分类： politics

In a sharp departure from the pro-Kremlin foreign policy that defined Hungary for nearly a decade under former Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Budapest’s newly elected government has ordered 10 Russian diplomats to leave the country over accusations of participating in activities that undermine national security, triggering a fiery vow of retaliation from Moscow.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Anita Orbán announced the expulsion order via social media, framing the move as a necessary step to safeguard the country’s national sovereignty and security. She declined to share additional specific details about the alleged activities that prompted the decision, but emphasized that the expulsion does not amount to a full severance of diplomatic ties between the two nations.

The policy shift marks the most significant break yet from the course set by Viktor Orbán, who positioned Hungary as Russia’s closest ally within the European Union for years. Following Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party’s defeat in April’s general election, Prime Minister Péter Magyar’s Tisza party took power and quickly began moving away from the previous administration’s staunchly pro-Moscow stance. While Magyar initially pledged to maintain what he called “pragmatic” relations with Russia, his government has consistently called on Moscow to end its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a sharp contrast to the previous government’s positions.

Tensions between the two nations have been building for months. In May, Anita Orbán summoned Russian Ambassador Evgeny Stanislavov to protest a large Russian drone attack on Ukraine’s Transcarpathia region, which is home to a substantial ethnic Hungarian minority. Political observers have been quick to note that this move would have been unthinkable under the previous Fidesz administration, which never took such a step in response to attacks on Ukrainian territory holding Hungarian communities since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022. Just last month, Magyar formalized the policy break, releasing new official guidelines that explicitly label Russia’s military action in Ukraine as a direct threat to Hungary, European stability, and the global international order, as well as a critical danger to the Hungarian minority in Transcarpathia.

Stanislavov, Russia’s top envoy to Budapest, issued a scathing response to the expulsion announcement. He dismissed Magyar’s earlier promise of pragmatic cooperation as worthless, calling the expulsion an “extremely unfriendly step” that amounts to an unprovoked and unprecedented escalation of tensions between the two countries.

On the Russian side, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Moscow would deliver a “harsh and painful” response to what she called actions by the “Russophobic lobby” in Budapest. For years, the Fidesz government resisted any action against alleged Russian intelligence activity on Hungarian soil, according to former Hungarian counter-intelligence chief András Telkes, who spoke to the BBC about the situation. Even before the April election, when investigations into Russian spying operations were already underway, the previous administration blocked any punitive measures, Telkes explained.

Ahead of the 2024 election, independent Russian investigative outlet Agentsvo published a report finding that 15 of the 47 total Russian embassy staff in Budapest had confirmed ties to Russian intelligence agencies, with an additional six more suspected of having connections to intelligence work. That report also alleged that three Russian military intelligence officers had traveled to Hungary to attempt to influence the outcome of the national election. The Russian embassy in Budapest has repeatedly denied those accusations, and Moscow has a longstanding policy of rejecting all claims that its diplomatic missions around the world are used for espionage activities.

This expulsion order places Hungary in line with a broader trend across Europe: since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, hundreds of Russian diplomats have been expelled from European capitals over espionage concerns, and Moscow has consistently responded with reciprocal tit-for-tat expulsions of European diplomats. Telkes warned that the scale of the current expulsion could lead to a major disruption of diplomatic relations. If Moscow chooses to expel 10 Hungarian diplomats in response, that would effectively leave the Hungarian embassy in Moscow unable to operate, he noted.

The new Hungarian government’s move makes clear just how far the Central European nation has shifted its foreign policy in just a few months, ending years of close alignment with Moscow and bringing Hungary more in line with the European Union’s unified stance against Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Diplomatic tensions are roiling the North Atlantic after former U.S. President Donald Trump shared a provocative, expansionist map on his Truth Social platform over the U.S. Labor Day holiday weekend, reigniting long-simmering concerns over his territorial ambitions for the region.

The map posted by Trump reimagines the entire North American continent as U.S. territory, extending the nation’s borders outward to include both Greenland, the self-governing Danish territory in the Arctic, and the North Atlantic island nation of Iceland. The map itself was shaded in the red, white, and blue of the U.S. flag, and Trump offered no accompanying explanation for the post.

The unprompted share was not out of character for the former president: it comes after years of repeated public musings from Trump about absorbing Canada as the 51st U.S. state, and consistent speculation about seeking U.S. control over Greenland. Tensions over his Arctic territorial rhetoric had already been rising through 2024, with Arctic nations on heightened alert after Trump ramped up his public comments on U.S. claims to Greenland earlier this year.

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen called the post deeply concerning in comments to Denmark’s national public broadcaster DR on Tuesday. “It’s disturbing and, in many ways, completely inappropriate,” Rasmussen said. “It’s obviously a sign that the U.S. president still harbors some kind of maximalist vision in his own mind. We need to rein that in.”

