Opening Speech by Gábor Horn and Milosz Hodun
Gábor Horn, Chair of the Republikon Institute’s Board of Trustees, opened the conference, emphasizing that the election result is merely a symptom that highlights the transformative role and significance of American and Hungarian neo-conservatism on the political landscape, both internationally and domestically. Milosz Hodun, a board member of the European Liberal Forum, joined via video message, underscoring the importance of the topic and the responses to it, and thanked the participating organizations for their collaboration.
International panel:
Introduction: The first panel of the conference started off with the discussion of the key takeaways of the election results which was followed by the review of the policy paper written by Sivlestre and Kerner on the challenges posed by the radical conservative movements for the European and North American liberal democratic systems. Then after a short assessment of the Trump campaign, the panelists turned to the analysis of the relationship between the two continents and to how this result would impact hungarian domestic politics.
Zsolt Kerner, journalist at 24.hu: The foreign affairs journalist summarized the public opinion research and expectations, then discussed economic issues, highlighting inflation's significant role and the alignment (or lack thereof) between public policy and ideology. He noted that the size and maneuvering of European Parliament party groups reflect the state of the European right. In Kerner’s view, Trump’s campaign was better coordinated than before, with the leading issues (economy and immigration) were harmonized well with the candidate’s charisma. Reflecting on EU relations, he speculated on the future U.S.-EU dynamics and the potential leadership roles, suggesting that figures beyond Viktor Orbán, such as Georgia Meloni or Donald Tusk, could assume these positions. He linked EU integration processes to internal and external shocks, suggesting that Europe may be on the cusp of major transformation, especially in the reflection of instable governmental situations in Wester-European countries.
Izabela Szostak-Smith, lawyer and political expert: Izabela Szostak-Smith highlighted the rapid pace and high emotional charge of the campaign and explained how these elements significantly impacted how the parties were able to convert their support into votes. She anticipates that a future Trump administration may adopt even more radical stances in both policy and day-to-day governance. However, she expressed hope that society could find mechanisms to limit or temper these extremes. She identified key themes in the candidates' campaign strategies, noting the influence of these strategies on the election's outcome. According to Szostak-Smith, the central factor for victory was not only the weight of the campaign content itself but how well the campaign's components were balanced, how effectively it stirred emotions, and how well it captured the attention of various social groups. She emphasized the importance of information processing and its evaluation both at individual and community levels, pointing out the social forces that can either build up or fragment society. In particular, she stressed the effectiveness of the Republican campaign team, especially in their ability to frame issues powerfully and shape public perception. Szostak-Smith also highlighted the Republicans' approach to defining ideals around democracy, indicating that their skillful use of framing significantly influenced public discourse and resonated with a wide range of voters.
Ricardo Silvestre, Movimento Liberal Social: Ricardo Silvestre emphasized the significance of how the presidential candidates approached critical issues that later proved to be decisive: security, the economy, and healthcare. He observed that these topics were pivotal in shaping voters' choices and could be perceived as critical "turning points" in the election. Silvestre then focused on international security, highlighting the instabilities within this domain and Trump’s often confrontational foreign policy style. He suggested that Trump’s aggressive diplomatic approach may leave lasting marks on the international arena, potentially fostering a more destabilized world order. According to Silvestre, the results of the informal "soft power" exerted and practices collected by organizations like CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) in the past are likely to significantly influence Trump's formal foreign policy decisions. He further argued that Europe finds itself at its most crucial moment since World War II, as it faces both internal and external challenges. Silvestre analyzed populist forces' communication strategies, noting that they frequently promote goals that lack genuine support.
Domestic panel:
Introduction: The second panel focused on the effects and consequences of the U.S. presidential election on Hungarian domestic and foreign policy. Discussions revolved around anticipated results of the election, the complex relationship between issues and candidate personalities, and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's potential role in shaping future relations between the EU and the Trump administration. The panelists also explored the impacts of Trump’s win on Hungarian domestic actors and whether the average Hungarian voter might experience any effects as a result of Trump’s victory.
