• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
{
  "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 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 Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is Insane

    The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Corrupted by Absolute Power

    In an interview, Marc Lynch discusses his new book decrying the post-1990 U.S.-dominated order in the Middle East.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Why Does the Middle East Suffer “Forever Wars”?

    Because perpetual conflict enhances control, offers economic benefits, and allows leaders to ignore popular preferences.

      • Angie Omar

      Angie Omar

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Where is the Groundwork for Lebanon’s Negotiations With Israel?

    A prerequisite of serious talks is that the country’s leadership consolidates majority national support for such a process.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    A Military Balance Sheet in the U.S. and Israeli War With Iran

    In an interview, Jim Lamson discusses the ongoing regional conflict and sees an unclear picture when it comes to winners and losers. 

      Michael Young

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.