Ukraine warns EU of “feudal medieval Europe” after Hungary seizes bank convoy

“We have no right to allow the EU space to become a feudal medieval Europe.” The phrase concludes each of the official letters sent by National Bank of Ukraine governor Andriy Pyshnyy to senior European officials after Hungarian authorities last Friday seized a Ukrainian bank convoy carrying cash and valuables. Copies of the non-public letters were seen by European Pravda, a partner of EUalive.net.

Hungarian authorities last week detained seven employees of Ukraine’s state-owned Oschadbank, along with two armored cash-in-transit vehicles, during a routine international cash transfer from Austria to Ukraine. The convoy was operating under a long-standing agreement with Raiffeisen Bank Austria, carrying approximately $40 million in U.S. dollars, €35 million in euros, and 9 kilograms of gold – amounting to a total value of roughly $80 million. All items were properly declared in accordance with European customs regulations and international transport protocols.

Hungary detains seven bank employees in Budapest during cash transport

According to Ukrainian officials, the operation was ordered by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government and left a trail of legal violations. Ukrainian citizens were detained without a formal legal basis and initially warned they could remain in Hungary as hostages. Their treatment in custody at the Hungarian Anti-Terrorist Centre reportedly bore signs that could fall under the definition of torture.

The detainees were also stripped of personal belongings, including phones and money, which were not returned after their release. Against this backdrop, the refusal to grant them access to a Ukrainian consul appeared almost secondary.

Meanwhile, Budapest has refused to return the seized cash and gold belonging to Ukraine’s state-owned bank Oschadbank. To provide a legal framework for the seizure, Orbán’s government adopted two decisions preventing the return of the assets to Ukraine for at least two months.

Hungary has also publicly linked the release of the money to the restart of the Druzhba oil pipeline. Ukrainian officials have described the demand as “banditry” and “state terrorism”, accusations the Hungarian government has ignored.

Political motives

Several factors appear to explain the Hungarian government’s unusually aggressive actions. Тhe seized “Ukrainian gold” has already become part of Orbán’s political confrontation with opposition figure Péter Magyar, ahead of Hungary’s upcoming elections. Government-aligned media have begun promoting claims that the money was intended to finance the opposition.

Ukrainian officials believe the episode reflects Russian involvement in the campaign environment surrounding the elections. There are indications that Russian actors may have been present during interrogations of detained Ukrainians and involved in planning the operation, although Orbán himself reportedly authorised the action, writes European pravda.

Following the incident, networks associated with Russian information campaigns amplified narratives about the case online. Against this background, Kyiv has been seeking public support from European partners. So far, however, the EU has largely remained silent.

Ukrainian officials hope that further developments will eventually force Brussels to respond, although concrete action from EU institutions appears unlikely. The events unfolded on 5 March, quickly becoming a major issue in Ukraine after statements were issued overnight by Oschadbank, the National Bank and the Ukrainian foreign ministry.

Initially, Ukrainian authorities lacked details about what had happened. Oschadbank only realised that something was wrong because the armoured vehicles were equipped with tracking beacons. The signals showed that both vehicles suddenly changed route, headed towards Budapest and eventually stopped inside the Hungarian Anti-Terrorist Centre.

The employees escorting the cargo were unreachable, and Hungarian authorities did not respond to inquiries from Ukrainian diplomats. Ukrainian consular officials were able to meet the detained staff more than a day later, when they were brought to the border for deportation. All seven reportedly received three-year bans on entering the Schengen area. Their account shocked Ukrainian diplomats.

The convoy had followed its usual route transporting cash from Raiffeisen Bank in Vienna to Ukraine via Hungary, a route regularly used in recent years. During a scheduled stop at a petrol station on Budapest’s ring road, between the M4 and M5 motorways, armed Hungarian security officers reportedly surrounded the vehicles.

According to the Ukrainian foreign ministry, Hungarian officers dangled heavy weapons during the operation, despite knowing the Ukrainian collectors were unarmed, as carrying weapons abroad would be illegal.

