Intricate politics involving power tussles between the European Union (EU) leadership and various nations’ leadership are unfolding in some interesting forms. Of particular interest are hot button issues that are emotionally charged, posing tough choices for politicians and serving as bones of contention between the EU politicians and those leading specific countries. Dramatic rancour about migration and demographics in Europe, North America and elsewhere is unfolding in somehow bewildering ways. Beyond Europe, the unfolding events will have global ramifications, the aftermath of which might turn round to further harm the region in the long run. For this reason, attention to Western Europe is considered of great significance in the sense that, already, the countries making up the entire EU seem to be going through some internal turmoil, with consequences far beyond their borders.
Veneer on the position of the EU over many issues seems now unravelling, manifesting through election outcomes, bordering on some ideological underpinnings to a great extent. The European Commission in particular is frequently on a collision path with individual EU member states, reflecting the tension between the supranational goals of the EU and the national interests of its member countries. Key areas of conflict often revolve around the interpretation of EU law, budgetary decisions, balancing of national policies against collective EU strategies, human rights and social justice, including the treatment of the LGBTQ community, judicial independence and migration policy.
On migration in particular, the open border policy of the European Commission, clearly at variance with what countries like Hungary, Italy and Poland currently espouse, is one of the cornerstones of policies being foisted on countries making up the EU irrespective of whether or not such countries accept the policies. An election has just taken place in Hungary where the interest of the EU was clearly evident. Around €18 billion remains frozen under the rule-of-law mechanism and could be permanently lost after August 2026 unless the reforms required by the EU are implemented in Hungary. That is a catch.
It looks like the Prime Minister-elect is up to a fast game with the EU. To the EU political bigwigs, Viktor Orbán deserves to be punished for his unrelenting opposition to a number of EU’s policies. For years, Orbán was a thorn in EU’s flesh, opposing some of its core policies and particularly rejecting open borders policy among others. Apparently, therefore, a payback time came as the EU reportedly worked hard with Peter Magyar as Orbán’s successor. The direction towards which the EU is leading European countries has thus become clear. It calls into question if, indeed, democracy is about the people; and whether the unelected EU executives should have been expected to allow individual countries to elect their own leaders without the EU’s interference, overly or remotely.
But, the agenda of the EU bloc seems different. Take Hungary as an example. Disregarding realities about the impending progressive decline in Europe, the EU executives chose to work hard with Péter Magyar, Orbán’s perceived ‘rival’ to defeat Orbán in the recently concluded election. Unknown to the EU executives, the rival they supported could well be Orbán’s Trojan Horse at the elections. He ran his campaign on what the EU executives like and actively promote. The most visible organ of the EU leadership is the European Commission, the powerful arm that has proved more capable than others of arm-twisting any country to keep it in line.
The European Commission (EC) is the executive branch of the EU, responsible for proposing or enacting new laws, managing EU policies, enforcing EU law and allocating funding. On funding, it becomes clearer why the EC wields such enormous power, operating as a cabinet government with 27 Commissioners (one per member state). Despite not being made up of members elected the same way as national leaders (presidents and prime ministers), it acts independently to represent the interests of the EU as a whole, dictating terms and policies to the various countries through their national leaders. Ursula von der Leyen is the President of the EC.
In her response to the recent election in Hungary, von der Leyen made known the position of the EC, declaring that, “today, Europe is Hungarian,” by which she means Hungary now toes the EU’s line. In her powerful message after Hungary’s historic vote, von der Leyen declared that “we are stronger. More united.”
Addressing the Hungarian people directly, she praised their democratic choice, saying “you have spoken. You have chosen Europe.” To the people of Hungary, she enthused, “you’ve done it again.” She framed the result as a victory for fundamental freedoms and a moment that strengthens the entire EU. “This is not just Hungary’s moment — it’s a defining moment for Europe’s unity and values.” The mention of values in her speech presupposes that Europe is monolithic in value and that value tends towards her ultra-liberal standpoint.
Unknown to the EC and its president, the euphoria could be short-lived. While early warning signs and red flags are not difficult to spot about what could in fact be a continuum of Orbán’s 16-year rule, the headline-obsessed mainstream media seem to be missing certain components of the election puzzle in Hungary. Their narrow spectrum of variations in editorial bias reveal that they may be missing some surprising aftermath of the Hungarian election outcome. Similar lines like the headlines and introductory statements in the next few paragraphs expose the naivety and unveiled bigotry of many Western media on politics, politicians and ideological leanings.
“Viktor Orbán’s 16-year rule is over, defeated by a 45-year-old ex-party insider who convinced a majority of Hungarians to oust him,” wrote one media organisation. Another went like this: “Viktor Orban has been ousted from power by Peter Magyar, ending Orban’s 16-year reign as Hungary’s prime minister.” And, according to another: “The Hungarian election has brought the Viktor Orbán era to an abrupt end. His defeat is set to transform the power dynamics at the EU table.” Now, consider this: “Peter Magyar did what many opposition candidates before him couldn’t: topple Viktor Orban’s right-wing government.”
