Time is on our side

Ez az interjú magyarul is olvasható.

The European Commission has used both the coronavirus pandemic and the war in Ukraine to accrue more powers, and there are increasing efforts to eliminate the requirement for consensus in foreign policy decisions. In which areas is this stealthy transfer of competences most noticeable?

Brussels has been working for years to transform the European Union from a voluntary cooperation of nation states into a federal, centralised structure-where Member States gradually lose their autonomy, and decision-making becomes concentrated in the hands of a narrow elite. The Commission first tested this crisis-based power grab during the coronavirus outbreak: centralised vaccine procurement lacked transparency and placed many Member States at a disadvantage. Since the war in Ukraine, efforts have been underway to abolish the principle of consensus in foreign policy by restructuring decision-making processes, presenting Member States with faits accomplis – whether on arms deliveries or sanctions.

But this stealthy erosion of competences extends to other areas as well. On migration, Brussels initially proposed mandatory quotas, and now seeks to force Member States to accept illegal migrants, with financial penalties imposed on those who refuse. During the energy crisis, joint purchasing schemes and price controls were pushed, which in many cases led to rising prices. In agriculture, particularly under the green transition, Brussels aims to impose regulations on farmers and the industry that do not reflect Member States’ interests, but instead serve ideological goals.

The federalist forces envisage a Europe in which Member States are sidelined, and Brussels holds sway over all key matters. Hungary, however, has made it clear: decisions on foreign policy, energy, agriculture, and migration – to name just a few – will remain in the hands of the Hungarian people.

What are the most important areas of the sovereigntist reform process?

The aim of the sovereignist reform process is to reshape the European Union into a cooperation of equal, strong, and sovereign nation states, rather than a centralised, top-down empire. The crises of recent years – and the corruption scandals in Brussels – have revealed that the centralisation of power does not solve existing problems but instead strengthens the dominance of the Brussels elite. The European election results of June last year made it clear that change is needed in several areas.

These include protecting national decision-making, reducing the political influence of EU institutions, and strengthening democratic accountability. Safeguarding national competences means ensuring that Brussels cannot impose its political will on Member States. EU institutions, particularly the Commission, must be prevented from using financial pressure or political sanctions to influence sovereign decisions. Restoring transparency and democratic functioning also requires enhancing the role of national parliaments in EU decision-making and curbing the unchecked influence of the Brussels bureaucracy.

What methods are being used to enforce these efforts?

There are two main avenues to implement the reforms. First, through political and diplomatic cooperation with other Member States that also prioritise sovereignty. Second, by applying the EU’s own legal frameworks and holding its institutions consistently accountable to the principles of the rule of law. These efforts are aimed at preventing Brussels from making arbitrary decisions over the heads of the Member States.

Can we expect that, alongside the Hungarian government and its allies within the Patriots, other national leaders – regardless of party affiliation – will also seek to put an end to “more Europe”?

Yes. An increasing number of leaders across Europe are beginning to understand that federalism leads not to stability, but to division. Europe’s future success does not lie in a centralised will, but in the free cooperation of sovereign nations. The Hungarian people have never bowed to imperial ambitions – and they will not do so now. But today, Hungary is no longer alone in this struggle.

Time has vindicated our position. Behind closed doors, more and more Member States support Hungary’s stance – even if they are not yet ready to declare it publicly in Brussels. And more surprises are on the horizon.

On what issues can a broader alliance be formed?

Europe’s migration policy has clearly failed. Even those who once promoted the free movement of illegal migrants are now facing the consequences that Hungary has been warning about from the very beginning. In some Member States, people are afraid to visit Christmas markets or to let their children out after dark. Regardless of ideology, politicians can only ignore people’s daily realities for so long.

More and more people are also recognising that “more Europe” is not just about economic or institutional centralisation – it is also an ideological project that undermines the cultural and social self-determination of Member States. The Brussels elite seeks not only political power but also the imposition of a worldview that disregards Europe’s traditions, Christian roots, and national identities – often even targeting our children.

The European Green Deal and the EU’s climate policy agenda are also facing growing resistance. Not because people are indifferent to sustainability, but because the Brussels elite is attempting to enforce ideologically driven measures, with no regard for social or economic realities.

Following the European farmers’ protests, a growing number of leaders are acknowledging that the green transition must not become a tool for disadvantaging farmers, workers, and industry. One thing is certain: time is on our side. Hungary stands ready to cooperate with all who recognise these realities and are prepared to take action for meaningful change.

Beyond the question of competences, are other reforms needed in the EU’s institutional system?

Yes. Today, the EU’s institutional structure no longer serves the citizens of Europe – it has become a power tool for the Brussels elite. The Commission has evolved into a political actor, launching ideological campaigns instead of safeguarding the Treaties. The European Parliament increasingly acts as the mouthpiece of a narrow federalist elite, growing ever more detached from the electorate, while the influence of national parliaments continues to decline.

The most urgent problem is that decisions in Brussels are increasingly made through political blackmail and double standards – whether through the withholding of funds, forced migration quotas, or selective sanctions. Real reform means returning the EU institutions to their original roles and mandates.

What civil society organisations do you plan to build relationships with?

It is vital for Hungary to build partnerships with organisations that are committed to defending national sovereignty and upholding traditional European values. We will cooperate with all research institutes, think tanks, and NGOs that support Europe’s cultural heritage and the nation-state model, and who reject the idea that Brussels’ centralised will should override democratic decisions made by the people.

Special attention will be given to family policy and demographic organisations that understand that the future of Europe depends not on immigration, but on strong European families. Let me be clear: Hungary will not remain a passive observer while foreign-funded, politically motivated NGOs attempt to manipulate or disrupt European public life.

The future of Europe must be shaped by those who truly serve its interests. We cannot allow outside forces to dictate how we think, how we live, who we live with, or what kind of future we build for ourselves and our children. Defending sovereignty is a shared responsibility. The fate of Europe must remain in the hands of the people of Europe.