Tamás Deutsch is a member of the European Parliament (MEP) for the ruling Hungarian conservative party, Fidesz, who has recently been nominated as the party’s lead candidate for its European Parliament electoral list.
He has been an MEP for fifteen years, and has witnessed first hand the evolution of the EU in what he describes as “a sovereignty-decreasing, empire-building aspiration that seeks to transform the European Union into a European empire, a superstate.”
In an interview with The European Conservative, he talked about the battles that will shape the political agenda in Brussels in the coming years, the deep political crisis the EU finds itself in, and the possibility of right-wing parties joining forces.
You recently said in an interview that it was the responsibility of Hungarian MEPs to stand up for Hungarian interests, even if this results in disputes and conflicts. Are not all Hungarian MEPs already representing Hungarian interests?
Hungary has been a member of the European Union for the past twenty years, and Hungarian voters have been electing their MEPs for the same period of time. In these past twenty years nothing has changed: on the one hand the left-wing, liberal MEPs want to become well-behaved members of the Brussels elite, and instead of representing the interests of their voters, their only desire is to be accepted and appreciated by the bureaucrats in Brussels; on the other hand they seek every opportunity to amplify and to take part in the political attacks against Hungary, or even to initiate such attacks themselves. They naively believe the more the situation worsens for their own nation, the more it benefits their own political aspirations. With a few exceptions, I can’t think of MEPs from other nations who act the same way. Left-wing Hungarian MEPs have never submitted an amendment proposal in the European Parliament that would have benefited Hungary in terms of receiving more EU funds, but have done the exact opposite.
What kind of disputes and conflicts are you expecting in the next legislative cycle of the European Parliament which begins after the European elections in June?
The most important question has to be how we can resist the constant attacks by the decision-makers in Brussels against the sovereignty of member states. One of Brussels’ main aims is to diminish, limit, and to take away the member states’ sovereign decision-making rights by every means possible. This is a sovereignty-decreasing, empire-building aspiration that seeks to transform the European Union into a European empire, a superstate. These aims are visible in a number of areas. Brussels wants to force nations to give up the protection of their borders and accept migrants redistributed from other countries. Another area is the madness of gender ideology: they want to tell member states how to regulate laws regarding the protection of children. Then there is the rule-of-law jihad, a tool used for political blackmail: so-called rule of law violations are called out purely for political reasons. To summarise: the sovereignty issue is the one broader area where there will be more and more battles between Brussels and the member states.
The European Parliament adopted a resolution last year which aims to take away competences from member states, and abolish their right to veto. Many Western European leaders, like the German chancellor have voiced similar opinions, saying the EU should leave behind unanimous voting in areas such as foreign policy and defence. How dangerous are these plans?
All such plans are completely misguided. I can’t think of one area in European politics where the aim to brutally abolish sovereign decision-making rights has not yet been proclaimed. These steps violate and sidestep the European treaties, but this doesn’t worry Brussels, whose fanatical aspirations are seemingly supported by some larger member states. Unfortunately, they haven’t yet realised that the Brussels bureaucracy no longer acts according to their will. It has long ceased to be a puppet. It has awakened and lives an independent life. In every area you can imagine—the modification of EU treaties, the EU’s structure, its institutions, the common agricultural and cohesion policies, the financial and taxation decisions, economic governance, the judicial system—there is a desired aim to meddle in the domestic affairs, the sovereignty, the political independence of nation states. These are not just intellectual debates, not just theory, but are being put into practice.
Regarding the ‘rule of law’, how do you see the EU’s decision to unfreeze billions of EU funds to Poland, just months after a liberal government replaced the previous conservative one?
There are two issues that highlight what a deep political crisis the European Union is currently in. One is the rule of law. With regards to Poland: the European Commission announced it will start unblocking payments to Poland. The outrageous decision was made despite the fact that the Polish Parliament has yet to adopt the laws required to unfreeze the funds—something that is regularly, rigorously expected of Hungary. This is what I call double standards. It has nothing to do with the rule of law. It is political machination to appease a government that is deemed ideologically satisfactory by Brussels. The other issue is the revolt of the farmers. The farming community has been accused of polluting the environment and contributing to climate change. This has led Brussels to adopt a disastrous environmental plan, the European Green Deal which has driven farmers to the edge of ruin. These decisions, based on globalist ideals and green ideology, coupled with Ukrainian grain flooding our markets, are not just harming our farmers. It is a brutal attack against them.