Péter Balázs (Former EU Commissioner) Péter Balázs expressed that although he supported Kamala Harris, he was not surprised by Trump’s victory. He shared skepticism that those political players and forces who backed Trump during the campaign would receive any significant favors in return. Balázs highlighted the crucial importance of the State Secretary’s role, both in terms of internal cabinet dynamics and its broader international implications. He warned of the dangers of Trump’s improvisational style, suggesting that this approach could disrupt the balance between international negotiation partners. Balázs also stressed the significance of the European Political Community summit in Budapest. In his view, Trump has little need for intermediaries, and even if he were to seek one, Hungary’s Prime Minister would be ill-suited for this role due to the diminished trust European leaders now have in him. Balázs concluded by suggesting that foreign policy remains largely irrelevant to the average Hungarian voter, implying that this issue does not typically influence public sentiment or voting behavior within Hungary.
Zoltán Balázs (Professor, TK-PTI) Zoltán Balázs argued that Trump’s victory was not due to his personality or manner of speaking, but rather to the specific issues he championed, such as immigration and inflation, which resonated with voters. He emphasized that outside of wartime, Americans generally show little interest in foreign policy topics, highlighting a longstanding tradition of isolationism in the United States. Balázs made a key observation that Trump, as a leader, is predictable, with a business-oriented mentality that will likely shape his negotiation style in the future. He suggested that the slow decision-making processes and lack of prominent figures in the Biden administration contributed to the Democrats’ poor public perception. Additionally, he highlighted the gap between the theatrical aspects of political communication and the actual background processes of decision-making. Balázs asserted that the U.S. administration also recognizes the Hungarian government as a security risk from both economic and political perspectives. Reflecting on the campaign, he underscored the nature of ideological debates and how voters relate to these ideological disputes. He noted Trump’s approach to positioning himself as a “man of the people,” which he believed helped him connect with the average voter. In Balázs’s view, partly due to the Trump administration's emphasis on reaching agreements, Hungarian voters will not feel substantial foreign policy changes stemming from this U.S. presidency.
László Seres (Journalist) László Seres was similarly unsurprised by the election result. He attributed the Democratic loss to a failure to account for demographic trends and the impacts of internal migration within the U.S. He expressed concern about Ukraine’s position, given Trump’s past statements and those of his close associates, although he noted that Israel might feel reassured by the election outcome. Seres argued that the U.S. should strengthen its role as the world’s “policeman,” working to maintain the current global order and prevent the emergence of a multipolar world system. Seres saw migration as one of the defining issues of the campaign and identified parallels between American and European attitudes on the matter. He highlighted the struggles and importance of the lower middle class in this context. Finally, he analyzed the various responses to left-wing identity politics, pointing out that Hungarian voters are likely to feel the economic effects of protective tariffs and the attempts to resolve the conflict in Ukraine as the most immediate consequences of Trump’s victory.
Anna Virág (Strategic Director, Republikon Institute) Anna Virág stated that she was most struck by the scale of differences revealed by the election. She noted the significance of campaign pitfalls and the role of ethnic minorities, underscoring that the shortness of Harris’ campaign often goes unacknowledged, even though it was a crucial factor in shaping both the election results and the campaign's trajectory. Continuing her analysis of party politics, Virág suggested that a key question for the next Trump administration will be whether it allows emerging politicians within the party to gain experience or stifles their growth. This, she argued, will be crucial for the cohesion of the Trumpist wing in the future. Virág also emphasized the role of government advisors, voicing a contrasting opinion to Zoltán Balázs by asserting that Trump’s policies are likely to be unpredictable. She observed that campaign messages often stand in stark contrast to actual policy actions, particularly with Trump. Virág does not anticipate any change in Orbán’s isolation within the EU, and she expects a loosening of U.S.-Hungarian relations on a bilateral level. She argued that Orbán consistently supports nationalistic, right-wing populist parties across Europe, aiming to strengthen right-wing discourse and collaboration on the continent. Lastly, Virág highlighted the importance of identity politics for the Democratic Party and the diversity in delivering political messaging among Republicans. She believes that the wide variety of communication tools utilized by the Republicans during the campaign could influence future Hungarian campaign strategies.
An event organised by the European Liberal Forum EUPF (ELF). Co-funded by the European Parliament. Neither the European Parliament nor the European Liberal Forum are responsible for the content of the programme or for any use that may be made of it. The views expressed herein are those of the speaker(s) alone. These views do not necessarily reflect those of the European Parliament and/or the European Liberal Forum EUPF.
