# COMMENTARY: The EU's €90 billion loan — the first €3.2 billion reaches Kyiv

> On June 25, 2026, at the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Gdańsk, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced the first disbursement of the €90 billion support loan granted to Ukraine. Amount of this first tranche: €3.2 billion, paid immediately, to help Kyiv cover its urgent financial needs and maintain essential state functions while it continues to defend itse

- Author: Maxime Marquette
- Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co)
- Section: Commentary
- Published: 2026-06-29
- Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/commentaire-le-premier-versement-du-pret-ue-de-90-milliards-3-2-milliards-arrive

## Introduction: A financial signal as much as a political one

### Von der Leyen in Gdańsk: the announcement and what it says

On **June 25, 2026**, at the **Ukraine Recovery Conference** in **Gdańsk**, European Commission President **Ursula von der Leyen** announced the first disbursement of the **€90 billion support loan** granted to **Ukraine**. Amount of this first tranche: **€3.2 billion**, paid immediately, to help **Kyiv** cover its urgent financial needs and maintain essential state functions while it continues to defend itself against Russian aggression.

This is not merely an accounting transaction. It is a strong political act, deliberately chosen to coincide with the Gdańsk international conference — a symbolically charged venue where European solidarity with **Ukraine** was expressed before the entire world. The European Union is saying, in hard cash: **we are not only beside you in words, we are beside you in euros**. That matters.

### The context of the €90 billion loan

This massive loan — approved by the EU on **April 23, 2026** — is designed to be disbursed over **two years**. It does not replace existing mechanisms such as the **Ukraine Facility** (whose seventh installment of €2.8 billion had been disbursed on June 8). It is added to those mechanisms to meet the scale of the growing needs of the Ukrainian wartime economy: a **projected 2026-2027 budget deficit of approximately $91 billion**, largely covered by external financing. **Ukraine** allocates the entirety of its tax revenues to **defense**. The rest, it asks for with dignity from its allies.

The disbursement of **€3.2 billion** is conditioned, according to the Commission, on the implementation by **Ukraine** of specific **reforms** in **public finance, public investment, and customs**. This is not free money. It is trust bought at the price of institutional discipline — and **Ukraine** has paid it.

*Three point two billion euros. That is a sum which, for most countries, would represent a decade of major projects. For Ukraine, it is enough to hold on for a few more weeks in a war that costs tens of millions per day. European solidarity is real. It will need to stay at that level.*

## What €3.2 billion enables concretely

### Financing a state fighting to survive

When we speak of **"essential state functions"**, we are talking about very concrete things: the salaries of teachers, doctors, firefighters, police officers — all the people who keep a country running under bombs. We are talking about **pensions for retirees**, benefits for combatants' families, funding for overwhelmed hospitals. These are the functions this loan helps maintain while all tax revenues are absorbed by the war effort.

**Ukraine** has accomplished something remarkable: maintaining a functioning state during total war. Local elections are held. Institutions continue. The currency has not collapsed. This is not a given — it is the result of rigorous economic management, supported by allies who understood that **Ukrainian economic stability is a condition of its military resistance**.

### A second disbursement earmarked for drones on the horizon

Beyond the first disbursement of **€3.2 billion**, information circulating at Gdańsk pointed to a **second disbursement of €6 billion**, this time specifically dedicated to **drone production**. If these figures are confirmed, it would be a first: European financing targeted at a specific military capability, integrated directly into the sovereign loan mechanism. This would no longer be general financial assistance — it would be **strategic investment** in combat capability.

The political signal of this potential second disbursement would be considerable: the EU would no longer only be helping **Ukraine** hold on economically, it would be investing in its ability to win. This is a **major doctrinal evolution** for an organization that in **2022** still struggled to assert itself as a security actor. Three years of war have done more to transform the EU than thirty years of institutional debate.

*Six billion for drones. If confirmed, this may be the clearest signal yet that Europe has understood something fundamental: supporting Ukraine means supporting its own security. Not charity. Sound foreign policy.*

## The architecture of European financial support for Ukraine

### A complex but coherent architecture

European financial support for **Ukraine** has been built in successive layers since **2022**. First came the **bilateral emergency aid** from member states. Then the **Ukraine Facility**, a structured mechanism of €50 billion over four years. Then the frozen Russian assets, whose interest feeds a dedicated fund. And now this **€90 billion support loan**, the largest ever granted to a single country outside of **IMF** mechanisms.

