13th Apr 2024


Europe is giving more aid to Ukraine than you think

  • EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and Ukraine president Volodomyr Zelensky: the EuU and member states actually contributed slightly more to Ukraine than the US did last year (Photo: European Commission)
Listen to article

Europeans need to pull their weight in Ukraine. They should pony up more funds. And most definitely, they should not fall behind the United States. Such has been the chorus since the start of the war, primarily on the other side of the Atlantic.

The problem is: the argument isn't borne out by the facts, at least not anymore.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Get the EU news that really matters

Instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

  • Between secrecy at the member state level, and incomprehensible acronyms from Brussels, it has been a challenge for Americans, US Congress first of all, to get a clear grasp of Europe's contributions (Photo: Wikipedia)

Let's look at the numbers: the European Union and its member states actually contributed slightly more to Ukraine than the US did last year.

US contributions approximated €48bn through 20 November, while commitments from the EU and its member states reached close to €52bn.

These included €34.7bn in financial support, which covered €17bn for Ukrainian refugees, €11.7bn in military assistance, and €5.4bn in humanitarian aid. These are numbers collected by Germany's Kiel Institute on the World Economy, which has tracked contributions to Ukraine since the beginning of the Russian invasion. It found that Europe surpassed the US relatively late in the year.

The economic fallout from the war also disproportionately impacted Europeans.

Sanctions imposed on Moscow severely hurt European businesses. The US is further away and less affected. Europeans also had to weather an energy crisis unseen in decades, forcing governments to pass massive relief packages.

Of course, the burden sharing debate is complicated and depends on what you include.

If you remove refugee costs from European contributions, suddenly, the balance tilts irredeemably towards the US. Of course, to a European, particularly one living in Poland or the Czech Republic, where Ukrainian refugees currently represent more than four percent of the national population, this omission would seem off-putting at best.

Europeans must recognize that the term "burden sharing" touches a raw nerve in Washington. Within Nato, it has been a longstanding issue. Europeans have been good at announcing defence commitments, less so on following through on them.

And on military aid, the discrepancy between Europe and the US is significant: Ukraine fires between 5,000 and 7,000 artillery rounds per day, an amount no European industry can match.

Washington plans to increase production from 14,000 rounds per month to 20,000 by the spring, which would still only cover less than a week of Ukraine's needs. That's what the entire French army ordered between 2015 and 2020 for its Caesar howitzers.

The US is the only country with the capability to lead here.

Europe's immediate strengths lie elsewhere.

The EU is endowed by its member states with the financial resources necessary to conduct continent-wide cohesion policies and promote regional development. Within weeks of Russia's invasion, the EU was able to identify €17bn from its cohesion fund which could quickly be allocated to help member states provide Ukrainian refugees with housing, education, and health care. Brussels also encouraged member state capitals to reallocate previously distributed cohesion funds by permitting the transfer of resources between approved programs.

American incomprehension

For Americans to recognise these contributions, Europeans need to be more transparent and find simple ways to communicate them. Between secrecy at the member state level, and incomprehensible acronyms from Brussels, it has been a challenge for Americans, US Congress first of all, to get a clear grasp of Europe's contributions.

More than anything, it is time to drop the 'tit-for-tat' mentality.

The transatlantic relationship has historically worked best when both sides of the Atlantic co-owned a project. Given relative strengths and weaknesses, joint ownership should not be mistaken for an equal one. Instead, asymmetries are unavoidable and even desirable.

The United States should drive the security assistance; Europe should lead the reconstruction. As time passes, Europe will be expected to take an ever-larger share of the burden given Ukraine's aspiration to become a member of the EU. Let's not forget: as a neighbour, EU countries will also reap most of the benefits from a thriving Ukraine.

The latest announcements seem to confirm this positive trend. Most (or even all) of Ukraine's immediate budgetary needs in 2023 will be covered. That includes an €18bn package by the EU, announced by in December.

Delivered in monthly instalments, these funds also include "initial support towards sustainable post-war reconstruction," suggesting more will follow.

Delivered in the form of heavily-subsidised loans with maturities going up to 35 years, these funds are a clear demonstration that Europeans are committed to Ukraine long-term. The US announced its own $45-billion package [€41.3bn], but in the context of a split Congress, its funds will be allocated on a need-basis.

While the EU Commission has successfully secured aid for 2023, it is still unclear how Europe will raise the required funds for Ukraine's longer-term reconstruction. The conversation about funding sources has not even started. It ought to. It would make future budget negotiations on Capitol Hill easier. If handled with care and foresight, burden sharing can end up in a virtuous cycle.

The upcoming EU-Ukraine summit in Kiev should be used to send such a signal.

Author bio

Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff is a distinguished scholar, James H. Sallembien a research assistant at the German Marshall Fund of the United States.


The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Why the new ECHR Ukraine-Russia ruling matters

The ECHR ruled that Russia was in "effective control" of separatist regions of Eastern Ukraine from 11 May 2014. In doing so, the court has formally acknowledged the inter-state character of the conflict and Russia's culpability for human rights abuses.

Ukraine — what's been destroyed so far, and who pays?

More than 50 percent of Ukraine's energy infrastructure, large parts of its transport network and industrial capacity, around 150,000 residential buildings damaged or destroyed. The bill is between €378bn to €919bn.

The problem of corruption in Ukraine — and a solution

Sunlight is the best disinfectant— so in a way, it is encouraging to see corruption scandals coming to the fore, as this may deter potential future graft, a key prerequisite for Kyiv's eventual EU accession.

This 'deregulation' lobbying now threatens EU economy

Next week's EU summit (17-18 April) will discuss the strategic agenda for the next five years. The current "competitiveness agenda" is to a large extent driven by a big lobbying campaign — so far, not well covered by the media.

Latest News

  1. UK-EU deal on Gibraltar only 'weeks away'
  2. Belgium declares war on MEPs who took Russian 'cash'
  3. Brussels Dispatches: Foreign interference in the spotlight
  4. Calling time on Amazon's monopolism and exploitation
  5. Resist backlash on deforestation law, green groups tell EU
  6. China's high-quality development brings opportunities to the world
  7. Ukraine tops aid list again, but EU spending slumps
  8. Who did Russia pay? MEPs urge spies to give names

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersJoin the Nordic Food Systems Takeover at COP28
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersHow women and men are affected differently by climate policy
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersArtist Jessie Kleemann at Nordic pavilion during UN climate summit COP28
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersCOP28: Gathering Nordic and global experts to put food and health on the agenda
  5. Friedrich Naumann FoundationPoems of Liberty – Call for Submission “Human Rights in Inhume War”: 250€ honorary fee for selected poems
  6. World BankWorld Bank report: How to create a future where the rewards of technology benefit all levels of society?

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Georgia Ministry of Foreign AffairsThis autumn Europalia arts festival is all about GEORGIA!
  2. UNOPSFostering health system resilience in fragile and conflict-affected countries
  3. European Citizen's InitiativeThe European Commission launches the ‘ImagineEU’ competition for secondary school students in the EU.
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersThe Nordic Region is stepping up its efforts to reduce food waste
  5. UNOPSUNOPS begins works under EU-funded project to repair schools in Ukraine
  6. Georgia Ministry of Foreign AffairsGeorgia effectively prevents sanctions evasion against Russia – confirm EU, UK, USA

Join EUobserver

EU news that matters

Join us