Hungary's European Council tenure: What can the rotating presidency do?

After Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán took the reins of the rotating presidency of the European Council on July 1, he engaged in a whirlwind of immediate activity, sparking questions and concern over the rights and limitations of the EU presidency, and whether it overlaps with any duties as a national elected official.

The very next morning, on July 2, he showed up in Kyiv with the goal, according to his spokesperson, of "discuss[ing] European Peace with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy." Later that week, on July 5, he was in Russia, continuing, Orbán said on X (formerly Twitter), his "#peace mission." Three days later, on July 8, he was already in Beijing, posting on X, "Peace mission 3.0."

This immediate spate of travel, coming hot on the heels of months of build-up to his presidency, which was promoted with the slogan "Make Europe Great Again," has caused quite a stir. 

The response to his travels was characterized by an incendiary back-and-forth, with EU officials and citizens incensed on one side by what they saw as Orbán’s overstepping, and another enclave of reactions to these reactions, expressing concerns and fears over what they saw as the overstepping of the EU if it sanctioned or limited Orbán’s role.

Logically Facts has created this short guide on how the EU presidency works: what the rotating EU president can (and can’t) do, along with a brief explainer of the events since Hungary overtook the position.

The response

Many EU representatives were alarmed that Orbán had seemingly taken it upon himself to "initiate dialogue" between Ukraine and Russia. According to Orbán himself, he asked Zelenskyy to agree to a ceasefire, a request which, to some, seemed to blithely ignore questions of "what that would mean for Ukraine’s territorial integrity," according to AP News.

Concerns about Orbán’s agenda and possible misuse of his new role were intensified when he showed up in Russia only days after asking Zelenskyy for a ceasefire. Upon arrival, Vladimir Putin welcomed Orbán specifically in his capacity as "president of the Council of the European Union," which caused a firestorm of response from EU leaders, who said he had no right to represent the EU on this mission. 

European Council president Charles Michel, for instance, tweeted the following in response to the visit:

(Source: X/Screenshot)

Daniel Keleman, McCourt Chair in the McCourt School of Public Policy at Georgetown University, told Logically Facts, "With his recent visits to Ukraine, Russia, and China, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has abused his control of the Presidency to pretend to speak for the EU as a leader on foreign policy. This has infuriated other EU leaders, particularly because Orbán’s pro-Russian stance is, in fact, totally at odds with the EU’s strong support for Ukraine."

For his part, Orbán remained vague, stating, "What I’m doing may look like a negotiation format because we sit behind a table and discuss issues, but we don’t negotiate," he said in an interview with Hungarian state radio Friday morning. "That’s why I don’t even need a mandate because I don’t represent anything."

EU representatives remained skeptical. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz weighed in: "Victor Orbán is traveling to Putin as Hungarian Prime Minister," a statement which attempted to draw a clear line that Orbán had no authority to represent the EU in missions of this sort. The EU later released an official statement underscoring this point. The statement said that Orbán’s "visit to Moscow takes place, exclusively, in the framework of the bilateral relations between Hungary and Russia." Statements like this attempted to draw a clear line between Orbán’s role and rights as Hungary’s prime minister and his role as the president of the Council of the EU.

A press statement released by the Russian government, however, appeared to state otherwise: "Given that Hungary has held the Presidency of the Council of the European Union since July 1, Mr. Orbán and I exchanged views on the state of affairs in relations between Russia and the European Union."

By July 16, a letter emerged, signed by 63 Members of the European Parliament, urging for Hungary’s EU voting rights to be stripped. Similar admonitions have surfaced repeatedly on X, often from citizens rather than politicians. One such post, which received 402,800 views, went even further, exclaiming, "Kick Hungary out of the EU now!"

(Source: X/Screenshot)

However, these responses urging for sanctions or limitations on Hungary or its presidency of the Council of the EU caused many to express concerns about the precedent this would set—specifically from a number of anti-EU voices. Posts abounded accusing the EU of wanting to revoke Hungary’s presidency.

