Peter Szijjarto - Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Hungary HARDtalk

from me. Stay with us here on BBC World News. Now on BBC News, it is

time for HARDtalk. Brexit is not the only

threat to the coherence The populist government

of Victor Orban rejected the EU's agreed response to the external

migration challenge, with the PM holding a referendum

in a bid to assert Hungary's right Other EU member states have accused

Hungary of threatening My guest today is Peter Szijjarto,

the country's Foreign Minister. Peter Szijjarto,

welcome to HARDtalk. Let's start by seeing if we can

agree on a basic principle. Europe needs unity today more than ever

before. Would you agree with that? Definitely I do. So why is Hungary

exhibiting signs of a nation determined to destroy EU unity? I

think you confuse us with someone else because we are the country who

has been complying with EU regulations more than anyone else.

Putting into consideration Dublin, Schengen and all the others, these

rules have been violated by so many others and we were the only ones to

comply with them even during the most complicated and difficult times

of last year. So I could pose the question to someone else, too many

others, whether these common regulations are still in power or

not. Usually the answer is yes, they are. Then my question is, why do you

bash a country which has been complying with these regulations?

Well, your word is bash but my word might be questioned. Many European

countries question your commitment to play by the collective rules of

the club, when, for example, let's go into one specific, in early

October your Prime Minister, your government, called a referendum

seeking a mandate to place Hungary's laws when it comes to immigration

policy above the agreed response of the European Union. Well, actually,

migration is the most serious challenge since the European Union

has been founded. I think we can agree on that. I come back to my

first question, unity, when you face your most serious question, it has

to be paramount importance. And here you go, demanding

from your own people, Because we are the ones who comply

with the EU rules and regulations. Once again, I would like to speak

about the Schengen rules These two regulations are actually

among the most important achievements and most important

pieces of regulations My question is, do we want

to kill the Schengen zone? Better, do we want to violate

the Schengen regulations? For those who aren't familiar

with all of the jargon, Schengen is the Visa free travel

within most of the European Union. Schengen says that there are two

pillars of consensus. Number one, you can move freely

within the Schengen zone. Number two, you have to protect

yourself externally. And, when we joined the Schengen

zone, we signed the agreement saying we are located at the border

of the Schengen zone. So it is our obligation to make

sure our borders would only be crossed through the official

border crossing stations That's what the Schengen

regulations says. When this whole migration crisis

broke out, we posed a question in Brussels, what kind of solution

can you propose to us to protect the Schengen border,

more than 500 kilometres of flat land without any kind

of natural obstacles. My question is, why do you bash us

because of building a fence. Not being the first country,

not being the first You have chosen to stake this

conversation on the ground I'm going to put it somewhere else,

if I may, because there are various different strands to what appears

to me, to be your basic challenge to the collective

will of the European Union. One of your basic challenges is,

the EU decided collectively that everybody would take

part in burden sharing, to take their share of the very

large number of asylum seekers that have entered the

European Union territory. 1289, or something asylum seekers,

to be taken in by Hungary as part of Now, you have just steadfastly

and fundamentally refuse Actually, we are principally and

fundamentally against this policy. Yet, you are the man who told me

at the beginning of this interview, that unity was the most important

principle of all? Who are you to say that,

we are talking about the collective Unity around wise decisions and not

around decisions which will lead us The decision, which was made

by the Minister of interior, saying there must be a relocation

mechanism which ends up It is totally violating the common

European regulations. Because that decision,

which ended up in a mandatory quota system, is actually amending

the Dublin Treaty. The Dublin Treaty cannot be amended

by ministers of interior. The only way to amend or change

treaty, to open them according to the treaties,

according to the common regulations, to open them, have a debate

about them then National parliaments are there to ratify and then

close the treaty. That's the way, how you can change

treaties and amend them. That decision was totally violating

all common European regulations. That's why we turned

to the European Court. Not only does, it was

Cechoslovakia as well. There were altogether for countries

voting against it and another one, Does it matter to you that

the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker,

says that Hungary in its stand on this

refusal to accept the relocation principle, is threatening the very

future of the European Union? I think what threatens the future

of the European Union is this migratory policy, which has been

carried out by the commission and the other

institutions in Brussels. Because it's totally

against common sense. All this kind of relocation quotas

are kind of encouragement for people and traffickers to come to Europe,

to violate our borders and break regulations and attack our police

and just crossed Hungary in order to get to Sweden, to

Austria or to Germany. I think this whole debate should be

put on a rational basis, Sorry, but if you put this

on a rational basis, you have What international law says,

right to a safe life is a fundamental human right,

but it doesn't say it would be a fundamental human right to pick

a country where you would like to live in and in order to get

there you can cross borders whenever International law says people

seeking asylum who are registered in a particular country,

in essence have a right to have their hearing

in that country. They must stay there

until the decision is carried out. According to Sweden,

backed by the government of Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Norway,

