Hungary, Russia and the Druzhba oil pipeline: who is really to blame?

Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó’s recent statement about the attack on Druzhba oil pipeline infrastructure drew a strong reaction. Budapest was quick to call it an “attack on sovereignty.” But is there any basis for such loud accusations? Let’s look at the situation more closely.

First, the obvious: an attack on pipeline infrastructure is not an attack on Hungary. It is a direct consequence of Russia’s aggression, which has now lasted for years. Druzhba carries Russian oil, and any damage to it is part of the war Moscow is waging. If Hungary really wants secure energy supplies, the logical step would be to back Russia’s isolation and look for independent sources of energy, not to complain about the consequences.

Hungary’s dependence on Russian energy is neither an accident nor the result of outside aggression. It is a direct result of Viktor Orbán’s policies. While other EU countries are successfully moving away from Russian oil and gas, Budapest remains critically dependent on the Kremlin. Why? Because Orbán deliberately chose cooperation with Russia over his country’s energy security.

Hungary’s reaction to the Druzhba incident looks like manipulation. Orbán and his government have long used any pretext to criticize Ukraine and justify their pro-Russian stance. Calling the attack on the pipeline a “blow to sovereignty” is contrived: no one targeted Hungary or its citizens. Budapest, meanwhile, is itself supporting the aggressor by continuing to buy Russian oil and so financing Putin’s regime. Other EU countries are gradually breaking this dependence, but Hungary remains vulnerable, and that is Orbán’s choice.

If Druzhba matters so much to Hungary, why has Budapest done nothing to protect it? If the Hungarian authorities saw the pipeline as a strategic asset, they could have pushed for extra security measures or looked for alternative supply routes. Nothing was done to reduce the risks, which is one more sign of the government’s inaction.

The talk of an “attack on sovereignty” looks more like an attempt to distract Hungarians from problems at home. Corruption, economic difficulties and falling living standards are fueling growing discontent. Loud accusations against an outside “enemy” are a familiar way for Orbán to shore up his power.

What is more, Hungary has in effect become a lobbyist for Russian energy interests in Europe. By blocking sanctions against Russia and supporting Gazprom and Rosatom, Orbán helps the Kremlin keep its influence on the continent. Against this background, Budapest’s complaints about a “threat to energy security” sound hypocritical: it is Hungary’s position that allows Russia to finance the war.

Ukraine, for its part, has every right to strike Russian infrastructure, including oil facilities. Russia’s economy depends on energy exports, and cutting that capacity is a legitimate step in war. Notably, Hungary has never condemned Russia’s attacks on Ukraine’s energy system, yet now it demands security for Russian oil.

Budapest is also indirectly helping Russia blackmail Europe. Talk of energy threats fits neatly into Moscow’s strategy of using gas and oil as geopolitical weapons, as it has done for decades. Knowingly or not, Orbán is acting as the Kremlin’s lawyer here.

The only realistic way forward for Hungary is to give up Russian oil. Instead of playing the victim, Budapest should join Europe’s course toward energy independence. Only then can Hungary secure real sovereignty, rather than covering up its dependence on Russia with loud statements.

It is time for Hungary to choose: remain a hostage to the Kremlin or move forward with Europe. So far Orbán has chosen the first, and not only Hungary but the whole of Europe is paying the price.