Orbán's Unilateral Diplomacy: A Challenge for the EU's Unity
When Viktor Orbán announces a trip, the rest of Europe surely raises an eyebrow, and with good reason. Shortly after Hungary assumed the EU presidency in early July, Prime Minister Orbán embarked on an overseas journey, meeting with leaders including Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, and Donald Trump to propose his unconventional vision for peace in Ukraine. So far, Orbán’s self-styled diplomatic mission has yielded little to no positive impact for Ukraine. On the contrary, the relentless aggression by Russia—now being aided by China—against Ukraine shows no sign of abating.
The repercussions of Orbán's excursions have also damaged the EU's diplomatic credibility. Orbán's clandestine meetings with the Kremlin and the Chinese regime, as well as his casual rendezvous with the former U.S. president, were not sanctioned or even acknowledged by his European counterparts. Their collective reaction can best be described as a distancing that emphasized Orbán does not possess the authority to speak on the EU's behalf or to negotiate any semblance of peace.
The EU’s solidarity, once strategically unified, seems frayed in light of Orbán's contradictory actions. In a recent trip to Georgia, he once again defied European consensus, much to the consternation of Brussels. While various EU officials openly questioned the legitimacy of the Georgian elections, alleging significant Russian interference, Orbán congratulated the ruling pro-Russian party, Georgian Dream, before the votes had even been tallied. This has further alienated him from other EU leaders, especially given that the Georgian President, Salome Zourabichvili, highlighted evidence of Russian influence in the election.
This discord is highlighted by the EU's general helplessness in addressing such interventions. After Moldova, Georgia stands as the second nation on the EU’s southeastern perimeter that Europe hoped to extricate from Russian influence due to the ramifications of the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Nonetheless, Moscow continues its insidious meddling through disinformation, coercion, and electoral manipulation.
Recently, the EU managed a small victory in Moldova where pro-European advocates barely won a referendum to enshrine EU membership as a national goal, however, the accession negotiations remain stalled since last summer. In contrast, in Georgia, there remains a lingering concern that Russia has gained more ground. Although Georgia's status as an EU candidate remains intact for now, the present government, under control of pro-Russian oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili, raises serious questions about the country’s commitment to the European path.
The root of the current impasse lies in Georgia's internal politics, with the ruling party passing a law against Western-backed NGOs, effectively labeling them as foreign agents. This law, recognized by Brussels as incompatible with Georgia’s aspirations towards EU integration, reflects the country's growing ties to Russia.
Should clear evidence of election fraud surface in the coming days, it may allow the EU to surmount the current dilemma; however, as it stands, public protests from opposition groups, while indicating unrest, do not serve as unequivocal proof of an electoral crisis. Reports of electoral misconduct are indeed alarming, but without definitive proof of rigging, the EU might have no alternative but to accept the election's results.
The EU's emphasis on investigating irregularities thoroughly reveals the complexities Brussels faces, compounded by the absence of clear support for the Georgian president’s claims of electoral sabotage. The mixed responses from EU nations illustrate the disunity within the bloc regarding how to address such breaches of democratic processes.
Next week, the topic of Georgia’s democratic integrity will be on the informal summit agenda among EU heads of state at a meeting in Budapest hosted by none other than Orbán himself. This situation presents an irony considering the backdrop of Orbán's endeavors that ostensibly undermine the EU’s diplomatic posture.
Given the divided opinion among EU leaders on how to react to Russia’s insidious influence in Georgia’s elections, the likelihood of a united condemnation seems dim. Achieving unanimity among 27 diverse governments—particularly in light of Orbán’s travel-centric diplomacy—poses a substantial challenge for the EU’s cohesion. What remains to be seen is whether European leaders can confront these challenges head-on or whether they will yield to the disjointed diplomatic style exemplified by Orbán.
Related Sources: