The wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, along with a sharp shift in U.S. foreign policy priorities, are gradually reshaping the European security architecture and prompting the European Union to look beyond established alliances and seek new partnerships, particularly in the energy and trade sectors.
We asked Polish Member of the European Parliament Michał Kobosko, a member of the pro-European political group “Renew Europe,” how noticeable these changes are and how they affect the perception of Ukraine in Europe.
Kobosko advocates for Ukraine’s European integration and for military and financial support for our country. He has repeatedly stated that by holding back the Russian aggressor, Ukrainians are helping to prevent its expansion into Poland, the Baltic states, and all of Europe.
In an interview with UA.News, Michal Kobosko discussed the prospects for Ukraine’s EU membership and the potential risks associated with political elections in Bulgaria and Slovenia; the rationale behind new trade agreements and the strengthening of defense cooperation within the European Union; as well as Europeans’ readiness to counter Russian hybrid attacks.
On Hungary and Overcoming the Crisis of Trust
There is no doubt that we have witnessed a crisis of trust within the European Union. Indeed, the situation varies greatly from one EU country to another. Until recently, Hungary was facing the worst-case scenario: as a member of the European Union, the country was working closely with Putin, the Kremlin, and the Russian administration.
In my view, we have been living in a black-and-white world ever since Russia attacked Ukraine. You can’t play both sides at once. Either you’re with us and a member of the European Union, or you play along with Putin’s expectations and needs. That is exactly what Viktor Orbán did. Now we have high hopes for the new government of Peter Magyar in Hungary and view this with optimism.
We congratulate the Hungarian people on the fantastic election results. This is undoubtedly a signal from the Hungarian people that they are tired not only of Viktor Orbán personally, but also of the system of political corruption and the fact that Hungary has found itself in opposition to all other member states of the European Union.
On Financial Support for Ukraine in the Coming Years
The discussion about a 90-billion-euro loan for Ukraine began back when we were still debating how to use frozen Russian assets in Europe. And this, in my opinion, should be the ultimate source of future funding for Ukraine that should be utilized. We are talking about the aggressor country’s money. It would be logical for Russia to pay war reparations to Ukraine. But with Putin and the current Russian administration, this cannot be expected.
After the European Union failed to reach a consensus on the use of Russia’s frozen assets, an alternative Plan B emerged regarding a 90-billion-euro loan. But Hungary—or more precisely, Viktor Orbán—blocked it for many months. Once this process is unblocked by the new Hungarian government led by Péter Magyar, the European Union is fully ready to launch the first tranche.
We understand that the situation with Ukraine’s state budget is quite dire, and not only months but also weeks play a crucial role in the flow of funds. Therefore, I expect the first tranche of this loan to be disbursed in coming weeks.
We know for certain that Ukraine needs these funds. First and foremost, to continue defending itself, pay salaries to the military, finance the army, purchase ammunition, and so on. And also to support state institutions such as schools, hospitals, and all other state structures that make Ukraine a true nation.
It is clear that we cannot count on financial assistance from the United States at this time. Therefore, the European Union’s funds are of fundamental importance to Ukraine, and they must be disbursed as soon as possible.
On Tightening Sanctions Against Russia
This is yet another issue related to Hungary, which, under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, has blocked not only €90 billion in aid for Ukraine but also efforts to tighten sanctions against Russia. It has also opposed initiatives aimed at advancing Ukraine’s progress in negotiations for accession to the European Union.
But the problem I see on the horizon is not Hungary. There are other member states that could potentially change their political course. Bulgaria recently held snap parliamentary elections. A political coalition that opposes support for Ukraine and advocates ending the war under any circumstances won a decisive victory. This coalition seeks to restore relations with the Russian government and lift some of the sanctions imposed against Russia.
Political changes in Sofia could indeed become a problematic scenario. I hope it does not come to pass. While we cannot completely rule out that Hungary will change its political course, Ukraine may instead face problems with Bulgaria or with Slovenia, where elections were also held. As is well known, forming a new government in Slovenia is proving difficult. There is still a possibility that the former prime minister, Mr. Janez Janša, a friend of Viktor Orbán and an ally of Russia, will return to the post of head of the Slovenian government.
It is important to emphasize that it is not enough to simply impose new sanctions; we must also ensure their effectiveness in practice. After all, Russia finds ways to circumvent sanctions or exploits their weaknesses. With this in mind, I am convinced that the 20th and subsequent packages of sanctions must be implemented as soon as possible. At the same time, however, it is important to identify additional risk factors and take them into account as potential threats when preparing new European Union sanctions measures.