However, although another one wrote a familiar headline, it nonetheless added a caveat. “Peter Magyar did what many opposition candidates before him couldn’t: topple Viktor Orban’s right-wing government. But Magyar is still a relative newcomer – and an unknown quantity for anyone who hasn’t been following Hungarian politics. We’ve taken a look at the policies he has set out — and where he has stayed silent.” Here is where one headline sounded a bit sceptical and apparently more pragmatic: “Hungary Replaced Orbán – But Can It Replace His Foreign Policy Legacy?”
It is appropriate to wonder at this point if the EU and the globalists have been totally scammed in the election that brought Magyar his election victory and is going to bring him to power. On Sunday, hours after the April 12, 2026 election, the likes of Von de Leyen, Soros, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Emmanuel Macron and a number of others were jubilant, celebrating the defeat of Orbán. But a few days later, their smiles appear to have disappeared. Their new champion Magyar appeared to have done a 180 degree switchback and doubled down on Orbán’s policies, rejecting 90 percent of what the EU wanted.
During his international press conference after his electoral victory as Hungary’s prime minister-elect Péter Magyar outlined a foreign policy strategy that partly echoes Viktor Orbán’s positions on migration and Russian energy, while pledging closer ties with the EU, a reset in relations with Ukraine, and anti-corruption reforms. As Hungary’s new PM, Magyar has specifically rejected the EU’s migration pact, refusing to let in Muslim immigrants or any without legal passports and visas. He was quoted as saying “we will still not join the pact. We will actually reinforce the border further to protect Hungary and broader Europe. We will find a way to stop the EU’s daily fine… In fact, I’m going to reinforce the border fence even more.”
In his policies and engagement with the EU, there is yet no migration pact, no sign off on further Ukraine funding, no weakening of the borders, and continuing to promote tax benefits for the birth of Hungarian babies to Hungarian women, all might remain on Magyar’s policy table. Rumours are rife that the now freed up Orban could be preparing to run for leadership of the entire EU, a prospect that could be upsetting for the entrenched occupiers of the EU political space.
A combination of Orbán as a member of the EU Commission and Magyar as Hungarian Prime Minister could prove a double whammy for the Commission’s leftist overwhelming disposition while entrenching the right wing power bloc in Hungary. Early signs are discernible from how Magyar began to reel out his mission, essentially detailing his policies, some of which are at variance with the EU’s official outlook. These are unmistakably a continuation of Orban’s regime by a political acolyte. To the EU’s chagrin, Orbán appears to be having a last laugh. What this means for the EU could be more than meets the eye in terms of implications and consequences.
For instance, it can embolden some cowardly national leaders in office who dread the EU and are hitherto afraid to call EU’s bluff to now gain some audacity to do so. The EU may not just be having this problem of betrayal by Magyar in Hungary, but may have to deal with many others in subsequent national elections. Moreover, the Orbán factor could be upsetting to the established forces in the EU. Trusting and supporting who aspires to national leadership’s highest office in any country’s future election may put the EU in a precarious situation as it may be unsure if the candidate it is backing would actually play ball or would become a turncoat upon election.
The EU’s partisanship has exposed its bias in the region. Rather than operating policies that accommodate differing national policies under the same regional umbrella, the EU’s proclivity for specific doctrines and policies will very likely alienate more countries and could even weaken the regional body politically. Italy and Poland stand out as shining examples. Take economy, for instance. Germany is Europe’s biggest, especially in terms of GDP. In terms of population, it ranks the highest. Its industry is one of the foremost. Even when it requires more foreigners to work in certain areas of the economy, Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently signed a pact to remove no fewer than 800,000 Syrian refugees and return them to Syria. Does this agree with the EU’s open border policy? There will still be more stressful national policies that will run contrary to the EU’s populist ideologies and will create some conflicts with specific countries. Their implications on immigration will be far reaching.
Behind the scenes activities should not be ignored as a diplomatic earthquake in Europe could be in the making. If the visit of Alice Weidel to Viktor Orbán in Budapest is ignored as inconsequential, it means the EU leadership is living in denial and controlled panic as the balance of power in Brussels could be faltering while a new alliance is apparently forming behind the scene and at the same time openly opposing the EU’s centralist line and demanding a “Europe of Nations.” The contrast is obvious as Orbán and Weidel are pushing for strict border controls, an end to migration policies and direct energy negotiations. While Ursula von der Leyen and the EU leadership are noticeably nervous, critics are speaking of a historic turning point that could shake Brussels’ dominance. Is Europe on the verge of breaking with its current course? These are more explosive than many realise.
- business a.m. commits to publishing a diversity of views, opinions and comments. It, therefore, welcomes your reaction to this and any of our articles via email: comment@businessamlive.com
Dr. Olukayode Oyeleye, Business a.m.’s Editorial Advisor, who graduated in veterinary medicine from the University of Ibadan, Nigeria, before establishing himself in science and public policy journalism and communication, also has a postgraduate diploma in public administration, and is a former special adviser to two former Nigerian ministers of agriculture. He specialises in development and policy issues in the areas of food, trade and competition, security, governance, environment and innovation, politics and emerging economies.
The successful failure of Vice President JD Vance