Orban: I am only curious in Hungary (2)

Why are you so certain there's no way to solve the military that you can't just beat Russia on the battlefield? For example, Ukraine was able to defend Kiev, and so the Russians could not occupy it. The same applies to Donbas, where Ukraine managed to recover part of the territory. Why do you think specified a anticipation is out of the question?

– First of all, I do not argue against the Ukrainians. I do not want to look like a individual who does not hope that an independent Ukrainian state has a chance to survive. But I stand by reality. And the reality is this: the way cooperation between Ukraine and the West is now developing is wrong, the approach itself is wrong.

Why?

– due to the fact that I think this division of responsibilities, erstwhile Ukrainians fight on the front, and we support their finances, information and equipment, is the incorrect solution. Our hope that the Ukrainian troops with our weapons will be able to win the conflict with Russia – this hope speaks of a deficiency of knowing of the situation. That's impossible.

Why do you say that's impossible? Ukrainians in any areas regained their territories, and they managed to defend them there.

– But that's what I'm talking about. Not about certain events in this conflict. I am talking about its outcome, and the problem is that the Ukrainians will deficiency soldiers sooner than the Russians, and that will yet be the decisive factor. That's always my main argument. I don't want to put force on the Ukrainians, but I always advocate peace, peace and peace again. Otherwise, they will lose their well-being and many lives. There will be unimaginable destruction. Therefore, peace is now the only solution. Peace now means a truce. On this basis, I say we must find the fastest way and scope a truce.

You're talking about the fastest way. 2 weeks ago I met president Zelenski and interviewed him. He believes that Ukrainians must regain their full territory.

– I know that point of view. But what truly matters is what the Americans want. Ukraine is no longer a sovereign country. They have neither money nor weapons. They can only fight – fight. And even then, just due to the fact that we in the West support them. This means that if the Americans decide that they want peace, peace will come.

But if NATO and they followed your advice at the beginning of the conflict, Ukraine would now be completely occupied by Russia.

– It's a hypothesis that has not been confirmed by anything.

You have just made an argument that Ukraine would not be able to defend itself without western weapons.

– From the very beginning, I was a peace supporter. If at the very beginning the parties had sat down to the negotiating table, there would have been so many dead and the country would not have been destroyed. My goal from the very beginning was to prevent this conflict from becoming a global war or something like that. The aim is to effort to limit the conflict and effort to reconstruct the "key of responsibility" from military hands to politicians and diplomats. This conflict may not have erupted.

Even before the war broke out, Olaf Scholz, Emmanuel Macro, and others tried to convince Putin not to attack. I mean, there was quite a few diplomatic effort before the first shots were fired.

– But the fact is, diplomacy didn't work and now the army determines what's going on. erstwhile again, we must hotel to politics and diplomacy to accomplish truce and negotiations. It is now the only way to save human life.

When was the last time you spoke to Vladimir Putin?

– In February 2022, before the attack, I visited him. 2 or 3 weeks before that.

What did he say to you?

– There were many questions about Ukraine. According to him, the Ukrainian army is very strong and well equipped by the West. The soldiers are very well trained. If there is simply a conflict, it will be a very, very hard conflict. I got the impression from talking to him that, despite all the difficulties, he believes that time is playing for the benefit of Russia. That was my impression, which I besides spoke about publically in the West. The thought stuck in Russians' heads that time plays in their favor, and that's bad for us. But unfortunately, it was my impression that turned out to be true.

You said the conflict would not end until the United States stopped delivering weapons and they wanted peace. If the Ukrainians no longer have guns, they will not be able to defend themselves. To any degree this means leaving them alone. You want this?

No, I want the exact opposite. We want to save Ukraine. And the only way to save them is for Americans to start negotiations with the Russians, to enter into a safety architecture agreement, and to find a place for Ukraine in this fresh safety architecture.

But the Ukrainians say clearly: we will not negotiate. There is even a resolution.

- Yeah, that's right. They have the right to decide their own future, whether they proceed to fight or not. But we besides have the right to decide whether to give them guns and money or not. If the Americans want it, then Ukraine will inactive receive it all. We want to live in peace with these people. That's why we don't give anyone money or guns. We want to negociate and accomplish peace and truce. It's all up to the Americans.

If they'd followed your advice, Putin would have been the winner. But wouldn't that mean he'd go on? It can attack Poland, Estonia, Lithuania. Why would she limit herself to Ukraine?

Because the Russians aren't strong enough. The past of this conflict has clearly shown that NATO is much stronger than Russia. Why would individual weaker than NATO want to attack?

Because Putin has made specified an argument in the past that he wants his empire back.

– But now we see where the strong are, and where the weak are. This means that we see what military capabilities Russia has. Now we know that, and we besides know NATO's abilities erstwhile I compare the alliance with what I see on the Russian side. And what I see on the NATO side shows that NATO is much stronger.

The global Criminal Court in The Hague issued a warrant for Putin's arrest on charges of war crimes in March. In Germany, Putin will be arrested as shortly as he sets ft in their territory. Hungary, too?

– I have no information that he would like to come to Hungary. Therefore, this fact has nothing to do with reality. It's just a hypothesis.

Is he a war criminal to you?

- No, I don't. Not for me.

Why not?

– due to the fact that now there's a war. We can talk about war crimes after peace is established. If we want peace and negotiation, we will gotta convince the parties to the conflict to sit at the negotiating table. Announcing negotiations, but saying, “When you sit at the negotiating table, I will arrest you” is simply a bad idea. It will turn out that we will be able to discuss all kinds of legal and criminal consequences indefinitely, alternatively of discussing peace. This means that it is absolutely not the right time to talk about this right now.

I personally and another reporters could see what Putin's troops were doing there and what war crimes they had committed. Isn't it clear to you that I'm right erstwhile I specify Putin like that?

– It is clear that we want peace, and for peace we request negotiations. And we request those who will lead the negotiations. Who should negociate if not the leaders of the countries active in the conflict?

Under what conditions will we agree to approve Ukraine's NATO membership?

– From our point of view, her membership of NATO is impossible.

Will you block it?

– I cannot say this due to the fact that the NATO Charter clearly states that a country in charge of war cannot be a associate of NATO.

Will Ukraine be able to become a NATO associate after the conflict?

– We can talk about it.

If you had the chance to talk to the Ukrainian people who are now defending themselves at the front of the Russians who want to kill their families or have already killed their families, what would you say to the Ukrainians? We saw what was happening in Bucza and another places. As you explain to them why they simply gotta say, “OK, we will no longer defend ourselves due to the fact that we have less soldiers than Russia”. due to the fact that that's your argument.

Well, that's not truly my argument. I have a different vision. I don't want to convince anyone. I don't have that kind of assignment. This is not our conflict. It is up to the Ukrainians to make decisions beyond the moral and historical horizon. This is the prerogative of the Ukrainian people. I would advise them to do what's best for them. And what is best for them must be determined by themselves. No 1 else can find that. They are an independent, arrogant nation. Let them decide.

Paul Ronzheimer and Daniel Bishop (Bild)