# ESSAY: €45 Billion for Ukraine — Europe Pays Its Moral and Strategic Debt

> The city of Gdańsk, symbol of Polish resistance against oppression, birthplace of Solidarity — this choice of venue for the Ukraine Reconstruction Conference of June 25, 2026 is not incidental. It is here that the European Union officially made the first disbursement of €3.2 bill

- Author: Maxime Marquette
- Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co)
- Section: Essay
- Published: 2026-06-27
- Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/45-milliards-pour-l-ukraine-l-europe-paye-sa-dette-morale-et-strategique

## Introduction: Gdańsk, June 2026 — The Moment Europe Said Clearly Where It Stands

### The Ukrainian Reconstruction Conference — a political signal as much as an economic one

The city of **Gdańsk**, symbol of Polish resistance against oppression, birthplace of Solidarity — this choice of venue for the **Ukraine Reconstruction Conference** of **June 25, 2026** is not incidental. It is here that the **European Union** officially made the first disbursement of **€3.2 billion** from the sovereign loan of **€90 billion** destined for **Ukraine** for the years **2026-2027**. It is here that European Commission President **Ursula von der Leyen** announced the imminent release of **€6 billion** for Ukrainian drone production. And it is here that **Europe** reaffirmed, before the entire world, that its support for **Ukraine** is not a circumstantial posture — it is a civilizational choice.

The structure of the **Ukraine Support Loan** (USL) is ambitious: **€90 billion** in total, of which **€45 billion for 2026 alone**. These 45 billion break down into **€28.3 billion earmarked for defense** — primarily drone production — and **€16.7 billion in budget support** to keep Ukrainian public services functioning. President **Zelensky** immediately signed a law increasing the Ukrainian defense budget by **1.56 trillion hryvnias** thanks to this funding. This is not abstract accounting. It is the difference between an army that holds and an army that collapses.

### €200 per European citizen — the price of solidarity

This support has a cost for European taxpayers. **Herald Ruijters**, one of the senior officials overseeing the program at the **European Commission**, stated it clearly: the commitment represents approximately **€200 per European citizen**. That is the price of solidarity. That is the price of security. It is also the price of history — because if **Ukraine** falls, the very borders of European security retreat westward, and the next conflict will be far more costly in every respect.

The question this essay poses is simple but fundamental: do these **€45 billion** represent a rational investment for **Europe**, beyond moral solidarity? The answer, analyzed through the available facts, is yes — provided the implementation follows the intentions and Ukrainian reforms progress at the demanded pace.

*€200 per European to maintain democracy at its eastern border. I find that figure modest given what is at stake. I find those who contest it modest in their understanding of what the world owes Ukraine — and itself.*

## The Loan Structure — An Unprecedented Financial Architecture

### €90 billion over two years — a historic precedent

The **Ukraine Support Loan** represents a precedent in the history of European external aid. Never had the **European Union** structured a financing of this magnitude — **€90 billion over two years** — to support a non-member state at war. This is a rupture with decades of European policy founded on strict conditionality and gradual disbursements tied to verified reforms.

The structure is designed to combine urgency and rigor. The urgency: disburse quickly to fill Ukrainian budget deficits which, without external financing, would lead to the collapse of public services — civil servant salaries, retirement pensions, hospital operations. The rigor: **32 reform conditions** must be met for each tranche of the macro-financial support component. These conditions cover governance, the rule of law, the fight against corruption, and structural economic reforms that **Ukraine** has committed to accomplishing as part of its **EU** accession process.

### The defense component — €28.3 billion for Ukrainian drones

The defense component of the loan is without precedent in the history of the **European Union**. **€28.3 billion** earmarked specifically for **defense procurement** — with an absolute priority on **drones**. Von der Leyen was explicit in **Gdańsk**: "**We will begin disbursing the first funds of €6 billion for drone production in the coming days.**" The first drone production schedule, adopted in March 2026, relied exclusively on Ukrainian suppliers — a deliberate choice to support the Ukrainian defense industry and its operational autonomy.

This strategic choice is crucial. This is not simply about providing drones manufactured in **Europe** to **Ukraine**. It is about funding the scaling-up of **Ukraine's own defense industry** — transforming **Ukraine** from a passive recipient of military aid into an autonomous producer capable of sustaining its own war over the long term. This is a profound strategic vision that extends beyond the horizon of the current conflict.

