Transcript for:
Entrevista al Primer Ministro Húngaro sobre la Guerra en Ucrania

Mr. Prime Minister, thank you for having us here.  The whole EU is talking about you again. I see   furious statements from various leaders, Olaf  Scholz, Ursula von der Leyen or Kaja Kallas. So   just a few of the reactions about your trip  to Moscow to meet Putin. What did you want   to achieve? Was it was it the Hungary rotating  presidency started 1st of July this year, which   means that we have to have the European Union to  work better and to achieve certain goals. This is   a very technocratic approach losses, legislative  competitiveness, very important issues. But we   can't neglect the fact that we are living in a  very special time. This is wartime. So I think   the presidency of the European Union, I mean, the  European Council simply cannot afford not to deal   with how to get closer to peace and whether is  there any chance to close the war. Ceasefire or   peace talks or if any rotating European presidency  of the Council, you wouldn't have to deal with   that. That would be hypocrisy. So I have a strong  moral and political motivation that we have to   do something. And my estimation is that in the  forthcoming two, three months till the American   election, what will what will happen on the front  line? It will be far worse than it was up to   now. Why do you think so? More weapons are there  and the Russians are moving Khuzestan lately had   sold the energy of the confrontation. The number  of deaths, the lost lives, the casualties will be   more brutal than it was in the last seven months.  Even the previous period was also very brutal.   For what is ahead of us is far worse than we think  now. So my my motivation is that if we would like   to do something and they we saw and to change from  war policy for supporting policy to other to the   peace policy, this is the right time to do so. The  question is how we can do that. Why do you think   so that it will be more brutal as your argument  that the Russians cannot be stopped because we   see little success? Also on the Ukrainian side was  Western weapons. There was you know, the Russians   tried to go closer to Kharkiv region. They tried  to attack in several occasions. It's not the case   that the Russians are really having big successes  so far. This I'm not speaking about successes. I   am speaking about energy, which is invested into  the frontline. And they had a chance to have a   conversation with the Ukrainian president and the  Russian president. And believe me, believe me,   that the forthcoming two, three months will be far  more brutal than anything. Why do you think so?   Did Putin tell you that both sides is very much  committed to do so soon? The Ukrainians are now   now the a country happy because it's not a proper  but an appropriate expression. But they are more   optimistic because they got a good quantity and  quality of new weapons and they will use it. So   the energy which we confronted on both sides  will be different than it was in the previous   one. So so we Europeans, if we would like to  get less shadow on the European life of the war,   we should not of great number one argument is  loss is life. Yeah. So life itself is this is the   number one moral motivation. But the second the  self interest of Europe because what's going on is   very bad for you. The argument from EU politicians  would be that a trip like you did to Moscow would   divide the position inside Europe and to show  Putin that Europe is not talking was one voice.   Very primitive, very primitive. What I am doing is  not that there are five main actors in this very   complicated situation, and now I have met two  out of the five Ukrainians, Russians than the   United States. Then China, then European Union.  They will continue to manage to get and collect   the opinions, the position, the talks, how we  can formulate to find a way, the quickest way   to the ceasefire and to the peace. It was not  just to do a trip to Kiev and Moscow. It will   be continued. What is your idea? How can there be  peace? I mean, if we look on the Russian position,   the Russians say all the regions, including  separate Kharkiv, Luhansk, Donetsk is Russian   and they say, you know, we go on and we will fight  and we will take at least these regions. They want   to destabilize the Kiev government. So how can  there be peace? Do you see any chance I mean,   what did Putin tell you? The problem is that  you, as many of the European politicians,   would like to get a solution immediately by 100%.  There is no that kind of solution. How the road   to the peace starts is that those who are in the  war or surrounding the would like to have a peace.   So that's the most important thing, the intention,  the real human, because the war is not coming from   from from from the sky. The war is a result  of decision of definite persons, you know. So   therefore, we have to find those leaders of the  world. Hungary is not among them, for obvious   reasons, whose decision will decide these or  war. Ukraine is one. Russia also because finally,   at the end of the day, they will make the decision  but very important. What is the approach of China,   United States and European Union? China has a  peace plan. America runs of war, war policy,   and Europe, instead of having our autonomy, most  strategical approach and position, we are simply   copying the American position. So sorry to say,  but Europe has a war policy as well. So my target   is to understand how we could change the position  of those elements, those pillars of the situation.   They thinking and approach from war to the peace.  