack. Orbán seems to want to put the concrete and tangible interests of the nation before ideological appeals or short-term pressures. In a world where great powers are competing for supremacy and an increasingly fragile balance, this approach could be not only pragmatic, but necessary to protect the country’s political independence and future.
How does Viktor Orbán’s relationship with the U.S. influence Hungary’s foreign policy decisions?
Interview between Time.news Editor and Foreign Policy Expert Dr. Anna Kovács
Time.news Editor: Welcome, Dr. Kovács. It’s great to have you here today to discuss the recent invitation extended by Hungarian President Viktor Orbán to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This seems to stand in stark contrast to the approaches of some European leaders. What do you think is driving Orbán’s decision?
Dr. Anna Kovács: Thank you for having me. Orbán’s invitation to Netanyahu indeed reflects a significant divergence in diplomatic approaches within Europe. At its core, this move appears to be driven by strategic pragmatism. Hungary has found itself at odds with the EU over issues of sovereignty and traditional values—something orbán has emphasized repeatedly. By supporting Netanyahu, he positions Hungary as a steadfast ally of the U.S., especially given the strong bipartisan support for Israel in American politics.
Time.news Editor: That makes sense. Orbán’s long-standing tension with the EU is well-documented. Could you elaborate on how his stance regarding the war in Ukraine ties into this?
Dr. Anna Kovács: Absolutely. Orbán has consistently advocated for diplomatic resolutions rather than the more militaristic stance taken by many EU leaders. He aims to present Hungary as a country that prioritizes dialogue and stability over confrontation. By reinforcing ties with Israel and seeking U.S. support, Hungary not only strengthens its international alliances but also demonstrates a commitment to what Orbán would frame as pragmatic governance.
Time.news Editor: You mentioned the U.S. support for Israel. With former President Trump being a key figure in Israeli-American relations, how does his influence play into this equation?
Dr. Anna Kovács: Trump’s influence cannot be overstated here. Orbán recognizes that aligning Hungary with the pro-Israel sentiment in the U.S. can bolster his own position domestically and internationally. He seems to be attempting to align himself with potential future administrations as well, suggesting that his approach isn’t merely reactionary—it’s strategic. Orbán is playing a long game, where support from the U.S., particularly in terms of geopolitical stability and security, is critical.
Time.news Editor: And what are your thoughts on the implications of Orbán’s rejection of the International Criminal Court (ICC)?
Dr. Anna Kovács: Orbán is tapping into a broader critique of the ICC as being ineffective and politically motivated. His assertion that punitive measures don’t yield genuine solutions resonates with many who feel that international law can be tainted by bias. By dismissing the ICC’s authority, he positions Hungary distinctly from the EU’s stance, which could be seen as both a defense of national sovereignty and an assertion of a more nationalist approach to international policy.
Time.news Editor: Critics of Orbán might argue that this strategy could further isolate Hungary within the EU. How do you respond to that?
Dr. Anna Kovács: It’s a valid concern. Orbán’s approach could indeed alienate Hungary from various EU initiatives. However, he seems willing to accept that risk. By courting allies like Trump and Netanyahu, he might be banking on a different kind of support network that doesn’t rely on traditional European alliances. In his view, positioning Hungary favorably on global issues—like the Ukraine conflict—may outweigh the potential costs of EU isolation.
Time.news Editor: It sounds like Orbán is calculating his moves very carefully. In your opinion, what does this mean for the future of European politics, especially for countries with similar leadership styles?
Dr. Anna Kovács: It could signify a shift towards a new political narrative within Europe, especially for right-wing leaders. Orbán’s strategies may inspire others to adopt a more confrontational stance against the EU, prioritizing national interests over collective European values. It introduces the possibility of more fragmented alliances, and as the world grapples with pressing geopolitical issues, this could influence how countries navigate their foreign policy. The balance of power is indeed delicate, and leaders like Orbán are very much aware of that.
Time.news Editor: Thank you, Dr. Kovács, for your insights today. It’s clear that Orbán’s decision holds significant implications for both Hungary and broader European geopolitical dynamics.
Dr. Anna Kovács: Thank you for having me. It’s an exciting time to discuss these developments, and I look forward to seeing how they unfold.