At this point, it’s less about ‘support packages’ and more about long-term commitment. €90bn sounds big, but spread over years it’s just maintaining the status quo.
182
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+88
Actually, the €90B is just covering a part of the projected needs for 2026-2027, which sits at €140B. The rest is supposed to be covered by the G7 countries that have pledged $50B.
I.e. it is supposed to pay some of Ukraine's rather huge budget deficit. Without it, Ukraine will have to start shutting down parts of the government funded apparatus this month.
It should also be noted that this is mainly to keep Ukraine afloat, not to change the status quo, and importantly the €140B figure assumes that the war ends in 2026, and it does not include costs for reconstruction after the war (which is estimated to be over €500B, and rising).
Edit: I.e. it's a rather short term fix, and it's ~~highly likely~~ inevitable that another loan is necessary for 2027, and then for 2028, and so on.
88
jeyhoundApr 21, 2026
+14
How will ukraine realistically be able to pay everything back? Will europe just own everything in ukraine or how is it going to go?
14
mildly_askingApr 21, 2026
+29
Some of the debt will be forgiven, I assume, some will be paid back over a very long period of time, some will be paid back over a very long period of time *with amazing conditions*.
As I've been told:
- A part will be forgiven, a part of the value the currency represents will be eaten by inflation, a part will be paid back over a long time.
----
If interest on the debt is either zero or consistently lower than inflation, it becomes 'cheaper' to pay back year by year. If you get both very low interest and decades to pay it back, you get incredibly good conditions.
Paying back loans for fifty years is preferable to most states when compared to occupation or annihilation.
Paying for a war in currency rather than in (citizen) lives is preferable for most nations.
Seems like a reasonable deal.
29
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+2
Good points. Though I think that a large part of it will have to be carried by the EU. Especially if we envision Ukraine as a future EU member it's not really feasible that they have a completely debt-burdened economy for decades. They would never be able to act on equal terms as the rest, so it's probably better to share the debt across the union.
There's also another way to "solve" the debt: By transforming it into new debt (i.e. kicking the can down the road). In fact, one portion of [the "reparations loan" plan](https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-capitals-frozen-assets-loan-ukraine-russia-war-finances/) in December 2025 was to repay a loan from 2024:
>€45 billion from the overall package would repay a G7 loan to Ukraine, issued last year
My limited understanding of economy leads me to believe that whatever we do, it will very likely drive inflation within the EU and weakening of the Euro during the coming decades (which is probably good news for other actors like the US, China and Russia).
2
mildly_askingApr 21, 2026
+3
I've been talked at by some smart people, I, myself, am fairly clueless.
What I've been told was:
It's a costly affair in *some* way, either now or later. Loans are easier to swallow, can be forgiven or eased in any way one would choose, that forgiveness or easing can be conditional (a pro-russian gov. can't simply get out of them, democratic backsliding can be punished) various parts of debt can be restructured, refinanced, forgiven as various parties and circumstances permit. A *recovering* Ukraine can pay back at least part of the loans over decades.
Therese also a few hundred billion worth of Russian assets controlled by the EU.
What I can easily add to that without being an expert:
A nonexistent or far more diminished Ukraine can't.
Outright inaction ~~might~~ will have its costs to. Creating an incredibly bad security environment (and possibly leaving the NPT) will be *all kinds* of costly as well. I know what my priorities would be in the next election should this come to pass.
3
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+1
I myself am mostly speaking from an interest and I try to read and understand as much as possible. I'm not even close to being an economy expert, and would never claim to be one.
I think you're right about loans being easier to swallow. I also think that a joint EU loan (as is the case here) is easier to swallow than several bilateral loans. AFAIU that's the background for the joint debt that the EU took during Covid, for instance, and I think that as you say, we're mostly pretending that it doesn't exist.
I think that there's a political component to it too. E.g. if Sweden was to take a €3 billion loan to fund Ukraine in 2026-2027, that would be a political decision by the government and ruling parties, and that would be subject for debate and critique that the political opposition could capitalize on. However, if the EU takes a €90 billion joint loan (of which Sweden's share is €3 billion), that decision is not really open for much debate among Swedish politicians as it's a shared decision within the EU. I.e. the discussion about how big the loan is and whether or not we should do this or that instead to support Ukraine has been removed from the domestic political discourse. If there's any controversy, it would be about whether or not EU membership is good or bad for Sweden, and that is a much easier discussion (we usually agree that EU is good for Sweden).
