Over the past weekend, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his government were accused of coordinating with Russian intelligence services in order to influence the results of the upcoming elections, including staging a fake assassination plot against Orbán; injecting so-called ‘truth serum’ into one of the Ukrainian citizens detained earlier in connection with a seized cash and gold transporter convoy; and leaking internal information from EU summits and meetings to Moscow.
That is already an awful lot to take in, even over the course of a year, yet the fact that such accusations surfaced and spread in the span of just two days highlights how intensive the information warfare surrounding the high-stakes parliamentary elections has become. While much of the Western mainstream media, as well as the domestic and EU opposition to Orbán, treat these claims as fundamental truth, there is actually very little evidence to support them.
Fake Assassination Plot
Let’s start with the most serious one. On Saturday, 21 March, The Washington Post published a report claiming that a unit of Russia’s foreign intelligence service (SVR) proposed staging a fake assassination attempt against Orbán to boost his chances in the April election, which is expected to be the tightest race in the past 15 years. According to the report, the plan was internally named ‘the Gamechanger’. It states that the aim of the plot was to ‘fundamentally alter the entire paradigm of the election campaign’ into an ‘emotional realm’ focused on state security and stability. The Washington Post said it had reviewed the plan, which was obtained and authenticated by a European intelligence service—unnamed in the report.
The alleged assassination plot spread like wildfire, with almost all major Western outlets reporting on the story, prompting pro-EU and pro-Ukraine politicians, commentators, activists, as well as Hungarian opposition figures, to harshly attack Viktor Orbán’s government and accuse him of ‘treason’.
Taking a closer look at The Washington Post’s report, several factors call the authenticity of the claim into question. First, it rests on a single, unverified intelligence document provided by one unnamed European intelligence service. There is no independent corroboration, no second intelligence source, and no proof of such a document existing at all.
‘When an unverified leak aligns so perfectly with an already established storyline, it raises serious questions about its authenticity’
Intelligence memos and documents are generally not considered the most reliable sources, let alone those attributed to Russian intelligence. It is no coincidence that Western agencies have long treated such materials as potentially fabricated, or so-called ‘Frankenstein’ constructions. They often mix real and false information, include deliberate disinformation, and may be designed for manipulation. Even if the existence of such a document had been proven—which is not the case at the time of writing—it could not be taken at face value.
However, the claim fits perfectly into the ‘stolen election’ narrative constructed by the Hungarian opposition and aligned media in recent weeks. This narrative has two key elements: Russia interfering in the elections to keep Orbán in power; and Orbán being so determined to retain power that he would do anything to stay in office—therefore, if he wins, the result is already delegitimized by the opposition and possibly by Western media and EU leadership.
The Russian interference narrative began in early March, following a report by Hungarian outlet Direkt36, which alleged that Russian military intelligence officers had been deployed to Hungary to support Orbán’s campaign. The report relied on anonymous intelligence sources and provided no evidence to substantiate the claim. Nevertheless, it was picked up by POLITICO Brussels, Financial Times, The Telegraph, and other Western outlets.
The Washington Post’s claim fits seamlessly into this narrative. When a leak aligns so perfectly with an already established storyline, it raises serious questions about its authenticity. The timing of the report is also notable, as it introduces a dramatic and emotionally charged allegation just weeks before a decisive election, creating maximum political impact with minimal time for verification.
Hungary Leaks Confidential EU Information to Russia
Turning to the second claim in The Washington Post’s report, it alleges that the Hungarian government has ‘for years provided Moscow with a vital window into sensitive discussions in the EU’. Based on anonymous European security officials, the report claims that Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó provided ‘direct reports on what was discussed’ during EU meetings, allegedly holding phone calls with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov during breaks in EU Foreign Affairs Council meetings and other gatherings. One official is quoted as saying: ‘Every single EU meeting for years has basically had Moscow behind the table’.
