In Hungary, which is set to hold the presidency of the European Council from July to December 2024 after the resignation of the Council’s head, Charles Michel, there is growing discussion about a possible interim transfer of leadership to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. An American newspaper has highlighted this potential scenario in its coverage of EU governance.
“If Michel steps down to take a seat in the European Parliament in mid-July, EU leaders will face a swift decision on who should replace him as the president of the European Council. If a successor cannot be agreed promptly, the rotating presidency would temporarily rest with Viktor Orbán, as Hungary prepares to assume the EU Council presidency in July,” the report notes (Policy analysis).
The article characterizes Orbán’s possible adjacency to the presidency as a moment of heightened tension. It describes Orbán’s anticipated role as one where the Prime Minister would help steer council discussions during Hungary’s six-month term, a period that could shape EU policy across a range of sensitive topics. The piece warns that such a scenario might be unwelcome to many of the other 26 EU member leaders who typically favor a more predictable leadership dynamic in the Council (Policy analysis).
Previously, it has been reported that European Council President Charles Michel may depart from his mandate ahead of schedule. The political leader has signaled an intention to participate in the European Parliament elections, which were held in early June, as a candidate for his Reform Movement party, a group he chairs. Under EU law, holding the presidency while serving in the European Parliament is not permitted, so Michel would resign from the presidency if he wins a seat in the Parliament. This divergence between roles has prompted analysis of how the transition would unfold and what it would mean for the presidency’s continuity (Policy analysis).
The ongoing scrutiny around Charles Michel also includes questions regarding the financial and administrative aspects of his tenure, prompting broader discussion about governance standards within top EU institutions. Observers emphasize that any transition will need to respect the integrity of the office, ensure stability in decision-making during the EU Council presidency, and maintain the momentum of the EU’s ongoing agenda across security, economic recovery, climate, and digital policy (Policy analysis).
As the EU prepares for a critical period of legislative work and intergovernmental negotiation, the question of leadership overlap—how to balance the duties of the presidency with the political realities inside and outside the Parliament—remains a focal point for policymakers and observers alike. The broader takeaway is that leadership transitions at the European level are scrutinized not only for their immediate administrative impact but also for how they influence strategic cooperation among member states during a pivotal time in EU policy development (Policy analysis).
It is worth noting that the coverage from international outlets often frames these developments as a test of the EU’s capacity to manage leadership changes without destabilizing the ongoing work of the European Council. In this context, the potential temporary leadership role for Viktor Orbán would hinge on a rapid cross-read of political agreements among member states and a practical approach to maintaining continuity in the Council’s agenda. Ultimately, the situation underscores how leadership arrangements at the EU level are deeply connected to the broader political climate and the evolving priorities of the member countries (Policy analysis).