*Funding Ukrainian drones by going through Ukrainian factories — that is the most intelligent decision Europe has made in this conflict. It does not give Ukraine a fish. It helps Ukraine build its own fishing rod. Under bombs.*

## Frozen Russian Assets — Europe's Financial Weapon

### The "double lock" — a bold legal innovation

To finance this colossal loan, the **European Union** has devised an unprecedented legal mechanism: the "**double lock**." The principle rests on **Article 122.1** of the **Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union**, which allows the **EU** to immobilize assets in reparation for damages caused to the European economy. Within this framework, the interest generated by **frozen Russian assets** — estimated at several hundreds of billions of euros deposited primarily with **Euroclear** in **Brussels** — serves to service the interest on the loan granted to **Ukraine**.

This mechanism is both legally sophisticated and politically risky. Legally sophisticated, because it uses existing European law without requiring an international law decision that **Russia** would immediately contest. Politically risky, because **Russia** — and other nations watching closely — interprets the use of frozen assets as a disguised appropriation of foreign sovereign property. If this precedent takes hold, it could alter the behavior of states that place their reserves in Western financial institutions.

### Russian assets — an underutilized lever

The **European Union** holds approximately **€300 billion** of **Russian Central Bank** assets. These assets generate several billion euros in interest annually. Until now, only this interest has been used — not the capital itself. The question animating an intense legal and political debate is whether the capital itself can be seized and transferred to **Ukraine** as war reparations.

European legal experts are divided. Some argue that international law does not permit the seizure of a foreign central bank's capital, even in response to a war of aggression. Others maintain that Russian aggression constitutes such a fundamental violation of international law that the normal rules of sovereign immunity do not apply. This legal debate has colossal financial consequences — and its outcome will partly determine **Europe**'s capacity to maintain its support for **Ukraine** over the long term without placing an excessive burden on taxpayers.

*Russia stole Ukraine's territory. Europe uses the interest from frozen Russian assets to help Ukraine defend itself. I search for the injustice in this reasoning. I do not find it.*

## The 32 Conditions — Europe Demands Reforms in Wartime

### A wager on Ukraine's transformation

The **32 reform conditions** attached to the macro-financial support component of the loan are the most controversial element of the financial architecture. Some — including **Zelensky** himself in certain statements — have criticized the imposition of conditionalities on a country fighting for its survival. Others — including MEP **Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann**, chair of the **European Parliament**'s defense committee — were unequivocal: "**In wartime, delays have consequences.**"

These **32 conditions** address systemic reforms that **Ukraine** must accomplish for its own long-term benefit: transparency in public procurement, judicial independence, the fight against corruption, fiscal reforms. These are not Brussels bureaucratic whims — they are the foundations of a rule-of-law state without which neither reconstruction will be effective nor **EU** accession will be possible. But their timing, imposed on a country simultaneously managing an existential war, is a real constraint.

### The opening of accession negotiations — the political reward

**Ukraine** earned a major political reward in June 2026: the official opening of accession negotiations with the **European Union**, on **June 15**, with the launch of the first "fundamentals" cluster. This is a historic step. **Ukraine** is no longer simply a partner to support — it is a future member of the European family. This prospect fundamentally changes the nature of the financial support: it is no longer merely humanitarian or military aid, but an investment in the construction of a new member state.

The accession process will be long — potentially a decade. The negotiating chapters are numerous and complex. The required reforms are substantial. But the political signal is clear: **Europe** has decided that **Ukraine** is part of its future. And this political commitment transforms the **€45 billion** financial support into something deeper — an investment in the European project itself.

*Ukraine negotiating EU accession while defending its borders — that is an image that should strike us with admiring astonishment. Not resilience as a general virtue. Real, concrete, painful resilience. Under Russian bombs.*

## Drones — The Heart of Ukrainian Defense Strategy

### Ukraine, the world's laboratory for drone warfare

**Ukraine** has become, since 2022, the world's laboratory for drone warfare. Its engineers have developed technologies and drone employment doctrines that influence military strategies worldwide — from **AUKUS** in the **Pacific** to European armies undergoing doctrinal revision. Ukrainian **FPV** drones, **Magura** naval drones, long-range drones targeting Russian oil infrastructure — all are the product of creativity born of necessity, initially funded with negligible resources.

