Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has triggered fresh controversy after suggesting that it is “not clear who attacked whom” in the war between Russia and Ukraine, a statement that shows a clear change from Hungary’s earlier official position on the conflict.
Turmoil made in Brussels
Speaking at a press conference following a European Union summit in Brussels, Orbán addressed journalists from pro-government media outlets and framed the meeting as less of a diplomatic gathering and more of a “war council”.
According to the prime minister, most EU leaders are now focused on how to defeat Russia militarily, while Hungary — alongside the Czech Republic and Slovakia — continues to argue for peace talks.
Viktor Orbán’s most striking remark came as he criticised proposals to seize frozen Russian assets and redirect them to support Ukraine. While arguing against such measures, he referred to Ukraine as a country subjected to violence, adding that it was “not entirely clear who attacked whom”.
- Viktor Orbán sidelined: Sanctions no longer need Hungary’s approval under new EU emergency mechanism
Memory issues? Viktor Orbán has admitted Russia’s aggression towards Ukraine
As 24.hu writes, the comment appeared to question a fact that the Hungarian government itself had previously acknowledged: that Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022.
Only two years ago, Orbán publicly stated that Russia was the aggressor and that Hungary shared the European Union’s common position on the matter. At the start of the war, the Hungarian government did not dispute Moscow’s responsibility, and Orbán himself referred to Russia’s attack on Ukraine as an act of aggression in April 2022.
He thinks the EU should leave Russia’s money alone
The prime minister devoted much of his briefing to the issue of frozen Russian financial assets, most of which are held in Belgium. Viktor Orbán argued that confiscating these funds would have amounted to a de facto declaration of war and warned that Russia would not have tolerated such a move without retaliation.
He praised the Belgian prime minister for helping to prevent what he described as a potentially disastrous legal and financial situation, claiming Belgium itself could have faced bankruptcy if Russia successfully sued over the seized assets.
Viktor Orbán also revealed that Hungary holds foreign currency reserves in Western Europe and suggested that, had Russian assets been confiscated, the Hungarian government would have immediately reviewed where to keep its own reserves.
He is against the new loan package
Turning to EU financial support for Ukraine, Orbán criticised the bloc’s decision to approve a EUR 90 billion loan package, calling it a “war loan”. He argued that Ukraine would be unable to repay the sum and that the burden would ultimately fall on European taxpayers. Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are not part of the scheme, a point Orbán emphasised repeatedly.
According to the prime minister, the only scenario in which the loan might be repaid would be a Russian defeat followed by reparations. He warned that by approving the loan, the European Union has now committed itself openly to defeating Russia — a move he described as extremely serious and dangerous.
The Polish Foreign Minister was completely on the mark when he said Orban deserves The Order Of Lenin. He is 100% without a doubt Putin’s Hungarian stooge.
Yes, Dear Larry – and if the choice had been Orbán’s to make – millions of Ukrainian men would still be alive and or not crippled, not to mention tens of millions displaced from their country.
Someone please pin the Order of Patent Lunacy, with Gold leaves, on the Polish foreign minister…
Omg, orban soon will say that the revolution of 1956 was started by hungarian extremist who did not support the benevolent soviet government 😭
Russia was but is not Soviet Union. Ukraine was also part of the Soviet Union. Soviet Union ended in 1990. The new soviet union is the EU and its destiny is similar to the USSR
Meanwhile:
Mafia Putin At Work: Primary Belgian Targets and Tactics
The campaign is aimed at preventing Belgium from supporting the use of €185 billion in frozen Russian central bank assets held at the Brussels-based depository, Euroclear, to fund Ukraine’s war effort.
Valérie Urbain: The CEO of Euroclear has been a primary target of threats and has used private security since late 2024.
Bart De Wever: The Belgian Prime Minister was reportedly targeted after making public comments in late 2025 regarding the “eternal consequences” Moscow threatened if Russia’s funds were seized.
Intimidation Methods: Security officials describe the tactics as “deliberate targeting” meant to instill fear and pressure leaders into blocking an EU loan for Kyiv secured by these assets.
Let me get this straight. In February 2014 the “Little Green Men” (Wagner) invaded Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts. Zhenya moved his family from Donetsk to Mariupol to escape the chaos. In 2022 the Russian Army invaded again and in March 2022 bombed Mariupol, Zhenya, his wife and his two young sons aged 9 and 4. They all died and Mariupol was reduced to rubble. This was Ukraine’s fault for starting the war. I see. How could I have missed it? Thanks Viktor, for clearing things up for me.
Do you have selective memory, or do you intentionally exclude the fact, that the USA pushed Ukraine into a civil war, into which Russia intervened once, then got betrayed, and intervened again?
