How fake SBU letters are turning Hungarians against Ukraine and Russia's role in this operation
European Pravda recently reported that Hungary’s current Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has made Ukrainophobia a cornerstone of his foreign policy, has suddenly changed his approach.
And although Budapest has officially acknowledged this policy shift only now, signs of change had been visible for some time.
There is no doubt that the Russians also noticed these changes. They attempted to bring hostility back onto the Hungarian agenda at the beginning of this year.
To do so, Russia used its network of controlled websites to leak what was presented as "correspondence" about alleged attacks on Hungarians supposedly being prepared by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU).
Read more about this information operation and whether it will affect the policy of the Hungarian government in the article by Sergiy Sydorenko, European Pravda's editor: How Moscow fuels Ukrainian-Hungarian relations: the story of a fake that Orbán’s circle 'swallowed.'
The "news" that stirred up Hungarians first appeared in Serbia.
The website Vaseljenska (which is not among the top outlets even domestically, and in Ukraine is known mainly to fact-checkers and specialists on the Balkans and Russian propaganda) published an article titled "Exclusive SBU documents: claiming that Zelenskyy ordered the persecution of Hungarians in Ukraine for supporting Orbán."
The editor-in-chief (and author) of Vaseljenska is Vesna Vejzović, a Serbian journalist who previously worked for the Serbian edition of News-Front, a publication widely regarded as one of the key media projects of Russian special services.
Moreover, both Vejzović personally and her website have repeatedly taken part in anti-Ukrainian operations led by Russia, including those previously covered by European Pravda. She came to our attention precisely because her portal became a platform for Russian information provocations aimed at Ukraine–Hungary relations.
The core of the publication consists of alleged scanned copies of two interagency letters dated 26 September 2025, purportedly signed by then-Head of the Security Service of Ukraine Vasyl Maliuk. The outlet claims it received both letters "from its sources," provides a very brief description of their content, accuses Ukraine of pursuing "a policy reminiscent of fascist regimes that cannot be justified," and concludes by saying that it "hopes for the failure of these plans of Zelenskyy."
The publication, which appeared as early as 5 January on a little-known Serbian website with a very specific reputation, suddenly "went viral" in Hungarian media on 14 January.
The first to pick it up was the website Mandiner (considered one of the key outlets of Orbán’s party). Nine days after the documents appeared on a Serbian "dump site," Mandiner suddenly noticed them and retold the story in detail for Hungarian readers. The article, published at 6:40 a.m., explained to Hungarians that the issue concerned Ukraine’s alleged interference in elections in favour of the opposition.
This time, however, it is important to note that the new Russian-Serbian fake did not spread across literally all government-aligned media outlets.
This indicates that Orbán’s approach towards Ukraine has indeed changed and that his circle is no longer seeking every possible pretext to inflame hostility in bilateral relations.
Finally, it is worth explaining what gives such firm confidence that the correspondence between the head of the SBU and Ukraine’s minister of defenсe and prime minister is fake.
Both "Maliuk letters" published by the Serbian pro-Russian website refer to a "Cabinet of Ministers resolution of 11.09.2025 No. 1120," which allegedly established a "Special working group on parliamentary elections in Hungary."
However, Ukraine’s legislative database shows that Cabinet Resolution No. 1120 is dated 10 September and concerns a completely different issue frozen Russian assets.
This is far from the only proof that the letters are forged. It is clear that the authors of this fake do not understand how the state apparatus functions, as the documents contain a number of inconsistencies and errors that cannot exist in official correspondence.