Будет ли Европа «давать бабки» Украине после окончания войны? Откровения Коломойского.

Summary

Presenter Olesya Medvedeva discusses Igor Kolomoisky’s courtroom remarks about the prospects for peace and Ukraine’s postwar finances.

Kolomoisky’s Argument

Kolomoisky argued that a ceasefire could leave Ukraine facing serious problems if Europe stopped providing money, potentially driving the dollar to 150 hryvnias. As presented in the video, he therefore favors continuing the war and hoping for Vladimir Putin’s death, after which he believes Russia’s new authorities might withdraw from Ukraine.

Medvedeva’s Response

Medvedeva calls the idea that Ukraine must keep fighting to ensure future funding a false and dangerous dilemma. She says peace proposals currently under discussion—including a plan associated with Donald Trump—include reconstruction and investment. She also notes reports that Russia might contribute some frozen assets.

She argues that even without major foreign recovery programs, Ukraine could attract investment through its mineral resources, agriculture, geographic position, and reopened ports. If Western military support for Ukraine ended, she says, Kyiv would face difficult strategic choices about its course and security guarantees.

Ukraine and the European Union

Medvedeva considers the question of Europe’s future support important, but says it should be viewed in the context of Ukraine’s relationship with the EU—not as a reason to prolong the war.

She warns that EU accession may bring difficult demands, including pressure on Ukrainian agriculture and changes affecting national control over judicial and security institutions. She also challenges the assumption that membership would automatically bring large financial benefits. Poland, she says, defended its interests, while Latvia and Bulgaria accepted more EU demands. Meanwhile, the EU is now in a much weaker financial and political position than it was when earlier members joined.

Medvedeva cautions that Ukraine could face strict accession conditions without receiving comparable investment, and could instead become a market for European goods, with control of key assets shifting toward European companies. She argues that Europe might run short of funds for Ukraine even before the war ends—a scenario she considers more dangerous than postwar aid ending.

Conclusion

In Medvedeva’s view, the best outcome is a prompt end to the war through a comprehensive settlement that includes security guarantees and resources for recovery. She says those resources need not come exclusively from Europe.

Presenter: Olesya Medvedeva.