The whole Ukraine fiasco was started by the CIA.
Russia made a peace.
Ukraine broke the peace.
Russia, after repeated warnings, came back, to finish the USA’s puppet, that leads a nation as a result of an illegitimate coup.
So no, it is not clear, that Russia is the “aggressor” here.
Russia invaded Ukraine, and it was 100% wrong to do that, but let’s not pretend it all happened in a vacuum. There are many important events preceding the 2022 attack going back to the early 1990s.
That aside, the only question that matters is what next.
Ukraine is not going to defeat Russia militarily alone, and if the “West” steps in, we’re going to have a global war, possibly nuclear. I don’t want a war, nuclear or conventional. I will not go fight nor will I accept loss of my quality of life as well as freedoms for the sake of Ukraine. Plus, what, send young European men to die, and be replaced by a bunch of bugubungas from Somalia, Nigeria, Syria, Afghanistan, etc.!?!? No, thanks. I hope every single European soldier refuses to go if we-know-who really do realize their wet dream of a war with Russia.
“I will not go fight nor will I accept loss of my quality of life as well as freedoms for the sake of Ukraine.”
Thank God that you, and too many millions of Westerners, will refuse to go to this war, for that is, ultimately, what will keep this situation from turning into a tragedy of truly international proportions.
One note, however, Herr Steiner – this war is not ‘for the sake of Ukraine’, but, rather for the Rothschild Banking Famiiy, the companies wrapped around it – Blackrock, Vanguard, & State-Street, along with the Western Governmental bureaucracies that service them, to get a hold of Russian assets, just as they had in the 1990s, and, as well, to obliterate any form of Russian strength that might compete with them globally.
This is a war to obliterate Russia, and it was planned and provoked for a very long time.
That this war has been, as it is being sold, as the defence of The Ukraine against Russian Aggression is because this coalition, that has controlled The West for more than a century, knows how much many of Westerners would love to believe the diabolic emnity they have been fed for many decades.
They, this vile coalition of effete parasites, understand how desperately Westerners want to believe in our own supremacy, and, therefor, by implication, the inferiority of all others.
They can work with that.
They can get us to support anything – not matter how craven and vile, by telling us that someone has done something wrong, and, if we are only willing to make sacrifices, we can make it a better world.
The packaging is different, as are some of the project supervisors, but, this is still Operation Barbarossa.
Wait – I thought Russians and Ukrainians are “one people”, artificially divided by borders drawn during the Soviet era?
Modern Ukraine is a creation of the Bolsheviks, lacking a genuine tradition of statehood!
The Special Military Operation was not a conquest of a foreign country, but a restoration of historical Russian lands (Novorossiya)!
I am citing Mr. Putin, here: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
In any event, Russian intelligence underestimated the Ukrainian capabilities, will to fight and the cohesion of the Ukrainian state, hence the “Special Military Operation” to bring Ukraine back in the fold taking almost four years already. I guess (sovereign) Ukraine respectfully disagrees with the conclusions of the essay.
Speaking of war dead and suffering – @Mouton – do spare a thought at this time of year for all those poor Russian sods with shit kit being sent to die for Novorossiya, since Mr. Putin does not appear to care, one bit:
https://en.zona.media/article/2025/12/19/casualties_eng-trl
I guess I am calling b/llsh/t, @Mouton `?
Russians and Ukrainians are “one people”, artificially divided by borders drawn during the Soviet era!
Modern Ukraine is a creation of the Bolsheviks, lacking a genuine tradition of statehood!
The Special Military Operation is not a conquest of a foreign country, but a restoration of historical Russian lands (Novorossiya)!
This, according to Mr. Putin: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
In any event, Russian intelligence underestimated the Ukrainian capabilities, will to fight and the cohesion of the Ukrainian state, hence the “Special Military Operation” to bring Ukraine back in the fold taking almost four years already.
I guess (sovereign) Ukraine respectfully disagrees with the conclusions of the essay.
Speaking of war dead and suffering – @mouton spare a thought for those poor Russian sods with shit kit being sent to die for Novorossiya – and maybe post on some other sites to draw attention to this. Mr. Putin does not appear to care, one bit:
https://en.zona.media/article/2025/12/19/casualties_eng-trl
I guess I am calling b/llsh/t @mouton ?
Oh my, what an argument. But I’ll give you a hand:
Russia and Ukraine are the same as Germany and Austria, North- and South Korea, Greek and Turkish Cyprus or Ireland and Northern Ireland. And I could list the parallels for days on end.
Yes, they are the same people. Yes they ARE different nations.
One people can live in multiple nations.
Wow! Imagine that, what a concept! I hope this isn’t overloading your 1 bit brain.