If China, United States and Europe would like to   have a peace, it's far easier for the Ukrainians  and the Russians to find a solution. How to stop   fighting, how to save a life, how to negotiate  and find a durable and durable solution. I would   argue there's always the question of costs,  because the Ukrainians would argue if we give   territory to the Russians, our people have to live  under Russian law, that they will torture them,   they will kill them, that they will, you know,  have to live under under Russian culture.   There's no Ukrainian books anymore, no Ukrainian  culture. And that they can't accept that. Yeah,   I would not like to go into details about the  Ukrainian minority policy. You have a conversation   now with the Hungarian prime minister. Yeah, but  you met Putin and Polanski and you have nothing.   But I know, but I know. How was the situation  of the Hungarian minorities living in Zapata,   which is part of Ukraine today, are treated by the  Ukrainian government on education, Hungarian books   on foreign soil. So I would not like to criticize  while Ukraine, because they are in the war and   then some of these in war, not the proper time to  criticize because their behavior to the Hungarian   minorities. But what you can't compare that with  butcher or other times. But I'm speaking it's the   job for me now is not to say that who is good, who  is bad. The situation is obvious. Putin and Russia   started the invasion against Ukraine, but I would  not like to be indulged into a kind of measurement   who is responsible for what and so on. My my duty  is to concentrate on how we can create peace.   And the only way is that sending clear signals  to the fighting parties. Guys, we, the world,   would like to have peace, to stop, fight, stop  killing each other. Let's start to negotiate one   at least understand that there is no solution  on the ground. Because my starting point of the   situation, understanding of the situation is that  there is no solution of this conflict on the side   of the fault line. So the only solution is peace.  So therefore we have to concentrate on that. The   main actors of the world would like to say or  would be ready to say, peace policy, what we need.   This is not the case today because we Westerners,  we run a war policy and especially the Europeans,   is difficult to understand because, okay, America  is far away and they have a difficult situation.   During the discussion of the candidates, we  cannot have too many illusions how this country   is run at this moment. So it's very difficult to  imagine major changes till the American election,   which means three or four months till then. And  we Europeans should use this situation to have our   own autonomous policy first, because we are closer  geographically. Hungary is part of Europe. It's   sitting in the cross line of the West and east. So  we know how does it work, what the Russians are,   how they behave. So we Europeans have a better  knowledge of this whole situation than the   Americans. So we should have a deeper analysis  and better understanding of the situation first,   second, the interest of Europe is in danger.  All of the Americans can suffer some losses   financially, economically. But the main victim,  besides the two warring parties is the European   economy and the European people. So therefore,  therefore, we Europeans should have our own   approach to this whole conflict. And what I  see now, there is no real intention to do so,   especially because they think that there is no way  for dialog and my trip to Kiev and to Moscow is a   clear evidence that there is a way to have direct  communication, diplomatic channels on the blocked   and all that kind of it's depends not exclusively  on us, but very much depends on us how we would   like to. Are we in favor of peace, not the  continuation of the war? And tell us more   about your trip, especially to Moscow. How is  it to shake hands with Vladimir Putin, who,   for my opinion, is a war criminal, and not only  my opinion, but also others, and at the same time,   somebody who is appreciating solid. Okay. So first  of all, we have to understand that what is decided   by the war is not who is right and who is bad.  It's not about who is right, who has no right,   because each party said always all argument why  it is reasonable to going to war. What is decided   by war is who will die and who will stay alive.  So don't, don't, don't misunderstand. Sitting   in Brussels, sitting in party or close to the  Atlantic Ocean, you can have a proper distance   to examine in a more theoretical way the war.  But the reality of the war is not. That gravity   of the war is is a very subtle reality. People are  dying every day, thousands now, every day on both   sides. Anyway. So therefore, when we are speaking  about how to approach from the dimension of rules,   responsibility, whatever is important, but not  the time important, the most important thing is   how we can stop the bad thing which is going on  and killing people each day. So for don't mixed   up the approaches to the problem because your  your questions are very much relevant tomorrow   but today not to. This is only how to stop the  was all the respect. I personally know how the war   looks like. I mean, I spend many months and years  at the frontline and I talk a lot to soldiers,   to Ukrainian citizens. And I can tell you that  even though it's brutal for them and many of the   soldiers are fighting for more than two years,  you don't find many people who are telling you,   okay, let's negotiate now, because these day, if  the Russians, you know, come closer to my home,   if they come closer to to my wife, to my mother,  you know, I don't want that. That's why we   are defending Ukraine. So if I understand you  correctly, you as a German man, the German guy,   try to explain me what does it mean to live  close to the Russians? So the point is, no, I   want to just tell you how it is at the frontline.  