Connect with us

Europe

Pascal Kohler – the herald of Kaja Kallas

Published

on

Editor’s Note: Moscow-based Swiss geopolitical analyst and legal expert Dr. Peter Hänseler responds to Swiss officer Pascal Kohler’s article published in ASMZ, which targets military analyst Jacques Baud. In his article featured on Forum Geopolitica, Hänseler proves that Kohler’s claims regarding subjects such as Bucha, Skripal, Navalny, and the Ukraine war contradict the actual statements found in Baud’s books, and accuses Kohler of plagiarizing from Wikipedia without citation. Furthermore, he points out that Kohler distorted Baud’s analyses to slander him, producing a smear piece with an amateurism unbecoming of an officer.


Kohler’s article in the Allgemeine Schweizerische Militär Zeitschrift (ASMZ)

On 30 December 2025, the ASMZ published an article by Kohler entitled «Kognitive Zermürbung: Die Logik hinter dem Fall Baud» (‘Cognitive attrition: The logic behind the Baud case’). This article is a vicious, defamatory attack on the most objective military analyst in the Western hemisphere, Jacques Baud.

In the lead-in to the article, Kohler does not describe the sanctions as ‘a blow to the freedom of expression of an individual’. He describes them as ‘rather a precise intervention in the logistics of modern hybrid warfare’, deliberately omitting what he believes ‘hybrid’ warfare to mean. Kohler thus insinuates that the EU is waging war – nota bene against a fellow Swiss officer – and that this justifies the suppression of freedom of expression. Kohler not only supports the EU’s sanctioning of Baud, but also assures the EU of the Swiss army’s support in this fight. It can be assumed that the Swiss army leadership is behind this strategy, otherwise a subordinate would not have written such an inflammatory article on the ASMZ website. However, I was unable to find any confirmation of this.

Kohler does not work carefully; rather, it seems that he did not even formulate his specific accusations against Baud himself, but simply copied them from Wikipedia, without citing the source, of course. This is plagiarism from a source that no serious geopolitician would touch.

On the ASMZ website, he describes his work as follows:

‘He is currently Head of International Cooperation & Training in the Operations Command, responsible for coordinating and implementing international training and engagements.’

Pascal Kohler, ASZM

Whatever this verbiage may mean, Kohler is head of training, and as head of training, he must set an example. A role model does not copy information from Wikipedia without citing the source and sell it as his own. In addition, Kohler deliberately neglects the real sources completely; those sources that contain Baud’s statements – the books by Jacques Baud himself.

The work of Jacques Baud

Jacques Baud’s real statements on many geopolitical issues are exhaustively covered in his books, which are pure analyses and in which Baud relies exclusively on Western and Ukrainian sources.

In none of his publications has Baud ever taken sides in any of the conflicts he has analysed. Jacques Baud’s statements in his books are exhaustive, as he does not use social media channels. We therefore compare the statements made by Kohler with the statements actually made by Jacques Baud.

Preliminary remarks on the defamatory statements

I have carefully read all the passages on all the topics raised by Kohler in his pamphlet in Jacques Baud’s books. Baud’s analyses are very accurate, detailed and clearly referenced with footnotes and sources, as befits a scientific work.

In order to make this article manageable for readers in terms of length, I will analyse Kohler’s slander regarding Butscha in detail by quoting longer passages from Baud’s books.

For the other topics – Skripal, Navalny, etc. – I will limit myself to quoting short passages from Baud’s work, which does not mean, however, that Baud has not written detailed analyses with references for all topics.


Bucha – 2022

Regarding Bucha, Kohler writes the following:

‘In the case of Bucha, he interprets the documented massacre as having been planned by the British and carried out by the Ukrainians – a thesis that contradicts German intelligence recordings of Russian soldiers’ conversations about killings and satellite images of corpses during the Russian occupation.’

