Orbán boycott: Borrell invites ministers to Brussels
After the boycott of the Hungarian Council Presidency announced by the EU Commission and several northern European countries, EU chief diplomat Josep Borrell has also stripped Hungary of its role as host of an EU foreign ministers meeting planned for August in Budapest and invited the ministers to Brussels instead. The controversy triggered by the decision - which was opposed by several countries including Germany, Spain and Luxembourg - is reflected in Europe's press.
Face conflict in Budapest
Der Tagesspiegel criticises the boycott:
“Precisely when they are angry with Orbán, they need to be there to tell him that. In other words, they should make their way to Budapest and tell the Hungarian government what they think, and in no uncertain terms. One needn't go as far as Luxembourg's Foreign Minister Xavier Bettel and describe staying away as 'nonsense'. But there can be no talk of astuteness either. ... Especially given that the EU should have confronted Hungary before it took over the presidency. It's not just since yesterday that Orbán has been on an ego trip and an authoritarian-autocratic path. In such cases conflict must be sought and endured. Especially now that Hungary holds the EU presidency.”
Plenty of barking but no bite
Once again, the Hungarian prime minister has got away with it, Corriere della Sera fumes:
“Orbán has been accused of disloyalty and overstepping his role, he's been threatened with being ousted from the rotating presidency and even with the so-called 'nuclear option', the never-before-applied Article 7 of the Treaty on the European Union under which EU membership rights are suspended for states that fail to respect the EU's values. In the end, it was all a lot of barking but no biting. Hungary will suffer an annoying but purely symbolic defeat on 28 and 29 August: the relocation of the informal Council of EU foreign ministers from Budapest to Brussels.”
Just a warning, but a serious one
A boycott would serve as a rare and therefore serious warning, says Népszava:
“A boycott of informal discussions is more a symbolic gesture: it won't hinder legislative work or hit a member state as hard as financial or political sanctions, which in any event would take a long time to impose. However, as it is only very rarely used by the EU institutions and member states, it constitutes a serious warning and a loss of prestige for a country that holds an important leadership position in the EU.”
The old dilemma with provocateurs
Der Standard explains:
“Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orbán poses a dilemma for the EU partners. It's the old problem when dealing with provocateurs and troublemakers: if you let them get away with it, they expand their radius of action - and thus the limits of what is considered politically normal. But if you put them in their place, you have to be extremely careful to follow the rules of the game and avoid escalating the aggression. Otherwise: see option one. This applies in particular to dealing with a cunning tactician like Orbán.”