Mouton what hole did you crawl out of? Your conspiracy theory crap is some of the worst slime I have ever seen posted.
Of course. I figured out which hole. It’s on Putin’s lower back side.
All the West needs to do is supply Ukraine with everything it needs. Ukraine is doing the heavy lifting causing 1.2 million Russian casualties including 156.000 recorded Russian deaths and estimated probable deaths of 250,000. It’s huge. The Russian economy is slowly being bled to eventual crisis. And after all of these Russian losses Russia has only gained 12% of Ukraine’s territory in almost four years. Russia proclaims how victorious it is but the war is a failure for them. On top of that NATO has now expanded with Finland and Sweden joining bringing more NATO military power to the Russian border. Never let up.
Why do you act, like Russian causalities are a plus for Europe?
How can you be so fucking sick?!
I’m telling you a little secret: No matter how much your owner wants it, Europe is not in war with Russia. Russia is not Europe’s enemy.
Ok, I know it overloaded your programming a bit, so breath slowly. And repeat: “We are not in war with Russia.”
Now try to understand that sentence. We are not in war with Russia.
Now repeat this:
“Wanting the death of innocent people is fucking sick.”
Ok, did your psychology stabilize a bit?
Unfortunately, Mr. Putin et al appear utterly disinterested as to how many lives are lost. And civilians are legitimate targets for the Kremlin.
Very simply – if Russia ceased hostilities tomorrow, the war would stop. However – this is not happening. More sh/t kit is being refurbished, stuff that hails from good old USSR times. Put a load of Russian (or North Korean) kids on it – glacial progress, over their dead bodies.
Europe is not at war with Russia. However, from Europe’s perspective, Russia is now a systemic adversary. In direct response to Russian behaviour, NATO reinforced its eastern flank, created new battlegroups, and Finland as well as Sweden chose to join NATO – possibly even Cyprus may join.
Thanks for your point of view with rationale @michaelsteiner. Good to have the old you back!
Such an idiot Stiener as usual!
You cant walk properly nor work for FOODORA or WOLT on a bike!!
How the hech you will go to the war??!!
They will use you as a dumb artillery maybe!! 😂
In his defense – I may not agree with @michaelsteiner, however he posts and motivates his points of view. I respect that.
Orban has played this perfectly, remember he is there with HIS Countries interest at the forefront. Hungary has strong ties with Russian History and he , like us all want this over. Daily News Hungary got their artical Wrong yesterday when they said Orban had agree’d to the EU Loan. He had NOT agree’d Hungary got a VITO from the Vote that is not an agreement. The Russians are going to the US this week again, lets hope we can somehow get a peace deal because the EU are throwing money at this that we have to pay back and our daughters and sons. God Bless Hungary for their resilience
God bless Hungary by damning Orban and his kleptocratic Fidesz regime of Russian ass lickers.
It is very clear who attacked who. The reasons Russia uses to justify the attack are vague and full of conspiracy theories without any real verified evidence. I hope there will be peace with Russian troops going back home from Ukrainian soil and letting Ukrainians develop their country the way sovereign Ukrainians themselves want after all the devastation Russia has done in Ukraine.
Yeah. Conspiracy theories.
I guess the Minsk 2 agreement, which became international law, as the UN Security Council approved it, just became a conspiracy theory, because the update to your “current year” NPC chip no longer contains it.
However. Minsk2 is the second Minsk agreement. Because Ukraine broke the first. And later they broke the 2nd. To which Russia was a guarantour. So Russia WAS obliged to intervene. By international law.
The CIA’s involvement in the Maidan coup’deta is also well documented, and 95% of the world, that is not living in the Western media gulag knows, that it is a fact.
How about you get your sources from … I don’t know, any news source, that isn’t infiltrated by the CIA (so CNN, BBC, FOX, MSNBC etc)?
You’ll find it a liberating to have information, that is not contradictory, and is actually logical.
Oh look, more conspiracy theories, this time about Ukraine breaking Minsk agreements, and of course there are no sources to back up this claim….
Nope, it was Russia that that broke both Minks agreements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
Also no sources for the “well documented” CIA orchestrated coup, how surprising… Nope, that was not started by CIA. Pure Russian propaganda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity
@Márk – you blew my little mind! However – here it goes.
In short:
Minsk II was politically important and UNSC‑endorsed, but not a legal blank check or obligation for Russia to invade.
Being a “guarantor” of an agreement does not create a lawful right (let alone an obligation) to use large‑scale force in another country.
Under mainstream interpretations of international law, Russia’s 2022 invasion cannot be justified as a legally required enforcement of Minsk II.