Kohler, 30 December 2025

Jacques Baud wrote the following in his book ‘Operation Z’ in 7.3.2:

“[…] What exactly happened there? No one knows. But some civilians were executed, while others appear to have been collateral victims of the fighting. As for responsibility, Ukraine accuses the Russian army, while Russia claims it was a fabrication.”

Baud describes the sequence of events as follows:

Date Incident/Facts
March 29 The Russian command decides to withdraw troops west of Kyiv toward Donbas to launch phase 2 of the operation.
March 30 The Russians are leaving.
March 31 Anatoliy Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, announces the withdrawal of Russian forces on Telegram[i] with satisfaction. He makes no mention of corpses or massacres: “March 31 will be remembered in the history of our community of Bucha as a day of liberation. Liberation by our Ukrainian armed forces from the Russian ‘orcs’, the Russian occupiers. That is why I am declaring today a day of joy. A joyful day and a great victory for the Kyiv region! And we will certainly wait for there to be a great victory throughout Ukraine.”[ii]
March 31 The Ukrainian media company Unian confirms the withdrawal of Russian forces and reports on statements made by the mayor of Bucha, without mentioning the bodies or massacres in the city[iii].
April 1 Ukrainian forces are combing the area in search of saboteurs and Russian collaborators (a Ukrainian video shows Ukrainian paramilitaries asking to be allowed to shoot those who are not wearing blue armbands).
April 1 A video shows corpses on the street that have not been there for three weeks, but whose positions resemble those in the satellite images from March 11. Some are wearing white armbands, others have their wrists bound with white cloth, others have Russian aid packages with them, and others were executed in a basement.
April 2 Ukrainian blogger Dimitry Komarov roams the city and shows the damage left behind after the Russian troops withdrew. He makes no mention of corpses or massacres[iv]. On the same day, the Ukrainian news site Unian reports that special forces have “liberated the city from saboteurs and collaborators with Russian troops”[v]. The SAFARI unit of the Ukrainian police enters the city to carry out mine clearance and demining work in case the Russians have mined the city. The video[vi]shot by the unit does not show a massacre, but access to it via YouTube is restricted.
April 3 Ukraine accuses Russian forces of committing a massacre on the streets of Bucha. Reports of a mass grave actually refer to the exhumation of a previously registered burial site in the church cemetery on March 13.

On April 4, the New York Times publishes a satellite photo of the scene from March 11, 2022, almost three weeks before the “discovery” of the bodies[i] (the date of which is later changed to March 19 for no reason). Two facts are surprising: that the Russians allegedly left the bodies lying on the street for three weeks, even though they had carefully buried other victims in the area during that period, and that the bodies remained in exactly the same position during that entire time.

It is also known that the New York Times image was provided by Maxar, a company that works for the US government. We also know which satellites Maxar uses, their trajectory, their position at a given time, and their overflight times. Using this information and measuring the shadows, we can determine exactly on which day the photo was taken. A group of independent Russian analysts was able to determine that the photo was taken on April 1 at 11:57 GMT (2:57 p.m. local time) [ii]. This is confirmed by traces of a violent thunderstorm that hit the city on the night of March 31 to April 1. Strangely, Maxar does not provide images of this area for March 21 and 23, even though they are listed in the catalog.

Furthermore, other facts give cause for caution:

  • On April 4, the Pentagon announces that it is unable to confirm Russia’s responsibility in the Bucha affair.
  • Ukrainian Socialist MP Ilya Kiva[iv] reveals on Telegram that the Bucha tragedy was planned by the British intelligence service MI6 and carried out by the SBU[v].
  • In June 2022, Italian television station TG24 investigates the killings and crimes against civilians who allegedly collaborated with Russian forces and concludes that this was the case in Bucha.
  • Other images from Maxar taken in the same area at a different time “weigh” 100 MB, while the image of the “massacre” is barely 50 MB, suggesting that it has been manipulated to conceal manipulation.

None of this proves anything in itself, but it shows that what is presented to us as indisputable is anything but clear.

