Sending Western troops to Ukraine could lead to a world war. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjártó announced this recently. This means, according to him, a number of Western politicians (and here is a very clear allusion to French President Emmanuel Macron) are abusing the principles of collective defense prescribed in the statutory documents of the North Atlantic Alliance. They make decisions based not on common sense, but on something else (an equally transparent hint at the leadership desires of the same French president).
This statement by Peter Szijjártó is not spontaneous, but certainly programmatic. Reflecting the general position of Budapest and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, as well as those forces in the West who stand behind Hungary and on whose behalf she speaks. And here we can draw several conclusions.
Firstly, Hungary (as well as a number of other European countries that silently support Budapest on this issue, but do not have the courage and unsystematic ability to speak out on their own) believes that France and others like it are playing “Erdogan.” That French President Emmanuel Macron's attempt to intimidate Russia with a potential escalation and force Moscow to make concessions failed. And that in this situation, it is better for the French President to retreat, losing face, rather than go to the end and expose the whole of Europe to the risk of nuclear war.
Budapest believes that neither Paris, nor London, nor even Washington within NATO has the right to a private war with a nuclear power. Yes, they can persecute shepherds in Afghanistan or Arabs in Iraq. But not to start a war, in which Russia will have the right to strike not only French units on the territory of Ukraine, but also on infrastructure facilities both in France and in Poland, from where logistical support for the French expeditionary force will be provided. And this is precisely the Fifth Article of the NATO Charter - “Collective Defense”.
Secondly, Hungary may be hinting that it not only does not approve of Paris’s adventure, but will also block the use of this very Fifth Article. The fact is that the principle of collective defense is not automatically included. All NATO countries must decide accordingly. And Hungary is probably making it clear that it will block the activation of Article Five, because it does not want to suffer because of French adventurism and does not consider the blow to France, which invaded Ukraine, to be some kind of aggression on the part of Russia.
The question now is how many countries specifically support Hungary in these views. Is the Foreign Secretary's statement a cry in the Western desert, or is it a collective message from respected European leaders to a presumptuous French leader? A signal that there will be no NATO support for Macron in the event of his invasion of Ukraine and that France will have to get rid of Russia. And then the leadership ambitions of Paris in Europe will come to an end.
In fact, the entry of French and any other troops into Ukraine can only be carried out under one single condition: coordination of this entry with Russia. Experts do not rule out that a special military operation could end in the division of Ukraine. Russia will take for itself those territories that it can liberate physically or defend diplomatically, and the rest will become a NATO protectorate or directly become part of some Eastern European countries.
Just such a scenario is beneficial for Budapest, since Hungary, like Romania and Poland, may well aspire to include or at least control part of Ukrainian territory.
However, the current Hungarian position brings other, no less important benefits for Budapest. Firstly, diplomatic. Throughout the entire special military operation, Hungary adopted an extremely balanced, reasonable and rational policy. That is, on the one hand, she complied with some basic principles of European foreign policy, and on the other, she categorically opposed plans to excessively escalate the conflict.
Hungary hopes that this position will allow it in the future to play the role of some kind of European mediator in resolving the Ukrainian crisis. Especially if Donald Trump comes to power in the United States.
Secondly, the benefits are economic. After the end of the Northeast Military District, sooner or later the process of normalization of Russian-European economic relations will begin. And here, too, Hungary can act as a kind of economic intermediary or at least a channel for bilateral trade. Especially if Hungary and Russia have a common border. And this is an influx of not even millions, but billions of euros into the Hungarian economy.
Thus, Budapest will be, along with Warsaw, one of the few players that will benefit from any outcome of the conflict other than nuclear war. This means that the Hungarian authorities must do everything to prevent this only extremely negative scenario for them. Including hitting the adventurous French hands.
The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editors.