Why do Ukrainian refugee women remain in a politically ambivalent host country? The case of Hungary.

Introduction: The prolonged displacement of Ukrainians after the full-scale Russian invasion has raised questions about why refugees remain in particular host countries even when the broader political environment is not consistently welcoming. Hungary provides a distinctive case in which increasingly exclusionary national political communication coexisted with legal protection, local assistance, and relatively stable everyday conditions. The aim of this study is to understand how Ukrainian refugee women made sense of their continued residence in Hungary and how they interpreted the relationship between national political communication and their everyday experiences. Methods: The study uses a qualitative longitudinal design based on two rounds of interviews. The first round, conducted in late 2024 and early 2025, included eleven Ukrainian refugee women who had already lived in Hungary for at least two and a half years. The second round was conducted in December 2025. Six participants were interviewed directly, while factual status information was available for the remaining five. Results: The analysis showed that continued residence developed gradually rather than resulting from a single decision to settle permanently. Participants' accounts highlighted employment, pre-existing family and labor migration connections, geographical proximity to Ukraine, children's schooling, and the organization of everyday life as circumstances associated with increasing stability. At the same time, pessimistic expectations concerning security, reconstruction, and future living conditions in Ukraine made return appear unrealistic in the near term. Follow-up information showed that ten of the eleven participants remained in Hungary, while the six women interviewed directly expressed little immediate intention either to move onward to another country or to return to Ukraine. These women were aware of increasingly hostile political messages concerning Ukraine, yet such rhetoric was not generally reflected in their established interpersonal relations and everyday experiences. Temporary protection under EU rules also helped preserve lawful residence and access to employment and essential services. Discussion: The findings indicate that understanding refugees' continued residence requires attention to how they perceive and navigate everyday living conditions, household circumstances, legal security, and available alternatives, alongside national political communication.