The European Union silently scrapped its proposed €20 billion immediate military aid package to Ukraine due to a lack of consensus among member states in the Council—just a few days before EU leaders convene for Thursday’s emergency summit in Brussels.
The official reason for shelving the plan was fears of Hungarian and Slovak vetoes, threatening to end the Council summit without a joint statement from participants. This would be embarrassing, given how desperate Brussels is to project a sense of unity.
However, insider sources revealed that many other member states are also opposed to the newest aid tranche at a time when their focus is shifting to rearming themselves (on top of spending the €60 billion the EU already earmarked for Ukraine this year), Being afraid to raise their own voice and challenging the common narrative, they simply let Budapest and Bratislava take the blame—again.
According to Politico’s unnamed “diplomats behind the scenes,” who were privy to the preliminary discussion among EU ambassadors preparing the draft, several member states—including France—are just as “happy” to see the military aid scrapped or delayed as Hungary and Slovakia are. The two sovereigntist powers are given the role of scapegoats again, as on so many previous occasions, including for blocking the blanket ban on Russian fossil fuels and other harsh sanctions.
Some member states have reportedly suggested using “more creative” ways to fill the giant hole left behind by the halted U.S. military supplies, such as through the upcoming “ReArm Europe” scheme unveiled by EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen on Tuesday, March 4th. The giant defense plan includes a €150 billion joint loan for arms procurement, and diplomats suggested that it could contain a clause requiring countries to invest or transfer 20% of each purchase to Ukraine.
While the two Central European countries are on board with jointly boosting Europe’s defense expenditure, Hungary and Slovakia have been quite open about their opposition to continued military aid to Ukraine that would only prolong the war with further unnecessary bloodshed instead of pushing for an immediate ceasefire.
“I note that there is a divergence on the path to achieve peace and, in particular, the ‘peace through strength’ approach,” Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán wrote in a letter to European Council President António Costa ahead of the summit. Instead of escalation, Orbán argued for following in the U.S. footsteps for a diplomatic approach and engaging in direct discussion with Russia and added that he recommends scrapping Ukraine from the draft conclusion for a chance of unanimous approval.
Instead, the Hungarian PM suggested that the EU Council should formally support the UN Security Council’s resolution from last week, which was the first time since the Russian invasion that the highest UN body managed to agree on a joint text on Ukraine, promoting peace through dialogue. Ten out of the 15 members (including both the U.S. and Russia) voted in favor, and none against, with five abstentions coming from Europe. According to Orbán:
The [UN Security Council] resolution signals a new phase in the history of the conflict and renders all previous agreed language by the European Council irrelevant.
European leaders decided in London today that they want to go on with the war instead of opting for peace. They decided that Ukraine must continue the war.
— Orbán Viktor (@PM_ViktorOrban) March 2, 2025
This is bad, dangerous and mistaken. Hungary remains on the side of peace. Ceterum censeo.
For his part, Slovak PM Robert Fico was even more direct, saying that the EU’s ‘peace through strength’ approach was simply “unrealistic” because “Ukraine will never be strong enough to negotiate from a position of military power,” and that Bratislava will no longer support Kyiv with military or financial aid, but will respect the choice of others to do.
For the Council’s conclusions, Fico proposed to include the necessity of an immediate ceasefire as a basis for further negotiations, while noting that if the summit tries to strong-arm Slovakia into adopting a pro-war stance, the Council “may not be able” to agree on a joint stance by the end of the day.
Apart from the missing €20 billion military aid package, the resolution is also unlikely to include any reference to concrete security guarantees or commitments to deploying troops, which has been categorically rejected by all countries except the UK and France. Italian PM Giorgia Meloni believes the move would be “ineffective” for deterrence and ruled out sending Italian soldiers, while (outgoing) German Chancellor Olaf Scholz even stormed out of the London summit when the idea was raised, calling it “completely premature [and] highly inappropriate.”
What might be included in the Council resolution is a call for an initial ‘one-month truce’ floated by Macron in London. Some in Western Europe are hesitant to support the idea—so as not to give a political win to Trump, who has been calling for an immediate (even temporary) ceasefire for weeks.
This is the only major proposal regarding Ukraine that could, in theory, garner unanimous support among EU member states.
