Viktor Orbán: We Don’t Want to Shed Hungarian Blood in Ukraine

Posted on by

As a follow-up to Sunday’s post, the video below contains excerpts from remarks made by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán during his most recent weekly appearance on Hungarian state radio (Friday May 31). Continuing in the same vein as the previous week, he outlined the dangerous situation Hungary and the rest of Central Europe face as NATO continues its push to foment war with Russia.

Many thanks to László for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes and RAIR Foundation for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

00:00   In addition to sending European troops to Ukraine,
00:03   the idea of resuming the mandatory rank-and-file service is increasing in the minds
00:08   of Western European politicians, concerning which some people would include women as well.
00:12   Meanwhile, NATO is considering allowing Kiev
00:16   to attack Russian targets with the Western heavy weapons it was provided.
00:19   In what direction are these declarations concerning
00:22   the war strategy of the West going, and how to stay out of it?
00:25   I’ll be asking these questions of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán in the next half an hour.
00:29   Good morning! —Good morning! —The most concrete debate about
00:33   the rank-and-file service is perhaps going on in Germany, but it is also
00:36   the order of the day in several other countries. And that it is not the distant future at all
00:40   can be seen in Latvia, for example, where rank-and-file service was already reintroduced last year.
00:44   What are the reasons for such a rapid militarization of Europe?
00:48   There was a thought 30 years ago, because at that time the rank-and-file service was still common.
00:55   The idea was that after the Cold War ended and there was peace in Europe, the Russians,
01:04   the Soviet Union was pushed back from Central Europe.
01:09   In essence, NATO had no rival military force on the globe,
01:15   therefore that constant readiness, that continuous military training of the young generations,
01:22   which was realized by the rank-and-file service, was no longer necessary.
01:28   Our countries can be protected with the so-called professional army.
01:34   There are people doing the rank-and-file service in every country,
01:40   who are willing and sworn to protect their country
01:45   even at the cost of their lives,
01:50   They will be the professional soldiers.
01:53   This, in my opinion, is the best part of society.
01:56   They are the most committed, the most serious, taking the most solemn oath in Hungarian society,
02:05   and of all our societies. Those who say that we are willing to live differently than
02:11   you in order to be prepared for the protection of our country.
02:15   We don’t live like you, let’s say, slack civilians.
02:18   When I was a soldier, they said that civilians were “weaklings”.
02:21   But I don’t want to offend. But we don’t live like you, civilians, we live differently.
02:26   We live like soldiers. This includes a very rigorous physical way of life,
02:33   includes friendship in arms, camaraderie, uprightness, humility,
02:38   a readiness to sacrifice one’s self for the country.
02:41   And we select these people, we separate them, and they will be the professional army.
02:46   The others will live their lives. This used to be the basic concept.
02:50   Now that there is a war in Europe again, a big question mark has been put behind the concept.
02:55   And I also think that humility, discipline, self-defense, readiness for self sacrifice,
03:02   camaraderie, working together in a team,
03:06   these are values that should appear beyond the professional soldiers.
03:11   But this does not necessarily mean that we have to bring back the rank-and-file army
03:15   because there are reservist training programs, there are military high schools,
03:19   there are summer programs where we can bring people closer to carrying guns,
03:25   to self-defense, honesty, patriotism, even without a rank-and-file army.
03:32   That’s why Hungary doesn’t yet feel that bringing back the rank-and-file army
03:36   is the only way we can react to the current war.
03:40   That’s why Hungary doesn’t have the return of the rank-and-file army on the agenda.
03:44   But there are a lot of military training programs on the agenda,
03:49   and a lot of national-defense programs in high schools.
03:52   So we’re doing a lot of things that make the whole country, the entirety of Hungarian society,
03:57   capable of self-defense without the rank-and-file army.
04:00   Now, this is the debate that’s going on elsewhere, too. Elsewhere there are —
04:03   I see mostly in Germany, but also the Baltics,
04:07   who have almost brought it back, some have brought it back,
04:10   some want it now, and they bring back the rank-and-file army.
04:13   This is the business of every nation; we don’t have to worry about that.
04:17   What we do have to worry about, though, is that they talk about the rank-and-file army
04:21   especially in Germany, and the leader of the European People’s Party
04:27   talks about the rank-and-file service in such a context,
04:31   as if it should be done in a unified — I add “imperial” —
04:35   Brussels-European Union army.
04:39   Which would mean that the control over our own young people’s destiny