Such accusations are not new and are largely based on Hungary maintaining closer ties with Russia than most other EU member states. Relations between Moscow and Budapest have not deteriorated even after the war in Ukraine, as Russia remains a major energy supplier to Hungary—one of the main points of tension between the EU, Ukraine, and Hungary. It is also a fact that both Péter Szijjártó and Viktor Orbán have met their Russian counterparts several times since 2022.
Despite this, the claim still rests on shaky ground. While it cites multiple sources—making it somewhat stronger than the assassination claim—it still relies entirely on anonymous accounts, rendering it unverifiable. The ‘phone call’ allegation is particularly weak, as no call logs, intelligence intercepts, or telecommunications data are presented to support it.
‘If Hungary had been consistently leaking confidential information to the EU’s primary adversary for years, why did no one report it earlier?’
The report also contains a significant internal contradiction between the scale of the accusation and the evidence provided. If true, the claim would constitute one of the most serious intelligence breaches in EU history, ongoing over several years. Yet no EU investigations or institutional responses have been launched in connection with it.
This raises the question of why such a systemic threat would remain confined to anonymous briefings and media reporting. Furthermore, if Hungary had been consistently leaking confidential information to the EU’s primary adversary for years, why did no one report it earlier? Why did officials wait years to raise such concerns without initiating investigations—and why surface them just weeks before the Hungarian elections?
Interestingly, beyond Western media and the Hungarian opposition, one government reacted immediately. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk wrote on X, just hours after the article was published, that Hungary informing Moscow ‘about EU Council meetings in every detail shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone’. ‘We’ve had our suspicions about that for a long time,’ added Tusk, a long-time critic of Viktor Orbán and supporter of Hungarian opposition leader Péter Magyar. Similarly, Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski shared the report on X with the caption: ‘This would explain a lot,’ tagging Péter Szijjártó.
The unusually swift reaction from two senior officials, including the prime minister, creates the impression that the Polish government may have been involved in the background of the report—perhaps the unnamed European intelligence service is, in fact, Polish. Speaking to Brussels Signal, a former senior Polish official said he had ‘no doubt’ that the source country was Poland, and that the memo itself ‘either does not exist or is currently being fabricated’. Additionally, the article was written by Catherine Belton, who previously worked alongside Polish American journalist Anne Applebaum, now married to Sikorski.
Truth Serum
The final claim to emerge over the weekend is arguably the most absurd. According to anonymous Ukrainian security sources, Hungarian operatives administered a ‘forced injection’ to one of the Ukrainians detained earlier in March during a raid on a convoy transporting large amounts of cash and gold bars through Hungary. The seven detained men were deported to Ukraine after being held for more than 24 hours.
During that time, The Guardian reported that one of them—a former employee of Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU)—was given the injection, believed to contain a ‘relaxant’ intended to make the subject more talkative during interrogation. According to the sources, the drug caused the man, who is diabetic, to suffer a hypertensive crisis and lose consciousness.
One Ukrainian source described the alleged injection as a ‘Russian-style method’, referencing so-called truth serums used in KGB interrogations. Another claimed that traces of such a substance were found in blood tests conducted after the men returned to Ukraine.
‘The Guardian admits it has not seen the results and could not verify the claims’
This claim, like the assassination plot, could be easily verified: Ukraine would only need to publish the results of the blood tests. Yet The Guardian admits it has not seen the results and could not verify the claims. Instead, the report relies on anonymous sources connected to a leadership whose relationship with the Hungarian government has significantly deteriorated in recent years and which has a clear interest in a change of government.
Similarly, Ukraine last week accused Hungary of assisting a Russian disinformation psyop targeting the Hungarian minority in Ukraine—again, without presenting evidence.
Hungarian officials—led by Péter Szijjártó—have rejected all three allegations outright, describing them as unsubstantiated and politically motivated claims tied to the election campaign. Russia has issued a similar response. At the time of writing, no EU officials have commented on any of the allegations.
Related articles:
At a time when public debate is increasingly polarized and superficial, Hungarian Conservative remains committed to depth, intellectual honesty, and independent conservative thought.
Producing high-quality journalism requires resources. Your contribution helps us expand our coverage, reach new audiences, and keep our content accessible.
Please consider supporting our mission.
