EU foreign ministers to meet in Brussels, not Budapest, over Ukraine diplomacy spat
www.euractiv.com
In a rebuke of Hungary's controversial solo diplomatic efforts on Ukraine, the EU's informal meeting of foreign and defence ministers will take place in Brussels instead of Budapest, the EU's top diplomat Josep Borrell said on Monday (22 July).

Archived link

"Hungary’s repeated uncoordinated steps to speak against EU unity must “have some formal consequences,” EU’s top diplomat Josep Borrell said.

Hungary chairs the rotating EU Council presidency until 31 December.

The step came after several EU member states said they would downgrade their participation in informal meetings planned in Budapest during Hungary’s EU presidency.

Some EU diplomats had even floated the idea of Borrell potentially calling the meeting symbolically in Kyiv, instead of Budapest. However, its backers remained in the minority.

  • cabbage@piefed.socialEnglish
    14·
    2 months ago

    Not many weeks ago, I thought the rotating presidency ending up at a person like Orban was a flaw in the design of the EU, even if he’s not really given any power.

    Now it seems more like a strength - Orban has successfully demonstrated to the entire world what a piece of shit he is, and he has achieved nothing in the process.

    It’s kind of neat. I’m happy it’s only until December. Maybe he’ll have a full-blown public mental breakdown by then.

  • rottingleaf@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    Which formal consequences really? It’s very convenient to have an Orban. I’m sure having him requires “normal” EU politicians to make various deals to “make” him cooperate, which are beneficial for personal finances of everyone directly involved.

    Anyway, I gave a thought to what I really see in politics and now I only care about Armenia and the republic of Artsakh.

    We come to the Web to talk, right? Well, people talk of things they care about, so will I.

    A situation happens involving nuking half the world, but somehow making matters closer to Artsakh’s liberation - good. A situation happens which everyone likes, but without that little part - bad.

    Borrell being mentioned triggered me on this - he was eager to say that something Pashinyan signed about Artsakh meant it’s part of Az*n yadda yadda. Only Pashinyan signed it after signing something meaning he can’t represent Artsakh. Then, I think, that very Borrell said something on the surrender by the government of Artsakh (under clear threat of wholesale massacre of civilians) which was supposedly an illegitimate government? Apparently it becomes legitimate when it’s convenient, as do threats of massacre.

    Lots of mutually contradictory statements by all these suits, the only intersection being that the EU and the USA and everybody else are on the side of Azerbaijan against Artsakh. Oh, well, they are now talking about both sides and mutual compromises (nobody has seen any compromise from Azerbaijan) and no sanctions while Armenia itself has literally been invaded.

    If they can do that, then I can pick lots of mutually contradictory legal principles in favor of Artsakh. Which I will. So - the republic of Artsakh is the only legitimate state on this planet. One can make less certain cases for Catalonia, Brittany and so on.

    Also starting to feel for Serbs, despite their government being shit.

    BTW, I know that this comment feels weird, but in my opinion actual crimes against humanity in which all these suits are involved are more important than, well, anything.