The atmosphere of the Ukraine is don't forget   that we are sitting in Budapest so nobody can  educate the Hungarians about Russia. I don't want   to educate a lot. I just wanted to tell you how  the situation there is and what people tell me,   even that the Brazilians, you know, it's  ridiculous. So the point is that Hungary   was occupied several times by Russia. Very few  person of the world can know more about Russia   than the Hungarians and especially the Prime  Minister, because that's my job to understand   it. So we know what does it mean? And I can't  afford to simply not to understand how the   Russians think and how to operate. we I have to  repeat, we are not sitting in a very safe part   of the world surrounding only by friends. We are  sitting in Budapest and the meeting point or the   division line of the East and the West and the  war is just in the next door. Next door, Country   four. So we know what's going on. What does it  mean? Russia, how they think, how they react.   And I am sure that Europe cannot afford the luxury  not to get be involved directly to communication,   not only the Ukrainians but the Russians also.  Otherwise they will simply not understand what   is in their mind. That's what I'm arguing in  favor not about who is right and who is not,   because my target is peace and ceasefire. On  the other end, I hear from the Ukrainian side   and also from NATO's people and European side is  even if there would be a ceasefire now and Putin   would accept that, let's say, you know, the lines  how they are right now that his strategy would be   to rebuild his army and to attack again and two,  three, four, five years. So they would argue we   tried it with Minsk. And after Minsk, the full  invasion of Ukraine happened seven years later.   Yeah, the the lessons of the Minsk is a serious  issue. So we should think about what is the real   consequences of that. But I think Mr. Minsk was  far better than the situation is today. So don't   underestimate the result of Minsk delivered by  the Minsk Treaty because for several years Minsk   delivered a better position. I can't say good, but  a better one than believe. Now the question is,   after Minsk, why The Europeans were not able  to understand that we have a job to be done.   That's is the problem anyway. Now we start about  defense industry. No, we stopped about European   security. Why not ten years ago, which was obvious  that after Minsk there would be a period when   everybody tried to re establish its position and  Europe should have a clear cut foreign and defense   policy for today. We haven't done so anyway. So  it's just in brackets. But back back to back to   the point. Your point, I mean, which is very much  relevant. So my conversation with the two leaders   lead us or led me exactly to your point, the same  argument on both side, because my question was to   both leader I'm not negotiating at all because I  don't have a mandate to negotiate. I am I try to   have the European leaders to understand what  are the limits of the peace possibilities.   And also I am raising questions and collecting  information and making reports to the European   leaders. So I raise the question to both leaders  Is it the possibility for creation of a limited   time ceasefire which can accelerate the peace  talks and then enjoying the good consequences   of an accelerated peace talks? Because now  everybody's thinking just the opposite. First,   we have to make a peace agreement, and when  there is a peace agreement, then we can have   a ceasefire. And they were not positive on that.  None of them. They said exactly the same thing as   you, the Ukrainians and the Russians. Ceasefire  would be the interest of the other because   during the ceasefire they can reorganize their  position in preparation to continue to war. Okay,   I understand that position, but that's why the  mediators has a role to be that. When you met   Putin, did you get the feeling that Putin  thinks he's winning? It's more than that.   What he thinks he has. He has a clear vision  about what's going on and how Russia will win   the same result. What does he say? The same with  Zelensky. Zelensky has a clear vision in his mind,   explaining how Ukraine we win, how does how does  Putin explain how he will win? Because he's not   making big movements so far. That's very easy.  Look at the realities, figures, sources of energy,   number of people and soldiers. So it may say  it cannot be lost. It's very logical to mean   soldiers, the soldiers, equipment, technology,  which shields in a war. So to defeat Russia is   an idea which in Russia is a you know, it's  it's even difficult to imagine, You know,   so it's the possibility that Russia will be beaten  is totally out of any calculation. Did you talk   with Putin about the fact how many Russian men  died so far? I ask both persons about the losses,   lost life and casualties, and both of them were  ready to say the number relating to the other one,   but not for themselves. So. So they said, how is  the Ukrainian losses? You can support the Russian   losses, but don't say anything about their own  losses. But it's, you know, okay, we can think   whatever we would like to think about politicians  generally, what if we are leaders but they are   human beings. So it's it's it's morally extremely  difficult situation