Andrej Babiš stated Ukraine is not ready to join the EU until the war ends
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Andrej Babiš has publicly said Ukraine “is not ready” for EU membership and that the war should end first; multiple outlets report he repeated objections to Ukraine’s immediate membership in the wake of his October 2025 electoral comeback [1] [2]. Reporting shows his stance fits a broader Central European pattern of skepticism — Hungary and parts of the Czech political spectrum have explicitly opposed fast-tracking Ukraine’s accession [3] [2] [4].
1. Babiš’s remark: what was reported and when
Coverage of Babiš’s post-election comments records that he told a Ukrainian journalist Ukraine “is not ready for the European Union” and urged ending the conflict first; that line appears in at least one regional outlet and is echoed in reporting that he “repeated his objections to Ukraine’s immediate membership” after the October 2025 polls [1] [2].
2. How his view fits his politics and coalition math
Babiš’s Eurosceptic instincts and campaign promises to cut military aid to Kyiv help explain the stance: outlets note he may have to form a government with more hardline Eurosceptic partners (SPD, Motorists) and that his return could shift Czech policy on Ukraine inside the EU, even as he sought to reassure the West about EU and NATO membership commitments [2] [5].
3. Not an isolated Czech view — regional pushback exists
Babiš’s remarks align with broader regional resistance: Hungary under Viktor Orbán has actively blocked certain Ukrainian accession steps and led domestic campaigns opposing fast admission, and reporting cites Hungary’s continuing vetoes and public consultations where large majorities opposed Ukraine joining the EU [3] [6] [7].
4. EU institutions and other member states take a different tack
European institutions and several member states have been pushing to fast-track Ukraine’s accession process: the EU agreed to open negotiations in 2024 and set out screening and cluster plans in 2025, with commissioners and enlargement officials publicly aiming for technical advances even amid political obstacles [3] [8] [7].
5. Practical obstacles to Ukrainian accession, beyond rhetoric
Independent reporting and policy trackers show substantial technical work remains — screening of negotiation chapters, reform roadmaps, and EU requests for reforms are ongoing. Hungary’s vetoes and concerns about minority rights and other political issues are concrete, procedural impediments irrespective of rhetorical positions like Babiš’s [3] [7].
6. Competing narratives: security-first vs. accession-as-security
Babiš frames Ukraine’s accession as conditional on peace — “end the conflict first” — a security-first argument echoed by some critics. Brussels and Kyiv argue accession can itself be part of Ukraine’s security guarantees and have produced to-do lists and plans to advance technical steps despite political blockages, offering a directly competing logic [1] [7].
7. Media and geopolitical slant in available reporting
Some sources cited here are regional outlets with pro- or anti-Russian editorial leanings; others are mainstream European press and policy outlets. Reporting that frames Babiš as a potential ally of Orbán or as steering a “pullback” on aid reflects both factual coalition arithmetic and an interpretive angle; readers should note the mix of local partisan outlets and established outlets in the sample [6] [2] [5].
8. What the sources do not settle
Available sources in this set do not provide full transcripts of Babiš’s remarks, nor do they say he alone can determine EU accession outcomes; they also do not report any formal Czech government policy change beyond his statements and the likely coalition dynamics (not found in current reporting). They do report concrete EU-level steps and Hungarian veto activity as separate factual constraints [3] [7].
9. Bottom line for readers
Babiš’s comment that Ukraine should wait for the war to end before joining the EU is accurately reported and politically significant because it reflects and may reinforce rising Central European resistance to rapid accession; however, it sits against an EU institutional push to advance technical accession work and a broader debate over whether accession itself strengthens Ukraine’s security [1] [2] [7].