The European Union moved quickly to shore up ties with Greenland just as Trump’s post circulated, offering the territory a new enhanced partnership and hundreds of millions of euros in targeted investment to counter growing uncertainty sparked by Trump’s repeated threats.

For Iceland, the map post amplified already elevated tensions that have roiled the island nation’s geopolitical landscape this year. Iceland’s Foreign Secretary Thorgerdur Katrín Gunnarsdóttir formally summoned U.S. Ambassador Billy Long to an official meeting, where she made clear that Trump’s Truth Social post was unacceptable, Iceland’s national broadcaster RÚV confirmed.

Relations between Iceland and Trump-aligned U.S. diplomatic leadership have been fraught for months. Earlier this year, Ambassador Long made a joke about Iceland becoming the 52nd U.S. state and himself as the territory’s governor, prompting thousands of Icelanders to sign a petition urging the prime minister to reject Long’s appointment. Long ultimately issued a public apology and took up his post in Reykjavik last month. Tensions rose again when Trump mistakenly name-checked Iceland four times during a speech discussing his plans for Greenland, despite the island sitting 180 miles off Greenland’s southern coast.

That incident pushed Iceland’s left-leaning coalition government to move up a planned national referendum on restarting long-stalled EU accession negotiations. The vote, held Aug. 30, was framed in part by supporters as a way to strengthen Iceland’s European ties and shield the nation from growing regional geopolitical instability. Ultimately, Icelandic voters rejected the measure, leaving accession talks stalled for the foreseeable future. Iceland is already a member of NATO, but has remained outside the European Union for decades.

Canada, which is prominently included as U.S. territory on Trump’s map, has also been a repeated target of the former president’s expansionist rhetoric. Trump has openly discussed making Canada the 51st state on multiple occasions, launched a trade war with the U.S. neighbor, and recently drew backlash for unilaterally renaming Lake Ontario — the Great Lake shared by Canada and the U.S. state of New York — as “Lake America.”

Over the same Labor Day weekend that the map was posted, Trump also added another provocative proposal to his list of naming changes: he suggested renaming the southwestern U.S. state of New Mexico to “New America.”

This report includes contributions from Associated Press correspondents Claudia Ciobanu in Warsaw and Darlene Superville in Washington.

BRUSSELS — In a landmark ruling that clarifies the balance between political expression and intellectual property protections across the European Union, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) – the bloc’s highest judicial body – handed down a judgment Tuesday affirming that a far-right Belgian political party had no legal right to co-opt home goods giant IKEA’s protected trademarks for an anti-immigration campaign. The court’s opinion also notes the unauthorized political use could cause serious harm to the global furniture retailer’s long-established reputation.

The dispute dates back to 2022, when Vlaams Belang, a Belgian far-right party that also advocates for Flemish separatism, launched a high-profile anti-immigration policy proposal branded as the “IKEA Plan – Immigration Really Can Be Different”. At the campaign’s launch press conference, party organizers replicated IKEA’s iconic logos, branded signage, and signature visual style to frame its plan to tighten Belgium’s national immigration regulations, leaning on the brand’s widespread public recognition to draw attention to its political messaging.

IKEA, the Sweden-based multinational retailer known for its affordable flat-pack furniture and global brand identity, quickly filed a trademark infringement lawsuit with Belgian domestic courts, arguing the political campaign made illegal use of its legally registered trademarks without any prior consent or approval. Defending the campaign, Vrijheidsfonds – the independent association that managed the initiative on behalf of Vlaams Belang – contended that its unlicensed use of IKEA’s trademarks fell under the protection of the EU’s guaranteed right to freedom of political expression.

Unable to resolve the core legal question of competing rights on its own, the Belgian domestic court referred the case to the ECJ for a binding interpretive ruling on EU trademark and expression law. In its Tuesday judgment, the ECJ concluded that the party’s reuse of IKEA’s registered trademarks creates a significant risk of material harm to the reputation of the brand and the commercial interests of its owner, IKEA.

The court further clarified that invoking freedom of expression to justify unlicensed trademark use requires two key conditions: that the use is carried out in good faith, and that it serves a legitimate public interest. In this specific case, the ECJ found neither condition appeared to be satisfied. The judgment also emphasized that leveraging IKEA’s widely recognized positive reputation to amplify a polarizing political message does not override IKEA’s legally protected property rights and commercial interests under EU law.

