A Budapest reset, and a scramble to get Ukraine peace talks back on track

The “Budapest reset” means Hungary and the European Union are trying to move from confrontation toward cooperation. It follows years of acrimony between Brussels and Viktor Orbán’s government. The change matters because Hungary is an EU member whose decisions can affect major European policies, including Ukraine’s membership path.

The symbolism is unusually visible. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa are joining Hungary’s 1956 commemoration. Von der Leyen is expected to speak in parliament alongside Prime Minister Péter Magyar. She was previously portrayed on Hungarian billboards as a public enemy.

The reset is not complete. Magyar’s government improved ties with Ukraine but surprised EU diplomats by blocking the next stage of Kyiv’s accession talks. Still, the commemoration is Magyar’s first major international event since taking office in May, making it a public test of the new relationship.

The appearance is powerful because Hungary’s 1956 uprising represents resistance to Soviet domination, while today’s ceremony is also being used to signal a political realignment. Von der Leyen’s presence links that national memory with a new attempt to improve relations between Budapest and Brussels.

The contrast with the recent past is striking. Von der Leyen was portrayed on Hungarian billboards as a public enemy. She is now expected to address the same parliament where, only a few months earlier, Viktor Orbán lashed out at the European Union. Prime Minister Péter Magyar will appear alongside her.

The event is also Magyar’s first major international gathering since becoming prime minister in May. António Costa, Maia Sandu and Irakli Kobakhidze are expected too. Macron cancelled after riots in France, while Zelenskyy is unlikely to attend. The ceremony therefore offers a highly visible, though incomplete, picture of Hungary’s political change.

Hungary can act as an important gatekeeper in Ukraine’s path toward EU membership. Accession is not only a process between Kyiv and EU institutions. Member governments also have to support moving talks forward, so a national government can delay or block a collective decision.

That power became concrete this week. Budapest blocked the next steps in Ukraine’s accession talks, even though Kyiv had met the demands previously set for it. The move surprised EU diplomats because relations between Hungary and Ukraine had improved dramatically since Péter Magyar’s election in April.

Hungary’s position therefore combines cooperation and obstruction. Magyar invited Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the 1956 commemoration, but the Ukrainian leader is unlikely to attend. At the same time, Hungary’s decision shows that better bilateral ties do not guarantee progress in the EU process. Future accession steps may depend on whether Budapest continues supporting Kyiv or uses its influence to hold talks back.

The proposed peace process currently has a narrow core: Russia, Ukraine and the United States. Russia has indicated that it is prepared to resume trilateral talks at the technical level in mid-November. The format matters because decisions about the war could begin with only the countries directly fighting or mediating it.

The difference is not merely numerical. Trilateral talks would involve three parties. Brussels wants the process expanded into multilateral negotiations that also include European representatives. Europe would then have a direct place in discussions about Ukraine’s future and the continent’s security, rather than receiving decisions afterward.

The broader format remains uncertain. The article says it is far from guaranteed that Moscow would agree to European participation. Separately, Moscow has proposed a summit involving Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping. That proposal has intensified European fears that major powers could shape a settlement without sufficient Ukrainian or European influence.

Ukraine’s participation is fundamental because it is the country being invaded and would have to live with any settlement. European governments also insist on involvement because the war has made their own security vulnerable. A deal made by others could determine borders, guarantees and future risks without those most affected shaping the outcome.

The concern grew after Donald Trump embraced Vladimir Putin and Moscow proposed a summit including Trump, Putin and Xi Jinping. European officials fear the presidents could secretly reach an agreement that ends with Ukraine’s capitulation. One senior official called the situation “very disturbing” and “terrifying.”

Europe is therefore trying to stay engaged with the Trump administration. Officials say they must ensure that the European point of view is reflected in the peace process. Brussels hopes technical talks among Russia, the United States and Ukraine can expand to include European representatives. Yet Russia may refuse, leaving Europe trying to influence a process in which it lacks a guaranteed seat.

Europe’s security architecture means the broader system through which European countries protect themselves, coordinate policy and manage threats. The article presents it as a structure now under severe pressure. Russia’s war against Ukraine has already challenged the continent, while possible US-Russia bargaining could alter security arrangements without European control.

The pressure is visible in the debate over a proposed summit between Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. European officials fear that Trump and Putin could privately negotiate an outcome that forces Ukraine to capitulate. One senior official said Europe was not built to operate in a “ruthless transactional environment.”

The architecture is strained because Europe lacks certainty about its influence over the peace process. Officials still want engagement with Washington so their views are represented. Brussels hopes trilateral technical talks can become multilateral and include European representatives. If Moscow refuses, Europe may face a settlement shaped elsewhere, with consequences for Ukraine and the continent’s security.

Europe’s security architecture is the network of alliances, institutions, rules, and partnerships that protect the continent. It includes European cooperation, NATO’s collective defense, and the United States’ security role. Its purpose is to deter attacks and prevent countries changing borders by force.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has already tested that system. Moscow continues attacking Ukraine, including ballistic missiles with cluster warheads launched at Kyiv on Thursday night. A secret Trump-Putin settlement could force Ukraine to accept Russia’s gains, weakening the rule against redrawing borders through war. It could also sideline Europe from decisions affecting its own safety.

European officials fear a ruthless, transactional approach, while insisting engagement with Washington must continue. Russia has indicated possible mid-November technical talks with the US and Ukraine. Brussels wants European representatives included. The outcome will show whether Europe helps shape peace or faces a weaker security order.