A sharp disagreement has emerged within the European Union over the allocation of €6.6 billion from the European Peace Facility (EPF), exposing growing divisions among member states over how to finance military support for Ukraine.
At the center of the dispute are competing proposals from Poland and Germany. While Warsaw is demanding full reimbursement for weapons already supplied to Ukraine, Berlin argues the unlocked funds should instead be redirected entirely toward continued military support for Kyiv.
The disagreement concerns €6.6 billion that became available after Hungary lifted its blockade on the EU’s military assistance mechanism. The funds are currently held in Brussels, but the question of how they should be distributed has triggered an intense political debate among EU members.
Poland Seeks Full Reimbursement for Weapons Sent to Ukraine
Poland has made it clear that it intends to fight for every euro it believes it is owed under the European Peace Facility. Warsaw is seeking approximately 2 billion Polish zlotys (around €450 million) in compensation for weapons transferred to Ukraine during the early stages of the Russia-Ukraine war.
Deputy Defense Minister Cezary Tomczyk, speaking to Polish broadcaster RMF FM, said Poland opposes any changes to the reimbursement rules after countries had already made military contributions.
“This money is our money,” Tomczyk reportedly said, arguing that reducing reimbursements would directly impact defense budgets and military preparedness.
Polish officials argue that countries such as Poland and Slovakia, which quickly transferred military equipment to Ukraine after Russia launched its invasion, should not be penalized now because funds are insufficient for complete reimbursement.
Warsaw has also criticized what it sees as an attempt by Brussels to alter the original financial arrangements after weapons deliveries had already taken place.
Germany Wants Funds Directed to Ukraine
Germany, however, is pushing for a different approach.
Berlin believes the unlocked EPF funds should be used directly to support Ukraine rather than returned to national governments. German officials have described the European Peace Facility as a solidarity mechanism intended primarily to help Kyiv rather than reimburse national budgets.
According to reports, Sebastian Hartmann, Germany’s Deputy Defense Minister, urged EU partners during a meeting of defense ministers in Nicosia to channel unused reimbursements back into Ukraine’s defense efforts.
The German Defense Ministry has reportedly emphasized that Germany is already committing substantial resources to support Kyiv. Berlin plans to spend around €11.5 billion on Ukraine in 2026, making several hundred million euros in reimbursements less significant from its perspective.
A European diplomat quoted in reports suggested that Germany views direct aid to Ukraine as strategically more important than financial returns to member states.
Kaja Kallas Proposes Partial Reimbursement Plan
The disagreement intensified after EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas proposed a compromise plan for distributing the €6.6 billion.
Under the proposal, member states would receive proportional reimbursements—estimated at around 10% of eligible claims—while part of the money would fund the training of Ukrainian troops and joint arms procurement for Ukraine.
The proposal comes amid a major funding gap. EU countries have collectively spent an estimated €43 billion through the European Peace Facility since the start of the war, theoretically entitling them to much larger reimbursements. However, available funds remain insufficient to fully cover all claims.
Poland has rejected the proposal, insisting that commitments made to countries supplying weapons should be honored in full.
EU Countries Split Over Funding Priorities
The disagreement highlights broader divisions within the EU regarding military aid and burden-sharing.
Countries such as Poland and Slovakia argue that early contributors should receive compensation as originally promised. They warn that failing to reimburse nations could discourage future military support and strain defense spending.
Meanwhile, Germany and several Nordic countries favor a more collective approach, prioritizing immediate support for Ukraine over national reimbursements.
France has reportedly taken a middle-ground position. Paris is said to support parts of the reimbursement proposal but insists that any future arms procurement should prioritize European defense manufacturers rather than purchases from outside the bloc.
French officials are also understood to have opposed earlier ideas that involved buying weapons for Ukraine through U.S.-based procurement mechanisms.
What Happens Next?
The issue is expected to move to technical-level discussions before being elevated to EU ambassadors for further negotiations.
The outcome could significantly shape the future of the European Peace Facility and influence how the European Union finances military support for Ukraine moving forward.
The dispute also reflects a broader challenge facing Europe: balancing national defense interests with collective commitments to sustaining long-term support for Kyiv amid an ongoing war.
With billions of euros at stake and differing political priorities among member states, reaching a consensus may prove difficult in the coming weeks.
