Not a triumph, but a warning signal: is Ukraine ready for EU membership negotiations?

The European Commission has released a report on Ukraine’s progress towards EU membership. The government is calling it “the best in three years.” But is there any reason for such euphoria?

Yes, Ukraine remains one of the leaders among the candidates, and this is a credit to our Armed Forces and the entire Ukrainian people. At the same time, the report clearly states: if we want to complete the negotiations by 2028, it is necessary to accelerate reforms, primarily in the area of the rule of law and anti-corruption.

In addition, it is interesting to listen to the current authorities’ explanation of why the European Commission considers the goal of completing accession negotiations by 2028 to be ambitious and achievable for Moldova, but only ambitious for Ukraine.

Kostyantyn Yeliseyev, diplomat, representative of Ukraine to the European Union (2010-2015), spoke about this and much more in an exclusive interview with the “Pryamiy” TV channel.

— The European Commission recently presented a report on Ukraine’s progress on its path to the EU. On the one hand, our commitment to European integration is noted, and on the other, serious warnings are being made about political pressure on anti-corruption bodies and the lack of reforms. At the same time, government officials are talking about their readiness to complete negotiations by the end of 2027. We heard similar statements two years ago. It seems that we are at the same stage. Isn’t this a kind of deja vu?

— Indeed, it may resemble deja vu. If you search the Internet, you can find that back in January 2023, the then Prime Minister of Ukraine promised that Ukraine’s ambitious goal was to become a member of the EU in two years. Today we have the end of 2025, but this process does not exist, and we, to our great regret, are not a member of the European Union. Therefore, I would advise all government officials, from my own experience, not to make such mistakes and not to create excessive expectations. Instead of politically populist statements and “European integration shockwaves”, it is worth doing real work – rolling up your sleeves and working.

This also applies to the situation surrounding the European Commission’s annual report on Ukraine in the context of the EU’s enlargement policy. This document is currently the subject of close attention by Ukrainian society and authorities, and this is very good. In essence, this report is a report card of the work of the Ukrainian authorities and the state for the year. To be clear, every year each candidate country for EU membership undergoes such a thorough, thorough check by experts and officials of the European Commission for commitment to the goals, principles and criteria of the European Union.

Such reports are very valuable for Ukraine, as they create an objective picture of the stage at which the Ukrainian state is today in terms of democracy, the rule of law, human rights and freedoms, the economy, sectoral cooperation, decentralization, etc. We should thank our partners for the thorough work they have done and for the recommendations they have made to this text. I do not want to give assessments to the assessments of the European Commission experts. With almost 30 years of experience in diplomacy and almost 20 years of experience working with European institutions, I have confidence in them. I am convinced of their impartiality and sincere desire to help Ukraine.

This report was destined to be positive. And all the positive things in it – perhaps someone will disagree with me – are thanks to the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the resilience of the Ukrainian people, not to bureaucrats and officials. Bureaucrats, officials and civil society need to join forces to eliminate the shortcomings that the European Commission draws attention to in its report. There is no need to argue whether the report is good or bad… The top should start actively working on the mistakes that the report mentions today.

It is important that this report clearly identifies Ukraine as an important candidate for EU membership. It recommends that negotiations be started immediately and that three chapters be opened: fundamental rights, the internal market, and foreign policy and security. We need to start the negotiation process immediately. This is important for everyone, and above all for Ukraine. Why? Because the very start of negotiations will allow Ukrainian society, civil society activists, and non-governmental organizations to control the negotiation process and put pressure on the authorities to fulfill their tasks in the area of the rule of law and economic reform. Unfortunately, without opening negotiations, the authorities have no motivation to quickly correct their mistakes.

It is very good that the Commission mentions Ukraine’s ambition to complete the negotiations by the end of 2028. This is a wonderful ambition. But it notes that in order to achieve this goal, Ukraine must significantly accelerate the implementation of the necessary reforms, primarily in the area of the rule of law and fundamental rights and freedoms. I hope that everyone will listen to these signals. A similar report was approved for Moldova, with which we are currently moving together. Moldova also recorded the ambition to complete the negotiations by the end of 2028. But what is interesting: in its report on Moldova, the European Commission says that this goal is “achievable”. This word is not in our text. This made me a little confused, because it turns out that they believe more in Moldova’s capabilities.

