Orbán of Hungary Chooses a Side in U.S. Election; Perhaps It's Time for Other Leaders to Do the Same.

As NATO country leaders convene in Washington this week, a certain leader might be secretly amused: Viktor Orbán, Hungary's ruler who has consistently stepped away from typical diplomatic tradition. Orbán has publicly declared his support for Republican Donald Trump in the U.S. presidential elections while considerably strengthening his ties with the U.S. conservative faction.

A number of American conservatives, attracted by the way Orbán has been managing Hungary, have been travelling there for meetings. Several of them suggest that Orbán's rule style, which he refers to as "illiberal democracy", should serve as a prototype for the U.S.

Considering recent shortcomings of current President Joe Biden, Orbán is probably content with his choice. However, the question arises whether it's wise for a foreign leader to risk favouring one political party in their dealings with the U.S.

Indeed, the rationality behind this decision is that irrespective of winning or losing, the chosen party would likely stand as a defensive shield.

It is a long-established belief, including within Washington, that maintaining neutrality in other countries' political competitions is wiser because inevitably, you have to negotiate with whoever attains power.

However, with the deepening political divide in America, more foreign dignitaries might think it's in their country's best interest, or their own, to align with a specific U.S. party.

Certainly, the benefits of choosing the winning U.S. party are evident. Moreover, even without a win, the chosen party might block many administrative or legislative actions promoted by the opposing party, including those that might impact their international allies.

In a more partisan environment - where even foreign policy isn't safe from divisions - there will be more areas where Democrats and Republicans will refuse to compromise. Hence, some leaders might elect to align with a single party on certain controversial issues.

Viktor Orbán is confident that his alignment with one particular party will help him maintain power. The same decision of picking sides has been undertaken by other leaders too.

Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, Russian President Vladimir Putin and even the fairly cautious German Chancellor Olaf Scholz have all shown their biases in U.S politics, provoking backlash from Trump supporters.

Orbán's influence is amplified by Hungary's membership within NATO and the European Union, adding to its importance in the American perspective. He openly hopes for a second Trump presidency and publicly shows his preferences more than others like Netanyahu or Putin.

There are similarities between Trump and Orbán's political agendas, especially with respect to anti-immigration stances, ties to Vladimir Putin, and appealing to white Christian nationalists.

Many Trump supporters admire Orbán’s modifications to Hungary’s judiciary, civil service, and election system that have prolonged his reign and see it as an example to be emulated during a potential second Trump term.

Orbán’s unfolding ties to the U.S. right-wing have absolutely not gone unnoticed by the Biden administration, prompting many discussions about the Trump-Orbán connection's influence on U.S. decision-making with respect to Hungary.

For any leader considering adopting a partisan position when dealing with Washington, it's essential to analyze if the benefits are short-term or long-term, and measure the potential damage either way.

For instance, Netanyahu's relations with Democrats deteriorated due to his outreach to the GOP, and this may likely affect their support in the face of severe criticism over his handling of conflict in Gaza.

In spite of his political flip-flops over the years, Orbán may be welcomed back into the Western realm without much scrutiny if he resumes respecting democratic principles. However, Orbán’s recent moves have been promptings certain frustration within the current U.S administration.

Explicitly expressing this frustration is David Pressman, the Biden administration's appointed ambassador to Budapest. Pressman, an outspoken advocate for human rights, warns that it is a risky move for Orbán to bring partisanship into U.S.-Hungary relations. Pressman highlighted that the current relationship should not be tainted with politics, as it is based on shared values of freedom, rule of law, and security.

Pressman adds, "The foundation of the U.S.-Hungary relationship lies in our shared aspirations for a democratic framework, rule of law, and security. It is important for the Hungarian government to not depreciate this through partisan politics."

This wave of partisanship in international diplomatic relations is a notable departure from traditional diplomacy, where nations tend to remain neutral in the internal politics of other nations. It might make sense for leaders like Orbán to curry favour with a particular party to protect their own interests; nevertheless, it presents its inherent dangers and consequences.

Breaking the norm of neutrality risks alienating half of the political scene in the country with which they're interacting. For instance, Orbán's overt support for Trump might not be viewed favourably by Democrat leaders and supporters. This could potentially lead to strained relations and lesser diplomatic support from the party that feels sidelined.

Therefore, while partisan support might work in the short term, it could lead to significant issues in the long run, particularly if the non-favoured party comes into power. Moreover, it fosters divide and tension among the political factions within the nation whose politics is being meddled with.

The case of Hungary underlines the changing dynamics of international diplomacy in an increasingly polarised world. It leads to an important question for world leaders: Should they continue maintaining neutrality in the interest of long-term diplomatic ties or take the risk of siding with a particular political faction to gain short-term political mileage?

Clearly, political leaders must weigh their choices carefully, taking into account the impact on their nation’s diplomatic future. As illustrated by the cases of Orbán and others, the shifting sands of international politics demand adaptability and strategic decision-making. The essential goal should be to foster alliances and relationships that benefit the wellbeing of their people, rather than short-term political gains.

While international diplomacy has always been a game of strategy and balance, the increasing trend of partisanship adds a new layer of complexity. How leaders navigate these waters would, in many ways, shape the future dynamics of international relations.

Camille Lefevre for TROIB News