![Visegrad Is Back? with Linda Kapustová Helbichová [PODCAST]](http://4liberty.eu/phidroav/2026/06/Liberal-Europe-Podcast-Format-1-6-1024x1024.jpg "Visegrad Is Back? with Linda Kapustová Helbichová [PODCAST]")
Is the Visegrad Group still relevant? Is it expereiencing its renaissance after Péter Magyar’s win in Hungary? What is the relationship between the Visegrad countries and Ukraine? What types of projects does the International Visegrad Fund foster and what is their relevance in terms of cultural cooperation? And can civil society funding be considered as part of democratic infrastructure? Leszek Jazdzewski (Fundacja Liberte!) talks with Linda Kapustová Helbichová, the Executive Director of the International Visegrad Fund. She has extensive experience in diplomacy and public administration, having served at the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs and the Ministry of Culture of the Slovak Republic.
Leszek Jazdzewski (LJ): Given the political differences that have emerged among the V4 nations since its creation in 1999, how has the relevance and role of the Visegrad cooperation shifted over the last two decades?
Linda Kapustová Helbichová (LKH): First of all, I would like to highlight that we need somehow to make the difference between the Visegrad Group and the Visegrad Fund. We know that in the region, we have several formats of regional cooperation, like the Slavkov format, the Three Seas Initiative, the Visegrad Group, and others. But not all of them have an organizational structure or an instrument such as the International Visegrad Fund.
This year, we celebrated our twenty-sixth anniversary on the ninth of June. Over the years of our existence, some of our priorities have stayed the same, and some of them have changed. We are flexible enough that, for example, after the war in Ukraine, we were able to react and collect one million euros to help Ukraine with ad hoc initiatives for Ukrainian migrants. This is a practical issue of the whole thing, but our relevance is that we try to make people-to-people contact and we try to keep the region and the cooperation in the region very vivid and very active. That is our aim. We are basically open to every idea of cooperation. We are not limited only to the Visegrad region, but to a broader scope. This is also related to the neighborhood countries, such as the Western Balkans or the Eastern Partnership.
LJ: To what extent do current political differences and shifting alliances among the V4 nations impact the operations, strategic priorities, and overall effectiveness of the International Visegrad Fund?
LKH: The intensity of collaboration between the V4 foreign ministries or the political level is very important. As you know, the Visegrad Group presidencies are rotating. At this moment, we see the finishing Hungarian presidency, which is going to be taken over by the Slovak Republic from the first of July. Every presidency country has its program of activities and calendar of activities, which are presented and fulfilled. It is not a secret that the political level of cooperation was weak in the past.
The direct impact on our cooperation is not as such because the fund has its own grant schemes and mobilities which are given and related to strategic priorities. Those are set up by every presidency. But if we are talking about future cooperation with countries which are not from our region, and we would like to bring more attention to the Visegrad region from partners from Asia or a broader scale, then it will be very beneficial to have a compact, positive, or cooperative view—the spirit of cooperation within the region. This is always helpful, therefore it is relevant in a sense.
LJ: Within your civic and cultural cooperation portfolios, which specific areas have demonstrated the highest success, and how have applicant interests shifted between cultural initiatives and other sectors in recent years?
LKH: When we are talking about the priorities of permanent areas of collaboration, we have seven, and two of them are the support of and through the support of universities, NGOs, and research and development institutions. We take our ideas and convert them into real projects. Culture is one of them and remains a strong priority.
However, in 2024, for the first time, we have supported more educational and research and development-oriented projects than ever. The collaboration with universities and NGOs has been scaled, and our applicants are moving. The portfolio or the percentage of the cultural projects is not as dominant as it was in the past. The fund was seen at the beginning as a cultural organization supporting mainly literature. You know that we have had the literature residency program since 2012, and we do support mobilities not only for scholars and fellows in several cities and universities in the V4, but we also have cooperation with the Open Society Archives of Radio Free Europe in Budapest.