The **€6 billion** European funding for drone production represents an industrialization of this creativity. It transforms artisanal workshops into industrial production lines. It enables **Ukraine** to produce drones at a scale that matches its actual operational needs — which are enormous. **Russia** uses its own drones — notably the Iranian **Shahed** drones — by the hundreds in each wave of attacks. To respond effectively, **Ukraine** needs massive and continuous production.

### The Ukrainian defense industry — scaling up under pressure

The **EU**'s decision to go through Ukrainian suppliers for the first drone production schedule is not merely symbolic. It is a strategic decision that develops Ukrainian defense industrial capabilities. Dozens of Ukrainian companies — small and medium-sized, often founded by engineers who began making artisanal drones in their garages — now have access to industrial-scale contracts.

MEP **Strack-Zimmermann** acknowledged the difficulty: there exists "a significant gap between what **Ukraine** needs and what industry can deliver in the short term." This is a real constraint — a defense industry cannot be built in a few months, even with adequate funding. But the trajectory is the right one. And **Europe**, by choosing to invest in this trajectory rather than in simple equipment transfers, is making the right long-term bet.

*Ukraine manufactures drones that destroy Russian refineries 1,000 kilometers away. That is human ingenuity in its rawest form. And Europe has just decided to make it an industry. That is the best decision it has made since the 2004 enlargement.*

## The Gap Between Promises and Reality — The First Disbursement Goes to the Budget

### The first tranche — macro-financial support, not drones

We must be honest about what happened on **June 25, 2026**. The first disbursement of **€3.2 billion** does not go — contrary to what certain newspaper headlines might have implied — directly to drone production. According to **Euractiv** cited by Ukrainian sources, this first tranche is a disbursement from the macro-financial support component — it goes to the general Ukrainian state budget to finance current public expenditures, notably civil servant salaries and essential services. This is not without value — on the contrary, it is vital. But it is not the same thing as directly funding drones.

The **€6 billion earmarked for drones** will be disbursed "in the coming days," according to **Von der Leyen**'s statements in **Gdańsk**. This additional delay illustrates the administrative complexity of European disbursement processes and the need to validate the preconditions of the defense component. For **Ukraine**, every day counts — but this delay of a few days is acceptable in the context of a program running over two years.

### The risk of the gap between announcement and implementation

The **European Commission** has a complex history with implementation delays in its aid programs. Conditionality mechanisms, compliance verifications, multi-level approval processes — all these elements can transform a **€45 billion** announcement into a reality of much slower disbursements on the ground. **MEP Strack-Zimmermann** was right: in wartime, delays have consequences. The **Commission** must ensure its administrative processes do not become the enemy of operational efficiency.

The good news is that the mechanism was already tested with the **EU Ukraine Facility** program from previous years. Commission teams have experience with this type of disbursement. And President **Zelensky**, by immediately signing the law increasing the defense budget in line with the European loan, sends a strong signal of seriousness and good faith in the use of the funds.

*European bureaucracy is sometimes its own worst enemy. Announcing €45 billion under the spotlight is one thing. Making sure every euro arrives where it needs to be, when it needs to be — that is the real test. Brussels must pass it.*

## The Cost for European Taxpayers — A Necessary Comparison

### €200 per citizen — an investment, not an expense

Let us put the **€200 per European citizen** that this program costs in perspective. That is less than the monthly cost of two streaming platform subscriptions. It is less than the average European household's monthly electricity bill. And it is incomparably less than what a **Russia** victorious in **Ukraine** would cost European taxpayers — with military reinforcements at all of **NATO**'s eastern borders, additional refugees, and the economic and political destabilization of **Central Europe** that would result.

The cost-benefit calculation is favorable, even on coldly economic grounds. The **European Union** has spent far larger sums on far less strategic objectives. The agricultural subsidies of the **Common Agricultural Policy** alone represent more than **€50 billion per year** — for an economic outcome that has been the subject of debate for decades. **€45 billion to safeguard Europe's eastern border and support the continent's largest democracy in an existential war** — that is a defensible priority without hesitation.

