Devil in the Detail of Kallas’s Multi-Billion Military Aid Plan for Ukraine

BRUSSELS – EU countries are hashing out the details of a new multi-billion Ukraine military aid plan, but key sticking points on participation and calculating contributions remain.

EU foreign ministers on Monday discussed the latest draft of the plan, circulated among EU member states and reported by Euractiv last week, which has pitched mobilising between €20 and €40 billion worth of military aid to Ukraine this year.

“There is broad political support for a €40 billion defence initiative, but of course, now the discussion is about the details,” the EU’s top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, told reporters after the talks.

Kallas added that “everyone at the table understood that we have to demonstrate our resolve right now and support Ukraine so that it can defend itself.”

The plan, as pitched, includes spending €5 billion on 2 million rounds of large-calibre artillery ammunition and further spending on air defence systems, missiles, drones, fighter jets, and other lethal and non-lethal equipment.

EU leaders are expected to discuss the initiative when they meet in Brussels on Thursday after they did not go into detail on the issue two weeks ago.

An early version of the EU summit draft conclusions, seen by Euractiv, does not directly reference the Kallas initiative.

According to EU diplomats, most countries – including Croatia, Germany, Netherlands, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Czechia, Romania, Poland and the Baltics, among others – are in favour of moving towards a quick agreement and attaching a rather ambitious figure to the proposal.

But a number of technical details remain unclear – including the total value of the package. EU diplomats have described the discussions as “complicated” and said they do not expect an agreement this week.

For the initiative to move forward, key questions remain on participation and how contributions would be calculated.

One possible solution would be to seek a ’coalition of the willing’ for in-kind and in-cash contributions to the future fund, rather than a financial instrument based on the consent of the entire EU27.

This would help bypass potential vetoes by Hungary, which is expected to uphold its long-standing opposition to providing any further military support to Ukraine.

Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó reiterated again on Monday that Budapest “will not be dragged into this, nor will we let Hungarian taxpayers’ money be used to finance arms supplies to Ukraine.” Slovakia, too, has said it will not participate in the fund.

Kallas’ plan would also allow the inclusion of non-EU countries such as Norway or the United Kingdom, though it remains still unclear under which conditions they would be included.

Even more difficult issues are related to how each participating country’s contribution would be calculated.

According to the latest proposal, contributions would be determined by using the gross national income (GNI) as a key indicator, which would ensure that countries provide donations according to their “economic weight.”

While this is seen as fair by the vast majority of smaller EU member states, which have often punched above their economic weight in supplying aid to Ukraine aid, larger countries – including France, Italy and Spain – remain reluctant.

But this weighting would compel countries that have contributed less than northern or eastern European countries to “contribute their fair share,” one EU diplomat said.

Another sticking point remains the accounting of pledges.

According to the latest proposal, support “provided in-kind since 24 February 2025” will be taken into account in the figure attached to the fund, though some EU diplomats have raised the issue of countries double-pledging the same amount – once nationally and again as part of the EU-level fund.

“The [Kallas] initiative helps to structure and focus the mind, and all the talk about double counting or not (…) is a question of whether the cat is black or white [whether the money is fresh or not],” a second EU diplomat said.

It remains unclear how future security guarantees to Ukraine, such as potential policing of the ceasefire with boots on the ground, would be accounted for if they would happen this year.

EU member states have also asked for clarification as to how the €18 billion from the windfall profits from Russia’s frozen assets would be taken into account.