Further details released later described detainees being kept blindfolded for extended periods and interrogated under conditions that could constitute torture under the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.

During the detention, Hungarian officers allegedly told at least two of the Ukrainians they might never see their country again and could remain imprisoned in Hungary. Personal belongings seized during the operation have not been returned.

Despite the severity of the treatment, no formal charges were brought. The Ukrainians were questioned only as “witnesses” in an unspecified investigation.

Alleged Russian involvement

The detainees were questioned without translation into Ukrainian, despite Hungary having accredited translators available. Instead, interrogators spoke Russian and demanded answers in Russian.

According to Ukrainian sources, one of the participants in the interrogation spoke Russian as if it were his native language. While this alone does not prove Russian nationality, it adds to suspicions surrounding the operation.

Reports in Hungarian media had previously suggested that advisers from Moscow were assisting Orbán’s political campaign ahead of the elections. The team is said to operate under the Kremlin political strategist Sergei Kiriyenko, whose network has been linked to election interference operations in several countries.

Ukrainian officials also believe Russian actors may have helped identify the convoy because it included former senior security officer General Hennadiy Kuznetsov, now working for Oschadbank’s security service. Kremlin-aligned commentators began circulating conspiracy theories about him shortly after the detention, before his presence in the convoy had been publicly reported.

Even if Russian actors were involved, Ukrainian officials stress that the main responsibility lies with the Hungarian authorities.

Orbán’s political campaign

Orbán himself is believed to have personally authorised the operation. Notably, he visited the Anti-Terrorist Centre hours before the convoy was seized, a move widely interpreted in Budapest as a signal of political backing for the action.

Hungary is due to hold elections on 12 April, and for many figures within Orbán’s political camp the outcome could determine not only their political future but also their legal exposure should a new government launch investigations into past actions.

Soon after the seizure of the Ukrainian convoy, pro-government media began promoting the claim that the cash was intended to finance the campaign of opposition leader Péter Magyar and his Tisza party.

This narrative soon appeared in official documents as well. The Hungarian government adopted a decree stating that the state has the right to seize the money and valuables from the two vehicles and hold them for at least 60 days while investigating possible foreign financing of Hungarian political forces.

A bill containing similar provisions was rushed through parliament the following day, during its final sitting before the pre-election recess. The adoption of a law targeting two specific vehicles appears unprecedented.

Europe’s silence

“We need one thing from Europe today – not to remain silent,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said when asked about expectations from Western partners. For now, however, EU institutions have largely refrained from commenting.

Kyiv has made considerable efforts to inform Brussels about the incident and provide details of what happened. Yet Ukrainian officials were cautious in their initial statements, partly because many aspects of the case remained unclear and partly because EU institutions have limited authority over the actions of national security services.

On Monday, National Bank governor Andriy Pyshnyy sent official letters to Austrian central bank governor Martin Kocher, European Central Bank president Christine Lagarde, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, and European Commission financial services director-general John Berrigan.

In the letters, Pyshnyy warned that inaction in response to what Kyiv describes as state-backed banditry could have serious consequences for the EU. “We have no right to allow the EU space to become a feudal medieval Europe,” the letters state.

He also warned that such actions could create reputational risks for the EU’s single market and undermine confidence in European financial compliance procedures. The Ukrainian official called on the European Commission to act as an independent third party to clarify the circumstances of the incident.

The European Commission confirmed it had received the letter but declined to comment further. The European Central Bank also said it had no comment at this stage. According to sources in Brussels, EU institutions have recently tried to avoid publicly criticising Orbán ahead of Hungary’s elections, as such criticism is frequently used by Hungarian government media to mobilise domestic support.

Nevertheless, at least one member of the European Parliament have spoken out. French MEP Nathalie Loiseau, coordinator of the Renew group on security and defence, raised the issue during the opening of a parliamentary session on 9 March, calling for pressure on the Hungarian government and warning against criticism of Ukraine in the context of the incident.

Caption: A toy house with a bank office. Corporate visual by Oschadbank on X