After 16 years in power, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is facing his most serious electoral challenge yet from opposition leader Péter Magyar. A new report by the Clingendael Institute frames the vote as “make-or-break” for EU-Hungary relations, warning that Brussels is “holding its breath” as the contest unfolds. 

The outcome of Hungary’s parliamentary election on April 12 could be a defining moment for the European Union, testing its ability to manage internal divisions at a time of war on its eastern flank and growing geopolitical uncertainty. The election could reshape how the EU makes decisions, how it supports Ukraine, and whether it can enforce its own democratic standards among member states. 

“The Hungarian parliamentary elections… are already coined as Europe’s most important elections this year,” says the report, 'Make or Break: What do the Hungarian elections mean for EU-Hungary relations?' by senior research fellow and programme lead EU and neighbourhood Saskia Hollander and senior research fellow Julia Soldatiuk-Westerveld. 

For years, Orbán has been the EU’s most disruptive insider, frequently clashing with Brussels over rule-of-law concerns, migration, and relations with Russia. Under his leadership, Hungary has “backslid into an electoral autocracy,” the report says, while increasingly positioning itself as a veto player inside the bloc.

For its part, the EU has withheld billions of euros in funding to Hungary since 2022 over concerns about corruption and judicial independence. At the same time, Orbán’s government has repeatedly delayed or diluted EU measures supporting Ukraine in its war against Russia. His close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin have heightened concerns. The report warns that Hungary is “posing an ever-greater threat to European security due to his friendship” with the Kremlin leader.

Polls suggest momentum for change

Recent polling suggests a potential breakthrough for the opposition. Magyar’s centre-right Tisza party is projected to win around 49% of the vote, ahead of Orbán’s Fidesz at 39%.

Yet the authors caution that Hungary’s electoral system, redesigned by Orbán after returning to power in 2010, makes translating votes into seats far from straightforward.

“The complex electoral rules have favoured Fidesz disproportionally,” the report says, noting that the ruling party previously secured a two-thirds parliamentary majority with just 45% of the vote. This system, combined with Fidesz’s entrenched control over state institutions and media, means that “a Tisza takeover is not as easy as the polls seem to suggest”. 

The campaign has been characterised by escalating rhetoric and geopolitical framing. Orbán has centred his messaging on opposition to Ukraine and the EU, portraying both as threats to Hungarian sovereignty. As in past elections, the prime minister has relied on identifying external adversaries to mobilise voters. “Previously, migrants were the main enemy, now Ukraine is,” the report notes, particularly targeting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Recent incidents involving energy infrastructure, including disruptions to Russian oil and gas flows, have added fuel to the campaign. Orbán has used these developments to accuse Ukraine of driving up energy prices, claims that analysts say are contested.

The EU has also remained a central target. Orbán has long argued that Brussels threatens Hungary’s sovereignty through its policies on migration, LGBTQ+ rights and support for Ukraine.

Magyar, by contrast, has focused on domestic issues: corruption, declining public services and Hungary’s strained relationship with the EU. He has avoided taking strongly pro-Ukraine positions, wary of alienating conservative voters. Instead, he has pledged to “restore the rule of law” as a means to unlock frozen EU funds and stabilise the economy.

Worst-case scenario for the EU

A victory for Orbán, even by a narrow margin, would represent the worst-case scenario for the EU, according to the Clingendael report.

“There will be no chance for the restoration of the rule of law, of the relationship with the EU, nor for support for Ukraine,” it says.

Orbán has already consolidated control over key institutions, including the judiciary and media, and is expected to deepen that control further. Proposed legislation, such as a “Transparency Law” targeting foreign-funded organisations, could “further erode civil rights.”

For Brussels, the implications would be profound. Orbán has repeatedly used, or threatened to use, Hungary’s veto power to block EU decisions, particularly on sanctions against Russia and financial support for Ukraine. “He will likely continue to do so in the future,” the report warns, potentially paralysing decision-making in areas ranging from foreign policy to the EU’s next long-term budget.

The EU is likely to respond by escalating pressure. Options include increased legal action, further withholding of funds, and even efforts to trigger Article 7 proceedings, which could suspend Hungary’s voting rights. There is also growing discussion of bypassing unanimity requirements in certain policy areas — a move that would fundamentally reshape how the EU operates.

Another scenario is a fragmented result in which neither Fidesz nor Tisza secures a majority. In that case, Orbán could seek to form a coalition with the far-right Mi Hazánk party, which is described as “even more anti-EU and anti-Ukraine than Fidesz.”

Such an outcome could push Hungary further toward isolation within the bloc and intensify fears of a pro-Russian alignment on the EU’s eastern flank.

Magyar has warned that such a coalition could create “a real risk of Hungary leaving the EU”. 

Limited change

Meanwhile, the the report cautions against excessive optimism in case of a Magyar victory, as meaningful reform would be difficult. Fidesz loyalists retain control over key institutions, including the Constitutional Court and the presidency, limiting the scope for change.

“To restore the rule of law… would require constitutional change,” the report notes, which in turn would require a two-thirds parliamentary majority. Without it, “implementing reforms will be virtually impossible.”

Magyar’s foreign policy stance also falls short of what some in Brussels might hope for. While more open to cooperation with the EU, he has opposed sending weapons to Ukraine and has pledged a referendum on Kyiv’s EU membership bid.

His priority, analysts say, will be pragmatic: repairing relations with Brussels to unlock funding for domestic reforms.

Even a clear opposition victory may not guarantee a smooth transition of power. After more than a decade in office, Orbán retains significant institutional leverage. The president, a Fidesz ally, could delay government formation, while emergency powers could be extended to prolong the outgoing administration’s authority.

“After 16 years in power, it remains to be seen whether Fidesz will allow for a smooth transition,” the report warns.

Whatever the outcome, the election highlights a deeper challenge for the European Union: how to deal with member states that diverge sharply from its democratic norms and strategic priorities.

Even in the event of a change in government, “the EU’s troubles with Hungary are unlikely to be over soon,” the report concludes. It calls for “a fundamental rethink” of how the bloc handles internal dissent, including measures to make it easier to suspend voting rights for countries that undermine the rule of law.