The long road back: Péter Magyar and Hungary’s European future

In this op-ed for Commonspace.eu, Anna Szedlacsek, Junior Research Assistant at LINKS Europe Foundation, argues:

"Even with a commanding electoral victory, Péter Magyar would need to 'de-capture' a state where the chief prosecutor, media regulators, and constitutional authorities hold long mandates designed specifically to survive a change in government. This means that while voters can replace a cabinet, they cannot instantly replace the institutional architecture Orbán built over fourteen years"

Here is her op-ed in full:

The rise of Péter Magyar has transformed Hungarian politics from a stagnant contest into a genuine struggle over the country’s geopolitical future. Once associated with the orbit of Viktor Orbán’s ruling system, Magyar now presents himself as the figure who can bring Hungary back into the European mainstream. His message is direct: Hungary must strengthen its position within the European Union and secure its place in the West, “where it has always belonged.” Yet, no matter how compelling this western pivot sounds, Magyar would inherit a state whose institutions and energy system remain deeply entangled with Russia.

For years, Orbán silently intensified relationships with Moscow. Hungary has benefited from cheap gas and oil contracts, with Russian crude making up 93% of Hungary’s oil imports in 2025, representing a 32% increase from 2021. Another key project is the Paks II nuclear power plant, agreed upon in 2014 by Viktor Orbán and Vladimir Putin, with the Russian Rosatom acting as the main contractor. Lastly, the leaked conversation between Putin and Orbán, as well as Péter Szijjártó’s, Hungary’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, calls to Sergey Lavrov, his Russian counterpart during breaks in EU Council meetings, have resulted in Fidesz being viewed by many Hungarians (and others) as catering to Russian interests. 

On the other hand, Magyar has declared seeking to bind Hungary to the West, ending Orbán’s seesaw foreign policy. As a clear signal of this strategy, Magyar claims that his first visits as prime minister will be to Warsaw, Vienna, and Brussels, in that order. Magyar has also pledged to deepen ties with neighboring countries, building on close economic relations and historical connections dating back to the Austro-Hungarian Empire. At the same time, negotiations with Brussels are already underway: last Wednesday (29 April), Magyar has met with Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, to discuss steps to unlock €10.4bn of the EU's Covid-19 recovery fund —around 10 percent of national output— before it expires at the end of August. Magyar is also looking to unlock an additional €6.3 billion in cohesion funds that were frozen because of rule-of-law concerns under the Orbán government. Beyond that, Hungary could gain access to €16.1 billion in low-interest EU defence loans, while Magyar is also expected to seek an end to the €1 million per day penalty Budapest has been paying for violating EU migration regulations. 

For any incoming Hungarian government, access to those funds would be economically transformative. Magyar understands this. He has pledged to pursue more constructive relations with Brussels and to stop using Hungary’s veto powers as bargaining chips for unrelated concessions. Regarding concerns over democratic backsliding and corruption, his party, TISZA (Respect and Freedom Party) in its platform pledges to “uncover the hidden truth and present it to the public: the true state of the economy, healthcare, and education; secret government decisions; domestic and international treaties; loans; and concealed agreements, ”and, following a national security review, to “publish the summaries of government meetings held between 2010 and 2026,” as well as the “complete documentation related to the asset management of the Hungarian National Bank under the presidency of György Matolcsy.”

In addition, the program outlines the creation of new watchdog agencies of the Anti-Corruption Office and the National Asset Recovery and Protection Office to recover stolen public wealth and uncover corruption cases, economic, and political abuses from the past 20 years.  Finally, it underscores a commitment to restoring democratic governance by ensuring Hungary joins the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and by reestablishing checks and balances within the political system.

Regarding Russian energy, Magyar emphasized that diversification – rather than disengagement – is the core objective. As he put it:

"…we will do everything possible to diversify the energy mix… because that gives us security – and energy security is one of the most important issues in Hungary –, and secondly, this is how you can purchase oil and gas at the lowest prices."