As Ignazio Cassis, Swiss Foreign Minister, explains:

“These are not war crimes unless a court has determined that they are.”

Ignazio Cassis, April 7, 2022

Slander 1: Baud never wrote or said what Kohler claims

Baud never claimed that Bucha was planned by British intelligence. He clearly stated that no one knows what happened there.

In his remarks, Baud merely quotes a post on X by Ukrainian MP Ilya Kiva, who was murdered in Moscow on December 6, 2023. On December 6, 2023, the BBC reported that Kyva had been murdered by the Ukrainian secret service SBU.

Against his better judgment, Kohler is passing off the statement made by the murdered Kiva as a statement made by Baud.

Baud agreed with Federal Councilor Ignazio Cassis, who stated on Swiss television on April 7, 2022:

“These are not war crimes as long as no court has determined that they are.”

Ignazio Cassis, April 7, 2022


Skripal – 2018

Regarding Skripal, Kohler writes the following:

“In the case of the attack on Skripal in 2018, he interprets the proven nerve agent as something else.”

Kohler, December 30, 2025

Jacques Baud wrote the following in section 8.6.5 of his book “Fake News”:

We will limit ourselves here to two quotes from Baud’s book; the entire analysis can be found in the book.

“Furthermore, the initial report compiled after the victims were admitted to hospital mentioned fentanyl poisoning, as Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reported in September 2018, without mentioning ‘Novichok’[i]. The Salisbury Journal of March 5 also mentions possible fentanyl poisoning[ii]

“The silence of the British and Western authorities on this issue suggests that the analysis was unable to confirm Russia’s guilt. But in fact, we know nothing about it.

Slander 2: Baud never wrote or said what Kohler claims

Baud does not interpret anything; he analyzes the official findings and statements with precise references and concludes that the analyses cannot confirm Russia’s guilt – nothing more.


Navalny – 2020

Regarding Navalny, Kohler writes the following:

“In the Navalny case in 2020, he claimed it was a mafia act, even though the use of Novichok was verified by independent OPCW certification laboratories and the involvement of FSB agents was proven.”

Kohler, December 30, 2025

In his book “The Navalny Case,” Jacques Baud wrote the following in section 7.1:

“Analysis of the Navalny case shows that at every stage of the proceedings, the explanations that were systematically selected from the range of possible explanations were those that fit the narrative of poisoning with Novichok and thus must have been ordered by Vladimir Putin. The fact that Skripal and Navalny’s symptoms were completely different, that neither of them showed symptoms of nerve agent poisoning, that neither of them showed the long-term effects associated with Novichok poisoning, or that Novichok was also produced by Western countries, did not cause the media or politicians to exercise caution.

On the contrary, foreign policy is being shaped and measures with uncertain consequences are being taken based solely on the telephone “confession” of an agent whose identity and status no one could verify, and on secret military reports.”

“Since the reports from the German, French, and Swedish laboratories and the OPCW are classified as secret, we do not know their content. However, it can be assumed that if their conclusions had clearly confirmed the presence of Novichok, they would have been published in more detail.”

Slander 3: Baud never wrote or said what Kohler claims

Baud never used the term “mafia-like” as claimed by Kohler. In his detailed analysis, Baud merely concludes that the German, French, and Swedish laboratories were unable to verify the “desired” result. Kohler’s claims that Novichok and the involvement of the FSB have been proven are false.


Osama bin Laden – 2001

Regarding Osama bin Laden, Kohler writes the following:

“On historical events: Baud claimed that Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with September 11.”

Kohler, December 30, 2025

Jacques Baud wrote the following in his book Gouverner par les Fake News (Governing by Fake News) – Section 5.4:

In June 2006, Rex Tomb, head of public affairs for the FBI, confirmed:

The reason “9/11” is not mentioned on the Osama bin Laden wanted poster is that the FBI has no evidence linking Bin Laden to “9/11”[iii] .