you have broken the rules by refusing to take back people

who registered in Hungary, but ended up in,

for example, Sweden. This is an insult,

because it's not true. The regulations say that illegal

migrants must be sent back to the country where they entered

the European Union. Now, these people who marched

through Hungary last year, 400,000 of them, they didn't come

by plane, they didn't come by plane. That would have been the only way

they would have entered Hungary These people, these people,

these 400,000 entered the territory of the European Union

in another member state, or even crossed two or three member

states before they got to Hungary. The common regulations says

that these illegal migrants must be sent back to the first country

where they entered the territory It's not me questioning

the viability of your argument, The Swedish Foreign Minister,

just the other day, reflected on your stand,

that you've repeated here to me, He reflected 60 years ago in 1956,

Sweden topped 8000 and dairy -- He reflected 60 years ago

in 1956, Sweden took 8000 Hungarian refugees who went on to make

Sweden a better place. And now he says, we have the same

duty as a continent to respond in the right way to this

migration challenge. And in his view, Hungary

is a failing in its responsibility. In this case, it's another result,

I have to tell you why. In 1956, Hungarian people,

who have escaped from Hungary, There, they waited patiently,

weeks, months or even years They didn't attack the police,

they didn't block railway lines, they didn't occupy public areas,

they waited there, respecting laws 400,000 people entered

the territory of ours, breaking regulations,

violating our border, attacking our police

and just marched through. All these people broke European

regulations by leaving You talk of these migrants,

and let's not forget many of them are from Syria,

many of them are escaping war, You talk of them as if they are all

committing violent acts I have been checking the most recent

human rights watch reports, the last one written just last month

on the situation in Hungary. They talk about police brutality,

beatings, use of pepper spray. They have pages and pages

of documentation. This is the reality,

your authorities, in a desperate bid to keep these people out

of your territory... Have brutalised hundreds

of migrants. I am afraid these people have

never been to Hungary, or a part of them have

never been there. Or, if they have been there,

then they are lying. Very straightforward,

they are lying. The UNHCR and Human Rights Watch,

all these other groups are lying? Let me refer to one

concrete example. Around that meeting of ours,

I remember there was an attack on the Hungary and, Serbian border

and Hungary sealed off And then the migrants realising

they cannot violate the border, they cannot get food,

they started to attack They threw stones, pieces

of concrete for one and a half hours, injuring many

Hungarian policemen. Then the Hungarian police reacted

with water canons and you can And then what was the news

in international media? Hungarian police brutally

attack innocent refugees. No words, no words about these

migrants attacking our police for one and a half hours,

throwing stones and My question is, what would have

happened here in London if a group of people started to throw stones

and pieces of concrete Let's just park that for a moment

and talk about one other aspect of your government's policy-making

in recent times. Let's go back to your decision

to hold a referendum, to get a popular mandate

for the stand your Let's think about the campaign

you run and about the rhetoric used He basically told your people that

all of the immigrants What we said was the following,

I myself, I know what I've said. What we said was the following,

that mass migration, without any kind of regulation,

control or check gives the opportunity for terrorist

organisations to send their terrorists to the territory

of the European Union. My question is, is it a rational

debate to speak about whether this uncontrolled and unregulated

migration, whether it has given a chance to terrorist organisations

to send their terrorists or not? You say, listen,

this is what he said. I made a note before entering this

interview just a be sure I knew This is what he said

during the campaign "Every single migrant poses a public

security and terror threat." Yes, because if people come

into the territory of your country without knowing who they are,

that's a potential threat. To most people, I put it to you,

to most people across Europe, that is language which suggests

the population of your country should see every

migrant as a terrorist. We don't have to influence our own

people, because our own people, the Hungarian people,

voted on the basis of experience. Because we were the country

where 400,000 of these people marched through,

