Brussels summit masks growing tensions over Ukraine’s EU bid France, Netherlands seen as key obstacles

European leaders are set to reaffirm support for Ukraine’s EU aspirations at a summit in Brussels, with formal accession talks beginning this week. However, despite the public show of unity, significant disagreements remain behind the scenes over how quickly Ukraine—and other candidate countries—should move toward membership, exposing deeper divisions within the bloc on the future of EU enlargement. 

They will celebrate the EU’s decision this week to begin formal accession talks with Ukraine, a move that has sparked renewed optimism about the bloc’s enlargement agenda, Euractiv reports.

However, behind closed doors, EU leaders are expected to debate the next steps amid growing diplomatic disagreement over the pace and scope of expansion.

“Expect plenty of smiles, bonhomie, and backslapping in front of the cameras when Europe’s leaders greet Volodymyr Zelenskyy at Thursday's summit in Brussels,” the report notes.

After Zelenskyy leaves the room, “the tone will change” as the EU’s 27 leaders consider how to manage a widening queue of candidate countries and a stalled enlargement process that has not seen new members since Croatia joined in 2013.

“Albania has already taken 11 years, why should we do Ukraine in three weeks?” said one EU diplomat, highlighting concerns about accelerating the accession process. France and the Netherlands are considered among the main countries cautious about speeding up Ukraine’s membership path.

Zelenskyy has called for Ukraine to join the EU by 2028 and is seeking to embed that timeline into a future peace settlement with Russia. However, officials across European capitals consider such a timeframe unrealistic and politically unfeasible.

German officials have promoted an alternative proposal described as the “only game in town,” advanced by Friedrich Merz, which would offer Ukraine “associate membership” — a limited status without voting rights until full accession at a later stage. Zelenskyy has rejected the idea.

EU accession requires candidates to progress through six negotiating “clusters,” beginning with rule of law, democratic institutions, and reforms. Ukraine’s next objective is to open the remaining five clusters.

However, draft summit conclusions were reportedly revised, softening earlier language that referred to opening “all other clusters” to a more cautious formulation of “other clusters,” reflecting ongoing hesitation among member states.

Several EU countries continue to raise objections. Bulgaria insists on safeguarding the rights of the Bulgarian minority in Ukraine and has previously used similar concerns to block North Macedonia’s accession process. Hungary’s Péter Magyar has advocated a timeline exceeding a decade and suggested a binding referendum on membership.

France is expected to face domestic political considerations ahead of its April 2027 presidential election, while Poland has expressed concerns over the potential impact on its agricultural sector.

With a growing list of candidates — including Albania, which has been waiting since 2014, and Montenegro since 2010 — EU officials are also exploring alternative integration models that would avoid formal treaty changes.

These proposals would move away from full enlargement toward gradual integration into selected parts of the EU single market, offering a more limited form of membership.

Gerald Knaus, chair of the European Stability Initiative, described such an approach as the most “realistic utopia.”

“For me, it is pretty clear that in the next few years, perhaps Montenegro will join, I’m not sure, but no other countries,” he said.

Marta Kos, the EU’s enlargement commissioner, has also suggested withholding full voting rights from new members for up to 15 years, particularly in cases where governments are accused of democratic backsliding after accession.

Under such a model, even Croatia — which joined the EU in 2013 — would not have enjoyed full voting rights today. However, the idea has faced resistance, including from Montenegro, which argues that smaller countries should not be treated as unequal within EU decision-making structures.

By Vafa Guliyeva