This indicates that we are currently lagging behind a bit. This worries me, because all previous years Ukraine was the leader of EU integration, a kind of icebreaker that dragged other states along with it. Now, judging by the assessments, although we are in the top four candidate countries, we are inferior to the Republic of Moldova. There is a danger that in Brussels there will be more and more voices in favor of separating the accession processes of Ukraine and Moldova, because this process should be merit-based. If Moldova is ahead of us, it should be given the right to move on. This is an unpleasant trend for us, but, on the other hand, it can be a good motivation for the Ukrainian authorities.

It seems that after this report, some authorities believe that nothing can be done until 2028, because the European Commission will give us a positive assessment in advance. Today, European Commission Vice-President Kaia Kallas stated that the EC supports Ukraine’s ambition for EU membership by 2030. And I believe in this date. Why? Because the term of office of the current European Commission will end in 2029, and they want Ukraine and Moldova to complete all the necessary procedures to complete the negotiation process during this time. This will allow Ukraine, with the new composition of the Commission, to apply for full membership, to have its own commissioner and deputies in the European Parliament. This goal is very ambitious, but it is good that we are not talking about two years, but about the period until 2030 – provided that Ukraine significantly accelerates the pace of reforms.

We should not waste time discussing whether the glass is half empty or half full. We need to join forces, roll up our sleeves and move forward. The issue of European integration is a matter for the entire state, both the government and the opposition. By the way, in the report, the European Commission emphasizes that both the government and the parliamentary opposition have a consensus on the priority of EU membership. And this is very important, because European integration is an important guarantee of the security of the Ukrainian state, especially while we are not members of NATO.

— Artificial intelligence gives optimistic forecasts for the start of negotiations in 2026, based on available information and positive statements. But if we assess the situation realistically, what do you think about the date you announced – 2030?

— We must do our part to ensure that artificial intelligence produces truly correct, encouraging, and well-founded information. Ukraine must begin accession negotiations as soon as possible, and it all depends on us. We should not shift responsibility to third countries. We must do what is ours, and then let the European Commission deal with those who can slow down the process within the EU. We are not making reforms for Brussels, but for Ukraine and Ukrainians, so that they can live better, so that there are fair courts, because the key demand of society is the demand for justice.

By making reforms, we receive assistance. These reports give us directions, provide financial resources. This report recognizes that since the large-scale invasion, the European Union has provided Ukraine with assistance in the amount of 177.5 billion euros. This is a colossal amount. If you add to this assistance from the United States and other countries, the amount will be even greater. Therefore, we should be grateful to the EU. They understand the difficult situation that Ukrainians are in. The report notes the strength and resilience of the Ukrainian people in the face of blackouts and missile terrorism from Russia. They believe that we will achieve our goal.

Today, Ukrainians are the most Euro-optimistic nation in the world – 80-90% support EU membership. For this reason, for the sake of future generations, we must do this. To date, no one has come up with better standards of quality of life, food, or social policy than those that exist in the European Union. We must gradually, though not quickly, create such conditions, even despite the war. The war should not be an excuse not to make reforms.

Yes, some things in our country are conditioned by martial law. But the European Commission notes that the application of all the restrictions inherent in martial law should not undermine the democratic reform agenda. This is a warning to the Ukrainian authorities not to abuse martial law and tighten the screws, for example, by introducing political censorship in addition to martial law…

— Returning to political obstacles. The opposition, in particular “European Solidarity”, insists on the repeal of the illegal resolution banning deputies from traveling abroad, calling it a violation of the rule of law. How is this related to the EU recommendations?

— The issue is broader than just traveling abroad. The European Commission considers this in the context of parliamentary democracy and opposition rights. They really pay attention to restrictions on foreign trips specifically for opposition MPs. That is, even the European Commission understands that permission to travel is an element of political corruption in Ukraine: if you vote correctly, you are given permission to travel. They do not mention it directly, but diplomatically point to restrictions specifically on the part of the parliamentary opposition.

