It would be easy to argue that in four years of war, little has changed in Ukraine or in the broader state of support for the country. Perhaps the only notable shift is that Donald Trump's return to the White House has placed the burden of aiding Ukraine almost entirely on Europe's shoulders. But that shift has also had consequences that at first glance seem unexpected.

"NATO's role in this conflict has changed radically. When the full-scale invasion began, especially under the Biden administration, there was serious concern about whether Russia would exploit NATO's involvement for propaganda purposes or whether it could become an escalatory factor. So everything done to support Ukraine was kept outside NATO. Individual countries handled it. That framework was proposed by the United States. Now the situation has completely changed," said Estonia's ambassador to NATO, Jüri Luik.

Although weapons assistance is not sent to Ukraine directly under a large U.S. banner — and Europeans are footing the bill — it is happening through NATO, where American logisticians and planners are contributing alongside Europeans.

"NATO assesses Ukraine's needs and then assembles the weapons packages. Using NATO-controlled infrastructure, they are sent to Ukraine. There are separate headquarters and agencies for this and NATO now also has a very large representation in Kyiv," Luik said.

NATO's contribution in Ukraine has grown, but the fact remains that the United States does not support inviting Ukraine into the alliance. At the same time, Ukraine has been promised that its path to NATO is irreversible.

"Irreversible is a good word. Even if the timeline stretches somewhat, it is still irreversible. At last year's Hague summit, there was quite a sharp debate about this and it was decided — naturally to avoid major disagreements among allies — that everything not explicitly revoked remains in force. Consequently, the commitment that the path is irreversible also stands," Luik said.

Luik added that the security guarantees being discussed in peace negotiations are quite similar to what NATO would offer.

"It's a somewhat comical situation where, for political reasons, we are building a parallel NATO at a time when NATO already exists. I believe that as time passes, if peace truly comes and the situation settles, we will return to the NATO issue. In any case, it is not off the table. Although at the moment it may not be moving forward as Estonia would wish," Luik said.

The situation in the European Union is in some ways similar. Although Ukraine has in principle been promised that the EU's door is open, Hungary is blocking real progress. Hungary has also begun blocking the latest, 20th sanctions package against Russia. Budapest has even started referring to Kyiv as an enemy.

"We do not hate Ukraine. The problem is that Ukraine hates Hungary. Ukraine has been acting against Hungary for the past 10 years. Ukraine is hostile toward Hungary. Please ask the Ukrainians why they have halted Russian oil deliveries to Hungary. Ask the Ukrainians why they are threatening our energy security and not restoring the rights of the ethnic Hungarian community," Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó said.

Hungary is also blocking a €90 billion European Union loan to Ukraine that was agreed at the end of last year. Without that support, Ukraine will effectively run out of money this year.

"This is indeed very depressing. What can be done? One option is simply to adopt the sanctions and let the member states that oppose them take the matter to court. That could take years, but the sanctions would remain in force. That's the most brutal approach. Another option being considered is the Article 7 process, under which a member state that genuinely threatens the fundamental principles of the European Union can have its voting rights suspended. That would require 26 member states and I'm not very optimistic that it is actually possible. A third possibility, which some here are hoping for — though I am not particularly optimistic about this either — is that elections in Hungary conclude and perhaps then Hungary will come to its senses," Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna said.

More likely, however, as on previous occasions, others will eventually manage to persuade Hungary. In addition, there is growing desire in Europe to insert itself into the negotiations. The key question, however, is not who should speak, but what they would say.

"Europe has clear and legitimate interests in how the war started by Russia should end. To ensure that Europe's interests are not lost as collateral damage, we must clearly state what we expect from Russia. Respect for borders, an end to sabotage, compensation for war damages and the return of children abducted from Ukraine are not unrealistic demands, but rather the minimum requirement. Before talking to Moscow, we must clarify what we intend to discuss. Russia's maximalist demands cannot be met with minimum demands," said EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Kaja Kallas.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!