to get information every day   that thousands of your compatriots are dying  of war. So for it's not so they are that's the   reason why I'm sure that even if logically they  are rather negative ones on the quick ceasefire   and they are cautious to say the truth and so on  and so on. But I'm sure that at the very bottom   of the things, everybody is aware that it would be  better not to die tomorrow morning and the Russian   and then the Ukrainian who met Putin for several  hours. What do you think is his real goal right   now? Is it the same as it was at the beginning of  the war when he wanted, you know, to conquer Kiev,   wanted Slansky to flee or to kill him or to  change the government? What was on the table   when you talk to in Europe, we regularly consider  it a little bit too complicated. Now, what is the   real interest what the Russians have clearly.  So we overcomplicating the things here. Putin   regularly delivers speeches. Sometimes they  produce documents. I follow that. Even I   read the documents, even they have negotiation  documents to the Ukrainians and 2020 to April   about how the negotiations could be run and  concluded and so on that document and a speech   he thought we should take more seriously.  That's the reason why I suggest to all the   European leaders direct information they read the  communication diplomacy. If we don't use that,   we will not understand what's going well. They  would argue at the beginning of the war, they   tried it before the war started. They tried it.  We all saw Macron on the telephone with Vladimir   Putin just before the war started. Schulz was  there negotiating even after the war, they were   in regularly phone calls, but it seemed to be that  they saw it doesn't make sense. It was two years   ago. Now we are in a war for more than two and  a half years. The the the awful consequences of   the war is obvious for everybody. What was two  years ago a theory, how the war look like now?   It's reality that's different. Psychologically,  politically, morally, everything is different and   we know how we are changing anyway. Europe. So I'm  I would not like to neglect what is the impact of   the war on us. Look, look at Europe now. It was a  passive, almost pacifist continent. There was no   question the peace policy is the most important.  We are getting more and more militarized our way   of thinking, our approach. So so what my argument  is that regardless what has happened two years   ago, two and a half years ago, I mean, that time  attempt proved to be not successful. Now we have a   lot of very bad experience of the war. This is the  right time to open a new chapter and communicate   directly. Did you talk to Putin about the threat?  And we're talking about that for many months,   actually since the beginning of the war, that the  Russian army could attack Natal in Natal country?   You know, I, I don't like to be to become  ridiculous. So no serious man can raise any   serious conversation that Russia has an intention  to attack Natal. Why are you so sure about that?   Look look I know the Russians, they are different  than we are. And also it's totally nonsense to   consider them exactly as we are and seeing the  they think exactly as we think so because they   have different kind of history, different kind of  culture, different kind of instinct and attitudes,   different understanding of freedom, different  understanding of of, of national sovereignty,   priority over the freedom and all that kind  of very much different thing from the European   mindset. Yeah, but they are rational. They are  keep a rational thought. Well, but how was it?   How was it rational? So to interrupt, but how  was it rational to attack Kiev? I mean, in 2022,   when you say the Russians are rational, then  everybody would say, well, this wasn't irrational   thing to do, was it? Miscalculation? Being  irrational is two different thing. Irrational   means to do madness, miscalculation, to do some  mistake, calculation, mistake. That's different   thing to attack me by anybody, not only Russia,  but anybody of the to attack Natal is totally   impossible because Natal is the strongest  military community. It's a defense system.   We are far better and stronger than anybody else.  So look at how difficult is on the front line the   Russians have with the Ukrainians. What kind  of possibilities and perspectives would be   for Russia to attack Natal? You know, it does not  work if the unity of Natal is maintained, which is   the number one precondition of our security, that  Article five and the Basic Treaty of Natal must be   respected by everybody. Natal Summit is coming  up this week. Would you talk there about your   experience with both Putin and Zelensky? But this  is not my Atlanta. What I am doing that after each   meeting I made the report to other European prime  ministers and to the President of the Council to   inform them and to make some suggestions how we  could go ahead and they have to make a decision.   So, okay, you should know who you are. So we  are discussing a huge empire of Russia. You   are discussing Natal. Natal is dominated by  United States. We have you are speaking about   big European superpowers like France and Germany.  