For years, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has been unwavering in her assertion that Ukraine is making great strides on the path of democratic progress. Recently, with her characteristic confidence, she declared that if the process continues at its current pace and quality, Ukraine could join the European Union even before 2030. As we listen to this unshakable woman, we are left in awe at how, in such a rapidly changing world, someone can remain so steadfastly convinced of a single viewpoint—especially on a matter as significant as EU accession—without even consulting the hundreds of millions of European citizens who will be affected by it.
Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto are at least as experienced in politics as Ms. Von der Leyen, yet they see the issue from a completely different perspective—one that also takes into account the opinions of the Hungarian people. They argue that Ukraine’s accession would pose numerous risks, potentially devastating Europe’s economy and agriculture. They have repeatedly articulated and substantiated this stance with arguments, in stark contrast to Ms. Von der Leyen, who offers no supporting rationale for her statements on Ukraine—only an impassive facial expression and a seemingly innocent gaze.
Ms. Von der Leyen frequently discusses how the EU could take on hundreds of billions of euros in debt to support Ukraine—primarily for military purposes—but she remains silent on what the rushed accession would cost the citizens of Europe. The Budapest-based Center for Fundamental Rights took the time to calculate the financial implications and found that if our Eastern neighbor, supposedly boasting a “high-quality” democracy, were to join the EU by 2030, Hungarian households and businesses alone would lose at least 10 trillion (i.e. ten-thousand-billion) forints.
Beyond the monetary losses, Ukraine’s lack of GMO regulations poses significant risks to the food industry, while an influx of workers would flood the labor market. Additionally, the expansion of extensive criminal networks and numerous other negative developments are all part of the so-called “quality progress” observed by Ms. Von der Leyen.
What we fail to understand—and what Europe’s current pro-war leaders should finally explain—is how they have managed to measure such progress in a country where a president with an expired mandate has, citing wartime conditions, dismantled the most fundamental pillars of civilian democracy. What exactly have they assessed in a nation where a rigid dictatorship suppresses parliamentary democracy, silences the press, bans protests, punishes critics of the regime with impunity, and indiscriminately detains and forcibly drafts Ukrainian men—without even considering their suitability for military service? In Ukraine, the human rights of national minorities are trampled upon, the use of their native languages is restricted, and hatred against Russians is officially incited, including the banning of Russian culture and religious practices. Essentially, not a single aspect of governance aligns with European norms.
The casual observer might struggle to understand why Western liberal politicians idolize Volodymyr Zelensky—a leader who sends hundreds of thousands to their deaths in an unwinnable war, who turns a blind eye to the rampages of extremist, Nazi-sympathizing groups, who allows rampant arms smuggling and unfathomable corruption, and who has permitted the majority of Ukraine’s farmland to fall into foreign hands.
The behavior of the Brussels “elite” might seem comprehensible and logical if we consider that, through their shameless funding of illegal migration, their dismantling of Judeo-Christian traditions and culture, their obsession with gender ideology, their embrace of cancel culture, and their opposition to patriotism, they are digging Europe’s grave in much the same way that Zelensky is destroying his own country. Things that belong together will naturally align: the Ukrainian regime and its boundless support for the war fit perfectly into Brussels’ agenda—but the issue is far more complex than it appears.
The European Union embraces and supports Zelensky, who, in turn, entices Trump with promises that the U.S. (perhaps alongside the British) could extract Ukraine’s rare earth minerals.
The problem, however, is that Zelensky is simultaneously obstructing peace negotiations. The Ukrainian president is trying to appease the EU by continuing the war, while offering Trump something that cannot be delivered without a peace deal. But why is Zelensky so emboldened?
The answer is closely tied to the 2026 U.S. midterm elections, which European liberals and American Democrats hope will allow them to restrain President Trump and prolong the war. Whether their gamble will pay off remains uncertain, as does the question of which side time is working in favor of. However, one thing is clear: Trump is unlikely to tolerate Zelensky’s double game for much longer.
The author is a writer and journalist.