While the ECJ’s ruling provides formal legal guidance for the domestic proceedings, the final binding decision on the infringement claim will still be issued by the original Belgian court. Legal observers widely expect the Belgian court to align its final judgment with the ECJ’s clear guidance in the case, setting a broader precedent for future disputes over political use of private trademarks across the European Union.

LONDON — A pre-planned disclosure from Buckingham Palace regarding the non-working royal status of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle has thrown the couple’s current visit to the United Kingdom into the center of a new public dispute, after the pair was given barely any advance notice to prepare a response before the letter was published.

Multiple sources close to the couple’s inner circle confirm that representatives for Harry and Meghan received the full text of the letter — sent on King Charles III’s behalf to senior British government and military leaders — only 72 minutes before it was distributed to national and international media outlets. By the time the couple’s team was able to connect with Prince Harry, who was tied up in a pre-scheduled private meeting, only two minutes remained before the letter went public, leaving no window for the pair to craft an official statement or negotiate any adjustments to the text.

Dated Monday, the formal correspondence from the Lord Chamberlain, the highest-ranking official in the British royal household, reaffirms what has been the palace’s official stance since 2020: Harry and Meghan will remain classified as non-working members of the royal family, and will continue to refrain from using their “His Royal Highness” and “Her Royal Highness” honorary titles. All philanthropic activity the couple undertakes moving forward will be done in their personal, non-official capacity, the letter adds, noting that all decisions regarding the pair’s on-the-ground operational security fall under the jurisdiction of British law enforcement agencies. In the letter, the Lord Chamberlain explained that the formal notification was intended “to help avoid doubt or confusion” following the couple’s return to UK soil.

This public clarification of the couple’s unchanged status is not new — it aligns with the position set by the late Queen Elizabeth II when Harry and Meghan first stepped back from official royal duties in 2020. At that time, the Queen made clear that part-time royal roles were not possible, and the pair would need to relinquish all official positions if they chose to pursue independent commercial careers, a commitment King Charles has upheld since ascending to the throne in 2022. After stepping down, the couple relocated to North America and signed high-value content deals with streaming giants Netflix and Spotify to fund their independent ventures.

What has drawn sharp criticism from the couple’s camp, however, is the way the palace chose to release the letter. The lack of advance notice caught Harry and Meghan completely off guard, according to the source familiar with internal discussions, amplifying long-simmering tensions between the couple and the senior working royal family during their first high-profile UK visit in months.

Palace analysts have long warned that the couple’s periodic visits to the UK carry inherent risk for the monarchy, with some observers noting concerns that Harry and Meghan’s high public profile could create a de facto parallel royal platform that draws attention and support away from the working members of the House of Windsor.

The most contentious issue on the table during this visit remains the question of personal security. When the couple gave up their official roles, publicly funded round-the-clock police protection for Harry was withdrawn, and the prince has waged a years-long legal and public campaign to have that funding restored. All final decisions on security arrangements for high-profile individuals like the couple are handled by RAVEC, the Royal and VIP Executive Committee, a specialist government panel. A source familiar with the committee’s schedule confirmed that the body is set to convene to discuss the matter as early as this week.

BRUSSELS — The European Union’s most senior leaders have voiced profound shock and condemnation after Serbian authorities facilitated a state-tinged hero’s funeral for Ratko Mladic, the Bosnian Serb war criminal who died last week while serving a life sentence for genocide and multiple war crimes. The controversial ceremony has thrown into serious question Serbia’s long-stated ambition to join the 27-nation bloc, reopening deep divides over the Balkan nation’s commitment to European democratic and historical values.

Mladic, infamously known as the “Butcher of Bosnia” for orchestrating the 1995 Srebrenica massacre that left more than 8,000 Bosniak men and boys dead — the first proven genocide on European soil since World War II — was interred in central Belgrade on Monday. The ceremony included full military honors: active-duty Serbian army soldiers carried his flag-draped casket through the cemetery, while the head of the Serbian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Porfirije, personally led the funeral service. Multiple sitting Serbian government ministers were in attendance, alongside high-profile guests including Bosnian Serb nationalist leader Milorad Dodik and Russia’s ambassador to Serbia, Alexander Botsan-Kharchenko.

While populist Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic — himself a former extremist nationalist who backed Serbian expansionist policies during the 1990s Yugoslav wars — opted not to attend the ceremony, his son Danilo Vucic was present as a representative of the administration. Vucic has framed the public turnout and official backing for the funeral as a natural “emotional outpouring” for a figure still widely viewed as a national hero among conservative segments of the Serbian population. Serbian Justice Minister Nenad Vujic, who appeared alongside Mladic’s family during the service, claimed the state’s only role was to provide security to ensure the event proceeded in an orderly fashion, with all ceremonial arrangements handled by Mladic’s family.