Slander 4: Baud never wrote or said what Kohler claims

Nowhere in his books did Jacques Baud ever claim that Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with September 11; he merely analyzed Western sources and concluded that not much was known about the origins of 9/11.


Cause-and-effect relationship Ukraine conflict – 2021

Regarding the Ukraine conflict in 2021, Kohler writes the following:

“He reverses the cause-and-effect relationship with regard to the invasion of Ukraine. He claims that Ukraine provoked Russia by attempting to recapture Donbass in 2022. To support his claims, he quotes a statement made by Zelensky’s advisor Arestovich in 2019, which, however, was an analytical warning of a possible Russian invasion, i.e., a security policy forecast that later tragically came true.”

Kohler, December 30, 2025

Jacques Baud wrote the following in his book Ukraine Between War and Peace – Section 3.1:

“Ukraine’s accession to NATO is therefore only possible if Russia is unable to threaten it. Russia must therefore suffer a crushing defeat that destroys its economy, triggers a revolution and regime change, or even leads to the division of Russia into smaller entities. This is exactly what Arestovych explains: “Our price for joining NATO is a war against Russia and its defeat.” He even mentions the expected date of this war: “2021 or 2022”[iv] !”

Slander 5: What Kohler claims, Baud never wrote or said

Jacques Baud never reversed the cause-and-effect relationship regarding the invasion of Ukraine. He merely quotes from an interview with Olekseï Arestovych and explains his thoughts.


Conclusion

It is somewhat astonishing that a career officer in the Swiss army, who is also responsible for training, would write such an easily refutable pamphlet or hate speech against a former colleague, thereby stabbing a colleague who has been weakened by sanctions in the back. The question of whether he did so on behalf of a superior remains unanswered.

This pamphlet is characterized not only by malice, but also by an almost incomprehensible amateurishness. One can only hope that Jacques Baud will not let this primitive and actionable attack go unchallenged, but will hold this person, who does not deserve to wear an officer’s uniform, accountable. It remains to be seen how long this person’s superiors will stand by him. A training officer convicted of defamation would be a first for the Swiss Army.


References:

[i] Ron Synovitz, „Name Your Poison: Exotic Toxins Fell Kremlin Foes”, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, September 18, 2018

[ii] “Man found seriously ill in Maltings, Salisbury, is former Russian spy Sergei Skripal,” www.salisburyjournal.co.uk, March 5, 2018.

[iii] http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=rex_tomb_1

[iv] „Predicted Russian – Ukrainian war in 2019 – Alexey Arestovich”, YouTube, March 18, 2022 (https://youtu.be/1xNHmHpERH8).

[i]. Carole Landry, „The Horror in Bucha“, The New York Times, April 4, 2022 (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/04/briefing/russia-ukraine-war-briefing-bucha-warcrimes.html)

[ii]. https://t.me/rybar/30599

[iii]. „Pentagon can’t independently confirm atrocities in Ukraine’s Bucha, official says”, Reuters, April 4, 2022 (https://www.reuters.com/world/pentagon-cant-independently-confirm-atrocities-ukraines-bucha-official-says-2022-04-04/?taid=624b43bd3225ef0001288ec4)

[iv]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illia_Kyva

[v].https://t.me/intelslava/24353

[vi]. Jacopo Arbarello, „Guerra in Ucraina, la questione dei collaborazionisti filorussi” (War in Ukraine, the issue of pro-Russian collaborators), Sky TG24, June 7, 2022 (https://tg24.sky.it/mondo/2022/06/06/guerra-russia-ucraina-filorussi)

[i]. https://t.me/vityzeva/52988.

[ii]. „Bucha liberated from Russian invaders – mayor”, ukrinform.net, April 1, 2022 (https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3445989-bucha-liberated-from-russian-invaders-mayor.html).