### The moral dimension — an irreducible debt

But reducing this support to an economic calculation would be insufficient. There is an irreducible moral dimension. **Europe** has benefited for decades from a security founded on American guarantees and an international order that excluded wars of aggression in its immediate neighborhood. **Ukraine**, by resisting Russian aggression, is defending that order — at the price of its blood, its cities, its children. That **Europe** contributes financially to this defense is not generosity. It is the partial repayment of a debt.

This debt is first historical. **Europe** endorsed the **Budapest** agreements in 1994 by which **Ukraine** renounced its nuclear arsenal — the third largest in the world at the time — in exchange for security guarantees from **Russia**, the **United States**, and the **United Kingdom**. Those guarantees were not honored. **Europe**, which was present in Budapest, bears a moral responsibility for what resulted. The **€45 billion** do not repay that debt. They acknowledge its existence.

*Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in 1994 because it was promised security. It was lied to. The least we can do now is keep the promise that was made — with the means we have. €45 billion is the very least.*

## The Impact on the Ukrainian Economy — Reconstruction During War

### A GDP that holds against all odds

The Ukrainian economy has shown remarkable resilience since 2022. Despite massive infrastructure destruction, millions of internal and external displaced persons, and the necessity of devoting a considerable share of GDP to military expenditure, the Ukrainian economy avoided total collapse thanks to massive international support. The **IMF**, the **World Bank**, the **European Union**, and Western governments have maintained financial flows that enabled the Ukrainian state to function.

The European loan of **€90 billion** — of which **€45 billion in 2026** — is now the backbone of this support. It enables the Ukrainian government to plan over the medium term, maintain investments in public services, and avoid destructive budget cuts that would weaken popular support for the resistance. This relative macroeconomic stability is a strategic weapon as important as drones or tanks.

### The challenge of fund absorption

A real risk must be named: the capacity to absorb the funds. **Ukraine** is receiving massive financial flows in parallel — American, European, bilateral. The institutional capacity of the Ukrainian administration to manage these flows, direct them to the right budget lines, and ensure their traceability and transparency is a real constraint. Phenomena of corruption, misappropriation, or simply administrative inefficiency can reduce the actual impact of funds on the ground.

This is why the **EU**'s **32 reform conditions** matter more than a mere bureaucratic exercise. They aim precisely at strengthening the institutional capacities that allow effective use of external financing. The **National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine** (NABU) and other oversight institutions have shown real results since 2022 — officials have been prosecuted, contracts cancelled, processes improved. This progress is real and must be supported.

*Ukraine is fighting corruption while fighting an army. That is a double war that I am not sure many other countries would know how to wage simultaneously. This double effort deserves our respect — and our conditional support, to ensure funds reach where they must.*

## The Gdańsk Conference in the History of Western Support

### A pivotal moment after two years of hesitation

The **Gdańsk Conference** of June 2026 marks a turning point in the history of Western support for **Ukraine**. The first two years of the conflict (2022-2024) were characterized by progressive aid — often delayed, always insufficient according to Ukrainian requests. Each new category of weaponry — long-range missiles, heavy tanks, combat aircraft — was the subject of prolonged wavering before being finally granted. These hesitations had a cost in human lives and lost territory.

The establishment of the **€90 billion** loan, combined with **NATO** armament programs, represents a maturation of Western support. **Europe** no longer reacts to each Ukrainian request with prolonged internal debates. It plans over two years, with clearly defined envelopes, operational disbursement mechanisms, and conditionality based on concrete reforms. This is a welcome professionalization of support.

### Poland's role — host and champion of Ukraine

The choice of **Gdańsk** as the conference venue honors the central role of **Poland** in support for **Ukraine**. **Warsaw** has been since the start of the conflict the principal logistical hub for Western military aid, the country hosting the largest number of Ukrainian refugees in **Europe**, and one of the most consistent defenders of robust and uncompromising support for **Kyiv**. **Poland** knows, better than any other European country, what the threat of an aggressive and expansionist **Russia** represents. Its history taught it that lesson at a terrible price.

By choosing **Gdańsk** — city of freedom, of workers' resistance, of the union that helped bring down the Soviet empire — for this conference, **Europe** sends a powerful symbolic message: the same breath of freedom that animated Solidarity in 1980 animates the Ukrainian resistance today. History is a continuous line. And **Europe** is choosing, clearly, which side of that line it stands on.

