Hungary — What’s the rationale behind voting about not voting about Sweden’s and Finland’s NATO accession? [closed]

Question

Today, the quasi opposition motioned the formal legislation to vote on a formal bill introduced outlining the ratification of Hungary’s sister states in the EU, Finland and Sweden to NATO. (This bill was proposed by the supermajority of MP’s manually selected and controlled by Orban with power to amend, repeal and reinstate the formal constitution)

Despite their own formal bill, the formal speaker of the formal assembly denied putting the bill to a vote. Then the formal opposition moved to overturn the formal decision of the speaker by a formal vote, but the Orban supermajority formally voted to not put the question of the sister state’s accession to a vote.

What might possibly be Orban’s rationale to have his representatives in the formal legislation so cast their formal vote other than trying to give Putin a little more time to potentially turn the tide, and get everyone “reasonable” about whether NATO should want to let Sweden or Finland among its ranks?

Answer 1

There are probably two different rationales in play here that have nothing to do with giving Putin time, apart from me not seeing how that would benefit them anyway.

1. Display of Power

Even if they consider voting in favour of the ratification as their official line of communication still is, it will be important to them that it is them, not the opposition, who have complete control over the point of time and the whole formal process. Voting in favour of an opposition movement of any kind can always be taken both as a validation of other, related opposition positions and a sign of a lack of control and initiative from themselves. In other words: they make clear that it is them and only them who have a say in any political decision.

2. It is a political bargaining chip

The government of Hungary has but one interest and that's their own, as evidenced with playing either sides when it suits them. Accordingly, as all other NATO members rely on their ratification, they will try to maximise what there is to gain politically. Some weapon deals here, some money there. Probably, not all of the negotiations on that are finished yet, if they even made up their mind about what exactly they can and want to get for this ratification.