So among the 10 million country. So I know exactly   who are the Hungarians. So why are we leave? What  what is our responsibility for how we run our own   policy and what can we do on an international  arena? And I cannot undertake more what is   rational for my our position, the size of the  country and so on. So I try to be as modest as I   can in this respect. So it's not my job to inform  the natal ones of what they know. So that would   be well, but they would, they would probably ask  you when, you know, if they ask me, that's another   issue. You know, modesty is the most important  thing. If you are a Hungarian, are you surprised   by the reactions of other leaders or did you know  that this would happen? My, my, my point is that   now we are speaking a lot about strategic autonomy  in Europe and we do very few things in favor of   that because what Hull strategic autonomy means  is not to have our own interests based sovereign   foreign policy. And what we are doing is not  discussing directly, publicly in an understandable   way what is the interest of Europe under these  circumstances. But we are simply copying the   American position. I think we should start to  discuss a little bit more and deeper away what   is the strategic interest of Europe under this  circumstance, and especially after the American   election? Don't forget about that. So what  I'm arguing in favor is deeper understanding   discussions to raise more alternative to the  policy line in European context then we have done   of up to now. So so therefore discussion which  was generated my my trips and my future trips will   also generate is not a bad thing, is a good thing.  This is a starting point to argue not only in   favor of the war, but now there are more and more  person who would like to argue in favor of peace,   which was not the case even one week ago. So it's  a fermentation. Me I say what we need and I think   it's already started to happen. Did you tell  the Ukrainian president when you met him in Kiev   that you would meet Putin and was he in favor? I  haven't informed anybody prior to my meetings. So,   you know, sovereignty is important if you are  doing that very delicate, sophisticated job of   the peace mission. What I'm doing now, you have to  maintain your sovereignty to 100%. So therefore,   I do not inform anybody about what I am doing  prior to the event, after that, of course,   but never prior to that. Did you talk with the  Lansky or the Ukrainian government again after   you met Putin? Not yet. What would you tell him? I  know exactly. So what would be the next step from   your perspective? The next step? This is going on  to happen just soon, beginning of next week. Have   you talked to Donald Trump lately? Because Trump  that's a very important step. His son was here   just two weeks ago. So you think Trump's going  to be the next president? You know, election is   election, which is the greatest possible of all  of the years. How an outcome of the election is   finally coming out from the individual intention  of millions or hundreds of millions of people.   So nobody can say what will be the outcome of an  election. It's a mystery. Even even in the Bible,   you can find the moral mass and decency. So  it's very complicated. But at the same time,   politics is a field of rationality as well. And  what I can say that that is a very, very high   chance that the next American president will be  not the same president who is today. Do you think   Joe Biden is mentally and physically fit to be  president? I'm not a voter of the United States   of America, so it's not my job to say anything  on that. But what I can say, Europeans should   run autonomous sovereign foreign policy under the  present leadership of the United States. I'm sure   Donald Trump talked a lot about a possible peace  plan. He wants to sit down with a this both sides.   And he said at the end he would threaten not  to deliver any more weapons to Ukraine. What   do you think of his plan? I think new leadership  will provide new chances. So do you see things in   the same way Donald Trump does? He's a different  kind of person. And he he he trust and believe   more on direct communication and negotiation than  the regular type of European more intellectually   honest oriented and intellectual background to  policymakers. So he is a he is from businessman,   He's a self-made man. He has a different approach  to everything. And I and I believe that that would   be good for for the world politics. Don't forget  that he is the man of the peace. I am not saying   he will be the map. He is the man of peace. Under  his four year term. He did not initiate a single   war and he did a lot in order to create peace in  the very complicated old conflicting areas of the   world. So that's the reason I have a big trust.  I know many Ukrainians who are very afraid that   Trump becomes president and just gives Putin  what he wants. He's not that kind of man. Be   sure to give somebody what you would like to get,  But that's what a self-made man is. Not above my   father. Very logical. So do you support everything  with Trump is saying regarding his plan to end the   war? You know, I try to be very cautious because  I am not just, you know, an intellectual who is   writing something on politics, but I'm a prime  minister and I have the limits of my authority,   the United States and other countries I would not  like to be involved in all to be political. This   whole thing I'm not I'm speaking only what  Donald Trump or the continuation of the   present presidency would mean for the world.  And I'm sure that a change would be good for   the world. But that's all I can't say. More on  that. Have you talked to the German Chancellor,   Olof Schulz, lately, and have you discussed with  him your view on the war, the prior to go to Kiev   and Moscow and some other capitals soon? First  I visited the German Chancellor first, then the   Italian. But you didn't tell him as well and then  go and then the the French president to discuss   the situation, including the war, of course. So  what was the outcome of that talk? I became more   informed. I was earlier in which we are getting  more the position. It's not my job to reveal   any points made by the German chancellor, but he  explained his position in a version of it and they   explained my mind also. That was not coincidence  between the two things. Do you miss Angela merkel?   