And of course the bar is even higher if we were to use tax money (part of the state budget) instead of a loan to fund Ukraine. That would be an even harder discussion.
1
mildly_askingApr 21, 2026
+1
This is an unnecessarily cynical view, I'd say.
Sure, the optics are better if *the EU* and not *poor lil Netherlands*
Anyone even vaguely familiar with the topic will be aware that these are costs.Anyone even vaguely familiar with the topic will also be familiar with the cost of inaction. A newly founded polish nuclear program, including delivery vehicles and early warning systems wouldn't be c****.
Even if those are paid back in full, in another world, the EU could have issued 100B+ of loans to develop local DRAM fabs or build schools for homeless dogs or whatever else would benefit their electorate long term.
There is also absolutely an advantage for every party involved (except the enemy belligerent) if credit is provided by - and risk is shared amongst the members of - one of the biggest economical entities in the world.
1
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+1
I think you're overwstimating the level of fear and support among European voters, and underestimating how much most politicians value votes.
I have come to embrace cynicism when analyzing and understanding geopolitics, because apparently that is exactly how the decision makers work. Also I have accepted that the vast majority of any population is incredibly selfish and short sighted.
Any time that things like morals, solidarity or altruistic motives are invoked in geopolitics, my base assumption is that it's bull (or more adequately: propaganda to get popular support).
>Anyone even vaguely familiar with the topic will also be familiar with the cost of inaction.
This comes to the heart of the issue. It's extremely vague. What exactly are the costs of inaction? What is inaction? What is action? How much is a billion Euros? A trillion Euros? Aren't we already doing enough? Ukraine is winning after all? I don't think that most people have a clear concept of these things. Also, time frames longer than a couple of years are an eternity in most people's minds.
That's why politicians have to dumb down messages (hence propaganda) and avoid decisions that can be directly felt by the people (because that can cause unrest, fuel populistic opposition, and lose votes).
That said, you are absolutely right that there are many advantages of a joint EU loan other than the optics (I mentioned some of them, I believe).
1
AdMoist5134Apr 23, 2026
+1
u forgot the most important part...the EU plans to make Russia pay for it...through reparations...if russia doesn't pay the bill, they consider keeping some of those 300B frozen assets
1
calls1Apr 21, 2026
+10
1. They won't. No one expects these loans to be repaid. This is just hoe finance work internationally, you give loans, you layer forgive them. It does also mean ant legitimation Russian puppet would be required to repay later, yiucan imagine how this matters in other scenarios.
2. Ukraine in 2013 had a gdp per capita of 4000 $/capital, that was halved by the 2014 invasion and recovered by 2021. That's up from around 1000 $/capita at the soviet collapse . Poland started at just under 2000 $/capita, manged to get to 5000 $/capita, which is where Ukraine is now nominally, by 2005, when they entered the EU. Today 20 years later they're at 25,000 $/capita. If Ukraine still has 200% gdp per capita debt after the war, even without inflation deleting those debts denominated in local currency, just raw growth from equalising with the rest of post soviet Europe would reduce the burden to 40%gdp a perfectly normal value. Ironically because of Russian modelling Ukraine still has huge catch up potential and thus the ability to outgrow its debt after the war, IF it can get inside the trading bloc.
10
andreravApr 21, 2026
+3
The loan is secured/guaranteed by seized russian assets, last time I read about this.
3
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+1
Only indirectly AFAICT. I think the wording is something along the lines "Ukraine does not have to repay the loan until Russia pays reparations to Ukraine, and until that happens the Russian assets will remain frozen".
In reality, it's extremely unlikely that that will happen (the bar is very high for getting Russia to pay reparations to Ukraine). A more likely scenario is that this will be used as a bargaining chip in peace negotiations, and/or the EU will ultimately have to pay back the loan.
1
Crypt33xApr 21, 2026
+2
The frozen assets are our secruity and we wait for the war to finish. So speculating on reperations and if not, Russia would need to force us to give them back. Putin already said good-bye to the assets last year. Currently we pay the loans from the interests of frozen assets.
2
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+2
Nobody wants to talk about it. I think that the most likely scenario is that the EU will have to foot the bill somehow, and I think (hope) that most EU leaders are aware of that.
If we're talking about ~€600B, it would be €60B/year spread over a decade, on top of repaying the loans (in addition to this €90B loan, Ukraine has taken on significant debt too that has to be repaid somehow). Edit: For reference, €60B is more than some EU member's GDP. It's not peanuts.
