Brussels – Comments, analysis, and predictions about what could happen following Viktor Orbán‘s historic defeat in the Hungarian election and the incoming government led by Péter Magyar are spreading, while EU institutions are considering the “lessons learnt within the European Union,” as Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in the aftermath of the vote. Including unanimity and the veto right.
“I think moving to qualified majority voting in foreign policy is an important way to avoid the systematic blockages we have seen in the past,” von der Leyen suggested, in response to a question on the implications of the change of government in Budapest for the entire Union. “We should use this momentum to move forward on that topic,” she added.
However, there is little appetite for procedural changes in the Council. As EU diplomats anticipated before the Hungarian elections, member states would be satisfied with a “big push on the enlargement file” likely to follow a change of government in Budapest. However, this enthusiasm does not extend to any revision of the accession methodology, as there is “no intention” in any of the 27 capitals to renounce a national prerogative such as veto power at intermediate steps of the accession process, although not envisaged by the Treaties.
Between unanimity and internal reforms
“This issue goes beyond Hungary, even though it will undoubtedly become less difficult once Orbán is no longer there to carry out Putin’s orders,” says MEP Sandro Gozi (Renew Europe), speaking to The New Union Post. According to the rapporteur on the institutional consequences of EU enlargement, moving to qualified majority voting (QMV) in foreign policy “is extremely urgent,” especially with the contentious issue of Ukraine’s EU accession on the horizon.
“Hungary or no Hungary, Magyar or no Magyar,” if EU leaders in the Council believe they can manage what lies ahead on enlargement policy without internal reforms, “I think they will run into the wall of parliamentary ratifications and referendums where these are required,” MEP Gozi warns.
Despite Orbán’s defeat and the end of his politicised veto on the start of Ukraine’s accession negotiations, the position that the incoming centre-right Hungarian prime minister will take remains “an open question,” he adds. Magyar did not adopt clear positions on Ukraine during the electoral campaign – largely so as not to jeopardise his chances of winning – but the general understanding in Brussels is that he will adopt a “more constructive” approach and will “not abuse the veto right as Orbán has done.”
However, both the EU accession process in general and Ukraine’s membership in particular “do not depend solely on Hungary,” but also on how current member states and EU institutions choose to “organise the governance and functioning of a European Union undergoing further enlargement,” MEP Gozi points out, drawing on the recommendations of his report on the institutional consequences of EU enlargement.
According to the liberal MEP, part of the responsibility for the lack of preparation on internal reforms also lies with Commission President von der Leyen herself, “as she has never pushed either for better use of the flexibility offered by enhanced cooperation within the Treaties, or for targeted and specific treaty revisions,” including those concerning foreign policy, which she is only now suggesting.
Moreover, MEP Gozi recalls a critical issue constantly reported by The New Union Post in recent months: “We are still awaiting the Commission’s communication on enlargement governance.” As explained by EU sources, the proposal on pre-enlargement reforms is now frozen – waiting “for the best moment” – and has evolved into something more closely linked to Ukraine’s accession and to “a new idea” of the enlargement process than to a broader reform of how an enlarged Union should function.
Scepticism is already creeping through the corridors of the European Parliament, especially over the “excess of communication and lack of results when it comes to EU governance” from Commission President herself. The nature of the proposal itself – a strategic document with no legally binding force – also raises doubts. “We shall see whether this will once again be one of von der Leyen’s communication exercises, or whether it will finally be an initiative followed by concrete action,” MEP Gozi cautions.