Secondly, they draw attention to the rights of the opposition in a broader context and call on the Ukrainian authorities to urgently develop an appropriate bill. The opposition should initiate the preparation of such a bill, because today you are in power, and tomorrow you are in opposition. Such a law exists in any normal democratic country that aspires to become a member of the EU. The European Commission gives us a pass: please, settle this issue.

The text also draws attention to the unacceptability of the application of illegal sanctions, in particular the freezing of assets for certain opposition leaders. Although names are not mentioned, we understand who is being referred to. If the commission draws attention to this in its annual report, then whether anyone likes it or not, it must be implemented. The prologue to this report was the resolution of the European Parliament, adopted in September, where all these points – sanctions, the ban on deputies from leaving, and the fight against corruption – were concisely reflected.

Now this report must be approved by the European Parliament and will become, in fact, a table map for any representative of an EU member state in dealing with Ukraine. We will not be able to “untie the knot”. The sooner we do it, the better it will be not for Brussels, but for Ukraine and Ukrainians. We must think first of all about them. Will they be better off from this? Will the quality of life improve? Will there be justice? Of course, there will be. This is why we hire ministers as managers of the people. Please make our lives better. If you can’t, make way for others.

— The President of Finland proposed organizing a meeting between Volodymyr Zelensky and Putin at the G20 summit. Isn’t there a danger in this?

— I am a supporter of a different concept. We need to focus not on form, but on substance. And the substance, as the President of Finland rightly said, is reaching an agreement on a full, comprehensive and unconditional ceasefire. Until that happens, there is no point in talking about any format of meetings. Believe me, any country in the world would be happy to host such a meeting if it felt that it would bring results.

In addition, I believe that the result will not be achieved through bilateral meetings with the aggressor, but through negotiations, where our friends and partners will sit at the table as witnesses to this process. And thirdly, in order to force Putin to sit at the negotiating table, we must use methods of coercion for peace. This requires three things that everyone already knows: weapons, hellish sanctions, and powerful financial support for Ukraine. The issue of financial assistance, in particular the fate of the reparations loan at the expense of frozen Russian assets, is now very relevant for our European partners.

Of course, Trump’s position is also important. It is thanks to him that a window of opportunity has opened for us to end this bloody war. I admire his ambition to end the war in Ukraine. Under what conditions is a subject for discussion. But as of today, I do not see any desire on the part of Russia to negotiate. The previous meetings were not negotiations, but rather consultations or diplomatic intelligence. Real negotiations have not yet begun.

— You mentioned frozen Russian assets. Politico writes that the Belgian Prime Minister does not support the European Commission’s plan to use them, as he fears lawsuits from Moscow and wants guarantees from partners. What kind of guarantees are these?

— This is a difficult issue, which has political, legal and domestic political components related to the unstable situation in the Belgian government. The Belgian side does not want to be left alone in the event of possible lawsuits from Russia. Why against Belgium? Because it is on its territory that the Euroclear financial institution is located, where 140-150 billion euros of frozen Russian assets are stored.

The situation is difficult, but I am convinced that the European Union will show creativity and find a way out. It is politically important for us to show Putin that Ukraine is financially secure for the next few years. A reparations loan from these assets can guarantee us support for at least three years. This is a powerful signal to Putin that his tactics of a war of attrition are not working. The Belgian Prime Minister wants to be vouched for not only by EU countries, but also by other countries in the world, such as Norway, Japan, Canada or the USA, which also have frozen Russian assets on their territory.

If one of them gave a signal of readiness to use these assets to provide a loan to Ukraine, this would be a good guarantee for a positive decision by Belgium. The main thing for us is to have money, and the form is already the EU’s authority. I see a great willingness to resolve this issue, preferably by the end of the year. The deadline has been set – the next EU summit on December 18-19. The European Union will provide us with the necessary financial support, and we, for our part, must show that we will use it transparently and effectively, fighting corruption.

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