Budapest emerges once again as the backdrop for Ukrainian diplomacy, three decades after serving as the site of one of the most significant—and ultimately broken—promises in modern European history. The Hungarian capital is now being considered for a potential summit between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin, a meeting reportedly orchestrated by Donald Trump’s administration.
The symbolism is unavoidable. In 1994, the Budapest Memorandum saw Ukraine give up the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal in exchange for security guarantees from Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Those assurances collapsed when Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and launched a full-scale invasion in 2022, leaving Ukrainians to regard Budapest as a place tied to betrayal.
Now, instead of hope, Budapest is viewed by many as the stage for political theatre. Trump, who has already met with Zelensky in Washington and Putin in Alaska, seeks to present himself as a global peacemaker, eyeing the potential prestige of brokering a high-profile deal.
For Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, offering Budapest as the venue is a calculated move. By positioning his capital as “neutral ground,” he shifts Hungary’s image from being the EU’s dissenting member to its indispensable broker. Success or failure matters little for Orbán; either way, he places himself at the centre of history.
The choice of Budapest is as much about practicality as symbolism. Geneva feels too Western-dominated for Moscow, Vienna has lost credibility in Russia’s eyes, and Istanbul’s role in earlier failed talks diminishes its appeal. Budapest, however, provides Putin with safety—Hungary is not part of the International Criminal Court—and legitimacy without overwhelming Western influence. For Trump, it provides optics: a European stage controlled by an ally where he can claim the spotlight.
For Zelensky, however, Budapest presents a painful dilemma. Accepting it risks domestic backlash, given Hungary’s repeated attempts to block EU aid and sanctions against Russia. Rejecting it risks painting him as resistant to peace. His choices are limited to balancing degrees of compromise.
Across Europe, reactions are uneasy. Poland, one of Ukraine’s strongest allies, views another Budapest summit as a potential betrayal. France leans toward Geneva as a neutral option. Within Ukraine itself, doubts remain about conducting serious negotiations under Orbán’s watch while maintaining independence from Hungarian influence.
The proposed summit has transformed Budapest into a diplomatic chessboard. Orbán plays the host king, Trump the showman queen, Putin the calculating bishop, and Zelensky the embattled knight. Each comes with different motivations: Orbán seeks relevance, Trump craves spectacle, Putin looks for survival and legitimacy, and Zelensky faces existential stakes.
Three scenarios lie ahead. A breakthrough could create ceasefire lines, open humanitarian corridors, and potentially reframe Budapest’s legacy from betrayal to redemption. A stalemate would see the talks dismissed alongside past failures like Minsk and Istanbul. Most dangerous of all, empty theatrics could eclipse substance, turning diplomacy into a farce while the war rages on.
For Trump, Budapest is about controlling the narrative. Whether it succeeds or fails, he walks away as the central figure. For Putin, the venue shields him from arrest while projecting an image of reason. For Zelensky, it is a risk of perception as much as policy.
Budapest once marked Ukraine’s greatest gamble in disarmament, a decision met with shattered promises. Now it risks being remembered again, either as the place where redemption began or where history repeated itself in bitter irony. The outcome will shape not only Ukraine’s fate but also Europe’s future and the credibility of international guarantees in a fractured world order.
