Visegrad Four Group lives on despite opinion split over Russia’s war on Ukraine

Despite tensions and increasingly diverging opinions over key issues such as Russia’s war in Ukraine, the Central European Visegrad Four (V4) Group has so far managed to live on.

Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala hosted his Hungarian, Polish and Slovak counterparts for a Visegrad Group summit in Prague on Tuesday (27 February), which took place amid doubts about the future of the Visegrad bloc.

Established in 1991 as a regional platform for coordination on the common path towards the EU, the group became a “toxic” brand during the migration crisis around 2015.

The four countries of the region firmly rejected the European solution to the migration crisis – known in particular under the simplification of the “migration quota” – while not actively offering alternative solutions.

The Visegrad Group’s image has not been helped by the actions of the previous Polish and current Hungarian governments, which have undermined the rule of law in their respective countries.

Currently, the split goes in half, with the Czech Republic and Poland as staunch supporters of Ukraine on the one side and Hungary and Slovakia presenting more pro-Russian narratives.

Just days before the summit, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico delivered a controversial and pro-Russian speech in which he described Russia’s President Vladimir Putin as “falsely demonised”.

Protesters outside the Czech summit venue ‘greeted’ the Fico with signs reading ‘Fico, go home, to Russia’, a welcome also directed likewise at his Hungarian counterpart, Viktor Orbán.

“We do not hide the fact that there are differences between us (…) The V4 is a slightly different institution than before the Russian aggression in Ukraine,” Fiala said.

“Today’s meeting has shown that it makes sense to have a debate, even a difficult one and that it makes sense to listen to each other,” he added.

According to him, the leaders spoke openly without their delegations present.

V4 survival

“As the world changes, we have to ask ourselves whether we need the V4 – and if so, in what form,” Hungary’s Orbán said, describing the meeting “as not the easiest”.

“I admit that I have experienced V4 meetings where I wanted to yawn because they were a bit technical. Today, I did not have a second to yawn. This was one of the most important meetings for the future of the V4,” Fico echoed.

A separate meeting between Tusk and Fiala ahead of the summit was supposed to take place on Monday but was postponed for the day after due to the Paris Security Summit.

Both could “align the prime ministers’ notes on the strategy on how to proceed towards their partners in the Visegrad Group”, Jan Škvrňák, Poland expert at Prague Charles University, told Euractiv Czechia.

According to him, the Czech-Polish tried to persuade Hungary and Slovakia to become more involved in supporting Ukraine.

“Whether they were successful is not clear. They don’t have any additional tools and levers,” Škvrňák added.

According to statements by the four prime ministers after the summit, they ‘agreed that they disagreed’ on specific issues and clarified that they did not want to bury the V4 format.

“It is obvious that the V4 will survive in some way. It is a platform that will work, and it is not necessary to attribute any great value to it,” Pavlína Janebová, research director of Prague-based Association for International Affairs (AMO), said, adding that according to her, the meeting was not a breakthrough.

Fiala said the main dividing line remains: “We differ in our views on the causes of Russian aggression and resolution of the conflict.”

But there are two points on which they are all in agreement: that Russia’s aggression is a gross violation of international law and that aid to Ukraine must continue.

In their summit declaration, the V4 prime ministers intended to devote future coordination to common topics, including migration, energy, agriculture and EU reform.

[Edited by Alexandra Brzozowski, Alice Taylor]