It may sound paradoxical in Brussels top floor circles, but an Orbán victory would rather be good news for Europe. Few European elections provoke as much commentary beyond their borders as Hungary’s.Orbán has become a symbol of resistance to centralisationViktor Orbán is not merely another national leader seeking re-election. In fact, he has become a symbol of resistance to centralisation. He has become the symbol of the patriotic alternative to the federalist project of von der Leyen Unlimited. That is why a new Orbán victory would matter beyond Hungary.After all, the Commission of von der Leyen is rapidly stretching the very idea and concept of European cooperation to its limits. Treaty powers are being violated on a massive scale. Not only has the Union been transformed into a military alliance, but this transgression of competences is now visible daily in fields such as education, healthcare and social housing.An Orbán victory would preserve a key stronghold within the CouncilThis is accompanied by an expansion of the (multiannual) budget, perhaps in the hope that the debt accumulation will lead to a “Hamilton” moment of inevitable creation of a centralised European state. Apart from an exit, there are only two possibilities to counter the von der Leyen power grab: either a majority for a motion of no confidence against von der Leyen (shock therapy) or a (full-scale) rebellion within the Council where the member states (still) have their say within the existing institutions. Therefore, an Orbán victory in the Hungarian election is first and foremost about preserving a key stronghold within the Council.Hungarian voters have a thousand reasons to entrust Orbán with powerA potential Orbán victory will therefore be read across Europe as a verdict not only on one government, but as the sound continuation of a vision on the European cooperation in the future. Of course, the patriot alternative has many other opportunities even in the near future to reach the point of entering the Council and establish a coalition from within. Not only the French elections next year, but several others too, could alter the balance, as we have recently seen in Prague and Bratislava.But it goes without saying that either the continued presence or the sudden disappearance of Viktor Orbán will be interpreted by the federalist camp respectively as either a victory or a setback for the patriotic cause. If Hungarian voters once again decide to entrust Orbán with power — and they have a thousand reasons to do so, not least because of the migration they have been spared — that choice carries political legitimacy.The EU was meant to organise cooperation between nationsThe European Union cannot credibly claim to defend democracy while treating certain electoral outcomes as suspect simply because they are ideologically inconvenient to the Brussels mainstream. This is not a defence of every policy adopted in Budapest. It is a defence of a more basic European principle: the Union is made up of member states whose governments derive their authority first from their own electorates. European integration was never meant to replace that source of legitimacy.It was meant to organise cooperation between democratic nations, not to create a hierarchy in which national mandates are treated as valid only when they align with the preferences of the centre. That is why the Hungarian case matters beyond Hungary. It tests whether the EU can live with meaningful internal dissent. If the Union accepts diversity only when it is symbolic but reacts harshly when it affects major questions of sovereignty and competence, then Europe risks narrowing the democratic space it claims to protect.Political diversity is not a defect in the European projectOrbán’s importance therefore lies not only in what he represents for Hungary, but in what his re-election would say about Europe. It would remind the Union that political diversity is not a defect in the European project but part of its constitutional reality. A Europe in which liberals, conservatives, federalists or sovereigntists can all win elections is healthier than one in which only one ideological family is treated as morally admissible. That matters institutionally as well.The EU has grown more political over time. In such a system, electoral signals from member states become even more important. When voters repeatedly choose governments that challenge the prevailing direction of integration, the correct response is not moral panic or administrative punishment. It is political reflection. An Orbán victory would therefore force a useful correction in tone.Eating “à la carte” is more European than forcing one menu on everyoneToo often, the debate about Hungary suggests that pluralism is welcome only up to the point where it becomes consequential. Yet genuine pluralism means accepting that nations may choose different balances between integration and autonomy, common rules and national discretion. Europe does not become stronger by isolating voters whose choices displease the federalist model of centralised unification. It becomes stronger by proving that the Union is broad enough to contain disagreement without turning it into a legitimacy crisis.A Europe that respects the democratic choices of its nations is not weaker — it is more legitimate. Eating “à la carte” is probably more European than forcing one menu on everyone.Gerolf Annemans, treasurer of the “Patriots for Europe” group in the European Parliament. Annemans is a member of the Vlaams Belang party (Belgium) and sits on various committees in the European Parliament