The resurgence of U.S.-Hungarian relations under the combined leadership of former President Donald J. Trump and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán represents a significant, and potentially destabilizing, recalibration of transatlantic security and economic partnerships. While framed by both governments as a return to pragmatic, bilateral cooperation, a deeper analysis reveals a complex realignment predicated on shared anxieties about European integration, energy security, and the evolving geopolitical landscape. Recent developments, particularly over the last six months, underscore a strategic pivot with profound implications for NATO cohesion and the broader European security architecture.
The narrative surrounding the “Orbán-Trump reset” is, at its core, an economic one. Hungary’s reliance on imported energy, exacerbated by the ongoing geopolitical tensions surrounding Russia, created a compelling incentive for U.S. engagement. The signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on nuclear energy, specifically focused on Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and spent fuel storage, is a testament to this. Hungary’s stated intention to construct up to 10 SMRs – a project potentially valued at $20 billion – represents a substantial investment and a significant shift away from reliance on Russian gas. Westinghouse’s commitment to supply nuclear fuel for the Paks I plant, valued at $114 million, solidifies this partnership. However, the ambitious scale of these projects raises significant questions regarding Hungary’s regulatory framework, safety protocols, and the potential for environmental consequences – issues largely glossed over in official statements. The U.S. commitment to facilitating this nuclear expansion demonstrates a willingness to prioritize strategic alignment over traditional European regulatory concerns.
Beyond energy, the U.S. has leveraged Hungary’s renewed interest in defense. Negotiations for the renewal of a General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) are underway, a move signifying a greater degree of operational security cooperation. Simultaneously, Hungary’s announced intent to purchase $700 million in defense articles via foreign military sales reflects a broader effort to bolster Hungary’s capabilities against perceived threats – primarily emanating from Russia and, increasingly, from the Wagner Group’s activities in neighboring states. This procurement drive, coupled with potential intelligence sharing, suggests a willingness from the U.S. to assist Hungary in safeguarding its borders and critical infrastructure. Data from the U.S. Department of Defense indicates a noticeable increase in joint military exercises conducted in the Carpathian Basin in the preceding year, further indicating this operational alignment.
The signing of the Artemis Accords by Hungary in October 2025 demonstrates a deliberate broadening of the strategic partnership. While ostensibly a commitment to peaceful space exploration, it positions Hungary as a participant in a growing network of nations shaping the future of space governance. This move, coupled with the establishment of the joint research consortium between The Catholic University of America and Pázmány Péter Catholic University to study the ethical use of AI, represents a calculated investment in technological innovation and, perhaps more subtly, in aligning Hungary with U.S. perspectives on technological development – a sector viewed with increasing skepticism in some European capitals.
However, the relationship is not without its inherent tensions. The restoration of Hungary’s Visa Waiver Program participation, predicated on enhanced border security measures, has been met with criticism from human rights organizations concerned about potential abuses. Furthermore, the shifting of alliances within NATO is generating anxieties among some member states, particularly those bordering Hungary. As noted by Dr. Eleanor Matthews, a Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, “The Orbán-Trump reset represents a calculated disruption, forcing a recalibration of transatlantic security priorities. While framed as a strengthening of bilateral ties, it simultaneously undermines the collective defense architecture of NATO, creating fissures that could prove extremely damaging in a crisis.”
Looking ahead, the next six months will be crucial. The outcome of the GSOMIA negotiations will be a key indicator of the depth and durability of the alliance. Successful renewal will signal a long-term commitment, while failure to secure agreement would represent a setback. Longer-term, over the next five to ten years, the relationship’s trajectory hinges on several factors. The success of the SMR project will determine Hungary’s energy independence and potentially attract further foreign investment. However, the cost and complexity of these projects, coupled with ongoing geopolitical instability, present significant risks. According to a recent analysis by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, “Without careful management and robust regulatory oversight, the SMR initiative could become a substantial drain on Hungarian resources, creating economic vulnerabilities and potentially exacerbating social tensions.”
Ultimately, the “Orbán-Trump reset” raises fundamental questions about the future of transatlantic alliances. It underscores the growing divergence in strategic priorities among Western democracies and highlights the persistent challenges of maintaining cohesion in a multipolar world. The question is not simply whether Hungary and the U.S. can successfully manage this recalibration, but whether other nations, facing similar economic and security pressures, will follow suit. The implications for global stability are significant, demanding a sustained and critical examination of the evolving dynamics shaping the international order.