Viktor Orbán: “Can We Restore Democracy in Europe?”

Yesterday marked the first day of the EU emergency summit on the migration crisis. After the morning session, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán spoke to the media about what had occurred so far, and what he was anticipating in the later sessions.

Many thanks to CrossWare for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

0:00   I met with and negotiated with the Austrian chancellor,
0:04   and I called together the V4 as well.
0:08   And we are only halfway through the day. I expect sharp arguments
0:12   and a long night, because the prime ministers’ summit,
0:16   will start in the next few minutes and the stakes are high!
0:20   Everybody knows the question is: can we restore DEMOCRACY
0:24   in Europe? We know that democracy is broken down in
0:28   Europe, because European leaders are not doing
0:32   what the people want and what the people expect from them.
0:36   The people want two things, but not only in Hungary, Central Europe,
0:40   not only in Italy, not only in Austria, but I dare say:
0:44   EVERYWHERE in Europe. They want us to defend the borders,
0:48   do not let in migrants, and with that defend their safety.
0:52   With the ones who have already arrived, they [people] want the proceedings to be completed
0:56   and to send them home. European leaders have not been willing to do that so far.
1:00   That is why European democracy is in trouble.
1:04   Perhaps we can come to an agreement today so that we can order a complete closure of the borders,
1:08   of the full outside border of the Union. And perhaps we can also agree on
1:12   the creation of hot spots [camps] outside of
1:16   European territory. With this, we
1:20   will not have solved the problems, but at least we will have taken a step in the right direction.
1:24   Today I will fight for this, because that is what the Hungarian people want, too.

13 thoughts on “Viktor Orbán: “Can We Restore Democracy in Europe?”

  1. Useless meeting where nothing changes, for people who need time to waste, like Merkel, in order not to be dumped by her hypocrite ex ally of CSU. Actually she had success in this, nothing has been solved but she has got some more time.

    Stopping the NGO boats is important, but it is not final solution, because NGO boats are not the cause of the problem, but a consequence.

    Without closing the UNHCR, UNICEF, and most important the Strasbourg Court for human rights, it will all be useless. Because there are laws who say that people outside of many EU counties (like germany for example) has more rights of its own citizens; for example muslims which are in war within themselves all the time since their fake prophet came. One of the most important thing would be to trash the Geneva Convention for the refugees (which is totally out of its original scope today). All other discussions are just smoke in the eyes, which do not aim to the root of the problem, and these kind of international politician meetings are useful just to some of their personal careers.

    • Well, you’re correct, but good luck in trashing the international globalist bureaucracies.

      The best that can be done is for a country to put its financial affairs in order, to avoid the German and financier blackmail, and keep its military strong to avoid EU incursions. A very strong intelligence service with international reach wouldn’t hurt in the least.

  2. Since the video, the following happened. In the meeting, which ended around 4 am, the V4 emerged victorious. Baby steps though, they were able to pull out the idea of mandatory quotas, which threatened to forcibly move thousands of muslims to their territory. Essentially now the Western countries slowly starting to follow, what Orbán said 3 years ago. Macron even tries to sell it as his ideas… They try to do better border control, create hotspots outside of EU…

    • We’ve discussed this before. Ultimately, the countries of the V4 and others of the same mind will have to pull out from the EU and its authority altogether. Orban is playing along, doing what he can.

      But, the election of Trump created a window of opportunity. With Hillary, the NATO would be a complete tool of the EU.

  3. @Cross Ware: this appears unfortunately incorrect if this AfD parliamentarian is correct (in German):

    He says that the development of Dublin III into the future Dublin IV as passed by EU parliament in Nov. 2017 was mentioned “casually in passing” by Merkel as policy in her declaration to Bundestag just now. He says she has always been very good at hiding the essentials in apparently insignificant things she says and asks: who is behind her, whose plans is she implementing?

    The AfD man says this new EU law would throw Germany wide open like a barn door.

    Dublin IV from a Czech standpoint in English is here:


        but I think we are missing the point here. The motls article mentions a commentator underlining the unusualness of Brussels ordering migrants to remain in certain countries, D4 would have even paid I think for countries to host – that would likely mean an EU fund where the collective citizens of EU would be footing the bill… something that is being tried unsuccessfully in a limited way already. The point we are missing is that within a few years in any country, say Greece, the migrant will not be a migrant but take Greek nationality, and so be able to travel to say Germany afterwards. In fact the question of registry is :

        Obtention of ID so permitting integration ( work, banking etc.) and eventually nationality.

        Benefits available in country of registry.

