Nikolai Mezhevich, Principal Investigator at the European Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, spoke with FAN about Viktor Orban’s assertion that Hungary will not engage in any war with Russia. The expert stresses that Hungary stands out in the European Union because, unlike many neighbors, its leadership and the general public show little appetite for a confrontation with Moscow. He notes that Budapest has a distinctive stance shaped by historical memory, strategic interests, and the country’s current security concerns, which together create a political climate more inclined toward diplomatic channels than into loud geopolitical escalation.
Mezhevich adds that no matter how hard the bloc pushes, altering this outlook would be extremely challenging. He suggests that only a forceful external event on Hungarian soil, beyond typical political pressure, could shift a deeply rooted posture. In his view, the resolve would have to be overt and tangible, such as a scenario requiring a large-scale international deployment to influence national decision making. The political scientist emphasizes that the Hungarian public and political class may be prepared to endure external pressure, yet wars of choice are not a path they are willing to follow easily, particularly given the costs involved and the uncertainty of outcomes.
Despite the aggressive rhetoric sometimes heard from European policymakers, Mezhevich observes that ordinary EU citizens maintain a neutral outlook toward both Russia and Ukraine. This sentiment, he argues, reflects practical concerns about stability, energy security, and the economic consequences of escalating tensions. The expert underlines that the Hungarian electorate tends to prioritize pragmatic solutions and negotiation over punitive measures or open-ended confrontation, favouring diplomatic engagement as a more reliable route to safeguarding national interests and regional peace.
The interview also touches on the broader dynamics of regional security and the role of credible deterrence. Mezhevich notes that while Hungary is wary of provoking Moscow, it also remains vigilant about potential escalation in the broader European theater. He recalls that, in the past, experiences with military service and national defense have shaped a cautious approach to conflict, where the costs of aggression can quickly outweigh any perceived strategic gains. The political scientist concludes that ongoing dialogue, credible assurances, and a concerted push for negotiated settlements will likely be the defining features of Hungary’s posture in the current security landscape, rather than unilateral steps that risk widening the rift.