Will the Hungarian Government Launch the High-Speed Rail to Serbia?
Hungary, according to experts, would have to service the loans already taken, and a potential break in cooperation with Chinese partners could lead to international disputes and additional costs.
TL;DR
- The TISA party, led by Peter Magyar, won the parliamentary elections, prompting questions about the future of the Budapest-Belgrade high-speed rail project.
- Analysts believe the new government is unlikely to stop or permanently block the rail line but may revise business terms and increase transparency.
- The project's Hungarian section is approximately 160 km long, with an estimated cost of $2-3 billion, 85% financed by a Chinese loan.
- Critics have raised concerns about the project's economic viability and the lack of transparency, citing secretive contracts and a special law restricting access to documentation.
- Halting the project would have significant financial and diplomatic consequences, including servicing existing loans and potential international disputes.
- The TISA party has criticized the project's management model, alleging corruption and lack of transparency.
- The future Minister of Transport, Dávid Vitézy, supports railway modernization but has criticized the prioritization of international freight routes over domestic lines.
- Experts suggest the new government might review contracts, disclose loan conditions, examine work costs, and redefine commercial exploitation terms.
- There's a possibility the new government will aim to integrate the project more into European transport networks rather than solely China's geoeconomic strategy.
- The EU has previously raised concerns about public procurement and compliance with European transport rules for this project.
- The project is nearing completion, with delays primarily due to technical issues and testing of the ETCS train control system.
- It would be difficult for the new government to justify closing a completed and paid-for railway; making it operational and increasing its economic benefit is seen as more rational.