Many good projects are appearing. We are not only supporting culture, but we still do, and that is one of our public relations tools. It is also the project of the year we are awarding every year. For this year, we had four beautiful projects, and one of them was Sounds of Diversity. I can publicly say that this is the project which is going to be awarded, because Sounds of Diversity is a showcase festival of new compositions by composers from the Visegrad Group countries. Culture has its important role within our grant projects, but it is not the only priority; it is one of seven.
LJ: Given that the International Visegrad Fund supports initiatives like the Open Society Archives and concepts like European strategic autonomy, which seem to contradict the domestic policies and rhetoric of certain member governments, do you operate with complete political autonomy or does this create institutional tension?
LKH: Thank you for this question. It is not only the Open Society Archives which does not match the political metrics of our countries, if you are speaking about Hungary. It is also the support toward Ukraine, because we are free to support the students not only from the Visegrad Group, the Eastern Partnership, or the Western Balkans, but we do have applications from all relevant institutions and universities from the world. Over the years, it became a relevant institution, and we do cooperate with them; we have done so for sixteen or more years. We are quite independent in our support, which is very good news.
There is also the support for Ukraine within the Civil Servants Mobility Program. Ukraine has been a priority country for more than six years, and all the V4 countries have been accepting this. There is not any contradiction in that. It is an expert mobility exchange for civil servants, and it is working pretty well. Not only Ukraine and other related countries, but also the ministries prove their experience in the exchange of views and working on a network within the countries which are seeking experience from our region. It has been beneficial for both sides.
LJ: As public skepticism or fatigue regarding the war in Ukraine grows across the region, how is the International Visegrad Fund adapting its continuous funding, cultural exchanges, and civic support to address the evolving needs of both Ukraine and Ukrainian citizens living within the V4 nations?
LKH: The support is continuous and there is no negation of support. In fact, our support by now exceeds ten million euros. I can share the numbers from the last year, 2025. We have supported nine projects and twenty-five scholarships for Ukrainian students. On top of that, we have supported thirty-two research fellowships and we have received twenty-five Ukrainian civil servants who have been visiting our countries, ministries, and institutions.
The reason was capacity building and networking within the civil servants program, and it is a tailor-made program. The main topics were European Union integration and institutional reforms in Czechia, public administration reform and environmental protection in Hungary, adaptation of legislation and administrative standards in Poland, and energy efficiency in Slovakia. Ukrainian beneficiaries were approved funding in total exceeding 600,000 euros in 2025. There is a continuous support of Ukraine and Ukrainian applicants. We are willing to continue, and we thank our ministries of foreign affairs that allow us to do the work with the Ukrainian applicants and mobilities.
LJ: Do you observe a sense of “Ukraine fatigue” within the V4 societies regarding public support for Ukraine?
LKH: It is a tricky question because we are counting with our budgets. The budget of the fund has been increased twice recently, in 2022 and 2025. It is not a secret that we do not count with hundreds of millions of euros. We do count with a support of eleven million euros from our ministries of foreign affairs, which is not large in comparison to organizations like USAID. With a small amount of money, we try to make miracles. Low-scaled, soft projects—this is our agenda. Questions around the budget, regarding whether it is enough or not, can be raised. But we know what our role is and what we can support with the money we have.
LJ: Given the rising political and societal tensions between certain V4 nations and Ukraine regarding energy, historical memory, and military aid, has it become more difficult to fulfill your mission of supporting Ukraine compared to four or five years ago?
LKH: The advantage of the Visegrad Fund is that we have our solid way how to do things, and we do that. There is an approval and an agreement from the ministries and from the governments regarding what our mission is, and Ukraine is part of our neighborhood and our region. For us, it is very clear that besides the fact that we need to strengthen the ties between our neighboring countries, we have to work with Ukraine. It is up to the Ukrainian applicants which topics are relevant for them and which they are going to bring to the table. We are more than happy to assist; that is basically all I can say. We do receive many good applications, so we have enough to look for and to search for, making it a good cooperation.
LJ: In light of your “Enlargement 2030” project perspectives, how do you view the future of European Union enlargement, and what practical role will the International Visegrad Fund play in that process?
LKH: Enlargement is not exactly what we do, but if there is a need from the Ukrainian side or applicants, they see enlargement as their priority. I am sure they definitely do. They will send us more ideas how to profound the ties between the region, between the Visegrad Group and the European Union or the rest of the European Union countries, and themselves. We are very happy when we are able to support more practical topics.