(Source: X/Screenshot)

The initial actions taken in response to Orbán has been to send civil servants, rather than higher-order representatives — a fairly symbolic gesture. More recently, Josep Borrell, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, announced that an informal meeting of foreign ministers that would have taken place in Budapest had now been moved to Brussels. 

Although Borrell was resistant to the label of "boycott," detractors nevertheless cried out against the movement as an overstep. One such post on X stated, "EU’s top diplomat boycotts Hungary’s EU Presidency over Orbán’s Peace Mission….why do they hate the idea of peace? $ from the US war pigs?" 

On both sides, then, people are demanding to know just how far the EU sanctions against Hungary can go. In reality, the power inherent to the presidency of the Council of the EU is quite limited, as are the measures the EU can take to hem in or punish the actions of any one presidency. 

The structure of the European Council and the Council of the EU

First, it is helpful to understand that the European Council and the Council of the EU are two separate entities. The European Council, consisting of 27 EU leaders, sets guidance which is sent to the Council of the EU (composed of 27 ministers).

The following image is helpful in explicating this structure, and demonstrates quite clearly that the presidency of the Council of the EU has nothing to do with elected leadership roles such as that held by Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, or European Council (not to be confused with the Council of the EU), president, Charles Michel. 

(Source: European Council / Council of the European Union Website)

The role itself described: the Presidency of the Council of the EU

It isn’t even completely accurate to say that one country truly holds the presidency – although colloquially, this is often the phraseology used. The fact of the matter is a bit more complex. Unlike von der Leyen or Michel, Orbán is not acting in an elected capacity in his role in the Council of the EU – instead, his role is scheduled, rotating, and representative of the home country rather than himself as a leader (as it would be when considering his role as prime minister within Hungary). 

Additionally, there is no single presidency holder. In reality, a trio of EU member states holds the presidency of the Council of the European Union for a total of 18 months. Within this 18-month period, these three countries trade-off as the primary leader for six months apiece. So is the individual country or the trio of countries considered the president? The situation is one of both/and, or of checks and balances. 

In fact, the Council of the EU’s own websites explaining the trio system and the role of the presidency specifically states that the three "presidencies working together," while simultaneously acknowledging the role of the primary 6-month leader as having the unique title of "presidency of the Council" for 6 months. 

However, the word "presidency" may imply more power to many readers than the role actually holds. In most of its official coverage of the presidency, the Council of the EU’s own websites describe it as a "chairperson" role, with the presidency chairing all the meetings at every levels in the Council (with a few exceptions). Or, as the European Council themselves puts it, "the role has been likened to someone hosting a dinner, making sure their guests all gather in harmony–able to express differences during the meal, but leaving on good terms and with a common purpose."

The trio, as well as the individual president, does have the privilege of setting the priorities for the 18-month period and a more nuanced plan for the 6-month period, respectively. However, this 6-month plan remains guided by the longer-term 18-month plan. 

The Council of the EU also carefully states that, in reality, "the presidency is held by a whole country, rather than an individual." This is an important distinction because while the term presidency is used, the role is not elected but pre-determined based on a rotating schedule — everyone gets a turn. Thus, the individual holding the role is representative of their country holding the presidency, rather than they themselves acting as an elected leader — although the role is hardly a mere symbol, either.

For this reason, Viktor Orbán’s role as prime minister of Hungary cannot be seen as equivalent to or similar to his rotating role as president of the European Council. More importantly, the two roles do not and theoretically should not overlap. 

The reality

While commentators like those mentioned above from X have alternately demanded heavier consequences for Hungary (such as revoking Orbán’s presidency of the Council of the EU), others have lamented the possibility. Ultimately, experts say the options for such punitive or restrictive measures are quite limited. According to EU officials, "changing the order of the presidencies or shortening Hungary’s six-month turn at the helm of the EU might have been options at one point, but are now legally fraught as the presidency is underway."

Other experts have suggested that withholding funds is the more typical method of correction enforced by the EU while acknowledging the limited impact that would be likely to have that effect.

Instead, according to the think tank Chatham House, "it is more likely that Hungary’s presidency will rumble on" in spite of the outcries on both sides.