[iii]. Violetta Orlova, „Мер Бучі підтвердив звільнення міста від російських військ”, Unian, April 1, 2022 (https://www.unian.ua/war/bucha-novini-mer-buchi-zayavlyaye-pro-zvilnennya-mista-vid-okupantiv-novini-vtorgnennya-rosiji-v-ukrajinu-11769010.html).

[iv]„Буча после ухода русских военныхQ”, Kedrov Talks/YouTube, April 2, 2022 (https://youtu.be/72TZbAeKPSE).

[v]. Violetta Orlova, „У звільненій Бучі розпочали зачистку території від диверсантів та російських пособників”, Unian, April 2, 2022 (https://www.unian.ua/war/bucha-u-zvilnenomu-misti-rozpochali-zachistku-teritoriji-vid-diversantiv-ta-rosiyskih-posobnikiv-novini-kiyeva-11770498.html).

[vi]. https://youtu.be/Z7yIyNBMpQY.

Europe

Hungary’s new PM Magyar vows absolute ban on illegal migration, challenging Brussels over fines

Published

on

Hungary’s newly elected Prime Minister Péter Magyar has pledged to block all illegal migration, reject European Union quotas, and challenge Brussels’ punitive fines, signaling a highly restrictive border policy even as he vows to restore ties with European partners.

In his first interview with the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung since taking office, Magyar outlined his administration’s strategic roadmap. He addressed the smear campaigns directed against him by the former government of Viktor Orbán, relations with the EU, migration policy, and the economic necessity of maintaining energy ties with Russia.

Reflecting on his transition to power, Magyar noted that the Orbán administration targeted him, his family, and his colleagues during a highly polarized campaign.

“I have known Viktor Orbán for a long time. What happened during the election campaign was no surprise to me, even if it might be difficult to imagine in other countries,” Magyar said. “The mudslinging campaign was not just directed at me personally, but also against my family, my colleagues, and my friends. However, those who faced each other were not Hungarians against Hungarians; it was Viktor Orbán and his vassals standing against the Hungarian nation. One of our most important campaign promises is that we will do everything we can to reunite the Hungarian nation.”

Despite running a pro-European campaign to secure victory, Magyar acknowledged fundamental disagreements with Brussels, particularly on migration. He argued that former Prime Minister Orbán’s hardline stance during the 2015 European migrant crisis was correct.

“My government will pursue an extremely strict and decisive policy regarding illegal migration,” Magyar said. “You can be as angry with Viktor Orbán as you want—and no one has criticized him more than I have—but when the migration crisis began in 2015, he was right. Many member states have now admitted they made wrong decisions at the time. In any case, we will protect our homeland, our country’s borders, and the external borders of Europe.”

“Hungary will not accept any illegal migrants”

Responding to whether Hungary would comply with newly implemented EU asylum rules, which mandate member states to conduct processing procedures at external borders, Magyar delivered a firm refusal regarding quotas and penalties.

“I can only say this: Hungary will not accept any illegal migrants. We will not pay any penalties for this either,” Magyar said. “However, we will help protect Europe’s external borders, whether in Greece, Malta, or Italy. The 2015 migration crisis must be a lesson for Europe. The most important duty of European politicians is to protect the safety of the people. I believe there are many ways to stop illegal migration without violating European Union rules. It is simply a matter of being able to negotiate.”

Magyar also dismissed the current relevance of a European Court of Justice ruling imposing a daily fine of 1 million euros on Hungary for failing to implement EU asylum procedures, arguing the decision is outdated.

“The court’s decision was made at a very different time and under a different legal framework,” Magyar said. “Today, we are in a completely different situation. This decision no longer reflects today’s reality. Today, there are many countries acting just like Hungary, yet this European Court of Justice decision does not apply to them. I find this incredibly unfair. In order to protect our borders and avoid having to pay the daily fine of 1 million euros, we will hold talks with our European partners and find a common solution.”

While acknowledging that the judicial ruling is final and cannot be appealed, Magyar described the financial burden on Hungarian citizens as unjust.

