OPINION:
We live in strange times, where daring to admire patriotic leaders who produce for the citizens who elected them is met with charges of racism, neo-nationalism, even fascism. While any level-headed person who picks up The New York Times or happens to glance at the BBC or CNN is aware, this nonsense is hardly confined to this side of the Atlantic.
In Britain, a big story of the day is outrage that a Boris Johnson adviser has dared to suggest that the U.K. will seek an enhanced relationship with Hungary’s “authoritarian government.”
Oh, horrors! Imagine engaging a Hungarian government that puts its people first, goes to lengths to protect its Judeo-Christian Heritage, and who’s first concern, through its immigration policies, dares to choose for itself who will enter its borders. That is madness, indeed.
The left and some of the British press were triggered and found it “highly controversial” when Johnson adviser Tim Montgomerie, speaking to an audience in Hungary, praised policies of the Orban government and suggested that an enhanced friendship with Britain could be in the cards after Brexit happens at the end of the month.
What rubbish. Full disclosures: I am a fellow of the Danube Institute, the forum to which Mr. Montgomerie delivered these remarks. However, were I not, I would have experienced the same disgust at the usual misguided chorus of anti-Hungarian sentiment in the global media. This, by the way, is the same chorus that does their utmost to denigrate the governments of President Trump, President Bolsonoro, Prime Minister Modi and, of course, Prime Minister Boris Johnson, for making their respective nations’ sovereignty and prosperity priorities, as any sensible leader would.
What is more, in its current posture, poised to bid an elated (judging by “Brexit Boris’” recent landslide election victory) departure from the European Union, why on earth would the U.K. not pursue an enhanced alliance with a similarly Eurosceptic EU partner such as Hungary? Heaven knows, Hungary has had its own strife with the EU. Just last June, the European Commission sued Hungary over immigration policy, preferring instead to dictate who Hungary should allow to settle within its borders. Similar disputes have arisen with the EU attempting to impose its will on Hungary’s media and academic policies.
The U.K., whose people decided in a 2016 referendum to leave the EU largely on its sovereignty-compromising political overreach, naturally finds Hungary a like-mind in its often strained dealings with the EU. Hungary has even publicly defended the U.K. against EU defiance. Indeed, while Hungary regrets the U.K.’s departure, its foreign minister, Peter Szijjarto, has expressed that Hungary blames the divorce, not on Britain, but rather on the EU: “The situation is a failure for the European Commission, because the British Government made it clear what it would require to remain a member of the European Union, but the EC did not hear what the British had to say.”
But back to Mr. Montgomerie and his mortal sin of expressing enthusiasm for a greater Budapest-London alliance. Mr. Montgomerie is absolutely right to admire Mr. Orban’s view that “nation matters and that globalisation is often a threat.” Moreover, he hit the nail on the head when he urged his Budapest audience to consider why voters are selecting the likes of Mr. Johnson, Mr. Trump, Mr. Orban, etc.
Perhaps this question, more than any other, ignites the ire of the left who cannot comprehend the growing embrace of voters for leaders who promote exceptionalism of their nations rather than one world order. Elites in countries across the globe shake their heads and wring their hands at the trend of nations who select patriotic nationalists whom liberals deem “corrupt authoritarian xenophobes.” In a no-holds-barred conflagration on democracy, leftists despise the people who overwhelmingly select Mr. Trump, Mr. Orban, et al, just as they mistakenly insist a Brexit referendum do-over would yield a different result, or that Mr. Trump can be removed without cause, just because they don’t like him.
Boris, Donald, Viktor and their like-minded colleagues are not carbon copies of one another. They each have their unique styles and geopolitical situations. But it is clear that while the media love to spin Mr. Trump’s loneliness on the world stage, or Brexit Britain’s “back-of-the-queue” status, or Mr. Orban’s “extreme” immigration policies, that these world leaders find validation in each other’s approaches. Mr. Trump welcomed Mr. Orban to the White House last May, Mr. Orban’s first such visit in decades, and the American president will give the U.K. a post-Brexit bilateral trade deal that will be great for both sides of the Atlantic. These relationships are far more beneficial when strong leaders willingly engage, championing the interests of their own nations rather than carrying the water for supranational organizations like the U.N. or the EU.
• Lee Cohen is a writer, commentator and fellow of the Danube Institute. He was adviser on Europe to the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.