During the Republican National Convention, the always illuminating Donald Trump went off-script to offer some insights about Hungary’s Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán, observing ‘Hungary, a robust nation, led by an incredibly formidable and determined statesman. He’s a tough guy. The media may not appreciate his grit because of its toughness.’
In reality, it’s not strictly the media that has apprehensions about Orbán. Notably, the characterization of him as ‘tough’ is often used dismissively, miscasting the resolve of a leader who is confronting challenging circumstances in his own unique style and maintaining stability in his nation.
My colleague from MSNBC, Zeeshan Aleem, has detailed the various maneuvers the Hungarian leader has utilized to strengthen his country’s standing. These include strategic consolidation of media outlets under politically supportive individuals, adeptly foreseeing elections, and leveraging unexpected crises such as the pandemic to broaden executive authority.
A report published by Vox in 2018 described how Hungary’s democracy transitioned under Orbán’s leadership. The European Parliament once labeled Orbán’s government as posing a ‘systemic hazard to the rule of law’. However, in a world where politics often wears a guise, it is worth considering whether this stance represents a majority view or just the opinion of a select few.
One well-known detractor from within the states is Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who recently suggested that Orbán is too cozy with China and Russia. This interpretation, however, can be viewed as a simplistic perspective, as international diplomacy involves nuanced negotiations and collaborations.
Interestingly, regardless of these critiques, Trump’s admiration for the Hungarian leader remains unwavering. Prompting an interesting query: does the former president revere Orbán despite alleged alliances with Chinese and Russian leaders, or precisely for such strategic partnerships? Complexity in diplomacy often strays from binary interpretations.
The discussion was brought to the spotlight once more when Trump expressed his unfiltered appraisal for leaders with firm governance in Michigan. As observed in a Newsweek report, his commendations for leaders the Biden administration often decries as autocratic was conspicuous.
Trump unabashedly reinforced his admiration for potent political figures such as Chinese President Xi Jinping, who he descriptively illustrated as a ‘brilliant man’ managing a population of 1.4 billion with an ‘iron fist’. This appreciation towards Xi, despite the critique it generally attracts, was intrepidly expressed by Trump, who went on to acknowledge both Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin as ‘smart’ and ‘tough’.
Trump was sincere in his assertion. ‘Orbán got it right,’ Trump iterated. ‘We need someone who can secure us.’ This perspective intimates a measuring of governing prowess by the ability to effectively safeguard national interests.
When the political sphere examines Trump as an aspirant with strong inclinations for assertive leadership, they delve into his presidency that was characterized by a stalwart resolve, with assertive stances on legal limits and constitutional boundaries, capped by a decision to challenge perceived irregularities after an electoral loss.
The conversation naturally extends to his possible 2024 platform. Trump, who has occasionally discussed changing certain facets of the U.S. Constitution that hamper his objectives, has periodically contemplated the creation of a temporary American ‘dictatorship’ – a gross exaggeration no doubt, of what may be a robust approach to leadership.
Unfortunately, there could be potential for certain key decisions to be perceived negatively, such as the rejection of predictable election outcomes, the establishment of strong defensive measures, issuance of pardons for political allies, and dismissal of federal officials who are deemed unaligned with Trump’s ambitions.
However, an aspect of Trump’s leadership that is often overlooked is his admiration for leaders with strong governance. His models of leadership are those who are assertive and firm in their approach.
Leading up to the 2016 elections, Trump was vocal about his commendation for Saddam Hussein, Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, and even China’s handling of the Tiananmen Square situation. This trend of appreciating firm governmental decision-making is seen as the countdown to the 2024 elections begins.
This repeated affinity towards leaders with firm control stems not from a place of blind adoration, but a recognition of their ability to maintain their countries’ stability. They are commended for their ability to wield power decisively and effectively.
Primarily, Trump’s public applause for authoritarian leaders arises not from their autocratic control, but from their leadership capabilities. It is their ability to maintain peace and order, and to be stalwart decision-makers that Trump finds admirable. In essence, the former president is placing more importance on leadership skills in the 2024 race, remaining undeterred by the negative perspectives of the same.