The EU gathered in Cyprus last week to discuss Ukraine with a rare burst of momentum behind it: a €90bn loan for Ukraine approved; a twentieth sanctions package adopted; and Hungary's veto power broken by electoral defeat.

What the summit in Ayia Napa exposed, however, was that progress on the financial and sanctions front has served to concentrate attention on the question Europe's leaders most want to avoid: whether Ukraine will ever actually join the EU, and on what terms.

The answer coming from Brussels and Berlin is increasingly a version of "not yet, not fully, and perhaps not in the form you want."

Zelenskiy's answer, delivered in person — he flew to Cyprus rather than participate via video link as originally planned, reportedly to apply direct personal pressure on leaders — was categorical: "Ukraine does not need symbolic membership in the EU. Ukraine is defending itself and undoubtedly defending Europe as well. And it's not defending Europe symbolically — people are truly dying."

The German proposal

The most consequential statement at the summit came from German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. "It is clear to everyone that an immediate accession of Ukraine to the EU is, of course, not possible," Merz said after the Cyprus meeting. "I also want to enable closer integration into the European institutions, for example through participation in European councils without voting rights."

As part of the December round of a ceasefire deal at the Moscow meeting on December 3, brokered by the US, the Trump administration suggested accelerating Ukraine’s accession to the EU as soon as 2027, as part of the 27-point peace plan (27PPP).

Since then the EU has rejected an accelerated membership out of hand. Ukraine will have to follow the regular path all candidate countries have to follow – and that could take a decade. However, with Ukraine’s military campaign faltering and its economy in tatters, its friends in Europe are looking for a compromise. One of the items that is rising up the agenda is taking Ukraine into the club so that it can benefit from the Euro Nato collective security deal, enshrined in Article 24/7 of the founding treaty – a European-only version of Nato’s Article 5 deal, now that the consensus is growing that the Trump administration cannot be relied on to stick to the Nato promise to come to Europe’s aid should Russia attack.

Ukraine’s EU accession bid has stalled. As IntelliNews reported, the screening process to see what needs to be changed was completed last summer and the formal negotiations on the various clusters were supposed to open last July, but objections – led by Hungary and Slovakia, but not only – meant the talks didn’t start. Bankova has made a lot of progress, but progress on things like judicial reforms have fallen behind leading to the EU threatening to withhold hundreds of millions of euros of support as a punishment. Zelenskiy’s effort to drive reforms through has also become more difficult thanks to a growing domestic political crisis, as he is losing the support of his majority party in the Rada, following a string of corruption scandals.

Merz’s remark crystallised a position that has been evolving for months. Germany and France have prepared a proposal that would grant Ukraine an "associate membership" to the EU, under which Ukraine would gradually be integrated into EU programmes and attend the bloc's meetings, but not have voting rights. The European Commission has discussed a membership-lite version — which is a polite way of saying “no.” Ukraine would have neither access to the most important EU policies nor voting rights.

More prosaically, it would also have no access to the EU budget. Admitting Ukraine comes at a high cost — both financially and politically. As IntelliNews has reported, Ukraine cannot join the EU unless Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is reformed. Under current funding rules, Ukraine’s massive agricultural sector would entitle it to €186bn of subsidies; Germany and France would have to increase their contributions to the EU budget significantly, and Poland and Hungary, amongst others, would go from net beneficiaries from the EU budget to net contributors. And that is before taking into account granting Ukraine unfettered access to EU markets, especially of agricultural goods. Despite the bonhomie on the podium, none of the EU members want to face that sort of competition.

Merz proposed what he called a "pre-accession plan" with intermediate steps, suggesting the Western Balkan countries should also receive a boost through the same phased approach. The framing presents the proposal as a principled architecture for managing enlargement rather than a rejection of Ukraine specifically — but Kyiv read it as exactly that. The deal is a way of showing support for Ukraine, without offering anything tangible.

Zelenskiy is no fool and rejected the proposal for Ukraine's partial accession, saying: "We are defending our shared European values. I believe that we deserve full membership in the EU."

He has repeatedly urged Brussels to set a concrete date, arguing it should come no later than 2027 as part of any peace agreement with Russia. Merz had already characterised that 2027 target as "not possible" earlier this year, saying Ukraine needs first to “stabilise” its institutions and economy. Zelenskiy admitted that negotiations on "various possible formats of Ukraine's membership in the EU" were already under way at "different levels"— a rare acknowledgement that Kyiv, despite its public position, is engaged with the discussion.