Long version:
Minsk II and “international law”
The Minsk II agreement (2015) is not a classic, ratified international treaty between states; it’s a political agreement signed by representatives of Ukraine, Russia, OSCE, and leaders of the so‑called “DPR/LPR”.
UN Security Council Resolution 2202 (2015) endorsed Minsk II and called on parties to implement it, but that does not transform the Minsk text itself into a legally binding treaty with clear, enforceable obligations like “Russia must invade if Ukraine breaches it.”
UNSC endorsement = political weight and expectation of compliance. It does not automatically mean “every clause is now binding international law in the sense of giving states a legal right to wage war.”
“Guarantor” does not equal “right/obligation to invade”
The Minsk documents do not say: “Russia is legally obliged to use military force in Ukraine if Kyiv does not comply.”
Even in other contexts where states are called “guarantors” (e.g., guarantor powers in some peace treaties), that does not give them a blank check to use force. Any use of force still has to comply with the UN Charter.
Under Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, states must refrain from the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, except in very narrow circumstances:
Self‑defense against an armed attack (Article 51), or
A clear UN Security Council authorization under Chapter VII.
There was no UNSC resolution authorizing Russia to use force against Ukraine to “enforce” Minsk II, and nothing in the Minsk documents or UNSC 2202 gives such a license.
Breaking Minsk ≠ legal license for invasion
Even if Ukraine violated Minsk (and there were accusations on both sides of non‑compliance), that does not create a legal right for another state to launch a full‑scale invasion.
Violations of a peace or political agreement normally lead to:
diplomatic pressure,
sanctions,
arbitration/mediation,
or, in extreme cases, UNSC‑mandated measures – but not unilateral large‑scale war as a lawful remedy.
International law is generally hostile to the idea that one party can “enforce” an agreement through aggressive war.
Russia’s own role and violations
Russia itself was not just a neutral “guarantor”; it was a party to the conflict (e.g., by supporting armed groups, presence of Russian personnel, material support, etc., widely documented by OSCE and others).
By recognizing the “DPR/LPR” entities and then using that recognition plus alleged Minsk failures as a pretext for invasion, Russia violated:
Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,
the Budapest Memorandum (1994) commitments,
fundamental norms of the UN Charter.
That’s why a large majority of states in the UN General Assembly (e.g. Res 2623, 2625, ES‑11/1) characterize the 2022 invasion as aggression, not as a lawful enforcement of Minsk.
Logic and rhetoric issues
“The UNSC approved Minsk → it’s international law → Russia was obliged to intervene militarily” is a non sequitur:
UNSC endorsement ≠ treaty obligation ≠ authorization for war.
Calling others “NPCs” or saying something “became a conspiracy theory” doesn’t substitute for evidence or legal argument; that’s more rhetorical ridicule than reasoning.
Even if we granted every factual claim about who broke Minsk first, international law still does not grant a right to invade on that basis.
If you want, I can walk through the exact wording of UNSC Resolution 2202 and the key Minsk clauses so you can see concretely what they do and don’t say?
What you have stated here is an excellent comment.
Why?
Because it presents the objectively visible truth, which refutes any claims that Russia is somehow an justifiably aggressive actor steamrolling Ukraine on the way to Berlin and Paris.
if NATO dear to attack Russia, NATO countries will be nuked in 5 minutes. Putin said that 100 times. There is no way NATO will expand to the east. Ukraine is losing territory day by day. Europeans warmongers still have hope to survive the nuclear bombs. How naive they are.
NATO is a defensive alliance founded in 1949 on the principle that an attack on one member is an attack on all (Article 5). Its core purpose is to deter aggression—mainly by making it clear to any potential attacker (historically the USSR, now Russia) that they would face the combined military power of North America and Europe. Since the Cold War, NATO has expanded to include many Central and Eastern European states that sought security guarantees against renewed Russian pressure, and it operates with transparency, formal treaties, and parliamentary oversight in member states.
Russia, by contrast, has increasingly relied on covert and hybrid actions in Europe rather than open military confrontation with NATO. These include intelligence operations, assassinations and poisonings (e.g., in the UK, Germany), cyberattacks on governments and infrastructure, disinformation campaigns, election interference, support for extremist parties, and sabotage or “mystery” explosions targeting arms depots and energy infrastructure.
“NATO is a defensive alliance founded in 1949 on the principle that an attack on one member is an attack on all (Article 5). Its core purpose is to deter aggression—
That is the theory, bit, given that it is busy pursing war in the far eastern part of the Ukraine it has abandoned, in actual behavior, it’s core principles.
Moving east for the past 15-20 years, NATO lost the mantel of ‘Defender’, and became The Aggressor.