By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy asserted that Ukraine’s path to EU membership would continue irrespective of opposition from Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Orbán has been a consistent opponent of Ukraine’s membership, raising concerns about alleged discriminatory policies and potential war involvement. Zelenskyy emphasized that EU membership is the choice of the Ukrainian people and hinted at procedural workarounds to bypass Hungary’s veto. In response, Orbán accused Zelenskyy of attempting to dictate to Hungarians and employing “moral blackmail” in order to push Ukraine’s membership.
Read the original article here
Zelensky Says Ukraine Will Join EU ‘With or Without Orbán’
The sentiment is clear: Ukraine’s path to EU membership is viewed as a matter of “when,” not “if.” The enthusiasm among those who support Ukraine’s accession is palpable. Many see this as a strategic win for the EU, and they are prepared to embrace Ukraine regardless of the political roadblocks thrown up by individuals like Viktor Orbán, the Prime Minister of Hungary. The strong support indicates a willingness to overcome hurdles and keep the focus on the bigger picture of European unity and values.
Many see Orban’s opposition as an obstacle, not a determinant. There’s a common desire to simply “ignore” or “override” him, perceiving his stance as misaligned with the EU’s core principles. The frustration is rooted in the belief that Orbán is obstructing progress and doesn’t represent the wider interests of the Union. Some would even suggest re-evaluating Hungary’s place in the EU, implying that the benefits of the Union outweigh the need to appease dissenting voices. This is a bold statement on the commitment to welcoming Ukraine.
The economic and strategic benefits of Ukraine’s inclusion are frequently highlighted. The country is seen as having a strong military and agricultural potential. The idea of a “breadbasket” Ukraine providing cheaper food is viewed as a positive outcome. The prospect of a readily available workforce to offset aging populations in other member states is also seen as attractive. The possibility that Ukraine’s inclusion will offset any loss from Brexit is very much on the cards.
However, the path to membership is not without its challenges. There’s recognition that Ukraine must meet all of the EU’s criteria. Addressing corruption, upholding human rights, and aligning with EU standards are paramount. Some commenters believe that the current state of post-war rebuilding will be a hinderance to this goal. There’s also a realistic understanding that the process will take time, potentially decades, and will require significant adjustments. The discussions center on an understanding that the EU accession is an investment in the future.
Concerns about the economic impact of Ukraine’s accession are also voiced. There are fears of competition in agricultural markets, and the need for Ukraine to align its practices with EU standards. There’s also a worry that Ukraine will become a burden. It is also important to note that this is not a valid argument, as admitting any nation into the EU always results in shifts, and this is a natural outcome of the process.
A critical point of discussion revolves around the EU’s decision-making processes, particularly the role of veto rights. Some believe that veto rights are an obstacle and that a move towards qualified majority voting (QMV) would streamline decision-making. Some think that this system should apply to almost all decisions, including the ability to remove a member state. The debate also covers the implications of eliminating or modifying these rights, and how it might impact the willingness of countries to join the EU.
This discussion is, at its heart, about the future of the EU. It’s about whether the Union can adapt to change, overcome internal conflicts, and expand its influence. It’s about whether the EU’s core values are strong enough to weather political storms and welcome new members. The question that stands is whether or not to wait for the outcome of the war. Many have stated that it is best to deal with the war and its consequences now rather than be caught in the situation later.
In conclusion, the sentiment surrounding Ukraine’s potential EU membership is overwhelmingly positive. The desire to welcome Ukraine into the fold is clear, with many regarding Orbán’s opposition as an annoyance. While acknowledging the challenges of meeting EU standards, many see Ukraine’s accession as a strategic benefit. The conversations are, therefore, ultimately focused on how to make it happen, rather than whether it should happen.