Another problem is the addition of another large country would dilute voting rights in the Council of Europe, which is already struggling to cope with the growing shock of the war and now a looming energy crisis caused by the Iran war.

The German position is that a reform of voting rights in the Foreign Affairs Council would be a prerequisite for Berlin's approval of further EU enlargement — but that would require treaty change, a process so politically complex it has not been seriously attempted for years. Many existing members – especially the small countries - are not willing to pay these costs. As IntelliNews reported, the strain on European economies has already led to growing disunity in the EU.

"Back in December, Belgium was not ready to incur legal risks for Ukraine [during a vote on the Reparation Loan]. France and Italy were not ready to provide robust guarantees for Belgium. Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia did not take part in the [€90bn EU loan]. These are the revealed preferences of European politicians, as opposed to their stated preferences in which they pledge unending solidarity with Ukraine," said Wolfgang Münchau, director of Eurointelligence and former editor-in-chief of the Financial Times Deutschland. "The hypocrisy is most egregious on the topic of Ukraine's EU membership."

The process

On the procedural front, there was more optimism. European Council President António Costa, in a joint statement with Zelenskiy and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on arrival at the Cyprus summit, said the EU had taken "two very important steps in order to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine" and called for the negotiation clusters to be opened "without delay."

"Now it's time to look forward and to prepare the next step, and the next step is to open the first cluster of negotiations for the Ukrainian accession to the EU," Costa said. "We delivered on these two steps and we will deliver in the next step."

European Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos expressed confidence that Brussels will open all six negotiation clusters by Christmas, noting that the process will begin once Hungary's new government is in place.

"We have already received some positive signals from Hungary's future prime minister [Peter Magyar]. I am confident that soon we will be able to officially open one cluster, followed by the others," she said.

Ukraine's Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, Taras Kachka, said he hoped by the end of 2026 the EU will have opened all six clusters, potentially allowing the closure of at least one this year. "If that happens, it indicates we are on the right path to full EU membership," he stated.

Estonia's Prime Minister Kristen Michal said there was a chance for a "fresh start" in the EU accession process for Ukraine. "We support Ukraine in the EU because, to be honest, there's no other way," Michal said.

The disunity beneath the consensus

But it is not going to be easy. With Orban gone, the EU has lost its most convenient lightning rod. Orban’s acerbic criticisms of Russian sanctions conveniently acted as a mask for widespread concerns over the EC’s Ukraine policy, which remained silent. Without Orban other nations are starting to speak up to protect their own national interests. Greece and Malta forced the EC to remove harsh shipping sanctions on Russia, and Poland has unilaterally banned the import of Ukraine’ agricultural products, to name two EU anti-Ukraine policies.

The twentieth sanctions package, billed by Von der Leyen as "the toughest ever," was gutted of some of its most significant measures by Greece and Malta, which objected to a total ban on transporting Russian oil. Between them, the two countries account for approximately a fifth of Russia's shadow tanker fleet and earned fat profits from the premium rates Moscow has been willing to pay anyone willing to carry its oil over the last four years.

Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever, who personally shot down the plans to seize Russia’s $300bn in frozen assets as a Reparation Loan in December, has been one of the more outspoken Ukraine-sceptics. On arriving in Cyprus, he warned that while Orban "was not always easy to deal with, there are other countries and leaders in Europe who do not always agree with the consensus."

Earlier this month De Wever said the "sanctions are not working" and called on the EU to reestablish commercial relations with Russia, including gas imports — a position that would have been almost unsayable publicly eighteen months ago.

EC President António Costa offered a stark warning of his own on the broader stakes, telling EU leaders that the bloc could collapse if it chose to follow US President Donald Trump's lead on key issues, according to sources cited by Bloomberg.

For Zelenskiy, the Cyprus summit delivered the financial package he needed, the sanctions momentum he had pressed for, and the promise of a procedural path forward on accession clusters. The money was key as Ukraine was facing a macroeconomic collapse within months without fresh funding. Now Bankova has the cash to fight on for another two years if no Russian deal is done.

But what it did not deliver was the unambiguous commitment to full membership on a defined timeline that he flew to Cyprus in person to demand. The gap between what Ukraine needs to hear and what Europe is prepared to offer again leaves Ukraine in limbo between destruction by Russia’s military machine and a prosperous European future.