Always. it's you know, it's a very funny thing in  politics that because of migration, you know, I'm   a strong anti-immigration guy and she was rather I  heard about that she was more in favor of to find   the technical solution for that. They had a what,  historical civilizational horizon to approach   this issue. So therefore, we were not able to  agree on migration issue and the confrontations   sometimes were what I do. So I try to be always  polite, but that was very difficult anyway. So.   So that was not easy. But but regardless  of the migration, Angela merkel has a clear   understanding of this region, not just Germany,  but central Europe. He has a clear understanding.   She has a clear understanding. What is Russia  about, you know, liberal democracy in Russia.   And that kind of stupid approaches from many  Western is totally untouched. Her, you know,   also. So she did not understand what does it  mean East and Russia and history and so on. So   so she was a good partner to understand together  and two and two and to find common points how to   understand the Eastern politics. Central Europe,  how it is related to Western Europe and European   Union. So her perspective was very wide and very  high to discuss historical issues. You know,   the problem in the European politics is that  there's a failed mis misleading understanding   of political leadership because in Brussels and  in Europe they think that political leadership   means to manage the institutions. While, you know,  because institutions are the key of our political   system and institutions are able to manage  well the life of the people, which is partly   true anyway. Partly true, especially when things  are going well, but when things are getting worse   and unprecedented developments are happening,  surprises coming in politics institutions does   not help institutions just paralyze you. You need  political leaders, personalities who can react,   understand, and make decisions and not  go. America was death kind of leader. So   that's the reason of my appreciation to her. If  Angela merkel was still chancellor of Germany,   do you think the war would have won a full scale  invasion, would have happened? Would have never   happened? Would have never. Why? Because she has  a capacity and understanding and skills to isolate   the conflicts which are bad for you. What  the mistake we have done that there is a   conflict as of war. And instead of isolating  it, we escalated it and made it more and more   international. But we tried. Everybody tried was  means and Minsk was a failure because. Swallow   That's your understanding of means? I don't think  so. I don't think for me, if you think that the   political actually like Minsk can solve all the  problems, of course, is a minsk is a failure.   But if you see that there is a situation which is  bad and must be managed somehow, the only relevant   reference point is not how could it be good, but  how cannot it reverse? And don't underestimate   the situation now. The situation is far worse  than it was after Minsk. So therefore the Minsk   situation we are pretty sure would appreciate  today a minsk situation. But now we are at that   level to the war, Zelensky said. And it's even the  law, Ukrainian law. He would never sit down with   Vladimir Putin to discuss and to have peace talks.  What's your understanding? Will this ever happen   that Zelensky and Putin will sit on one table,  the three major actors of world politics, China   United and European Union, would like to have a  negotiation. These there will be negotiations at   peace. And will that happen? We have to work on  the peace is not coming just by stuff. This is   something which must be created by somebody.  Decisions on the war was decision of certain   persons. If if if we would like to have peace, we  need persons who would like to have peace and make   decisions in favor of peace. And we like we have a  lack of that kind of world leaders at this moment,   unfortunately. How does it make you feel that now  so many European politicians are criticizing you,   that commentary, saying you, Putin's puppet  propagandist? I even read and Applebaum saying   the wife of the Polish foreign minister, that  the native countries should take care of what   they discussed on the next summit because you  would tell it to Putin directly. They are very   young ladies and guys, you know, not them, not  that old folks, as I am in the job. You know,   I do remember in 88, 89, when I raised the  point that Russians would leave Central Europe   and Hungary and we should be as tough as we  can. The battling war should come down. And   we have to do it now, not 40 years later. I was  heavily criticized by the leftist politicians   from from from Germany. Later on. And I said,  Guys, migration, we have changed your society,   by which probably you will be not happy. So  think twice. I will happily criticize. So to be   criticized, I used to it. If you are a Hungarian  prime minister, living in a place where I believe   that's part of the job. So the criticism right  now and people telling you are helping Putin,   I'm helping Europe. So my approach to this  whole situation is how we can create a better   policy for Europe. Thank you very much for your  time, Mr. Prime Minister. Thank you very much.