Yesterday, I received countless calls and private inquiries from my friends and acquaintances, who were confused and asked how it should be understood that the European Union wants to give Ukraine candidate status immediately and what does it mean for us that Péter Szijjártó also supports this? Are we really going to admit Ukraine to the EU now? Raising the question also caused confusion on the right.

Gábor Sebes wrote the following:

Karsay Feri, the mayor of our district, always said the lesson learned from his sports career:

"Son, don't stand in front of the line because you'll be slapped in the face, and don't stand in the back because you'll be kicked in the ass."

We now follow this policy.

(my answer below; please note)

I will try to explain it so that you can understand, but at the same time not to sound like a "Putin mercenary", although I already wrote the gist of it in a longer article .

#PrayForUkraine on its official Facebook page . It means nothing in the world. Nothing. Nothing on the cube…

The decision - if it is made - only "authorizes" Brussels to start negotiations with Ukraine on the terms of accession. Which Ukraine would not be able to fulfill within 30 years even if it were not at war with the Russians, and even if neither Donbass nor Crimea existed as a problem.

Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe and also the most corrupt, its infrastructure rivals that of a moderately developed African country, its legal system is not based on European (Roman) law, but on that of the Bolsheviks, i.e. legal harmonization would be long and very painful. The state is barely functioning, Ukraine is deeply in debt, its economy is backward, it is not compatible with the EU, it will take decades to transform it... Getting Ukraine back on its feet will cost one or two thousand billion euros, if not more, while its GDP is barely equal to Hungary's.

In Europe, several countries have been waiting 10-20 years for entry, while they have already gone through all the procedures and legal harmonisations, or maybe Brussels - for tactical reasons - deliberately left one or two chapters open so that they would not have to decide on admission. The worst example is Turkey, which - although an associate member for 60 years - applied for full membership in 1987, i.e. 35 years ago, but even today it is not known when they will be able to enter, or if they will be able to enter at all? In fact, it looks more like the Turks don't even want to enter anymore.

But what would the Union do with a country where physical fights are a daily practice in the parliament? What would the Union do with a country that the dollar millionaires and billionaires left with all their money when Putin raised his index finger?

And what would the Union do with a country in which 15-20 million Russians or citizens of Ukrainian nationality with Russian identity live? Will Putin have a faction of 15-20 people in the EP? Maybe you can give me a commissioner in the EC?

***

A word like a hundred: EU candidate status is nothing more than a band-aid for the fatal injury caused by a shrapnel grenade. #PrayForUkraine on its official Facebook page . He will not give anything in the world to Ukraine.

Has anyone thought this through? Or is the rapid granting of EU candidate status just a sure sign that European politicians have lost their heads, their sound judgment and are in a hurry? Perhaps the granting of the status is not about anything other than the fact that the politicians of some countries are not sending a message to the Ukrainians or to Putin, but to their own voters, that now we have stood up hard for Ukraine - and the truth. But nobody really cares what will happen to Ukraine in the meantime...

***

And why does MO support this? It is also clear from my reply to Gábor Sebes' note - formally (edited afterwards):

Stupidity. We "support" it so that we do not fall out of the sacred "common unity" in all matters. It is of no importance whether we "support" Ukraine's status as a candidate for membership, because it will never be a real question to be decided. But if we were to oppose it, they would immediately point the finger at us that Hungarians are the gravediggers of European unity. There is a month until the elections. You have to endure it.

I would also add that politics is such a profession. It's a bit like the joy girls, so you basically need two important things to cultivate it:

– rope nerves;

- good stomach.

Because, to be clear: by the time the substantive decision on candidate status is made in the EU, Ukraine - as an international legal entity - may not even exist, so those who really supported the granting of the status do not have to take responsibility for the current action either. (let's say for domestic political reasons).

And we still need energy, gas, oil, Paks II after the disintegration/termination of Ukraine, but also imported electricity for a while (most of which comes from Ukraine today and will continue to come from there, but Putin will have the power switch in his hands). That's why we have to politicize smartly, not only in order to stay out of the war, but in 3-5-10 years, when the status quo will be settled, not to be on the losing side (again). This should not be disturbed by the fact that some countries make wise decisions regarding Ukraine for internal political - or other, unpredictable - reasons. You have to "be in solidarity" with them as long as it does not endanger Hungarian interests.

Because, as Lord Palmerston, a former British Prime Minister, said:

"We have no eternal allies, and we have no eternal enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.”

Say:

England has no eternal friends, England has no eternal enemies, England has interests.

***

Regardless, we must accept all refugees from Ukraine. Even if Russian…

The author is a military engineer and freelance publicist

Ferenc Mernyó