The farmers’ protests in Brussels on Monday was one of the most aggressive to date. Police had to use water cannons and tear gas against the participants who attempted to break past the barricades. Has Brussels heard the cry of the farmers?
Yes, they heard it alright, and they are scared. They are now very hastily thinking of what measures to take for the sake of keeping up appearances. For example, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced she would repeal a ban on specific pesticides, saying it is a burden on the farmers. However, almost a month has passed, and nothing has happened on the matter.
You have been a member of the European Parliament for fifteen years. How has the thinking, the behaviour, the political style in Brussels changed since you arrived?
What I can say is that if the EU came into existence now, and took on its current form—with all the ideologies—then none of its current member states would want to join. They would laugh at the notion. They would say the EU is laughable, annoying, and is going against the interests of Europe and its nations. The mainstream European parties of 2009, including the European People’s Party, the social democrats and the liberals, would be outraged or amused at the initiatives that we have talked about. Now they are actually trying to outbid each other by coming up with all kinds of absurdities. I could go on forever listing all the things they used to denounce, but are now part of the mainstream agenda: same-sex marriage, the curtailing of the freedom of speech, extremist environmental policies, and so on. The European Union won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012. Now it is the biggest warmonger, saying that the escalation of the war in Ukraine will bring us closer to peace.
What led the EU to such drastic changes in such a short period of time?
The moderate Right, the centre-right has been completely annexed by a globalist, social-liberal ideology. There is a new fault line that divides political forces in Europe: the sovereigntist-globalist fault line. The once proudly sovereigntist large parties of the Western European centre-right, that used to respect EU laws and treaties, have been sucked in by the globalist side. That is why the European Union acts like a globalist political steamroller, and why the globalist agenda dominates every aspect of our lives, for example the issue of illegal migration. The globalist ideology calls into question the traditional European political and economic model, and the European way of life. We are witnessing a very serious political battle.
Fidesz left the European People’s Party, the EPP in 2021 for exactly that reason: the EPP had moved too far to the left. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán recently stated that Fidesz will join the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the European Parliament after the European elections. Is that a done deal?
What we are about to witness is a right-wing breakthrough at the elections. First of all, we have to do our homework, and make sure we, the right-wing forces, win our respective national elections in June. Then we have to concentrate on creating a political architecture where these parties can become an influential decision-making force in the European Parliament. Whether this will be one or two strong groups, is yet to be decided, but we have to establish a strong cooperation between these parties. Fidesz will definitely be participating and contributing to this.
So, nothing more concrete is known at this time?
No, because there are a lot of initiatives on the table from all sides, discussions are still ongoing. Fidesz is doing well in opinion polls, punching above its weight, and may get 12-14 seats out of the 21 allocated to Hungary. There is currently a great opportunity for right-wing parties to make a change. It may well be that after the elections a political situation arises in which the ECR, the Identity and Democracy (ID) group, Fidesz and other like-minded political parties, will have the highest number of seats in parliament. It’s not a completely unrealistic scenario.
After the elections, the next European Commission has to be approved by the European Parliament. Hungary approved Ursula von der Leyen becoming Commission president back in 2019, but the Hungarian government has recently made it very clear it does not see the past five years with her at the helm as a success. What has this commission failed in doing?
What hasn’t it failed in doing? Just to name three issues: the way the war in Ukraine has been handled is a catastrophe. The EU has just approved the 13th round of sanctions against Russia, which does nothing more than harm Europe’s economy. Regarding illegal migration: all the Commission was able to do in five years was to present a disastrous migration pact that doesn’t solve any of the problems Europe is facing, but brings about newer ones. The farmers’ protest highlights the hopelessness of the Green Deal which was supposed to restrain the effects of climate change, but in reality is nothing more than an ideological concept, which ruins our competitiveness and our agriculture. If we want real change in Europe, we have to start by reconsidering a new leader of the Commission.
