Europe Speaks, Bankova Pretends to Hear: How Kyiv’s Illusions Threaten Its EU Future

Source: Author’s Facebook page

By now, most Ukrainians have heard government officials celebrate the European Commission’s “positive” report on Ukraine’s EU accession progress. But behind the triumphant rhetoric from Bankova lies a harsh reality: Brussels’ tone may be polite, yet its message is a warning, not applause.

Indeed, it is important that, in the midst of a brutal war, the European Commission manages to maintain a delicate balance — acknowledging Ukraine’s difficult circumstances while keeping its assessment objective and ensuring that Europe’s political and financial support does not lose momentum.

At the same time, it’s clear that the authorities in Kyiv are not inclined to read between the lines, and few people will take the time to go through the full text of the report. So I will highlight several key points.

First, the European Commission appears concerned that Ukraine’s leadership is attempting to implement European integration for a nation of millions during wartime with the help of just five or six “managers.” The report explicitly notes that “it is necessary to ensure the active participation of all stakeholders, with an emphasis on cooperation between the executive and legislative branches of government. The government should continue to engage with the public on EU integration.”

After the shock in July, when the Office of the President attacked NABU and SAPO, Brussels began watching very closely to see whether Bankova would reverse course. It didn’t.

The European Commission clearly recognizes what is happening — and says so directly. It notes that “the position of the Prosecutor General remains politicized. The provisions on the automatic closure of criminal cases due to the expiration of pre-trial investigation deadlines after a notice of suspicion, as well as the shortened investigation periods, have led to the closure of several high-profile cases, while others are now at risk. The legislation adopted in July 2025 allows for the transfer and appointment of prosecutors without competition and gives the Prosecutor General access to any pre-trial investigation materials (except those of NABU and SAPO).” The EC urges Ukraine to refrain from applying these provisions until they are repealed.

The Commission also notes the deep cynicism of the authorities, who, under the guise of patriotic slogans and wartime necessity, have created comfortable conditions for themselves and their allies to plunder the country.

The report puts it bluntly: “Legislative initiatives presented as protecting business or national security have been registered or adopted, which risk undermining the effectiveness of the fight against corruption, particularly by limiting the transparency of public registers and criminal liability for corruption crimes. Anti-corruption institutions and civil society organizations report increasing pressure from state bodies, including criminal investigations by law enforcement and security agencies. Overall, these developments call into question Ukraine’s commitment to its anti-corruption agenda.”

Brussels also sees what Zelenskyy has turned the State Bureau of Investigation into — and effectively calls for a full reboot: “introduce transparent and merit-based selection procedures for management positions in the central and regional departments of the National Police of Ukraine and the State Bureau of Investigation, with the participation of independent experts appointed by international partners, as well as strict disciplinary and anti-corruption standards.”

Finally, the EC expresses deep concern over Ukraine’s growing resistance to the participation of independent experts appointed by international organizations in various selection and verification processes — including pending constitutional petitions and legislative initiatives that seek to dismantle these “internationalized” mechanisms altogether.

Ukraine’s partners have also paid special attention — and used notably clear language — to describe the growing pressure on the opposition: “Some opposition members of parliament continued to be subject to certain restrictions, particularly regarding travel abroad or asset freezing. For democratic stability, it is important to constantly ensure that the rights of the opposition are respected. No legislative initiatives regulating the rights of the parliamentary opposition have been developed or registered.”

The European Commission further calls on Ukraine to strengthen a transparent, pluralistic, and independent media environment, ensuring that the restrictions introduced under martial law comply with fundamental rights — such as freedom of information and freedom of the press. The message is unmistakable: it’s time to end the era of government-controlled broadcasting. As the report puts it, “a review of the need for the telethon as a state-funded format should take place no later than before Ukraine lifts martial law.”

And this is only a fragment of the serious criticism voiced. The EC also points to systemic weaknesses in public administration, public procurement, and local self-government — areas where reform has either stalled or been replaced with imitation.

At this point, the authorities have a choice: they can finally wake up and start real reforms, or they can keep basking in self-congratulatory illusions of “unprecedented progress.” But if the old habit of blaming Europe for Ukraine’s failures prevails once again, the window of opportunity for true integration may quietly close — long before anyone in Bankova notices.

Also, follow “Pryamyi” on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, and Instagram.

• Materials published in the “OPINIONS” section reflect the opinion of the author of the publication, who bears full responsibility for the accuracy of the information.
• The editorial staff of prm.ua may not share the opinions expressed in the author’s material.
• The owner of the webpage in the “OPINIONS” section is the author of the publication.