*Poland paid in blood for the lesson that other Western Europeans had the luxury of forgetting: imperial Russia is never satiated. That Warsaw is today Ukraine's most ardent defender is not cold geopolitics — it is traumatic memory transformed into foreign policy.*

## The Limits of Support — What €45 Billion Cannot Do

### Money does not replace men and political will

It would be naive to believe that **€45 billion** alone will determine the outcome of the conflict. Money can fund drones, maintain budgets, build arms factories. But it cannot replace the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers holding the front lines. It cannot replace the political will of Western allies to maintain their support in the face of fatigue pressures and compromise temptations. And it cannot accelerate the reconstruction of devastated zones while bombs continue to fall.

The real question facing 2026-2027 is not financial. It is one of political will. The **United States**, under the **Trump** administration, has reduced certain types of direct military support. **Hungary** regularly blocks European decisions. Populist voices in several European countries question the cost of support. These political pressures are real and can, over time, erode support even when the financial mechanisms are in place.

### The risk of "Ukraine fatigue"

"**Ukraine fatigue**" — that politico-media phenomenon translating into declining attention and reduced willingness to maintain aid — is a real and documented risk. Prolonged conflicts exhaust public attention. Internal economic crises divert priorities. And Russian strategists count precisely on this fatigue — resisting long enough until the **West** tires and forces **Ukraine** into compromises.

The **Gdańsk** conference and the announcement of the first disbursement are, in part, a response to this risk. By creating a multi-year mechanism of **€90 billion**, **Europe** sends a long-term commitment signal that extends beyond the political cycle of the next two years. This is a signal to markets, to allies, to Ukrainians — and to **Russia**. **Russia** cannot count on European financial exhaustion to win this war.

*Putin plays for time. He counts on our fatigue, our helplessness, our divisions. Every billion committed on a multi-year basis sends him the opposite message: we will not tire. This is not just money — it is a signal of political will. The kind of signal that can, sometimes, change a strategy.*

## EU Accession — The Horizon That Transforms Everything

### The first "fundamentals" cluster — the beginning of the road

The opening of **Ukraine**'s accession negotiations with the **EU** on **June 15, 2026**, with the launch of the first "fundamentals" cluster — covering the rule of law, fundamental rights, and democracy — is a historic event whose significance extends beyond the current conflict. It means that the **European Union** has decided, irreversibly, that **Ukraine** is part of its common future. This is a political and civilizational investment in the fullest sense of the term.

This signal transforms the nature of the financial support. The **€45 billion** are no longer merely aid to an allied country at war. They are an investment in the construction of a future member state — as was, in their time, the aid to **Poland**, the **Czech Republic**, and the **Baltic** states at their accession in the 2000s. Those countries are today among the most dynamic economies in the **European Union**. **Ukraine**, with its **40 million inhabitants**, its vast agriculture, its natural resources, and its skilled workforce, has considerable development potential once peace returns.

### The post-war era — a Ukraine in the EU as a strategic objective

The accession prospect also transforms the logic of reconstruction. Investing in **Ukraine** today is investing in a future market of **40 million consumers**, a future commercial and industrial partner, a future net contributor or net beneficiary of the European budget. The economic return on investment — over ten or twenty years — of the funds invested today in Ukrainian reconstruction will be positive for the European economy as a whole.

This is the final argument I want to leave with the reader. The **€45 billion for 2026**, the **€90 billion over two years**, the entirety of European support for **Ukraine** since 2022 — all of this is not an expense. It is an investment. Moral, strategic, economic. An investment in the security of **Europe**, in the credibility of the international rules-based order, and in the future of a democracy that has chosen **Europe** at the price of its blood. There is no better investment possible.

*Ukraine in the EU — it was unthinkable five years ago. It is becoming inevitable. And this inevitability may be the most dissuasive thing for Moscow that exists. An empire can occupy a country. It cannot occupy a future member state of the European Union.*

## Zelensky's Voice — A Leader Who Deserves This Support

### A wartime leader who remains a democrat

**Volodymyr Zelensky** deserves to be named in this essay. Not as an abstract figure, but as a leader who has made remarkable choices under a pressure that few human beings would have overcome. When **Moscow** offered evacuation in 2022, he stayed. When some allies suggested territorial compromises, he resisted. When the temptation of wartime dictatorship was available, he maintained functioning democratic institutions — elections postponed due to war, certainly, but preservation of a parliament, an independent press, an active civil society.

