• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "Erik Brattberg"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "EP",
  "programs": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Commentary

Pompeo’s Courtship of Central Europe May Backfire

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo toured Central Europe this week. The United States needs these countries as a buffer against its competitors to the east. But ignoring their drift towards internal repression would be foolish.

Link Copied
By Erik Brattberg
Published on Feb 13, 2019

When U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s visited Europe this week, he stopped in Budapest, Bratislava, and Warsaw. The destinations were a window into the Trump administration’s strategy to reengage allies in Central Europe, who are confronting growing pressure from Russia and China.

Devoting more attention to Central Europe is sensible, given the need to keep vulnerable allies close amid rising geopolitical pressure from Russia and China.

But Washington must also use its influence to push back against illiberal trends and democratic backsliding in states such as Hungary and Poland. The Obama administration shunned nationalist, populist leaders like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán. By contrast, the Trump administration has concentrated on security relationships, while publicly downplaying the importance of democracy and the rule of law (although Pompeo, to his credit, did meet with Hungarian civil society and promised more U.S. support for independent journalism in Hungary).

The Trump administration views nationalist leaders in Central Europe as likeminded—for instance, when it comes to supporting tough immigration policies. Trump praised both Hungary and Poland in his speech before the UN General Assembly in September 2018, where he delivered a strong nationalist message. Trump’s visit to Warsaw in July 2017 was also interpreted by some in the Polish government as an endorsement of its policies, and a snub against the EU.

However, the swing towards repression in some countries in Central and Eastern Europe is a worrying internal threat to the transatlantic community and the values underpinning it. In Freedom House’s 2019 Freedom in the World rankings, Hungary dropped from “free” to “partly free,” as its independent judiciary, civil society, and media face growing pressures from Orbán’s government.

What’s more: Russia and China stand to benefit from these authoritarian tendencies. Hungary is already a proponent of stronger relations with Vladimir Putin and has sought to prevent EU sanctions against Russia and NATO’s engagement with Ukraine. Similarly, Hungary is openly inviting Chinese investments (including on 5G development) and has tried to block or weaken EU statements concerning China’s actions in the South China Sea, human rights violations, and the Belt and Road Initiative. Hungary’s inability to tackle corruption also provides opportunities for Russian and Chinese influence.

Isolating troublesome Central European allies like Hungary makes little sense. But if the United States only reengages with countries in Central and Eastern Europe on security—without explicitly addressing other concerns—it will damage U.S. interests in the region. To push back against Russia’s and China’s efforts to spread authoritarian influence in Europe, it is ultimately up to the U.S. and EU to show Central and Eastern European countries why Western democratic values and norms are more appealing than authoritarian-style politics and investment.

About the Author

Erik Brattberg

Former Director, Europe Program, Fellow

Erik Brattberg was director of the Europe Program and a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. He is an expert on European politics and security and transatlantic relations.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    How the Transatlantic Relationship Has Evolved, One Year Into the Biden Administration
      • +11

      Cornelius Adebahr, Dan Baer, Rosa Balfour, …

  • Paper
    China’s Influence in Southeastern, Central, and Eastern Europe: Vulnerabilities and Resilience in Four Countries
      • +1

      Erik Brattberg, Philippe Le Corre, Paul Stronski, …

Erik Brattberg
Former Director, Europe Program, Fellow
Erik Brattberg
Political ReformForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesIran

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Article
    What Could a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement Do for U.S.-India Ties?

    India and the United States are close to concluding a Reciprocal Defense Procurement Agreement (RDPA) that will allow firms from the two countries to sell to each other’s defense establishments more easily. While this may not remedy the specific grievances both sides may have regarding larger bilateral issues, an RDPA could restore some momentum, following the trade deal announcement.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Commentary
    India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?

    On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.

      Konark Bhandari

  • Commentary
    The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil Imports

    This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Commentary
    NISAR Soars While India-U.S. Tariff Tensions Simmer

    On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.

      Tejas Bharadwaj

  • Commentary
    TRUST and Tariffs

    The India-U.S. relationship currently appears buffeted between three “Ts”—TRUST, Tariffs, and Trump.

      Arun K. Singh

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.