The leaders of the 27 member states are meeting on Thursday in Brussels for a European Council partly dedicated to supporting kyiv in the short and long term.
What are the prospects for European support for Ukraine, almost two years after the start of the Russian invasion? Aid provided to kyiv is on the agenda of the European Council which begins in Brussels on Thursday February 1, among other subjects relating to the long-term budget of the European Union. During his visit to Sweden on Tuesday, Emmanuel Macron pleaded for “fair and courageous decisions”, for’“accelerate” European assistance to Ukraine.
“We will do everything to ensure that Europe’s common contribution is significant enough”, in turn launched the German Chancellor, Olaf Scholz. The stakes are high, as the conflict in Ukraine evolves into a war of attrition. EU support and its rise in power, decisive for kyiv, still face several challenges.
The specter of a Hungarian blockade
European leaders are due to discuss on Thursday aid of 50 billion euros for Ukraine (17 billion in grants and 33 billion in loans until 2027). The aid in question is “important so that the Ukrainian state can continue to function”deciphers Marie Dumoulin, director of the Wider Europe program at the European Council on International Relations (ECFR). “It also gives visibility and confidence to Ukraine.” Deep in war, the country must still allocate 37 billion euros to its defense this year, or half of its expenditure, points out Politico Europe.
This financial support is nevertheless conditional on its unanimous adoption by the Twenty-Seven, and therefore on the agreement of Hungary. In December, Viktor Orban vetoed this aid plan, and his position seems to have changed little. “We don’t like this proposal,” recalls the nationalist Prime Minister, close to Vladimir Putin, in an interview with Point.
“They try to convince us, then pressure, then blackmail, to force us to join them.”
Viktor Orban, Hungarian Prime Ministeron point”
Despite his speech, the Hungarian leader has recently mentioned a way out: voting at this stage in favor of aid, but reserving the right to change his mind later. “Every year we will decide whether or not to continue sending this money,” he suggests in his interview with Point. The possible blockage would therefore only be postponed, which would deprive kyiv of certainties for the next three years.
The other option is to commit to 26, by taking this aid out of the European budget, reports the American press agency AP. Such a plan would have to be approved by national parliaments, and “this would mean the end of unanimity”, analyzes Marie Dumoulin. A signal of disunity that could benefit Moscow.
The Hungarian position is “an immense political challenge” for Brussels, confirms Gesine Weber, researcher at the German Marshall Fund of the United States think tank. “The weight of Hungary’s veto remains considerable.” Especially since Budapest is not only blocking this aid. At the beginning of January, Hungary was still opposed to a new tranche of 500 million euros for the European Peace Facility (EFF), report The echoes. This instrument reimburses member states for military aid sent to kyiv. The country has, however, agreed to no longer obstruct a fund of 5 billion euros dedicated to this aid, according to information from Bloomberg.
The difficulty of planning massive military aid in the long term
On the eve of the European Council, leaders of the Twenty-Seven called, in Financial Times, has a “collective effort to arm Ukraine in the long term.” “What is urgent today is to send the munitions and weapons systems, including howitzers, tanks, drones and air defense, that Ukraine so urgently needs on the ground “, they insist.
In terms of ammunition, the European Commission announced in March a project to deliver one million munitions to kyiv in one year. However, in November, some 300,000 shells had been delivered, at a time when thousands are fired every day. And the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell, admitted on Wednesday that only half of the million promised shells would be delivered by the end of March.
European production capacities have increased by 20 to 30% in less than a year, but 40% of EU production remains intended for export. For Gesine Weber, this gap between promise and reality shows that “the European defense industry is not yet up to the challenge it faces, even if a lot has been done.”
“European support for Ukraine has exceeded all expectations, but that does not mean it is enough. Ukraine needs more military aid.”
Gesine Weber, specialist in European security and defenseat franceinfo
Concerning ammunition, several divisions were a first obstacle. As Gustav Gressel points out, European Council for International Relationsaccelerating production requires a lot of time and investment. “Many member states were reluctant to commit to long-term delivery contracts. However, these contracts are necessary to provide defense companies with stable income, which guarantees the financing of new investments.”
Crossing this long-term milestone is particularly complex. “We did not necessarily anticipate the idea of a long war. By sending heavy equipment, we remained on the idea that it was enough to send existing stocks, that Ukraine could put an end to the war. war with this effort”, comments Pierre Haroche, lecturer in international security at Queen Mary University of London (United Kingdom).
“Since last year, many existing stocks are no longer available. Are we now ready to engage in a real mobilization effort, to guarantee that Ukraine will have what it takes to fight for the years to come?”
Pierre Haroche, specialist in European integration and securityat franceinfo
For the researcher, member states have not yet entered a war economy, and national logics, rather than European ones, continue to prevail. Pierre Haroche mentions Germany, the leading supplier of military aid to Ukraine after the United States, according to data from the Kiel Institute (IfW). Berlin, which has promised more than 17 billion euros in military support in less than two years, speaks of “reduce national contributions to the European Peace Facility, for countries that already give a lot bilaterally”. For comparison, France is at the bottom of Kiel’s ranking. She disputes this data, ensuring that certain donations have not been made public. “Our arms deliveries are a game-changer“, even recently declared the Minister of the Armed Forces, Sébastien Lecornu.
Aid to Ukraine – and rearmament efforts – therefore differ widely from one Member State to another. In a recent study for the Jacques Delors Institute (in PDF)Pierre Haroche pleads for better European coordination, in order to avoid too much “fragmentation” of the defense market. The challenge, by offering a long-term perspective to kyiv, is also to “prepare our own capacity for resistance” after decades of declining investment, continues the researcher. “We must have an industrial defense capacity superior to Russia. Support Ukraine today, and be credible in the face of a possible Russian attack [sur le sol européen] tomorrow.” Especially if the main supplier of military aid to Ukraine, the United States, were to withdraw.
The risk of American disengagement
In Washington, the Biden administration wants Congress to approve a new envelope of 56 billion euros for kyiv, but negotiations with the Republicans are slipping. American conservatives, who have a majority in the House of Representatives, have pushed for this new support to be negotiated in parallel with measures on immigration. An agreement is far from being reached.
The prospect of a financial and military retreat by the United States is gaining ground as the American presidential election approaches. Donald Trump, a big favorite of the Republican camp, considers the Russian invasion of Ukraine less important for the United States, and denounces the significant sending of American military equipment to the front.
“A second term for Joe Biden would be more reassuring [pour l’aide à l’Ukraine]but in the medium term, it will be very complicated”, predicts researcher Gesine Weber. “Even in this administration, it is increasingly difficult to get this aid through. For the United States, Ukraine is an important war, but what matters most is the risk of confrontation with China.”
“The idea that we can just sit back and trust the United States is an idea from the 1980s.”
Gesine Weberat franceinfo
On the side of the European Union, Marie Dumoulin notes “awareness” of a possible end, even imminent, of American support. “This should, ideally, encourage them to take a greater share of assistance to Ukraine, and to develop their own capabilities. But I fear that we are still far from there.”