This architecture is both a political achievement — getting these amounts accepted by all 27 EU members was anything but obvious — and a solid financial infrastructure. It sends a message to markets, private investors, and non-**European** allies: **Europe is committed for the long term**, not just until the next election. That is not trivial in the context of a war of attrition where the credibility of allied support is itself a weapon.

### Reform conditionality: an intelligent mechanism

The fact that disbursements are conditioned on specific reforms — public finances, investment, customs — is not Western condescension. It is an **intelligent mechanism** that ties international support to Ukrainian institutional progress, creating a virtuous dynamic. These reforms also prepare **Ukraine** for its **future EU membership**, whose initial accession negotiations were officially opened on June 15, 2026.

**Ukraine** is reforming in wartime. This is an institutional performance without historical parallel. It is adopting public procurement laws, reforming its energy sector, progressively integrating its market to European standards — all while repelling a large-scale invasion. Those who doubt its ability to join the EU would do well to measure what it is accomplishing under conditions no member state has ever known.

*We speak of externally imposed reforms as if they were humiliation. But look at what Ukraine is doing: reforming itself, under bombs, to become the Europe it has chosen to be. That is one of the most impressive stories of our time. We do not say it enough.*

## The loan in the context of sanctions and frozen Russian assets

### Frozen Russian assets: a parallel source

Alongside this loan, **frozen Russian assets** in Western financial institutions — estimated at over $300 billion, a large share immobilized at the Belgian depositary **Euroclear** — generate interest that also feeds support for **Ukraine**. The EU's decision to approve the **twentieth sanctions package** against Russia in April 2026 reinforced this mechanism.

The reality is that European financing for **Ukraine** comes simultaneously from multiple sources: sovereign loans, structural facilities, interest on frozen assets, bilateral guarantees. Together, they form a continuous financial flow that allows Ukraine to maintain the coherence of its national effort. **Cutting any one of these flows would be devastating**. Maintaining all of them together is a necessary — though not sufficient — condition for victory.

### Diplomatic pressure and consistency of support

At the moment this disbursement of €3.2 billion is made, **Russia** continues its massive strikes on Ukrainian cities. **Putin declared on June 28** that Russia would pursue its military objectives no matter what. In this context, every euro transferred to **Ukraine** is also a political response to that rhetoric: **no, you will not make it yield through economic exhaustion**. No, financial attrition will not replace the military victory you cannot achieve on the battlefield.

This may be the most important message of this disbursement. Not the **€3.2 billion** in themselves — significant but not sufficient on their own. But the signal they carry: **the European Union will not bend**. And in a war of communication as much as of **missiles**, this signal has real, concrete, measurable value.

*Putin bet on the financial exhaustion of his adversaries. He was counting on Europeans who were too divided, too fearful, too focused on their own problems to hold. This disbursement tells him he miscalculated. Once again.*

## The political conditions of the loan: what the EU demands of Kyiv

### Conditionality as a guarantee of transformation

The disbursement of **€3.2 billion** is not automatic — it is conditional on the fulfillment of precisely defined reform milestones set by the **European Commission**. These conditions cover several domains: reform of the judicial system to improve its independence, anti-corruption measures including measurable progress from the **NABU** anti-corruption agency, economic reforms aimed at improving the business climate, and progressive alignment with the **acquis communautaire** within the framework of **accession negotiations**. Each tranche of the loan corresponds to a subset of these conditions — the **€3.2 billion** first disbursement attests that **Ukraine** has satisfied the conditions of this first phase.

This conditional approach is deliberately different from a blank check. It forces a continuous dialogue between **Brussels** and **Kyiv** on reform progress, creates incentives for Ukrainian reformers to maintain internal pressure, and provides EU member governments with the elements needed to defend these commitments before their respective parliaments. In a European political context where some parties question the level of aid to **Ukraine**, conditionality is also a political communication tool — it demonstrates that European money is not simply spent, but invested in verifiable transformation.

### The reforms accomplished to unlock this disbursement

To earn this first disbursement of **€3.2 billion**, **Ukraine** had to satisfy a series of specific milestones. Among the most significant: implementation of a **land reform** creating a more transparent agricultural land market; adoption of legislation strengthening the independence of the **Supreme Court**; progress in removing oligarchs from regulatory institutions; and a measurable improvement in tax revenue collection indicating a reduction in the informal economy. These milestones are not theoretical — they are verified by **European Commission** teams with access to Ukrainian administrative data.

