We'll understand EU summit decision's significance later; right now, the focus is on weaponry

The meeting will clearly be noteworthy. Why else rush to reveal your agents?

But it will be noteworthy from a historical standpoint. Future historians might mark this date, highlighting certain periods, but we in Ukraine might not feel this significance.

A few years ago, an invitation to EU membership talks would have stirred strong emotions among Ukrainians. Now, everyone is more interested in how the EU plans to address the issue of shells for the armed forces – a promise they now claim they "cannot fulfill."

The negotiations will still be tied to a distant perspective. Ukraine faces a lengthy period of bureaucracy, law-making, diplomatic meetings, and interstate negotiations. During this, "good" things will once again "come out" from our neighbors, even those from whom we didn't expect it.

This is the uniqueness of history being crafted before our eyes. The fact that something is historical becomes clear only later, much later. At present, practicality overshadows everything that was highly significant in peacetime.

What lies ahead for us?

Before the summit, we should expect a lot of "betrayal" talk — proposals not accepted, lacking support, Orban putting a block on it, and so on. However, such emotional ups and downs are unlikely to catch anyone off guard. Following that, there will be another "well-thought-out decision," which "everyone generally agrees with, but there are details to figure out." The resolution of all these "details" will come next...

Yet, the crucial point is not that. The key indicator of decision-making should be the provision of tangible support—more weapons and aid signify the importance Europeans attach to Ukraine's European prospects. In essence, we closely monitor this.

Source

About the author. Petro Oleschuk, political scientist

The editors do not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.