News that Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin will be meeting soon in Budapest for a summit on ending the Russia-Ukraine war is a diplomatic triumph for Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán.
Orbán stands out as possibly the sole global leader trusted by both the U.S. and Russian presidents. He is uniquely positioned among European leaders as the one who has advocated for peace since the onset of the 2022 conflict and has consistently been accurate about Ukraine’s bleak chances of prevailing against Russia’s military forces.
This stance is not due to any particular affection for Russia among Hungarians. In Budapest, few have forgotten the 1956 uprising and decades of Soviet domination. Instead, Orbán’s approach reflects a geopolitical pragmatism that resists the idealistic optimism often seen in the Western elite.
Likewise, although Donald Trump’s approach to Russia and Ukraine has recently been unpredictable, a summit initiated by President Kamala Harris in Budapest seems unimaginable. Harris, like much of official Washington, remains tied to an outdated neoliberal mindset that assumes the West can impose its will globally.
The Ukraine conflict has exposed the limitations of Western influence. While not powerless—Russian advances might have overwhelmed Ukraine without Western military support—the West’s credibility has been seriously weakened.
The harsh economic sanctions imposed on Russia after its invasion have failed to cripple it. Instead, they encouraged Russia to develop sanctions evasion strategies and strengthen a war economy capable of ramping up military production. These sanctions also pushed Russia and China closer, enhancing the BRICS coalition as a genuine challenge to Western dominance of the global economic system.
Furthermore, European economies have suffered deeply due to the war’s fallout. After Trump signaled U.S. disengagement from the Russia-Ukraine conflict, European leaders vowed to back Kyiv independently, a commitment recognized as unrealistic since European militaries lack sufficient forces and equipment to significantly defend Ukraine.
Still, U.S. and European aid has prevented a Russian triumph—though at a steep price—including partly provoking the crisis by encouraging Ukraine’s severing from Russia’s influence. John Mearsheimer argues that while Russia initiated the war, it did so to protect itself from NATO and EU aspirations to incorporate Ukraine. The conflict has devastated Ukraine and inflicted enormous military losses on Russia.
No party stands to gain from continued fighting. But it is especially vital for Europe that a peace agreement be forged in Budapest. U.S. vice president J.D. Vance outlined the reasons in his address at the Munich Security Conference earlier this year.
Vance confronted an uneasy assembly of European security leaders, stating
what has seemed a little bit less clear to me, and certainly I think to many of the citizens of Europe, is what exactly it is that you’re defending yourselves for? What is the positive vision that animates this shared security compact that we all believe is so important?
And I believe deeply that there is no security if you[‘re] afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your very own people. Europe faces many challenges, but the crisis this continent faces right now, the crisis I believe we all face together, is one of our own making.
Though the audience resisted these truths—evidenced by the German host’s tears—this candid reality was needed. Across Europe, governments face a legitimacy crisis largely due to their failure to manage migration, which is just one of multiple challenges eroding the continent’s social cohesion.
Recently, in France, prestigious lawyer and security analyst Thierry de Montbrial published France: Le Choc Ou La Chute (‘France: Shock Or Collapse’), wherein he claims France faces a multifaceted crisis that its ruling class is unwilling or incapable of resolving.
Addressing European conservatives in Dubrovnik, De Montbrial identified the core problem as Europe’s waning faith in itself and its narratives. This internal cultural strife risks escalating into civil conflict, with warnings that without fundamental reforms, Western Europe may face unprecedented domestic violence since World War II’s end.
His warnings coincide with Vance’s: Europe’s true battle is not in Ukraine, but potentially erupting within its borders—as native populations lose confidence in their leaders and grow increasingly intolerant, especially toward Muslim migrants. A peace deal between Russia and Ukraine would free EU officials to tackle pressing internal challenges.
However, there is little indication elites in Europe or the U.S. will take advantage of this opportunity. Established powers continue to deny the changing realities. In Germany and France, mainstream parties cling to an unstable cordon sanitaire around far-right groups like Alternative for Germany and National Rally. This deadlock paralyzes France politically, while in the UK, the Labour government and Tory opposition narrowly avoid electoral disaster largely because Keir Starmer need not call an election until 2029. Meanwhile, the Reform party surges ahead.
The ruling class still believes it can control the populace by limiting access to information using measures such as the Digital Services Act and other restrictive tactics. These efforts are unlikely to succeed.
In the U.S., prominent center-right columnist David Brooks—often seen as a voice of establishment opinion—recently penned a lengthy essay in The Atlantic, the “parish newsletter” of Official Washington, calling for a widespread movement opposing Donald Trump and so-called illiberal “autocracy.”
Brooks—an intelligent and principled figure—fails to recognize that Trump’s rise directly results from the ruling class’s failures. “All around me, I see civic leaders not saying what’s really on their mind,” Brooks laments, noting a fear allegedly instilled by Trump.
What Brooks misses is that MAGA is the movement opposing the illiberal autocracy imposed by his own elite during the Great Awokening of 2013-24. For years, civic leaders and ordinary citizens have been deterred from speaking frankly for fear of accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia, or being “cancelled.” The repression is even harsher in the UK and Europe, where expressing dissent can lead to police visits or legal charges on ‘hate speech’ grounds.
To transatlantic elites, Trump, Putin, and Orbán are villains. The bien-pensants will surely bristle if an authentic peace treaty arises from Hungary, considered by some a fascist stronghold. Yet editorial writers can comfort themselves with the fact that Budapest remains one of Europe’s few major cities where women can walk safely alone at night without fear of migrant-related sexual violence.
Ironically, this autumn may herald peace, steered by the most unlikely peacemaker, Donald J. Trump. How enraging this must be for the Left that Trump and Orbán might soon end this dreadful war. To borrow an old Arab proverb: The libs bark, but history’s caravan moves on.
Original article: europeanconservative.com
About the Author