“The decision cannot be appealed. We are looking for new rules and opportunities to avoid paying the fine,” he said. “It is unfair and disproportionate that the people of Hungary must pay a fine of 1 million euros every day. Similarly, it is a great injustice that while other member states receive these funds, Hungary has been provided with no financial resources for the wire fence it constructed to protect the external border of the European Union.”

“Exclusion only makes the far-right stronger”

Magyar strongly opposed pushback from member states—particularly pressure from Germany—to transition EU foreign policy decision-making from unanimity to qualified majority voting, defending the preservation of national sovereignty.

While rejecting the confrontational rhetoric favored by Orbán toward Brussels, Magyar emphasized the importance of compromise among sovereign states.

“I served as a diplomat within the European Union for a long time, and I know very well how difficult it is to reach a consensus among 27 countries. Yet, most of the time, this is achieved,” Magyar said. “Orbán always said, ‘We must defeat Brussels.’ I do not think that is the point. The point is to understand each other, to persuade, and not to try to defeat one another. People do not want a United States of Europe; they want a European Union based on strong member states. For this reason, I do not support transitioning to a majority voting system in many areas instead of the unanimity rule at this stage. We will negotiate and find a middle ground.”

Addressing the political rise of far-right parties across Europe, particularly in France and Germany, Magyar criticized traditional political elites for being disconnected from public anxieties and relying on political moralizing.

He warned that isolating these populist movements is counterproductive.

“I do not like labels like far-right or far-left. I do not like ideological wars,” Magyar said. “People deserve more than politically correct speeches where ideological labels are slapped on one another. I have no intention of interfering in the internal affairs of other member states, and I will not do so; on this point, I differ from Orbán. However, I observe that some countries make mistakes in combating extremist parties. In many countries, politicians do not act honestly. They do not understand people’s fears and expectations, and they do not dare to talk openly about problems and face them. They use the language of political correctness and, at the end of the day, fail to grasp reality itself. These are precisely the mistakes that certain groups exploit. Excluding these people and these parties, building a wall of isolation around them, is not a solution on its own. Exclusion only makes these forces stronger. In many countries, these mistakes have been recognized, but not yet everywhere.”

Asked if this critique applied to Germany, Magyar maintained his criticism of governing establishments.

“In many countries, the political, media, and economic elites protect their own positions and do not always address the real fears and problems of the people. But the public does not forget this. That is why what we need is honesty, honesty, and once again, honesty,” he said.

On the debate over whether conservative factions in the European Parliament should cooperate with the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, Magyar shared his perspective on the future strategy of the European People’s Party (EPP), which includes his own party, Tisza.

“In the European Parliament, political forces must always seek a majority, and grand coalitions between the center-left and center-right can function. Germany and Austria are good examples of this,” Magyar said. “However, this does not always work, and that is why the CDU/CSU and the European People’s Party, which includes my party Tisza, may have to make a decision one day. In my view, the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) are the natural allies of the European People’s Party. Whether they want to cooperate with the AfD is not my decision to make. However, I believe that talking to one another and listening to the other’s arguments never causes harm. What we accept from each other’s proposals is an entirely separate matter.”

“Europe will partially return to Russian energy after the war”

Defending Hungary’s decision to continue importing crude oil and natural gas from Russia despite the war in Ukraine, Magyar emphasized the country’s landlocked geography and economic constraints.

“The Hungarian people elected me as the Prime Minister of Hungary. My government’s duties include ensuring energy security, security of supply, and the lowest possible energy prices,” Magyar said. “In recent years, Hungary has become one of the poorest and most corrupt countries in the European Union. Three million people live below the poverty line. Our neighbors in the European Union must understand that Hungary is a landlocked country. We are still dependent on Russian oil, and we cannot change this overnight. We have not seen economic growth for years, and we need cheap energy to grow. Of course, we are doing everything we can to diversify our energy resources, but we cannot afford to see our companies’ competitiveness decrease further and Hungarian families’ energy poverty increase. I think Europe will partially turn back to Russian energy resources and lift sanctions when the war ends, because the competitiveness of all of Europe is at stake here. In a future state of peace, no one has an interest in maintaining a new economic and political Cold War. For this, of course, the war must first end.”

