After the departure of Viktor Orban, discussions about Ukraine’s accession to the European Union in Brussels have noticeably shifted. In Kyiv, there were expectations that negotiations would accelerate following the change in leadership in Hungary. However, it has become clear that concerns about the pace of EU expansion are not limited to Budapest.
Until recently, discussions about Ukraine followed a predictable pattern. Kyiv and the European Commission called for a rapid advancement of the accession negotiations, most member states supported this, and Hungary blocked any decisions. Since unanimous support from all 27 EU countries is required for each step, the negotiation process remained effectively stalled.
Although Orban is no longer in power, a quick breakthrough has not materialized. This is partly because his successor, Peter Magyar, is also in no rush. Despite being viewed as a more pro-European politician, he is cautious about being perceived as unconditionally supporting all Brussels initiatives.
Last month, with Hungary’s consent, the first negotiation chapters for Ukraine’s EU accession were officially opened. This week, work began on the second cluster. However, Magyar is not willing to open all six negotiation clusters this summer, as Kyiv desires.
After Orban, new doubts emerged
However, the issue extends beyond Hungary’s position. In closed negotiations in Brussels, reservations from other countries that were rarely voiced publicly before are increasingly being expressed. Diplomats frequently mention the Netherlands. The Hague continues to support Ukraine but insists that the country must meet all necessary reforms and criteria before new stages of negotiations can begin.
Diplomats note that the Netherlands is unafraid to openly express its dissenting views. One diplomat explained: “The Netherlands does not mind being loud and direct, playing the role of the bad guy.” Another source added that criticism from The Hague does not raise suspicions of pro-Russian sympathies, as was often the case with Orban.
At the same time, diplomats emphasize that the Netherlands is not the only country with such reservations. They do not oppose negotiations outright but insist that Ukraine’s progress be assessed based on the fulfillment of criteria. An EU representative noted: “The Netherlands indeed expressed objections, but we are still moving forward.”
According to European officials, it was Orban’s departure that changed the atmosphere of the negotiations. Previously, many countries felt there was little point in openly expressing doubts since Hungary would block any decision anyway. “Why spend political capital on such a sensitive topic if Hungary will block everything?” one diplomat explained.
Now, concealing one’s position is no longer possible. Following Orban’s departure, it has become apparent that individual states have differing visions regarding the pace of EU expansion. The European Commission and Ukraine aim for the fastest possible advancement of negotiations, the Baltic countries advocate for an even quicker pace, while other capitals prefer a more cautious approach. The general consensus is that Ukraine’s accession to the EU is unlikely to occur as early as next year, and the negotiation process is expected to take several more years.
More realism and more demands
As the prospects for Ukraine’s membership increase, more attention is being paid to the practical implications of such a decision. One diplomat summarized the situation: “Everything is becoming more concrete, and this requires more realism.”
In Brussels, it is recognized that Ukraine is fighting for its existence. At the same time, it is increasingly viewed as a strong negotiating partner that actively promotes its own proposals and interests. According to diplomats, this is why calls for a realistic assessment of the actual state of reforms are becoming more frequent. “Someone has to tell Ukraine that it is important to remain realistic,” one source noted.
In recent months, concerns about the pace of reforms have intensified. In Brussels, there is a belief that President Volodymyr Zelensky too often yields to influential domestic groups and the military establishment. This week, additional questions were raised by the president’s controversial personnel decision regarding Mykhailo Fedorov. Fighting corruption and ensuring the rule of law remain among the EU’s primary demands.
Furthermore, the scale of Ukraine presents a separate issue. It remains the poorest among the candidate countries while having a larger population than all other candidates combined. This has led the EU to discuss how Ukraine’s future membership could impact the distribution of agricultural subsidies and other European funds.
Source: NRC