        So (and someone might clarify the exact rules) a migrant registering in Greece may be able to migrate to Germany immediately afterwards in practice, only not be able to then claim asylum or benefits in Germany. I am not sure if they could actually register as resident and work in Germany above board, but possibly. Either way all returning to country of entry would do is to delay time until they could legally migrate and register in a preferred country. I suppose that might be off puting for some who have dreams of northern Europe, for the rest I expect they will not worry too much about returning north if expelled to try again at finding a way to stay there, with their southern registration in hand (I remember a page somewhere on migrant/asylum ID and the EU rights it carried, maybe someone will elaborate on what goes on in practice) . If you look at migrant communities they tend to understand and support each other in that endeavour.

        • Without knowing the details, your description sounds accurate. The whole point is, the EU bureaucrats are trying to spread out and dilute the problem until retirement time for them, and they retreat to a walled enclosure well supported by lavish EU retirement benefits.

          The European countries will sooner or later have to jettison the entire globalist world order and nexus of useless, expensive bureaucracies. They won’t see their soft cushions punctured without treachery Plus, the plain degenerates like Soros are motivated by the thought of a ruined Europe.

      • @Dymphna: are you thus perhaps saying that a country can avoid a Dublin IV event ie further hijra by having a US base/s in it? So Czechia could avoid such hijra?

        Well Germany has had such bases for decades: Ramstein is a US air force hub, Iraq wounded were flown thousands of miles into Landau military hospital, US nuclear weapons are stored on German soil. That is why there are regular German demos outside Ramstein.
        The war against Gaddafi was coordinated by AFRICOM working out of Kelly Barracks nr. Stuttgart, where it is located.

        But I am not aware- not that I have read Stars and Stripes on the subject – that GUS has any policy about how its troops are to react to ongoing hijra in Germany.

        Given that soldiers do what they are told and that ISIS is a US weapon long-term against Russia und China, as evidenced by various high-level US admissions, why would the US military leave barracks in Germany to intervene against hijra in Dublin IV?

        Notwithstanding that the GIs may have been warned not to wear uniform off-base or similar.

        It is frustrating that no serving US military seems to contribute to GoV: but the same applies to serving German police and soldiers, whose role/loyalty is a de facto taboo.

        • I will further that.

          The US military is an arm of the US administration , whoever or whatever you make that out to be. It is no discredit to military honour to also say that the military is being used according to agendas the average and loyal serviceman has little comprehension of. The world looks very different from the perspective of anyone serving, the priorities are necessarily narrowed down and objectives that are understandable from that field of view provided.

          When I look at EU/western management of migration, of borders, geopolitical aims, the picture is very daunting when viewed without any preconceptions, when you accept points of view that go against positions you think credible.

          So for example, it is possible to say Italy or the Vis.4 are being nurtured by EU into pushing for a wanted EU policy position that will formulate an EU border and acceptance by society of that in the name of Europe, that this whole exercise is more than just disrupting nation by dilution but has the final objective of having society ask for higher control of it, or to at least accept that.

          Same may go for migrant control points, these would be an extension of EU presence in disrupted countries, a new form of leverage there and reason to be politically involved in those countries.

          So from a cynical point of view it is all about an increased management, over own population, and in other countries, where nationalist sentiment will be played and used wherever possible to that end.

          For a while a base in north Africa for AFRICOM was sought but was not well received, same in Spain

          which met a lot of ground level opposition.

          To my view there is only one way to deal with all of this, and that is for EU countries to reclaim full sovereignty and shun the EU project.

          I don’t think they are able to, so that only leaves a circumstance where EU disintegrates by mismanagement if it does not manage to disintegrate the countries that form it first, in which case it will have integrated them into its outright control.

    • Hungarian parliament accepted changes to its Constitution (Basic Law) at the same time when they made the Stop Soros law package. In that change, it stated, that without the Hungarian government, nobody can be settled into Hungary. This change required a 2/3 supermajority, which the ruling Fidesz party got in this recent election on April 8.
      They did this, because the EU laws contain, that when a nation Constitution and EU laws collide, the EU laws MUST yield and the national Constitution is the winner. Both Germany and France lived with this numerous times.

      So no matter what law the EU globalists make, Hungary can point to their Constitution and say: NO WAY!

      • What happens when the EU changes EU laws to override not just laws but constitutions?

  4. With very few exceptions I don’t trust any of them and certainly not the major players in Europe.

    They must go, then be held accountable and then (or concurrently) we can put the European house in order.

    I find it unbelievable how completely preventable all of this was yet onwards they (slow/long) marched.

    Ah well, cometh the hour…..

Comments are closed.