04:42   would be taken away from national authority. We would lose
04:47   some of our sovereignty, and someone else would decide about the blood of the Hungarians.
04:51   This is unacceptable, so even before this idea runs wild,
04:55   as soon as this seed falls into the ground,
04:58   it must be uprooted before it turns into reality.
05:01   There is another plan, which, however, is much more concrete.
05:06   This is related to the fact that NATO will allow
05:10   Kiev to attack Russian targets with Western weapons,
05:13   and NATO is already taking a much more active role in the war.
05:18   So far, how do you evaluate this kind of move, these plans?
05:22   Now that I come to your studio more often because of the war,
05:27   it offers me the opportunity to compare, every time I prepare for this conversation,
05:35   what was going on the previous week, what happened and where we arrived.
05:40   And it’s scary if you don’t look at the events as usual,
05:46   but you stop and say where were we a week ago and where are we now.
05:51   Every week we are closer to war.
05:54   So something happens every week that points to the drift towards entry into the war.
06:03   This week, two things happened.
06:06   The first is that there are discussions between France and Ukraine,
06:10   that French training officers are going to Ukraine.
06:14   We know that, in a semi-official way, advisors are in Ukraine;
06:22   NATO soldiers are there, but not officially or at least not for military action.
06:30   Training is the most military thing that can exist.
06:34   So it’s a new level that the French are willing
06:39   to train soldiers openly in Ukraine.
06:44   The other, even more exciting event this week is that more and more people,
06:49   including the NATO Secretary-General,
06:52   say that weapons provided by Western countries can be used not only for self-defense,
07:00   but also to attack the Russians.
07:03   The NATO Secretary-General says that any weapon
07:07   we gave to the Ukrainians is already theirs,
07:10   and from then on they do whatever they want with it.
07:13   This will result in a big debate about how these weapons work,
07:19   …put in the hands of soldiers… especially the more sophisticated technological weapons,
07:25   how to do the targeting with them.
07:30   Because it usually done through a satellite system,
07:33   and it is realized through computer technology…
07:36   So to what extent is the weapon “Ukrainian” that strikes the territory of Russia,
07:41   and to what extent is it not? This will be a huge debate, and as the Russians announced yesterday,
07:47   they will consider this to be NATO’s hand
07:54   in any damage caused by the Ukrainians with weapons, on Russian territory.
08:00   That is, without NATO, Ukraine would not be able to shoot at the territory of Russia,
08:06   and now it can — so NATO must have something to do with it!
08:09   So somehow we took a new step of involvement.
08:14   In addition, the most important thing to conclude
08:19   is that we have to be able to judge the intentions of the opposing parties well,
08:25   because if we are not able, we will make a huge mistake.
08:31   And the Russians, regardless of who thinks what about the Russians —
08:35   because they were the ones who attacked Ukraine and launched an invasion —
08:40   but the Russians have a very clearly defined goal.
08:44   The Russians say that they attacked Ukraine because Ukraine wanted to join NATO.
08:51   I think too, that the key to the situation is the membership of Ukraine in NATO,
08:54   or the future of this issue. And the Russians have also announced
08:58   that they will advance into Ukraine
09:01   until there is a territory that the Ukrainians can no longer shoot over,
09:06   so that Russia — not the occupied territories, but the old Russian ones —
09:12   and cities would not suffer.
09:18   So how far the Russians will advance also depends on
09:23   what kind of weapons the Ukrainians shoot at the territory of Russia.
09:26   The better weapons they shoot, the more the Russians will advance.
09:30   Of course, no one knows whether this will be the case or not, but at least this is a clear message.
09:35   So there is a risk. We have to see this precisely.
09:38   If we support Ukraine in shooting at the territory of Russia,
09:42   we might pull the Russians closer to us.
09:47   We have to think about all of this. I just want to point out to you that week after week,
09:52   we analyze such deep correlations as well. Concrete steps are taking place.
09:57   Because the invasion into the war does not happen from one moment to another. It has three phases.
10:04   There is the speech, then the preparations, and then the destruction.
10:09   So [phase of] speech is already over. What we’re talking about right now,
10:13   what we’re analyzing at the moment, is the [phase of] preparations.
10:16   And it means that we are centimeters away from the real destruction.
10:20   But if this causes such debates and poses such a risk,
10:24   why are Western politicians so determined to continue supporting Ukraine?
10:29   Because they think they can win.
10:32   I think a lot about this, too. Because they are of sound mind as well,
10:36   they surely don’t want destruction and war either, do they?
10:39   Or at least only for very well-founded reasons.
10:43   And of course, they need something that keeps their sense of danger
