Globalization: Hungary’s Benevolent Boogeyman

Viktor Orban, Prime Minister of Hungary at the World Economic Forum on Europe and Central Asia, June 8, 2011. Photo by Heinz Tesarek.

Viktor Orban, Hungary’s Prime Minister, does not bite his tongue when it comes to globalization. Since he rose to power in 2010, he has persistently antagonized the EU, arguing that the organization is trying to dissolve Hungary’s cultural identity and turn people into “Homo brusselicus”—an epithet for people infatuated with the EU and devoid of national pride. By utilizing this anti-globalization rhetoric, Orban has built a coalition of nationalist voters who have staunchly supported him even while he has subdued the free press, packed the courts, and rolled back other democratic norms. However, in spite of his confrontational approach to the EU, Orban has silently exploited the economic benefits of globalization while decrying its cultural influence. The product is a potent yet paradoxical political message that has given him license to consolidate power in the country.

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, Orban had a plan for Hungary. As he would tell it, Orban was trying to disentangle the country from the speculative capitalism that prompted the ‘08 fiasco and the global financial institutions that infringed on countries’ sovereignty by imposing harsh austerity measures. As Attila Antal—a political science researcher specializing in contemporary populism—explains in the The Rise of Hungarian Populism, Orban projected an image of being an economic liberator of sorts, as the only person who could stand up to Western financial institutions’ excessive loan conditions. To his credit, he kept this promise on occasion, ending an International Monetary Fund (IMF) program in 2010 and forcing the IMF to close its Hungarian offices in 2013.

However, Orban’s rejection of international aid and declaration of economic independence were far more disingenuous than he ever wanted to let on. In fact, Hungary was so reliant on aid from the EU and elsewhere that the country would not have been able to sustain economic growth without it. As Paul Lendvai, an Hungarian journalist, notes in Orban: Europe’s New Strongman, if it were not for “annual transfers from the EU cohesion fund, amounting to €2.5-5 billion… the collapse of the Hungarian economy would be unavoidable.” This is in addition to the €10.4 billion the EU provided for post-pandemic relief, the €5.8 billion that multinational corporations have paid in taxes, and the $6.9 billion Hungary receives in annual foreign direct investment. In short, Orban has depended on taking advantage of international aid while vilifying aid organizations instead of making the Hungarian economy self-sustaining.

Moreover, Orban has always wrongfully framed himself as a protector of Hungarian tradition and culture against the corporate, globalist elite. In 2017, he even claimed that Hungary is able to spend so much on promoting families because he takes “it from the multinationals.” However, as Antal explains, the reality is that Orban has frequently tried to court global companies by crafting policies that integrate Hungary into the international financial framework. Whether that be by cutting corporate taxes, unraveling labor regulations, or enticing multinational corporations with billions of Forints worth of subsidies, Orban has played the globalization game and attempted to attract foreign investment. As a result, the Hungarian economy has become inextricably linked to the rest of the world as exports now make up 90% of the country’s GDP.

However, regardless of how much Hungary has become economically globalized, it would be antithetical to Orban’s political message to admit that. Throughout his career, Orban has established a political identity within and outside of Hungary as being an ethnonationist, proudly identifying as a Christian Hungarian determined to shield his country from the increasingly cosmopolitan and atheist West. Simultaneously, he has lamented the influx of Muslim immigrants and imposed harsh border controls. This perception would be undermined if he were to come clean about actively pursuing Western capital. It would look as if he was turning his back on Hungary and heeding to the purported enemy. At the same time, it would likely be politically destructive for Orban to unwind globalization in Hungary. Doing so would only risk the development that has kept the economy afloat and legitimized his progressively illiberal regime.

Orban’s balance between his rhetoric and policy is inherently tenuous. Up to this point, he has been able to maintain this equilibrium because there was little concerted effort by Western powers to challenge it. However, the tide is starting to shift. Exhausted by graft in the Hungarian government and Orban’s authoritarian tendencies, the EU has started rescinding billions of dollars worth of aid. At the same time, Hungary has suffered from debilitating inflation that has provoked protests across the country and forced Orban to request additional aid from the EU on top of what was already frozen. With this enhanced bargaining power, the EU has compelled Orban to accept judicial reforms and rule of law safeguards. In the coming years, Orban may have to make further concessions to the bloc as the specter of recession still looms over Hungary. Doing so, however, will endanger both his anti-globalization message and his autocratic control of the country. Consequently, Orban may soon encounter a critical juncture, where he must choose between doubling down on his illiberal nationalism, risking the economic and political fallout, or embracing EU reforms in an effort to rescue the economy and his own political standing.

Wyatt King (CC ‘26) is a Staff Writer for CPR studying political science and statistics. He is interested in eastern Europe, international political economy, and applying quantitative methods to political science research. In his spare time, you can find him reading a good book in either the MET or MoMA.