violating our border. They occupied public

areas, they block railway The Hungarian people,

they shouldn't have been influence, they knew what happened last year

and they don't want these kinds They clearly knew, not least

because as one of your independent think tanks showed, 95% of broadcast

media coverage of this referendum campaign was supporting

the government's line. But nonetheless, you still,

despite all that money and effort Hang on, despite all of the money

and effort you put into the campaign, you couldn't get even

close to crossing the 50% threshold. It was a humiliating failure for Mr

Orban. There were 3.3 million people voting

no, meaning backing the position In a country of 10 million that

doesn't even get close You posed a question to me,

I will try to answer. You know how many people

voted on our accession You know how many people voted

on our party to win 3.3 million people, it never

happened in the history of our country since transition,

that so many people would have voted in the same direction

on a single issue. Just one other final point

on the tone of the campaign and what it says

about your government. You and others in the government

talked about the no-go areas across Europe that was a direct

result of uncontrolled immigration. You yourself said Brussels

was a dangerous place. You described going

jogging, at one point... I didn't say Brussels

was a dangerous place. The campaign literature

backing your campaign talked Don't say that I have said that

Brussels is a dangerous place. What I said, there are dangerous

places in Brussels. And yes, I think we are in

the studio of the BBC currently, this is a television that shot

a deck you mentally, a 60 minute documentary about no-go

areas in Great Britain. a 60 minute documentary about no-go

areas in Great Britain. You are in London, your campaign

literature said there had no-go Do you feel threatened

here in London? Why do you try to say what I've

said, what I didn't say? I never said there are no-go zones

in the heart of London. I've lived here for a long time,

I'm not aware of them, This is based on experience

of people who have been living here, Look, we don't want to insult

the British people, we don't want to insult London,

we don't want to insult the United Kingdom because you are

a close ally and friend. But this is a very hypocritical

policy, which you should really get rid of in order to help Europe

to get out of the very The hypocrisy you talk about,

is it hypocrisy do you think for Hungary to refuse to take even

1289 asylum seekers as part of a burden sharing programme

across the European Union, and yet at the same time,

sell residency permits to Hungary, and by extension to the Schengen

area, for 300,000 euros as part Because thousands of people have

taken advantage of that. OK, number one, these kind

of programmes have been in place, not only in Hungary

but many other EU states. Let's talk about Hungary,

as you happen to be Sure, but this is a practice in

Europe. Sure, but other European countries

aren't refusing to take their share of the burden of immigrants,

where as Hungary is. It has nothing to do with illegal

migration, because we take part Because what other possible

ways are there of being Number one, you take away the burden

from the shoulders of the others. Number two, you don't bring burden

to the shoulders of the others. We are the first and only country

which could report to Germany, to Austria, to Sweden that

through our territory there are no illegal migrants arriving

to the territories of these countries, because we made our job,

we protected ourselves... The figures show that more than 2000

of these permits to reside and to travel through Schengen have

been sold for bonds I'm not saying they are legal,

I'm just saying they're migrants and your Prime Minister Mr Orban

talks about the cultural challenge. He talks about you being a Christian

country and he will not see your country diluted by those

who do not bring the Christian You know who the people

are that you've a soldier They are people from China,

from Iran, from a host of other countries which are not

Christian in any way. So what is Mr Orban doing selling

those residency permits and refusing to take 1200 people who are seeking

asylum because they come The problem is this whole migratory,

or this whole obligatory quota system is not about 1200 people

in our respect. Because first, there are tricks

being played in Brussels regarding this obligatory quota

system, because it was said there would be a system,

a voluntary one. Then it was about 120,000,

then it was about 160,000, then it was a financial penalty

against those countries So our fear is actually, having

looked at the European Commission's behaviour, this will be

an unlimited obligatory quota with which we really find

totally unacceptable. And we're not going

to take part in it. Before we end, we must talk