On the EU’s readiness to defend its interests in light of the new U.S. policy
The problem is that we don’t really know what to expect from the United States of America. There are words, there are decisions, there are concrete steps. At the moment, I would say, we are hearing far more words—and ones that cause concern and create problems—from President Donald Trump’s administration. There has been little in the way of real action so far.
The United States has not reduced its military presence or involvement in European affairs. The U.S. is working closely with European partners in the current war against Iran. In particular, the Americans are using military bases on European soil to continue the fight against the Iranian regime.
As of today, we are not yet prepared for such a turn of events; we are not ready to fully defend ourselves on our own. This will take time and massive investments. That is the problem.
That is precisely why we support all decisions aimed at enhancing Europe’s combat readiness. We support increased investment in the development of our defense industry and cooperation in this area among all EU members. This was not the case before. Each country developed its defense industry independently and, in practice, did not cooperate with others. Obviously, such activity requires significantly greater investment in the production of weapons and ammunition. That is the first and urgent area.
The second is increasing investment in the readiness of our armies to cooperate within the EU.
I want to emphasize that I do not consider the worst-case scenario to be possible. I am referring to the withdrawal of American troops from Europe. It is in the national interest of the United States to remain engaged in events in Europe, since this is where a real war is currently taking place. It is in the interest of the United States to remain active. But we cannot rule out a scenario in which the U.S. decides to reduce its contingent here.
On the Energy Crisis and the Response Plan
Each EU country faces a different situation in the energy sector and has a different energy mix. However, overall, until recently we were heavily dependent on imports of Russian oil and gas.
When full-scale war broke out in Ukraine in 2022, it was a wise decision to immediately seek alternative routes for supplying key energy resources to Europe. It is good that we have already significantly reduced our dependence and also have a concrete and clear plan to phase out Russian oil and gas from the European energy market.
There are some politicians or countries in Europe who want to return to “business as usual” in relations with the Russian Federation after the war. However, from today’s perspective, it is unlikely that the European Union, as a single bloc, will agree to restore its previous level of dependence on Russian energy resources. We understand perfectly well: for the Kremlin, this is not only a source of money but also a source of influence and power in Europe. This is a weapon against us.I fully support the decision of European countries and the European Union to rapidly remove Russian energy resources from our energy mix. Although some countries remain dependent. This is evident from the events surrounding the Druzhba pipeline in Hungary and Slovakia.
Overall, as a bloc, Europe must seek other sources of energy, particularly oil and gas. This is precisely what is happening now thanks to supplies from the United States, the Gulf states, and other sources. That's the right decision.
On the EU’s New Historic Trade Agreements
First and foremost, I want to emphasize that Europe needs to work on new trade agreements and partnerships. This is especially true following the upheaval in our relations with the United States, which has been and remains Europe’s key trading partner.
However, it is very difficult to continue cooperating with a partner who changes the rules from one day to the next or tries to use tariffs as a primary tool to influence reliable allies. I am convinced that trade wars make little sense, as they harm both sides of the trade. As soon as one partner raises tariffs, the other responds with similar measures. Ultimately, consumers and businesses on both sides end up paying the price.
That is precisely why I believe Europe must seek new allies, and I viewed the free trade agreement with Australia very positively. After all, it is about strengthening economic partnerships with like-minded EU allies.
As for the agreement with the countries of the South American economic bloc MERCOSUR, the situation is somewhat different. Negotiations lasted 25 years, the agreement has already been concluded, but it still raises serious doubts.
Therefore, we must put effective safeguards in place to protect our markets and farmers. This is precisely the issue we are currently discussing in the European Parliament, and it is a source of serious concern for us.
I am convinced that Europe and Europeans must be confident that the results of this trade agreement will be positive, not destructive, for the various sectors of our economy.
On Realistic Timelines for Ukraine’s Accession to the European Union
I firmly believe that Ukraine is part of Europe and should ultimately become a member state of the European Union. In today’s Europe, in my view, there is little room for neutrality, because it is quite clear that the aggressor is to the east.
It is clear that Ukraine is not alone. It is part of a group of candidate countries that are also involved in the negotiations. In my view, Ukraine should become a member of the European Union as soon as possible. That is, after the war ends and a just and lasting peace is achieved. For Ukraine, this is of paramount importance.
