By Javier VILLAMOR 

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

EU lawmakers warned on Wednesday that Ukraine’s potential accession to the European Union could blow open the bloc’s budget, destabilize the farming sector, and hand more financial powers to Brussels at the expense of member states.

Speaking at a conference organized by the Patriots for Europe Foundation in the European Parliament, MEPs and analysts said the costs and risks of admitting Kyiv had been underestimated as negotiations over the EU’s next long-term budget continue.

“Has anyone done the math? Has anyone calculated what Ukraine’s entry into the EU would cost?” asked Danish MEP Anders Vistisen of the Dansk Folkeparti, one of the most prominent speakers. He cited European Council figures suggesting Ukraine would absorb 30% of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and 16% of cohesion funds, amounting to €157.5 billion in a single budget cycle. “This would force an increase in the EU budget of at least 21% or 24%, equivalent to an additional €180 billion. And Brussels will not pay; it will be our citizens, businesses, and taxpayers,” Vistisen said.

The event coincided with the ongoing debate on the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), as EU institutions weigh future funding priorities. A European Commission document leaked in July proposed an extra €50 billion for Ukraine between 2024 and 2027, largely by reallocating existing funds from the EU’s pandemic recovery program.

Soma Lehotzky of the Századvég Foundation said the proposals would also allow Brussels to reorient funds in times of crisis without parliamentary scrutiny. “We are witnessing a democratic hollowing-out,” Lehotzky said.

If the budgetary cost seems unbearable, the impact on European agriculture would be devastating, speakers cautioned. Czech MEP Tomáš Kubín of the ANO party warned that Ukraine’s much lower environmental and labor standards would give its producers an unfair advantage in EU markets: “Ukraine’s accession is not just a geopolitical question; it is, above all a question of compatibility. And in agriculture, there simply is none.”

The MEP denounced a double imbalance: on the one hand, much laxer environmental, social, and animal welfare standards in Ukraine; on the other, a model of land concentration in the hands of oligarchs and foreign funds that collides with the philosophy of the CAP. “While in the EU, payments to large farms are increasingly capped to favor small farmers; a handful of companies in Ukraine control millions of hectares. It is an incompatible model and destructive for our agricultural SMEs,” he warned.

French MEP Gilles Pennelle, from National Rally, added that France would be particularly affected: “Ukraine has more arable land than France, with much lower production costs. If they enter the market without real harmonization, French farmers will not survive. We would be sacrificing the CAP on the altar of geopolitics.”

Polish analyst Kacper Kita took the debate to sensitive ground: the rupture of consensus in Warsaw. “Poland has been the country that has helped Ukraine the most since 2022, both in welcoming refugees and in military efforts. But we cannot confuse solidarity with economic suicide,” he said. He recalled that 27% of Europe’s arable land is in Ukraine, making its accession a structural earthquake for the whole continent.

He also pointed to the acquisition of a Spanish poultry company by MHP, Ukraine’s largest agribusiness group. Speakers said such moves show how Ukrainian firms are not only competing within the EU market but also buying up strategic assets. “Does anyone really believe that making an oligarch based in Cyprus or the Cayman Islands richer helps resist Russia?” he asked.

Ukraine’s accession divides European public opinion. While Brussels elites frame Ukraine’s accession as a moral obligation, Wednesday’s speakers said the economic and social consequences had not been fully considered, with overstretched budgets, farmers up in arms, and member states turned from net recipients into net contributors.

The conference’s conclusion was clear. “This is not enlargement; it is a fantasy expansion,” Vistisen said. “This is not about being anti-Ukrainian, it is about telling the truth and protecting Europe.”

Original article:  europeanconservative.com