This leader asked **Europe** not to fight in its place, but to give it the means to defend itself. And **Europe**, in **Gdańsk**, responded. This moment of explicit, documented, multi-year, and conditional support — not unconditionally charitable, but strategically grounded — is perhaps the best response that European democracies could give at this moment in their history.

### Ukrainian citizens — the real beneficiaries

Behind the figures — **€3.2 billion**, **€6 billion**, **€45 billion**, **€90 billion** — there are people. Teachers who can be paid. Hospitals that can function. Children who can attend school. Soldiers who can receive the equipment they need to survive and protect their families. Every euro of this European loan translates, somewhere in **Ukraine**, into a life maintained, a capacity preserved, a hope extended.

Europe's **€45 billion** for **Ukraine** in 2026 are not abstract politics. They are the sum of millions of individual human decisions — **Commission** civil servants, European parliamentarians, national leaders — who chose solidarity over withdrawal. This is, at bottom, what the **European Union** was meant to be: a civilizational project that upholds its values even when it costs something.

*I think of Ukrainian children whose schools function because Europe decided to pay their teachers' salaries. That is not a slogan. It is the concrete reality of what these €45 billion mean. That deserves to be said clearly.*

## Ukrainian Women in the War Effort — An Invisible Pillar

### The half of the country holding up the other half

The European loan of **€45 billion** will fund drones, civil servant salaries, reforms. But behind these financial abstractions are concrete human realities. **Ukrainian women** are an invisible yet fundamental pillar of the war effort. With millions of men mobilized, they are the ones keeping hospitals, schools, administrations, and factories running. They are raising children in a country at war, maintaining the civilian life that the army needs in order to fight.

The budget support component funds — the **€16.7 billion** earmarked for the general Ukrainian budget — finance these salaries, these services, this normalcy under the bombs. They allow a schoolteacher to continue teaching children who need structure and emotional security despite air raid sirens. They allow a nurse to remain at her post in a field hospital. These investments are as military as the drones — because the social cohesion of a country at war is a military capability.

### The memory of support — what Ukraine will not forget

There will be a post-war era. **Ukraine**, whatever the outcome of the conflict, will remember who supported it in its darkest hours. That memory will shape the political, commercial, and cultural alliances of the generation that will govern the country in twenty or thirty years. The **European Union**, by committing massively and durably, is investing in this memory. It is a capital of trust and loyalty that is not quantifiable in euros but is real and lasting.

**China**, which chose ambiguity and trade with **Russia** during the conflict, will pay politically for this choice in its relations with a potentially victorious or stabilized **Ukraine**. **Russia**, obviously, will have no normal relationship with **Ukraine** for a generation. And the countries that chose solidarity — **Poland**, the **Baltic States**, **Europe** as a whole — are building a privileged relationship that will last well beyond this conflict.

*Ukraine will remember. In twenty years, the Ukrainian leaders who will be in office will have lived through this war as children or young adults. They will know who was there. Investing now is investing in that collective memory. It is the best geopolitical placement Europe can make.*

## The Ukrainian Model — A War Economy That Inspires

### Industrial adaptation under extreme constraint

**Ukraine** has developed under constraint a capacity for economic transformation that few countries have had to demonstrate since the **Second World War**. Factories reconverted to defense production in a matter of weeks. Civilian engineers turned weapons system designers. A military supply chain built from scratch under bombs. This "Ukrainian model" of economic adaptation in times of crisis is being studied by economists and industrial strategists worldwide.

European funding — notably the **€6 billion for drones** going through Ukrainian suppliers — accelerates this transformation. It gives the Ukrainian defense industry the critical mass necessary to professionalize its processes, certify its products to international standards, and integrate into European value chains. This is an investment in Ukrainian post-war industrial competitiveness as much as in current military capabilities.