The future costs will only grow for every year that the war continues, and every year of war is more expensive (currently >€70B/year, and rising).
I.e. there is most likely an interest within the EU to end the war ASAP, to cut future costs, despite all the fine words about "for as long as it takes".
Of course, the hope is that Russia will agree to a ceasefire and negotiations in 2026, but there are no clear indications that that will happen.
Short of massively ramping up military support for Ukraine, I think that the only option for that happening would be for Europe to engage directly and seriously in diplomacy with the Kremlin, and be ready to make politically uncomfortable concessions/compromises (e.g. around sanctions and trade).
2
canspopApr 21, 2026
+3
The debt is supposed to be paid by ruZZia, once the war is over. If and how that works, only time will tell.
It took the UK 50+ years to pay back the WW2 debt payment to the US, so that route could just be a very big, long term loan.
3
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+4
>The debt is supposed to be paid by ruZZia, once the war is over
I honestly think that that's a pipe dream. It would essentially require Ukraine to push Russia into an unconditional surrender, and I don't see how that could ever happen. E.g. if Russia was really losing they could just leave Ukraine and not agree to anything. What would Ukraine have to do then to force Russia into agreeing to pay the money? Invade Moscow?
The European and Ukrainian current priority seems to be to get Russia to agree to a ceasefire and end the war ASAP. That requires negotiations, and having Russia pay reparations as a condition would probably be a non-starter.
I agree, though, that the time perspective can be huge. I also think that creative economic solutions can be used, including effectively "printing money", or shared ownership/returns for Ukrainian assets, similar to some proposals in the US 28-point plan last year. I also suppose that some financial magic can be worked out in combination with taking in Ukraine as a future EU member.
4
mildly_askingApr 21, 2026
+3
> The debt is supposed to be paid by ruZZia, once the war is over. If and how that works, only time will tell.
Are there any renowned experts (or EU employees) who see this as remotely likely?
3
xmuskorxApr 21, 2026
-1
From the Russian reparations / e.g. from the money already frozen by EU.
-1
JimTheSaintApr 21, 2026
This will acutely have a guarantee that Russia not Ukraine pays ut back since it's based on Russian frozen assets
0
Important-List344Apr 23, 2026
+2
That’s a fair point — it basically confirms what I was getting at. It’s not really a “solution”, more like keeping things running for now.
The long-term costs are clearly much higher, especially if the war drags on or reconstruction is factored in.
Which is why calling it a huge support package can be a bit misleading without that context.
2
PlateNo4868Apr 22, 2026
+1
If the war does end. I would be pretty confident Ukraine would make a pretty strong comeback. C**** eastern europe country that spent a good amount purging corruption and is now free of Russia influence? Private investors will flock in.
1
anders_hanssonApr 22, 2026
+1
Let's hope so. Ukraine is still one of the most corrupt countries in Europe, though, playing in the same league as Belarus, Turkey and Serbia. They also have a severe demographic problem (lowest birth rates and highest death rates in the world, and a population over 20% smaller than pre-war). So I don't expect immediate miracles. Give it time, though.
1
WastingMyLifeTodayApr 21, 2026
+10
Even just 10 billion can fund a lot of drone manufacturing.
They now have drones that can go over 50km with fiber optic cables, EW doesn't really work on them.
I do wish support was even higher, and happened sooner. One huge push in funding could make a serious difference in ending this war faster.
10
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+8
That said, Ukraine's budget deficit is over €70B for 2026 alone (including defense, pensions, and so on). That's what the loan is supposed to fix.
I agree that they would need much more if the money were to actually make a significant impact on the battlefield, or for that matter to discurage Russia from continuing the war.
I would have hoped for something like a guarantee from the EU for €200B+/year for five years, or similar. That would basically wipe out all hopes for Russia to bring Ukraine to a collapse before they collapse themselves, and they would likely agree to a ceasfire fairly quickly.
8
WastingMyLifeTodayApr 21, 2026
+5
Absolutely.
That's the main reason why I said 10 billion, as a good amount of money will go into supporting Ukraine government costs and other economic things.
Since you edited your comment:
I'm confident that EU has great plans to help rebuild Ukraine after the war is over. With a whole lot of billions.
5
clamorous_owleApr 21, 2026
+68
Although Péter Magyar doesn't take office until early May, his victory last week is already having an effect on events.