These **reforms**, accomplished in the context of an active war, testify to a remarkable administrative capacity. Some observers have expressed reservations about the real quality of these reforms — pointing out that some are more cosmetic than substantive, that judicial independence remains imperfect, and that resistance to deep-seated corruption does not disappear by signing a decree. These criticisms are partially valid. But they must not obscure the fact that significant reforms have genuinely been accomplished, under extraordinarily difficult conditions, by an administration mobilized on multiple fronts simultaneously.

*€3.2 billion is the price of a promise kept. Ukraine reformed under the bombs to deserve this money. Not sufficiently, not perfectly. But genuinely. And in the imperfect world of international politics, real imperfect progress is worth more than perfect reform on paper.*

## The €90 billion loan in the context of total international aid

### An unprecedented commitment in the history of international aid

The **€90 billion loan** over ten years represents the largest financial commitment ever undertaken by the **European Union** in favor of a third country in the context of an active conflict. To put this figure in perspective: it exceeds the American **Marshall Plan** (in equivalent value) that financed the reconstruction of **Western Europe** after **World War II**. It is equivalent to approximately half of **Ukraine's** annual **GDP** in **2026**. And it is added to the dozens of billions already committed since **2022** by member states, the **ECB**, the **World Bank**, and the **IMF**.

This massive commitment reflects a clear political decision on the part of the **European Union**: **Ukraine** is a strategic partner whose future is intrinsically linked to European security and prosperity. This is not philanthropy — it is strategic investment. A stable, democratic, and economically viable **Ukraine** on the eastern border of the **EU** is infinitely preferable, from the standpoint of **European** interests, to a destabilized, impoverished, or Russian-influenced **Ukraine**. The calculation is cold and it is correct.

### The risks for European taxpayers

The **€90 billion** is not a grant — it is a loan, which means **Ukraine** will eventually have to repay it. If **Ukraine** cannot honor its repayment commitments — a scenario depending on the outcome of the war, the speed of economic reconstruction, and global macroeconomic conditions — part of the bill will fall on **European** taxpayers. The **Commission** has put in place guarantee and insurance mechanisms to mitigate this risk, notably using interest from frozen Russian assets as a partial repayment source.

Critics of this commitment — mainly nationalist parties in **Hungary**, **Slovakia**, and some **Western European** countries — raise these risks in a legitimate way, even if their political motivations are often less avowable. The most convincing response to these critics is not to ignore them, but to demonstrate that funds are used transparently and that reform conditions are genuinely applied. That is precisely what the **Commission's** conditionality mechanism is meant to guarantee.

*€90 billion over ten years. That is Europe's bet on Ukraine. It is not idealism — it is strategy. A Europe that lets Ukraine collapse will pay far more than €90 billion in lost security, in refugees, in increased military spending. This bet, for once, makes sense.*

## The political signal sent to Moscow and Ukraine's allies

### A message of durability of Western commitment

From a strategic standpoint, the disbursement of **€3.2 billion** — the first in a long series — sends a crucial message to **Moscow**: the Russian strategy of exhaustion is not working. **Putin** bet that **Western** democracies would tire, that public opinion would turn against aid to **Ukraine**, and that divisions among partners would progressively weaken financial support. This bet rests on a historical reading: that is how certain **20th century** conflicts unfolded, where the war-weariness of democracies eventually led to arrangements unfavorable to the side they supported.

But every EU loan disbursement, every reconstruction conference, every long-term commitment by **Western** partners demonstrates that this calculation is wrong — or at least premature. The West is not tiring; it is institutionalizing its support. Disbursements over ten years do not depend on a single election or a single administration — they are encoded in legal agreements that will outlast changes in governments. This is precisely the institutional durability that **Zelensky** has sought to create from the start, and that this **€90 billion** loan helps to anchor.

### The impact on Ukrainian morale and civil resilience

Beyond geopolitical calculations, the disbursement of **€3.2 billion** has a concrete impact on the morale of Ukrainian citizens. In a country where every day brings its share of bombardments, losses, and economic difficulties, knowing that **Europe** is continuing to deliver on its financial commitments — not just promising them — maintains a form of collective hope that is itself a resource of war. Trust in allied support is a multiplier of civil resilience that cannot be measured in **billions** but is just as real.