a little bit about Brexit. It is a challenge for everybody

in Europe, including Hungary. Chancellor Merkel and Francois

Hollande in France have made it very plain they believe Britain should

pay a high price for leaving the European Union and that is,

there will be, according to them, it seems no preferential,

easily negotiated access to the European single market

unless Britain signs up to the principle of free

movement for the future. First of all I have to tell

you we regret a lot, this decision. I mean the decision of the British

people, but in the Because it is only the British

people who have the right to make a decision about the future

of Great Britain. We were part of the campaign issuing

whole page advertising in the Daily Mail saying we would be

very happy to stand together with the UK as proud members

of the European Union. That clearly didn't work,

so I want to know To come to your question,

our position is the following, Number one, we want to

have an agreement with the UK and the European Union which ensures

eight as close economic trade and investment Corporation,

as is possible. As free of obstacles

as it is possible. Because the UK and Hungary have

been very close allies regarding the economy,

trade and investments. The daily from the UK

Hungary Business Council, they're are 771 UK-based

companies active in Hungary So for us, it is

a significant issue. On the other hand, of course,

we would like to protect the rights of those Hungarian citizens who have

been employed in the UK. Let me stop you there

just for a second. Let's cut to the chase,

the Home Secretary here, Amber Rudd, has indicated it very

likely low skilled workers from the rest of the European Union

will struggle to gain access to the UK and to the British economy

and to jobs here in the future. That is what the British

government wants to do, How would Hungary respond,

if that's the case in the UK, would Hungary then say,

you can forget about preferential First of all, it's very important

others to protect the rights of those people who have

already been working here. On the other hand, we understand

penalising Britain is not So when Francois Hollande talks

about a heavy price, you won't use that language

of Britain paying a heavy price? I won't use this language,

definitely. But I'm not the president of France

and France is a bigger and stronger country than us of course,

so we understand there are different From our perspective,

having a very tight and close relationship

with the UK is essential. We think the UK's decision

to leave causes actually, not only economic,

but political problems I mean, if the second strongest

country or second strongest economy of an integration leaves

the given integration, it means there are some problems

in that given integration, which should be reformed

and challenge should be overcome. But politically speaking,

why we think it is a problem you decided to leave

the European Union, as the British citizens decided to do so,

is that he played a very important role in the debates about the future

of the European Union. And UK represented a very rational

position in many issues. This rational voice will be missed

from the debate about the future It's very interesting you make that

point because it does seem to me we focused on what the British

are going to do about Brexit, but what the Europeans want to do

about Brexit will introduce real divisions inside the remaining

members of the European Union? There will be within

the European Union official about that, when we put together

the mandate negotiation And a final point, which brings us

back to Hungary, your government You know what the Luxembourg Foreign

Minister said recently, when he took on board

all of the differences you have, and you've expressed in this

interview, between yourselves and the rest of the EU

on migration policy. He said this, we cannot act set

the basic values of the EU are being seriously breached

and anyone who, like Hungary, builds fences against refugees

from war, violates press freedom and judicial independence as well,

should be excluded temporarily, I think this statement is an insult

to Hungary and too much. I told John about that,

I think this statement was made in order to make

yourself more visible. I really do think bashing Hungary

on freedom issues is totally We have always been freedom

fighters, Hungary has made a lot in order to be free

and in order to have democracy. We have a strong democracy and these

kinds of allegations just seemed But if these allegations continue,

can you imagine a day when Hungary Of course not, Hungary's place

is within the European Union. Peter Szijjarto, thank

you for being on HARDtalk. It's a fine prospect

for many but for some, Friday morning could be one

of the first really foggy mornings Particularly across parts of Wales,

the Midlands and down