68
anders_hanssonApr 21, 2026
+6
In a way, but not as much as you'd think. E.g. just like Orban, Magyar demands that Ukraine opens the Druzhba pipeline before they lift the veto. Much of the work was done by the EU who pressured Ukraine into fixing the pipeline, and they have promised that it can be operational within days.
6
FaowhinApr 21, 2026
+6
I wouldn't be so hopeful yet. He tried really hard to avoid answering whether he will support the loan. Best case is he wants to trade that for unfreezing eurofunds for Hungary, and while I get that motivation on national level, it's terrible for EU in long-term as it sets bad precedent. Hungary should have been dealt with on an EU level.
6
Xenon009Apr 21, 2026
+17
I mean, it seems pretty sensible right? The freezing of funds was to punish orban and his fuckery, orban is gone, and so why punish the new guy if he plans to end orbans fuckery
17
ccjmkApr 21, 2026
-1
But it should go hand by hand with something to prevent this happening again. Will Magyar be willing to give away that power? (And the rest of European leaders, this is not just pointing at him alone)
-1
Xenon009Apr 21, 2026
+11
I mean, frankly it's a self enforcing deal.
If both sides play nice, everyone is happy.
If this situation continues, everyone is sad.
If europe lifts the sanctions, but hungary keeps blocking, europe just reimposes the sanctions, and everyone is sad again
If hungary stops the blocking, but europe maintains the sanctions, hungary can just start blocking again. and everybody is sad... again.
So far, it's unclear why orban was doing this blocking act. Presumably, moscow has been giving him some kind of personal benefit, but from the leaks, the moscow/hungarian relations has looked almost subservient.
11
NoPossibility4178Apr 21, 2026
+1
If not hopefully the EU wakes up.
1
rcanhestroApr 21, 2026
+2
as long as his position is to abstain, that's a victory already.
2
suddenstutterApr 22, 2026
+1
Its looking very possible that magyar is a trojan horse. I see the same playbook with tucker carlson happening where the the opposition goes against and detaches from the current leadership so they can make believe rig the next elections.
1
takesthebiscuitApr 21, 2026
-4
I’m holding my breath, he isn’t orban, but he was a member of orbans party
-4
suddenstutterApr 22, 2026
+1
Yep. Its looking possible magyar is a trojan horse. Some of the stuff hes doing is very suspect.
1
takesthebiscuitApr 22, 2026
+1
No idea why my comment is down voted he was a massive Orban loyalist for years before separating and leading the center-right Tisza Party
I’m not saying he is bad, but it’s his actions that will count
1
Full-Station5651Apr 21, 2026
+5
They should stop all the shadow fleet ecosystem that allows Russia to sell their oil and finance the war...
5
SupXApr 21, 2026
+17
This has to thru asap before Bulgaria starts blocking stuff….
17
dustycheeseApr 21, 2026
+2
Lots of doom and gloom about Bulgaria but they’re very unlikely to take as harsh a stance as Hungary
2
rintzscarApr 21, 2026
+4
Bulgaria will not block anything, stop spreading bullshit. You learned about the existence of the country yesterday, you have absolutely no clue what's happening there.
4
suddenstutterApr 22, 2026
+1
Actually they would. Its again a putin puppet. Not sure what youre trying to downplay here.
1
rintzscarApr 22, 2026
+1
No, we wouldn't and no, Radev is not a Putin puppet at all. Stop listening to stupid propaganda. Radev was not voted because 45% of Bulgarians want to shift to Russia or like Russia. None of what's happening has anything to do with current geopolitics. Bulgarians do not care even for a second about Listnook's EU/NATO/Russia/Ukraine/USA/Israel/Iran nonsense. Bulgarians care about the organized mafia having complete control over the judicial system for the last 30 years. You can't even comprehend how bad it is.
The elections were won entirely on internal corruption issues. That's Radev's focus, not blocking the EU. He's not anti-EU at all.
1
macross1984Apr 21, 2026
+9
Finally money Ukraine desperately need to continue resisting Russia may be headiing their way.
9
ShockkdiamondssApr 21, 2026
+4
F****** Orban
4
KirarifluffApr 21, 2026
+2
Is this why Putin was suddenly crying about the economy? because finally EU get to actually provide real support for Ukraine?
2
ThorAndHammersApr 21, 2026
-72
Is this tax money from hardworking Europeans? Or ia this the money they froze and stole from russian accounts in europe?
-72
Fast-Satisfaction482Apr 21, 2026
+61
It's from your account specifically
61
Spright91Apr 21, 2026
+13
Its a loan.
