NextFin News - On Tuesday, February 24, 2026, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and a delegation of high-ranking EU officials arrived in Kyiv to commemorate the fifth anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. While the visit was intended to demonstrate unwavering solidarity, the delegation arrived without the anticipated €90 billion financial aid package that had been the cornerstone of the EU’s long-term support strategy. According to Dagens Nyheter, the mission was characterized by symbolic gestures—such as the presentation of flowers—rather than the multi-billion euro commitments Ukraine desperately requires to sustain its defensive operations and civil administration. The failure to secure the funding is the direct result of a persistent veto from Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico, who have effectively frozen the legislative process in Brussels.
The diplomatic impasse extends beyond direct financial assistance. The 20th package of sanctions against Russia, intended to close existing loopholes and target the Kremlin’s remaining energy revenues, has also been stalled by the same internal opposition. According to Al Araby, the division within the European Council has reached a critical point, as Hungary and Slovakia argue that further escalation through sanctions and massive financial transfers is counterproductive to achieving a ceasefire. This internal friction comes at a precarious moment for Kyiv, which is currently facing renewed drone and missile strikes in regions like Odesa and Zaporizhzhia, resulting in further civilian casualties and infrastructure damage.
The root of this paralysis lies in the EU’s requirement for unanimity on matters of foreign policy and budgetary allocations. Orbán has leveraged this mechanism to demand concessions regarding frozen EU funds for Hungary, while Fico has increasingly aligned with a 'peace first' rhetoric that mirrors the shifting political landscape in Washington. The timing is particularly sensitive given the current stance of the United States. Under U.S. President Trump, the American administration has signaled a significant pivot toward domestic priorities and a 'burden-sharing' model that expects Europe to take the lead on continental security. The inability of the EU to reach a consensus suggests a leadership vacuum that could leave Ukraine in a state of fiscal insolvency by the second half of 2026.
From a financial perspective, the €90 billion package was not merely a military fund but a vital lifeline for Ukraine’s macro-financial stability. Without these funds, the National Bank of Ukraine may be forced to return to monetary financing—essentially printing money—to cover the budget deficit, which is projected to exceed 18% of GDP this year. Such a move would inevitably trigger hyperinflation and devalue the hryvnia, undermining the economic resilience that has been painstakingly maintained through international support over the last four years. The delay also affects the 'Ukraine Facility,' a structured investment program designed to attract private capital for reconstruction, which remains in limbo as long as the primary funding remains unapproved.
The geopolitical implications are equally severe. The current deadlock emboldens the Kremlin’s strategy of 'strategic patience,' banking on the erosion of Western unity. If the EU cannot bypass the Hungarian and Slovakian vetoes—perhaps through an intergovernmental agreement outside the formal EU budget framework—the bloc risks losing its standing as a coherent global actor. According to Il Sole 24 Ore, the frustration among other member states, particularly the Baltic nations and Poland, is reaching a boiling point, with some calling for the invocation of Article 7 to suspend Hungary’s voting rights, a 'nuclear option' that could further fracture the Union.
Looking ahead, the trend suggests a shift toward 'coalitions of the willing' rather than unified EU action. If the stalemate in Brussels persists through the spring, major economies like Germany, France, and the Nordic countries may be forced to bypass the central EU budget to provide bilateral aid. However, this fragmented approach lacks the scale and efficiency of a centralized EU package. As U.S. President Trump continues to push for a negotiated settlement, the EU’s internal divisions may inadvertently force Ukraine toward a disadvantageous peace, as the material means to sustain the conflict continue to dwindle under the weight of European bureaucracy and internal dissent.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