Ukrainian opinion polls from June **2026** show stable popular support for continuing the war — more than **70% of Ukrainians** remain determined not to accept territorial compromises. This level of resilience, remarkable after more than four years of intensive war, is partly sustained by the conviction that **Western** allies will not abandon them. Every EU disbursement, every weapons delivery, every statement of support contributes to maintaining this conviction. The **€3.2 billion** from **Gdańsk** is one more brick in this wall of trust.

*Ukraine receiving these billions does not receive them as charity. It receives them as recognition that its fight is also ours. And it is right. When Ukraine holds, Europe buys time, space, and dignity. €3.2 billion for that? That is a bargain.*

## Prospects for the next EU loan tranches

### The disbursement schedule and remaining milestones

The **€90 billion loan** will be disbursed in several tranches over ten years, according to a schedule tied to the fulfillment of progressive **reform** milestones. After the first disbursement of **€3.2 billion**, the following tranches should be in similar or slightly larger ranges — the exact schedule depending on reform progress and Ukrainian budgetary needs. The **European Commission** has flexibility to accelerate disbursements in case of urgent need or to slow them in case of governance problems.

The remaining milestones for subsequent tranches include deeper **judicial reform** — notably establishing a judge verification system that removes those who have demonstrated systemic corruption — progress in the privatization of state-owned enterprises, and advances in administrative decentralization. These reforms are structurally more difficult than those of the first phase, as they touch entrenched interests and institutions whose transformation requires time and political will.

### Risks to the disbursement schedule

Several factors could disrupt the planned disbursement schedule. A slowdown in **reforms** due to domestic political pressures in **Ukraine** or to administrative capacities limited by the war could delay subsequent tranches. A change of government in key **EU** countries — notably **Germany** or **France** — could alter support conditions, even if the legal architecture of the loan makes such changes difficult. And of course, the evolution of the military situation remains the most unpredictable factor of all.

Despite these risks, the overall outlook remains positive. **Ukraine** has demonstrated since **2022** a capacity to meet the conditions imposed by its international creditors — a track record that neither **Lebanon**, nor **Argentina**, nor other historical beneficiaries of massive international aid have managed to maintain under far less difficult circumstances. This institutional credibility is **Ukraine's** most precious asset in its relations with the international financial community — more precious even than the natural resources or agricultural potential that will underpin its **reconstruction**.

*The next tranches will come. Not automatically — but because Ukraine will have earned them. That is the contract Zelensky signed with Europe. A demanding contract. A just contract. A contract that I believe, in my best moments, he will honor.*

## Conclusion: €3.2 billion euros, a promise kept

### Solidarity that must last

The disbursement of **€3.2 billion** to **Kyiv** on June 25, 2026 is a promise kept. The European Union had announced this loan, conditioned reforms, and paid when the conditions were met. That is what serious, structured, credible support looks like — the opposite of theatrical announcements with no follow-through. In the context of the war, consistency counts as much as the amounts.

### The battle of resources continues

But this disbursement, as significant as it is, does not solve everything. The **Ukrainian budget deficit** is astronomical. The needs for military equipment, for reconstruction of energy infrastructure, for support for the displaced — all of this exceeds what the EU alone can cover. American support, wavering under **Trump**, remains a critical factor. The battle of resources is not won. It will only be won if all the allies maintain their commitment over time, without yielding, without growing weary. **Ukraine, for its part, does not grow weary of resisting.**

*The question is not whether Europe can afford to support Ukraine. The real question is whether it can afford not to. And to that question, the answer remains the same as on the first day: no, it cannot.*

**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 — EU Solidarity with Ukraine, first disbursement of €3.2 billion — June 25, 2026](https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-solidarity-ukraine_en)

### Secondary sources

- [Xinhua English — EU disburses first tranche of Ukraine support loan — June 26, 2026](https://english.news.cn/europe/20260626/dc0ed649fdab4374bedad49e48e4005b/c.html)

- [News Ukraine RBC — EU extends anti-Russia sanctions — June 2026](https://newsukraine.rbc.ua/news/eu-extends-anti-russia-sanctions-for-another-1782418457.html)

- [Euromaidan Press — EU disburses first 3.2 billion of 90 billion Ukraine loan — June 27, 2026](https://euromaidanpress.com/2026/06/27/eu-ukraine-loan-first-disbursement-3-2-billion/)

- Kyiv Independent — EU Ukraine 90 billion loan first tranche disbursed — June 2026

- United24 Media — EU disburses first installment of Ukraine support loan — June 2026

---

Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/commentaire-le-premier-versement-du-pret-ue-de-90-milliards-3-2-milliards-arrive