This must also happen after final agreements and arrangements with the European Union. After all, countries seeking EU membership must fulfill a number of obligations. To join this “club,” you must respect its rules.
It is well known that, to put it diplomatically, not everything was working very well in Ukraine as a state prior to the Russian aggression.
Therefore, we expect that after the war, not only will the infrastructure be rebuilt, but the effectiveness of government institutions will also significantly improve. This should lead to a reduction in corruption, which is a problem throughout the world, including in European Union countries. But this is not just a question of the level of corruption, but also of how effectively it is being combated.
So, there are many questions regarding the rule of law, the functioning of the courts, and the entire legal system in Ukraine. Overall, you have a lot of work to do to build a better state, step up the fight against corruption, and limit the oligarchs’ influence on the economy.
A separate area of negotiations with the European Union concerns agriculture and farming. Ukraine supplies food and agricultural products to many countries around the world, including the EU. An important task will be to find solutions and agreements regarding the export of these goods within the European Union in a way that does not harm the agriculture of other member states. I am speaking about this very openly and frankly. But these are sensitive issues that need to be brought up for discussion.
It’s hard for me to say exactly when Ukraine will be able to join the European Union. Technically, I still believe this could happen by 2030. But in reality, you’ll also need the consensus of all European Union member states to allow Ukraine to join the EU. That’s another part of the story.
This process will take another seven years, but I believe that when we speak in 10 years, we will see the European Union expand to include not only Ukraine, but also Moldova, Albania, Montenegro, and possibly other countries in the Western Balkans. After all, we need a stronger, larger, and more effective European Union to secure our shared future and the security of Europe.
On the EU’s Readiness to Counter Russia’s Hybrid Attacks
Hybrid attacks are a form of modern aggression. They are as dangerous as physical attacks involving weapons. Although they do not kill people instantly, they inflict significant harm on the countries that fall victim to them.
The European Union is fully aware of the risks associated with Russia’s war. There is no doubt: Russia is behind this. The Kremlin actively employs various hybrid tactics against the European Union and many countries. This concerns not only the eastern part of the European Union, but the entire bloc.
The European Union, the European Commission, and the European Parliament are doing a great deal to counter these threats. First and foremost, this involves raising public awareness. Our citizens must know what is happening and realize that they can become victims of hybrid attacks in various forms. This is because the Russians actively use information resources for such purposes, particularly the Internet and social media.
It is quite easy to spread disinformation, fake news, or simply falsehoods, as they often seem interesting and appealing. Although, as a rule, this is not true. People “like” and share such information, and this is exactly what the aggressor expects from us. Therefore, we need to raise public awareness.
We must remain vigilant; our intelligence agencies must be prepared to counter such threats. For example, Russia’s use of a “shadow fleet.” This is also a form of hybrid aggression against us. These “shadow” ships not only transport Russian oil while evading or violating sanctions; they are also used for espionage throughout Europe. As is well known, various types of drones are being launched from “shadow fleet” vessels.
On Poland’s Participation in European Defense Initiatives
In matters of defense, Poland is one of Europe’s pioneers and leaders. Poland is one of the few countries in the European Union that recognized the seriousness of the threats posed by Russia and the real possibility of war in Europe long before the current events. Many years ago, Poland began investing heavily in strengthening its defense capabilities, developing its armed forces, and enhancing its civil protection system.
We currently spend over 4.1% of GDP on defense and security, which is unique not only in Europe but also among NATO members. Thus, we are prepared for any form of aggression.
I am not claiming that we will be able to defend our country on our own. To be honest, today there is not a single country in Europe that could defend itself alone. Even France, with its nuclear arsenal, is not capable of doing so, let alone other countries. That is why we must strengthen our defense together. And we must continue our military and intelligence cooperation with the U.S.
But as we work together, we also need leaders in this area. And Poland is one of those leaders. We are investing significant funds in our defense industry. We are utilizing EU funding mechanisms, such as SAFE (Security Action for Europe), which are designed to support the development of defense capabilities across all EU member states.
At the same time, I am convinced that although Poland is a leader in defense matters, we must deepen our cooperation with EU member states and our friends. By working together, we will deter Russian aggression.
I do not believe we need to prepare for war. However, it is important to deter Russia by demonstrating that this time the situation is different. We are serious about this and are directing significantly more resources toward defense so that Russia will abandon its attempts to pursue its aggressive ambitions. Europe must be ready to deter Russia and not let it even think about invading any country of the European Union. That is the essence of it. That is what we are all talking about in Poland.