10:48   at a lower level than that of ours. Otherwise they would act the same way we do.
10:53   I think there is a significance to the geographical distance here.
10:57   So the fact that the big European states are further away from Russia
11:03   than Central Europe is a factor. Because they think Ukraine is there as a buffer zone,
11:09   which is still between them and the Russians. And of course Central Europe, too…
11:13   It used to be like that, didn’t it? This is what they use us for.
11:16   So they think they are further away from the real risk than Central Europe.
11:24   In Central Europe they are just whining…
11:27   And the Hungarian prime minister is pulling the fire alarm… And he is fearmongering.
11:32   And he is talking about the destruction of war. Which might be true in Central Europe.
11:37   But there, on the Atlantic coast in France… how come?
11:41   Of course, this is the perception.
11:45   This sort of argumentation turns off the [cognition of the] circumstance that modern technology
11:48   can bridge longer distances than in previous wars.
11:51   But still their sense of security is much stronger than that of the Hungarians.
11:56   On the top of that, they have already been winners of wars. And they still think of that.
12:00   Now I think this is the most important reason why they behave differently than us.
12:05   That they want to win this war. They want to defeat Russia.
12:10   Which, of course, they sometimes express that way, and sometimes
12:13   they say that “the Russians cannot win”. But the point is the same.
12:16   They want to achieve military success against Russia. AT ALL COSTS.
14:09   I can tell you that at every European Union summit,
14:14   the pressure on us and on me is growing.
14:17   It never decreases. There is no break. It is constantly growing,
14:20   and I feel that this is not over yet. So we have to stand up to it.
14:24   The question is whether we have a country behind us,
14:28   whether Hungary is united in the cause of peace,
14:31   whether we stand up for peace,
14:34   and whether we dare to say that we are not willing to die for Ukraine.
14:41   Because after all, this is the core of the matter. Do we want to shed Hungarian blood
14:45   in Ukraine, for Ukraine? And we don’t want to.
14:50   And it can be strongly criticized by the war-supporters.
14:59   I accept these, I accept them there [in Brussels] and here [in Hungary].
15:03   [But] for us, the Hungarian interest is the most important, and this is war is not our war.
15:07   This war is not being waged in our interest.
15:10   This war must not cause suffering to the Hungarians.
15:15   We have got to stay out of this war. I stand up for this, of course, even if in Brussels —
15:20   not in this studio — it is an extremely unpopular position that sometimes stands alone in Brussels.
15:26   But we must stand our ground. After all, our “contract” is not about always feeling good,
15:32   but about finishing our job. Well, this is the job now.
15:37   The truth of the matter is that I have a strong argument, though —
15:41   it’s a pity that arguments do not really matter any more.
15:45   And the argument is that “NATO is a defensive alliance”.
15:48   It was created and we joined it to ensure the defense of the member states.
15:56   And we did not create it to organize such a mission, let’s say a NATO mission in Ukraine,
16:02   by which we intervene in armed conflicts outside NATO territory
16:07   and create the threat of a world war with it.
16:10   That is absurd. That NATO, instead of protecting us,
16:13   pulls us, as a member state, into a world war.
16:17   This is as absurd as a firefighter deciding to come and put out a fire with a flamethrower.
16:22   That’s not what NATO was created for.
20:24   It is not only worth reading the memoirs that politicians wrote,
20:29   but also the eyewitnesses of the time,
20:34   writers, artists, writers, scientists.
20:39   And the first phase of every great war took place under a strong moral pressure,
20:48   where the war-supporters were trying to prove that the conflicts
20:53   that have arisen have no morally correct solution other than war,
20:58   and therefore whoever stands on the side of peace
21:01   actually represents a morally incorrect position.
21:04   It used to turn into heated mass gatherings
21:09   and clashes, all over, from France to Hungary.
21:14   And as time passed, and it turned out that the war was not the solution
21:20   to the conflicts that arose among the European nations,
21:23   the position of the war-supporters would shift in the direction of the peace-supporters
21:28   and the endorsement of the peace-supporters grew until peace eventually did come.
21:33   But in the First World War it took four years; in the second it took five years.
21:37   But it all came with terrible losses.
21:40   So history is for learning from it. This four or five years should be saved.
21:44   Because we can say now at the beginning of this war that it has no solution on the battlefield.
21:49   Whoever wants to win this war on the battlefield is foredoomed to war and risks a world war.
21:56   So let’s save that; let’s learn from the previous examples.
21:59   Let’s take back the initiative: let there be ceasefire, and let negotiations begin
22:04   before we find ourselves in the middle of a great European war.
 

