Ukraine ‘s crisis proves NATO’ s value for Central and Eastern Europe Ukraine-Russia crisis

In the current tense atmosphere, Russian President Vladimir Putin knows that he has real friends in the European Union. Viktor Orbán is certainly the Prime Minister of Hungary. On February 1, he appeared in Moscow for talks with the Russian leader, who was threatened by the invasion of about 100,000 Russian soldiers and a heavy weapon.

The official reason for his visit was to negotiate additional volumes of natural gas, following the signing of a 15-year supply agreement with Gazprom in September last year. The Hungarian Prime Minister has dismissed criticism of the opposition’s travel and stressed that he is working for the country’s economic interests and peace.

Orbán seems to be breaking ground with NATO and the EU in order to take advantage of his special ties with the Kremlin, and there may be others who will be careful not to upset Moscow in Eastern Europe. But this does not necessarily mean that there is a weakness on the eastern wing of the alliance. Continued regional developments show the value of NATO membership in Central and Eastern European countries, including Hungary.

On the one hand, Moscow does not support NATO’s demand to withdraw its troops and military assets from the region, including Hungary. In fact, according to the media, the Hungarian Ministry of Defense is currently negotiating the deployment of NATO forces in the country in response to the crisis in Ukraine.

In the rest of Central Europe, Orban’s political games do not seem to resonate. The Polish government of the Law and Justice Party, which often joins its Hungarian counterpart to fight the EU, has been one of NATO’s strongest advocates of a strong NATO response to Russia’s distance from Ukraine, criticizing Germany’s reluctance to supply weapons. Ukraine.

On February 1, while Orbán was on his way to Moscow, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki landed in Kiev, where he ordered military assistance to the Ukrainians.

Romania, another country that has not lost its love for Russia, has been steadfast in its support of a strong NATO response to Russian threats. President Klaus Iohannis demanded that more Americans be thrown to the ground long before the current crisis warmed up, and applauded U.S. President Joe Biden’s recent announcement that 8,500 troops would be on alert to deploy to the east wing of the United States.

In the three Baltic states – Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia – Russia is also considered a major threat, especially after the takeover of Crimea in 2014. That is why, since 2016, they have been eagerly embracing a NATO multinational force – an initiative known as the “forward presence” in the military diplomatic war.

However, Orbán is not alone. There are other governments in the region that have condemned the selection of fighting with Putin. On January 25, Croatian President Zoran Milanović dropped a bombardment with the declaration that Zagreb would not take part in a NATO military operation in Ukraine (as if one were in the works), calling it “one of the most corrupt countries in the world.” Prime Minister Andrej Plenković had to dispel the ensuing confusion with a public statement and apologize to the Ukrainian people.

Bulgaria is another example. In recent days, Bulgarian Defense Minister Stefan Yanev has stepped down to make statements against NATO deployments in the Black Sea country. In a televised interview, Yanev stated that in the event of an escalation in Ukraine, Bulgaria would be protected by Bulgarian forces under Bulgarian command.

Of course, such statements are only half-honest. On the one hand, Bulgarian military bases, as well as neighboring Romania, are already recruiting U.S. troops for training and projecting forces, as part of a military cooperation agreement signed with the United States in 2006. And as in the Baltics, they are also led by NATO allies. air police outside Bulgaria. In fact, on January 21, the Dutch Ministry of Defense announced that it would send F-35 fighter jets to reinforce the mission. In other words, Bulgaria, which sees NATO as a front-line state, is already militarily present.

Despite the public statements and political games of some of NATO’s Eastern politicians, the ongoing conflict over Ukraine has proved the value of Central European and Eastern Europeans in joining NATO. Had it not been for the security guarantees extended by the US and its allies, the countries of the former Warsaw Pact could have been in the same situation in Kiev. At the very least, they would be weaker than what scholar Mark Galeotti describes as the Kremlin’s “heavy metal diplomacy”: the use of military threats to force local governments to make concessions.

It applies as much to the hawks of Poland, Romania and the Baltic countries as to the pigeons of Budapest and Sofia. Orban will no doubt continue to play his own complex game, trying to benefit the Russians, but he will do so from the security of being in NATO as well as in the EU. The Bulgarian cabinet may be very careful not to provoke Russia, but in the end it still depends on the additional layer of protection that the Atlantic Alliance offers to its national security.

When the chips go down, all Central and Eastern European countries will go along with their response to Western Russia, whether it’s tougher sanctions or the deployment of additional troops on NATO borders. Some in the region may have thoughts, complained in public, or bowed their heads in fear of Russian retaliation, but the direction of the trip is clear.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial attitude of Al Jazeera.