The best example is the civil service mobility program scheme because this shows the practical effects of the collaboration. There are many more projects which are not dealing only with culture, but with practical impacts from the war or which are tackling exactly the areas where Ukraine needs to be stronger in terms of future enlargement. It is definitely important.
LJ: To what extent does corruption pose a challenge to your institutional cooperation and funding allocation within Ukraine?
LKH: It is not a problem with us because we have our financial rules. If the Ukrainian applicants are not complying with the rules, then we will not support them anymore in the future. It is very easy. Again, we are talking about tens of thousands of euros, not about millions. Our budget is really small, but it has its advantage because we are able to look more closely and collaborate more closely with every single applicant. It is very difficult to corrupt with us because we see that, and then the support will not be coming. It is not helicopter money. They need to send us a relevant application and a very detailed budget, so we see it from the beginning. Of course, you can have some cases, but it is not a huge problem.
LJ: Given that the Western Balkan nations have been seeking European Union accession for an extended period, is the regional cooperation model of the V4 relevant to their integration process, and what specific expertise can you offer them?
LKH: This is a tricky question. If we had those answers you are asking me, we would be already done with this homework. Enlargement is about the region, and the region is one of the agendas of the International Visegrad Fund. It is in our interest to have a solid relationship, but those homework assignments and the chapters which are imposed by the European Union for the countries to be fulfilled represent the actual role for those nations.
The only thing we can do, besides crossing our fingers for them, is to help them with the exchange of our network and our experts. Even when they feel the necessity to come to us, they know whom to contact, who is going to help them, how they can do things, and how they can proceed. For enlargement, not all the Western Balkan countries are in a situation that allows them to fulfill the criteria, making it a very complex question. But for those who politically are willing to, we are ready to help them with the particular projects they are going to apply for and need to do. Civil servants can be exchanged thanks to our collaboration, and this is a practical, productive, tailor-made program that we are happy to share.
LJ: Do you anticipate a political renaissance for the Visegrad Group following recent domestic electoral shifts in Hungary?
LKH: Ask me after the summit of the prime ministers on June 23. We are having the first summit after many months. There was no sign of collaboration on the level of prime ministers. We can only wonder what the output will be and how the political collaboration will proceed, because the expert collaboration is very clear through the fund. We know what to do, but what the political expectations will be and in which areas—whether Brussels-related topics or infrastructure—we can only guess.
LJ: How should the International Visegrad Fund shape its regional cooperation strategy to effectively engage and support the youngest generation?
LKH: It is not widely known that besides the grants, fellowships, and mobility schemes, we have a small grants program called V4 Gen Mini-Grants. We support young people between twelve and thirty years old, not through direct financial support to individuals, but through collaboration between basic schools, high schools, or universities.
That is an amazing initiative because the young generation changes a lot, and the collaboration is very vivid and dynamic. It makes sense to invest in youth because when they meet, thanks to the projects of the Visegrad Fund, they find out that they have similar problems. A Hungarian girl has the same problems as a Polish girl. Through normal life situations, they realize that they can relate to one another, which will probably create a positive ambience for collaboration in the future. We must take into consideration this human aspect of our region. We have so much information and so many offers thanks to Erasmus and Erasmus+, but we have to somehow come back to our background and know who is living just next to our borders. Coming back to our region is a challenge for us.
LJ: If the International Visegrad Fund budget were to be doubled next year, which specific dimensions or program areas would you prioritize for expansion?
LKH: That is a good question and a hypothetical one, because it will hardly be made real. However, I would probably suggest to the ministries to invest more money into the grants, specifically toward the dimensions of the Eastern Partnership and the Western Balkans. Currently, we have many more applications than we are able to support. The funding could be spread to the region and it would be consumed; I am certain of that.
This podcast is produced by the European Liberal Forum in collaboration with the Movimento Liberal Social and the Fundacja Liberté!, with the financial support of the European Parliament. Neither the European Parliament nor the European Liberal Forum are responsible for the content or for any use that be made of.