5 thoughts on “Viktor Orbán: We Don’t Want to Shed Hungarian Blood in Ukraine”

  1. Words, words words. Orban always says the right things, unfortunately not always does it. He have a saying from the early days from his career:
    DO NOT LISTEN, WHAT I SAY, WATCH WHAT I DO!
    What he done: sign all EU sanctions and laws, accept all conditions. He said no foreign army will ever stay in Hungary, right now we have a full NATO battalion staying.
    He did not block the signing of the 50 billion euro military budget for Ukraine. Previous day he said “the Hungarian genetically unable to bow for a blackmail”, next day he went out to “get a cup of coffee”, while voting were going on and be absent while the rest of the criminals voted away the EU budget to Ukraine.
    To be fair he was probably blackmailed with the financial destruction of Hungarian economy. But still he is like other politician, not willing to stand up when the going gets tough!

    Reply ↓

    • I thank you for pointing out (a sub-set of) the limitations and discrepancies of Prime Minister Victor Orban, and possibly he would also.
      However, to be fair is to compile a list of the things that the powers that be want to do to him and the things that they could do to him, and to note that they are one and the same. Economic collapse is one of the more benign entries on my list(s). Hungarians have chosen a leader who has delivered a resistance to cultural enrichment and a land where they can still talk the truth and that alone makes him unlike almost all other politicians. He keeps the memory of freedom alive for a people who remember that the Hungarians who stood up in the last century were generally cut down by the great powers. Freedom stands or falls with the election of President Donald Trump, an even more compromised character but the only realistic possibility within the field of politics. The going of delivering peace and freedom is tough for President Trump but impossible for Prime Minister Orban.
      Where to from here if God is dead and Technology is our master remains the question regardless of whether there remains some continuity with the past, or if it is asked from a few nuclear bunkers

      Reply ↓

    • “Let there be peace, or else!”, the mouse shouted at the raging elephants — or at least that is the story he’s telling us.

      That’s, I think, Hungary’s role in the WW3 psyop, in a nutshell.

      In other words: a pack of lies within another pack of lies. But there’s more to it than that.

      PM Orbán, like it or not, is apparently a political genious and “standing up to the imminent danger of WW3” is a niche strategy of political communication /propaganda he is using, meant for a domestic audience, within the globalist ‘dialectic’ of “WW3”.

      Under the guise of the WW3 narrative of “Russia vs. Ukraine” (and now Russia vs. Europe or even the USA), Russia’s Sberbank is now hosting the preparation for the next Attack on Humanity, doing the WEF’s “Cyber Poligon excercises” or whatnot.

      So while we are being entertained with the “Ukraine war” and its allegedly imminent esacalation into “WW3” (whatever you mean by WW3 — and that is the point), the next major strike on humanity is being silently prepared. I’m not saying that the controlled escalation of war is not part of the agenda: it definitely is, and what I call “WW3 psyop” may in itself be predictive programming for a controlled escalation that is already going on.

      My point is that the escalation of the war is going on uanabated as, for instance, NATO is making plans for creating a military logistic route, among others, across Hungary to Ukraine, right now. Which will make Hungary a target. Will PM Orbán prevent that? We will see, but I very much doubt that. So much about “standing up to war”…

      Therefore the exclamation “let there be peace” is not only absolutely meaningless on a physical level, but it’s also controlled opposition on the ideological / propaganda level of “dialectics”.

      Because “Let There be War” is a globalist narrative attack that creates a “planet” (or bubble) of pseudo-reality of “war vs. peace”, thus the narrative of “Let There be Peace” will remain near that planet — like another satellite circling around the centre of the narrative of a planet named “Fear of War”.

      Thus PM Orbán’s narrative of “let there be peace” not only does not harm the currrent Narrative of our globalist overlords but it balances it and enchances its power. Which means that no amount of civilized debate and demonstrations in Hungary will change the course of the kinetic war if the PTB start escalating it.

      In that sense, “let there be peace” is huge a lie.

      Before we start debating about the existence of reality, i.e. the claim that “the war in Ukraine is real”, I want to add that induced pseudo-realities (psyops, narratives, hoaxes, propaganda) and the so-called psysical reality has become already intertwined to a large extent (which is a stated globalist goal, by the way). Wherein the created pseudo-realities are being weaponized in order to enslave others in the good old physical realites.

      Therefore “the war in Ukraine and its potential / ongoing escalation” is real AND not real at the same time.

      Meaning that you cannot easily separate the reality of the escalation of war form its psyeudo-reality part any more. Therefore you cannot oppose it any more. Because if you start opposing the pseudo-reality part, you will attack shadows wasting your energy or even strenghtening the current narrative you are attacking.

      In that sense those “peace-supporters” and “war-supporters” orbit around the same narrative all around the world. And even if Donald trump stops some of the wars being waged by the US counter states, that does not matter that much in the big picture — from the perspective of the top globalists. What matters is the constant division in the society.

      Now, have you ever heard PM Orbán call out the (allegedly) next global attack, that is named within the so-called Cyber Polygon run by the PTB? No, you haven’t and you won’t. Because Hungary is in on the comprehensive and totalitarian digitalization with a lot of government programmes (like that of the “Digital Citizenship Programme”, to name one) — which are not on the forefront at all, on the contrary, it is being excellently camouflaged by the current loud WW3 propaganda.

      Hungary may or may not “shed the blood of their sons in Ukraine” in the future, but she is for sure on the path to digitally enslaving her own sons. But you won’t read or hear about THAT. Or the bloodshed that ensues… because that will be SILENT (remember the Jab Genocide?), unlike the current WW3 propaganda that disguises it.

      Reply ↓

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.