While Orbán maintained close ties with American conservative movements and received explicit support from Donald Trump, Magyar indicated that the change in leadership in Budapest would not damage relations with Washington.

“The US is Hungary’s natural ally in NATO and a highly important economic partner. What happened during the election campaign will not change this. We will maintain good relations with every American administration,” Magyar said.

Magyar criticized Orbán’s personal relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, arguing instead for a pragmatic, non-ideological approach to Moscow in the post-war era.

“I know the role of Russia in Hungarian history very well. I have not forgotten the years 1849 and 1956. In both periods, Russian troops bloodily suppressed the Hungarian freedom movement,” Magyar said. “But on the other hand, the reality is that geography does not change. We must accept this as it is. Therefore, we must develop pragmatic relations with Russia once the war against Ukraine ends. Nonetheless, it is extremely clear that Russia currently poses a security risk to all of Europe. It is unacceptable that people in Europe must live in fear of Russian sabotage or a Russian attack. That is why this war must end, and we must provide international security guarantees to Ukraine. However, Europe can only develop when normalcy returns, and Russia cannot have an interest in a new Cold War becoming permanent on the continent.”

“We can turn a new page with Ukraine”

Magyar pledged to end the hostile state-sponsored propaganda directed at Ukraine by the previous administration, emphasizing his respect for Ukraine’s territorial integrity and his personal involvement in humanitarian efforts.

“We want to build good relations with all our neighbors, not least because a Hungarian minority lives in each of them. This also applies to Ukraine,” Magyar said. “We have always stated that Ukraine is the victim in the Russia-Ukraine war and that Ukraine has the right to its territorial integrity. When the Russians bombed the largest children’s hospital in Kyiv in the summer of 2024, I immediately went to Kyiv with our volunteers and personally delivered the humanitarian aid of the Hungarian people. Right after the attack, we set off in a 30-year-old Ford Transit and reached Kyiv within 20 hours under air raids and missile bombardments. I did not see any other European politician at that bombed hospital. We are currently holding talks with Ukraine at a technical level, and we are working to reach an agreement within a few days to restore and guarantee the language, education, and cultural rights of the 100,000 Hungarians living in Ukraine. Today, we need to clarify certain matters with Ukraine regarding our minority in that country, and I hope we will achieve this in the coming days. Ethnic Hungarians there currently do not have the opportunity to use their mother tongue in their relations with official authorities. However, if we resolve these issues on the basis of mutual interest, we can turn a new page.”

Magyar cautioned that future security guarantees for Ukraine must be concrete and enforceable, unlike previous international agreements.

“In 1994, the famous Budapest Memorandum was signed, in which the US and other major powers guaranteed Ukraine’s independence and integrity. However, these promises were not kept, because empty slogans are of little use,” Magyar said. “Right now, everything is at stake in Ukraine. A large number of people are dying, and it is possible that this country will lose part of its territory. Therefore, Ukraine needs real, enforceable international guarantees.”

However, the Prime Minister reiterated that Hungary would remain militarily uninvolved in the conflict, stating that arms shipments do not constitute a genuine security guarantee.

“I do not believe that weapons are a security guarantee. Security guarantees can only be provided by the international community,” the Hungarian leader concluded. “Hungary cannot play a decisive role here; this is the work of the major powers. We can provide diplomatic and humanitarian aid, and Hungary can also provide a suitable ground for negotiations.”

Continue Reading

Europe

EU agrees new deportation rules allowing migrant return centers outside the bloc

Published

on

European Union lawmakers and member states have reached agreement on new legislation overhauling rules governing the deportation of asylum seekers.