At the same time, he underscored the limits of geopolitical change: 

"We cannot change geography. Russia will be here, and Hungary will be here. We will try to diversify, but that doesn’t mean that we want to detach ourselves…"

Magyar also faces domestic constraints beyond geopolitics. Even with a commanding electoral victory, he would need to “de-capture” a state where the chief prosecutor, media regulators, and constitutional authorities hold long mandates designed specifically to survive a change in government. This means that while voters can replace a cabinet, they cannot instantly replace the institutional architecture Orbán built over fourteen years. But the institutional structures are not the only legacy of the Fidesz era: the Hungarian economy has virtually stagnated since 2023, with average annual growth of 0.1%, leaving the TISZA government with a state budget deficit near 5% of GDP.  Western partners expecting immediate transformation may therefore need to wait for Magyar to learn to navigate not only a politically entrenched state apparatus, but also a fiscally constrained economy in which ambitious reforms, social spending, and strategic reorientation will all compete for limited resources. Any democratic renewal in Hungary is likely to be shaped as much by budget arithmetic as by political will.

Furthermore, while Tisza’s two-thirds majority gives it significant leverage, it also entails political risks. It has made some question whether Magyar would just sit on the power structures constructed by Orbán or would eventually end up becoming Hungary's next dictator. However, the situation at hand is more complex. The victory of Magyar, while certainly benefiting from a people-centered, energetic campaign, is primarily explained by a very strong anti-Orbán/anti-corruption sentiment. Accordingly, his voter base encompasses voters from the entire political spectrum: it is specifically because this coalition is united less by ideology than by opposition to the current regime that it would be structurally difficult for Magyar to recreate the centralized, leader-worshipping culture of the System of National Cooperation, constructed under Orbán’s rule or to govern in the Orbán mold. Nevertheless, when trying to meet the EU’s rule of law criteria, Magyar must be careful not to be seen as employing extraordinary measures beyond the rules of democratic control and accountability when trying to deconstruct a system of extraordinary corruption.

Source: Anna Szedlacsek is a Junior Research Assistant at LINKS Europe Foundation. Anna Szedlacsek is also pursuing a bachelor's degree in International Studies and an Honours degree in Governance and Global Affairs at Leiden University.

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
COP 17 in Armenia

COP 17 in Armenia

Armenia is currently hosting the COP17 conference of the Convention on Biological Diversity, which began earlier this week (19 October) and will run until 30 October, bringing around 15,000 participants from 196 different countries to Yerevan. At a leaders' summit held as part of COP17, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan expressed realistic ambitions: “We are halfway towards achieving these goals (Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework), and we must honestly acknowledge that we are not yet moving in the right direction. Our task now is not to make new promises, but to fulfil the commitments we have already made.” Pashinyan pointed towards Armenia's own records, noting that the whitefish stock in Lake Sevan has increased substantially in the last ten years. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze also addressed the summit, with Turkiye sending its agriculture minister. However, there were no reports of Azerbaijani representatives attending. The conference has given Yerevan a valuable international platform, yet the absence of Azerbaijan is likely to be read as a sign that the peace process in the South Caucasus has not yet been translated into wider regional cooperation. The leaders' summit was opened by Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who stressed that hosting the conference was a great honour for Armenia. He expressed hope that it would 'be productive and contribute to protecting our planet's biodiversity'. 'We – the citizens of Armenia, the government, state authorities and local governments – owe a debt to our nature,' the prime minister said. He noted that the international community had already developed the concept of 'living in harmony with nature’ and adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework in 2022, setting out goals and specific targets to be achieved by 2030. 'We are halfway towards achieving these goals, and we must honestly acknowledge that we are not yet moving in the right direction. Our task now is not to make new promises, but to fulfil the commitments we have already made,' Nikol Pashinyan said. The COP17 conference is expected to adopt a declaration at leaders' level. More than 30 documents are scheduled for discussion. If approved, the commitments set out in them will become legally binding on countries that are parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.”
Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)