13
Clear_Command_8925Apr 21, 2026
-2
Ah yes, definitely a loan Ukraine will be able to pay back in full!
-2
brandbaardApr 21, 2026
+38
[ Removed by Listnook ]
38
ThorAndHammersApr 21, 2026
-29
And you think Ukraine will pay this money back? Not sure if you're a European suffering from these wasted military industrial complex donations, but if you are, how can you justify the waste of your hard earned money?
-29
brandbaardApr 21, 2026
+20
Money well spent keeping Russia's imperialism at bay and their military force degrading and shrinking every day.
When the Russian fuckery is repelled and Ukraine joins the EU, they will contribute back and over time the scales will balance monetarily.
20
ThorAndHammersApr 21, 2026
-26
You sound like a typical Brussels pamphlet. I'll assume you're a bot and bid you nice day.
-26
brandbaardApr 21, 2026
+20
LMAO you think IM the bot? You sound like a typical Russian propaganda farm shill. Talking shit about "stolen" money and railing against anything that keeps the Russian fucks at bay.
F*** off good sir, and go have a good long look at your morals and allegiances to warmongers.
20
Livid_Ad580Apr 21, 2026
+5
You would not know the meaning of the word irony if it hit you in the face, now would you?
5
Teddy_RadkoApr 21, 2026
+5
Degrading russian aggression and imperialism is extremely good value for Europe. Every cent spent to help Ukraine is a immediate investment in every Europeans safety and well being. Glory to the heroes.
5
TorbenKoehnApr 21, 2026
+6
Europe, the typical hellhole for an average human. Sounds about right m8
There is a person that can stop this any day whenever he wants…
6
ThorAndHammersApr 21, 2026
-5
I don't think nuking ukraine will do him any more favours though. That money will likely never be given back now that they have confiscated it.
-5
TorbenKoehnApr 21, 2026
+7
As a european, I support defending a european, sovereign nation from foreign invaders with my money any day, any time.
Again, a single person can stop this. A single person could have never make it happen in the first place.
7
buy_nano_coin_xnoApr 21, 2026
+4
I don't know, but it will be put to good use.
4
Xenon009Apr 21, 2026
+3
The money is a loan, and yes, it's highly likely it will be paid back.
But also, that money is spent buying european weapons, which means europe pretty much immediately puts that money back into the hands of europeans, so a good deal all in all.
What I wonder is where russia is getting the money for its fuckery in ukraine from. Could it be hard working russians?
3
Crypt33xApr 21, 2026
>Or ia this the money they froze and stole from russian accounts in europe?
It's basically the legal way to circumvent us not being able to send them the frozen assets. The assets are our secruity.
0
bongkeydonerApr 21, 2026
-67
They stop supplying weapons to Israel but still sending money to Jewkraine
-67
buy_nano_coin_xnoApr 21, 2026
+14
What?
14
barbariccomplexityApr 21, 2026
+15
Are you upset they don’t support Israel, but are also upset that they support Ukraine because Zelenskyy is Jewish (alongside many other Ukrainians)? Worst of both worlds, like hating Germans and loving Nazis.
15
EricPhilps1979Apr 21, 2026
+12
The reason for cutting off Israel is not that they are Jewish.
12
aerivoxApr 21, 2026
-52
whys is this war still going on?? is ukr not accepting the loss of those regions?
-52
Xenon009Apr 21, 2026
+11
Ukraine is not accepting the loss of more regions than they already lost.
Ukraines terms are a ceasefire on the current lines, russia wants lands they wouldn't reach till about 2036, given the current rate of advance, or would never reach if you follow the month to month trendline.
11
EricPhilps1979Apr 21, 2026
+15
Because Russia is too weak to actually take the things they are attempting to steal.
15
aerivoxApr 21, 2026
-29
aren't they fully occupying those places??
-29
EricPhilps1979Apr 21, 2026
+5
Quite a lot of them are fully occupying the space directly beneath those places...
5
VendemmiaApr 21, 2026
+10
considering Russia is in deep shit would be stupid to let them win now.
10
BrolaubApr 21, 2026
+5
What's the alternative to this war? Russia already got what they wanted in Georgia and Crimea. What else do we need to give them to satisfy them? Are we forever slaves to Putins greed? Do you think France should've just given up in 1917 and accepted the losses?
5
ThorAndHammersApr 21, 2026
-1
Because raytheon and lockheed own the european politicians and NATO. But the average european isn't wise enough to see that and send their paychecks to a farcical cause
76 Comments