### The reconstruction dividend — Ukraine's economy of tomorrow

Economists estimate that the total cost of Ukrainian reconstruction runs into **hundreds of billions of euros** — some projections exceed **€500 billion**. That is a colossal sum. It is also a colossal economic opportunity for construction, engineering, renewable energy, and technology companies that will participate in this reconstruction. European companies, thanks to the **EU**'s early involvement in supporting **Ukraine**, are well positioned to play a central role in this reconstruction.

**Ukraine** possesses the **most fertile agricultural land in Europe**, significant reserves of lithium and other critical minerals for the energy transition, and a highly skilled workforce — particularly in computer engineering and the sciences. A **Ukraine** at peace, integrated into the **EU**, would be one of the fastest-growing economies on the continent. This potential more than justifies current investments — not as charity, but as a calculated bet.

*What strikes me about the Ukrainian wartime economic model is a form of ingenuity that only necessity can produce. Ukraine has transformed absolute constraint into innovation. I do not romanticize war — it is a catastrophe — but if any good must come of it, it may be this entrepreneurial fabric that Ukraine will have developed under the bombs.*

## Conclusion: €45 Billion, A Civilizational Choice

### The investment that defines 21st-century Europe

When the history of early 21st-century **Europe** is written, the decision to massively support **Ukraine** — financially, militarily, diplomatically — will be one of its most significant moments. Not because it guaranteed Ukrainian victory — the outcome of the conflict remains uncertain. But because it demonstrated that the **European Union** was capable of a coherent, multi-year, values-driven strategic commitment, even facing a nuclear adversary, even under internal economic and political pressure.

The **€45 billion of 2026** are part of this history. They fund drones, salaries, reforms. But they also fund something intangible and irreplaceable: the Ukrainian conviction that the **West** will not abandon them. This conviction is, militarily, as valuable as any weapons system. It maintains morale. It sustains resistance. It says: you are not alone.

### Europe facing its history

**Europe** was founded on the ruins of its own wars. It built a peace project so that no one would ever again have to live through what previous generations endured. That project is under attack — not metaphorically, but literally — by a war of aggression at its eastern borders. Supporting **Ukraine** means defending the European project itself. It means defending the idea that borders cannot be changed by force, that peoples choose their destiny, that democracy deserves to be defended. **€45 billion** for that? It is little. It is necessary. It is right.

*When I analyze Western support for Ukraine, I always return to this fundamental question: what are we capable of when we truly believe in something? The €45 billion from Gdańsk show that Europe is capable of a great deal — more than it believed of itself. It is this recovered confidence that is perhaps the greatest legacy of this support.*

**By Maxime Marquette, columnist**

## Columnist's transparency note

### Editorial stance

I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies.

I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events.

### Method and sources

This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here.

**Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies.

**Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations.

When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**.

### Nature of the analysis

The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted.

My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors.

This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text.

## Sources

### Primary sources

- [European Commission — First disbursement of €3.2 billion under the €90 billion Ukraine Support Loan — June 25, 2026](https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-disburses-first-eur32-billion-instalment-ukraine-under-eur90-billion-ukraine-support-loan-2026-06-25_en)

- [EU Perspectives — Brussels steadfast on Ukraine commitment, MEPs hear — June 2026](https://euperspectives.eu/2026/06/brussels-steadfast-on-ukraine-commitment-meps-hear/)

- [Ukrainska Pravda — Ukraine receives €3.2 billion from the EU — June 25, 2026](https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2026/06/25/8041057/)

### Secondary sources

- [Euronews — Von der Leyen announces first payment to Ukraine under 90-billion loan — June 25, 2026](https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/06/25/von-der-leyen-announces-first-payment-to-ukraine-under-90-billion-loan)

- [The Brussels Times — EU pledges further aid to Ukraine at Recovery Conference in Gdańsk — June 25, 2026](https://www.brusselstimes.com/2206936/eu-pledges-further-aid-to-ukraine-at-recovery-conference-in-gdansk)

- [UNN — Zelensky approves increase in defence budget after EU loan — 2026](https://unn.ua/en/news/zelenskyy-approved-an-increase-in-the-defense-budget-after-a-loan-from-the-eu)

-

---

Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/45-milliards-pour-l-ukraine-l-europe-paye-sa-dette-morale-et-strategique