The event comes as Vucic navigates a precarious political balancing act: he faces early parliamentary elections expected to take place within months, and relies on the support of hardline nationalist voters who broadly admire Mladic, while still clinging to Serbia’s official goal of EU accession. Even before the funeral took place, the EU signaled the ceremony would be a critical test of Belgrade’s alignment with bloc values. EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos canceled a planned visit to Serbia last week, stating explicitly that any public glorification of Mladic would be irreconcilable with the standards required for EU membership.

In synchronized statements released via social media on Tuesday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Antonio Costa condemned the event, saying “The images from Ratko Mladic’s funeral yesterday in Belgrade were shocking. The elements of official support and the presence of some senior Serbian officials at the funeral are deeply regrettable. They demonstrate a failure to confront a dark chapter in Europe’s recent history and contradict the values underpinning Serbia’s path towards the European Union.”

When asked about potential consequences for Serbia’s membership bid, a spokesperson for von der Leyen only confirmed that leadership is currently reviewing the situation, with no further details available. The EU is set to release its annual enlargement progress report for candidate countries in late October or early November, which will outline both progress made and ongoing deficiencies for Serbia. Von der Leyen is scheduled to tour the Western Balkans ahead of the report’s release, but no dates or agenda for a potential stop in Belgrade have been confirmed.

Serbia’s membership prospects were already in a fragile state before the funeral, with the bloc already raising serious concerns about democratic backsliding and electoral irregularities. In April, Kos warned Belgrade that it could lose access to as much as 1.5 billion euros ($1.8 billion) in pre-accession EU funds over fraud allegations connected to recent municipal elections.

The outcome of this controversy will also depend heavily on internal EU politics. Vucic’s ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), a nationalist-populist party, maintains close formal ties to the European People’s Party (EPP), the largest political grouping in the EU that unites center-right parties from across the bloc. Critics have long accused the EPP of shielding Vucic from consequences for his authoritarian turn. The EPP’s relationship with illiberal nationalist parties has precedent: for years the grouping tolerated Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party amid widespread concerns over democratic erosion, only eventually suspending Fidesz in 2019, before the party fully quit the bloc in 2021.

Von der Leyen herself is a senior EPP member, as are half of her college of commissioners and European Parliament President Roberta Metsola. She has avoided harsh public criticism of Vucic in the past. But pressure is now mounting on the EPP to take a harder line. “It is high time for the EPP to stop acting as a safe haven for the SNS party, which openly celebrates convicted war criminals and rolls out the red carpet for the ‘Butcher of Bosnia’,” Slovenian Green MEP Vladimir Prebilic said last week.

In a landmark move signaling a sharp break from its predecessor’s pro-Moscow stance, Hungary’s newly installed government has ordered 10 members of Russia’s diplomatic mission in Budapest to leave the country, citing activities that violate international diplomatic rules. The announcement, made public by Hungarian Foreign Minister Anita Orbán on Tuesday, confirms that the Russian ambassador to Hungary was formally notified of the expulsion order.

Orbán, who is not related to Hungary’s former long-serving Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, clarified that the decision stems from a Hungarian security assessment finding the 10 Russian diplomats engaged in activity incompatible with their diplomatic status under the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the binding international treaty that outlines accepted conduct for diplomatic personnel globally. She declined to provide specific details about the alleged improper activities, nor did she specify the timeline by which the expelled diplomats must exit Hungarian territory.

Crucially, the foreign minister emphasized that the expulsion is not a step toward cutting bilateral diplomatic ties between Budapest and Moscow. “This decision protects Hungary’s security and sovereignty,” Orbán said in an official written statement. “It does not imply breaking off diplomatic relations with Russia. Hungary intends to continue the necessary dialogue, based on mutual respect and adherence to the rules.”

Moscow has already signaled it will push back against the action. In remarks carried by Russia’s state-owned news agency RIA Novosti, the Russian Foreign Ministry pledged to deliver an “appropriate response” to the expulsions, though it offered no further details on what form that retaliation might take.

This diplomatic move marks the first major foreign policy shift from Prime Minister Peter Magyar’s administration, which took power earlier in 2025 on a campaign pledge to reverse the country’s long-standing pro-Russia alignment. Magyar’s predecessor, Viktor Orbán, maintained a close alliance with Russian President Vladimir Putin throughout his tenure, repeatedly working to delay or block collective European Union sanctions targeting Moscow over its full-scale invasion of Ukraine and prioritizing bilateral energy trade deals with Russia.

Analysts view the expulsion as a clear indicator that Budapest is aligning more closely with broader EU policy toward Russia, a departure from years of diplomatic ambiguity and pro-Moscow advocacy under the previous Orbán administration.