Ukraine’s attempt to fast-track its accession to the European Union has encountered a serious obstacle, and one that is directly linked to Serbia and the countries of the Western Balkans. The day before yesterday, Hungary withheld its consent for a key procedural step required to accelerate accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova.
While Kyiv wants to open all six negotiating clusters by mid-July, Budapest has made it clear that this is unacceptable, arguing that it would send the wrong message to countries in the region that have been waiting at the EU’s doorstep for decades.
The question that arises is whether this open support can genuinely accelerate Serbia’s European path and the opening of new negotiating clusters, or whether this diplomatic dispute will simply result in slowing down Ukraine’s accession process.
The European Union officially opened its first negotiating chapter with Ukraine and Moldova on 15 June, but Kyiv’s ambitious plan is now in doubt because Hungary is the only EU member state that has opposed sending the proposal to open all clusters to the European Council and the European Commission.
Hungarian Prime Minister Péter Magyar insisted that the words “as soon as possible” be removed from the written conclusions of the EU leaders’ meeting regarding Ukraine’s membership.
“There are six clusters, and I do not think opening all six at once is a good idea, partly because the ink on the first one has barely dried, and partly because it would send the wrong message to Serbia, Albania, Montenegro and North Macedonia, which have been working towards EU membership for years,” Magyar said.
“Ukraine’s accession to the EU would disrupt many things”
Branka Latinović, a former ambassador, said that whether Kyiv succeeds in its aim of opening all clusters by mid-July depends primarily on its own preparedness and on how far it has progressed in meeting EU values and criteria.
“We should not forget that countries join the EU on the basis of merit, meaning completed reforms, commitment, sincerity and achieved societal transformation. The fact is that Kyiv and Chișinău have accomplished much more over the past two years than the countries of our region, which have become somewhat complacent and are waiting for someone to hand them something. That gift is called EU membership and access to all the benefits that come with it. However, there are no gifts without hard work. Therefore, the countries of our region should focus on completing their own assignments from Brussels rather than expecting someone else to do the job for them,” Latinović said.
At the same time, she believes the Hungarian Prime Minister’s statement should primarily be interpreted as an attempt to slow down Ukraine’s European path.
“He has proven himself to be a skilled politician and a declared European, but one who always puts national interests first. This is not only about the position of the Hungarian minority in Ukraine but also about the state of agriculture, which was one of the topics discussed at the Visegrád Group meeting. Ukraine’s accession to the EU would disrupt many things and require appropriate solutions, especially considering that Ukraine is Europe’s largest breadbasket,” she said.
Budapest is not alone
Budapest is not an isolated case, as demonstrated by the strong positions of other European officials who insist that accession conditions must be the same for all candidates.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk publicly and strongly supported Péter Magyar’s position, stating that different conditions cannot apply to the Western Balkans and Ukraine. Tusk warned that the phrase “as quickly as possible” reflects enthusiasm without substance and that all candidates must meet the established criteria without shortcuts.
At the same time, Austria and Greece have also recently applied the brakes. Austria’s Minister for Europe, Claudia Bauer, sharply criticised what she described as a policy of double standards, stressing that it is unacceptable for “some countries to have an overtaking lane, with one foot already inside the EU, while others have to work towards membership for decades”.
A similar position has come from Greece, which emphasises that it supports Kyiv’s path to membership, but only if it does not come at the expense of the Western Balkans, whose European perspective was formally recognised as far back as 2003.
Two key issues complicate matters
Taking all this into account, Igor Novaković of the ISAC Fund previously said that these developments are essentially calls for a broader debate and that two key issues are complicating the entire enlargement discussion:
- The veto issue – There are concerns about whether enlargement should proceed before the EU resolves the question of veto powers. There is a fear that a new member state could fall under the influence of another member or pursue an independent course similar to that of Hungary.
- The Ukraine issue – In early February, US President Donald Trump reportedly urged the EU to offer some form of concession to Ukraine, and there was even discussion that Ukraine could become a full EU member within a year of a ceasefire.
Novaković also pointed to a clear division within the European Union regarding enlargement priorities.
“My impression is that we have several member states, primarily those bordering Ukraine, that would like the EU to be more actively engaged in Kyiv’s accession process, while those bordering the Western Balkan countries believe that both sides should be treated equally,” Novaković concluded.
(Blic, 25.06.2026)