According to Politico, the agreed text allows asylum applicants whose claims have been rejected to be sent to dedicated return centers established outside the EU.

As a key condition of the deal, measures to establish the return centers are set to be implemented immediately.

The move is said to be of particular importance to the Netherlands and Germany. Other provisions of the legislation are expected to take effect one year later.

The agreement must still receive final approval from both the EU Council and the European Parliament before it can formally enter into force.

European Commissioner for Migration Magnus Brunner said the agreement would help the EU regain control over both those arriving in the bloc and those required to leave it.

According to data from Eurostat, the proportion of migrants denied asylum in the European Union who ultimately leave the bloc remains at around 27%.

“We must give people the feeling again that we have everything under control,” Brunner said.

The new framework grants member states the authority to transfer individuals ordered to leave EU territory to return centers located outside the bloc.

Several member states are already examining the option, while human rights organizations have warned of risks of rights violations and abuse during the process.

The legislation also introduces stricter measures, including home searches, extended detention periods, entry bans, and penalties for individuals deemed security threats or those who refuse to cooperate.

French Member of the European Parliament François-Xavier Bellamy told the publication: “For years, Europe sent the worst possible message: even if you had no right to stay, there was a high likelihood that nothing would happen. That era is ending. If you do not have the right to remain in Europe, you must leave.”

The initiative, however, has faced opposition from lawmakers affiliated with liberal and left-wing groups.

Melissa Camara, a representative of the Greens group, described the agreement as “a legal arsenal serving a xenophobic ideology” and criticized both offshore centers and the detention of minors.

Marta Welander, head of the International Refugee Committee, said the new measures signaled “a troubling new era.”

Welander argued that the rules would normalize migrant raids and increase the risk of people being deported to countries where they could face persecution or torture.

According to available data, the number of migrants living within the European Union reached 64.2 million in 2025. During the same period, the foreign-born population arriving from outside the bloc increased by 2.1 million people annually.

In 2010, the European Union was home to approximately 40 million migrants.

As a result, the migrant population has increased by more than 60% over the past 15 years, while migrants’ share of the EU population has risen to 14.2%.

In December last year, US President Donald Trump said Europe faced the risk of destruction because of the migration policies pursued by European countries.

Trump had previously argued that the continent was facing a wave of migration and that, as a result, Europe was “no longer the Europe it once was.”

Continue Reading

Europe

Anthropic invites EU cybersecurity agency to access Mythos AI hacking model

Published

on

Anthropic has invited the European Union to access Mythos, its powerful AI-powered hacking tool, by sending an invitation to the bloc’s cybersecurity agency.

A European Commission official said the AI company issued the formal invitation following a meeting with the Commission in San Francisco last Thursday, adding that the EU must now establish a mechanism that would allow access to the model under appropriate security safeguards.

Bloomberg reported on Monday that ENISA, the EU’s cybersecurity agency based in Athens, would be granted access to Mythos.

European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said the Commission had held “several productive meetings with Anthropic” and “welcomes the latest developments regarding potential future access.”

Anthropic unveiled Mythos in early April and warned that the model outperformed most humans in identifying and exploiting cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

The disclosure raised concerns that the model could be used to carry out large-scale attacks against critical and sensitive systems if it fell into the hands of cyber adversaries.

European officials were unable to access the cutting-edge cybersecurity AI technology for weeks, prompting urgent calls from European lawmakers and government officials to secure access.

Cybersecurity officials also urged Europe to develop its own version of the technology.

“This latest development is extremely important in helping us gain a clear understanding of the potential risks. We should not forget that Mythos is not an isolated case and that a new wave of powerful models is entering the market,” Regnier said.

An ENISA official said the agency does not currently have active access to the model but is working to make it operational.

The Commission is developing a formal action plan to respond to powerful AI hacking tools.

According to an industry official, the Commission has indicated that it wants to publish the plan before the summer break.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey