In recent days, “European Solidarity” has unexpectedly found itself at the center of a public discussion about peace, although the questions should be directed at the government, which bears the full burden of responsibility for finding peace.
This discussion has shown that we are a democratic team with a plurality of opinions, capable of making consolidated decisions after an exchange of views. We steadfastly adhere to the key principles of our national identity — Army. Language. Faith. NATO. European Union.
Moreover, it has shown that it’s finally time to speak honestly with the country about the war. For years, we were presented with endless plans of resilience, steadfastness, power, and pseudo-security agreements. But neither society nor parliament has ever heard a strategy from the government on ending the war.
The complex situation on the front lines, alarms for 16 hours, daily strikes on cities, energy, and business, the loss of people and the exhaustion of the economy, today’s horrific attack on Pryluky — this is the reality. A war of attrition cannot continue indefinitely. We need a position capable of leading to real negotiations and a ceasefire.
Previously, the government falsely portrayed the very idea of a ceasefire as a concession to Russia and disparaged the Minsk agreements, through which we squeezed out seven years from Putin to build the army. Due to this approach, Ukraine lost opportunities even under favorable circumstances. Behind lost opportunities are lost lives. The main thing today is to draw conclusions and not repeat these mistakes.
Do we have a plan to end the war? Yes. It’s an immediate, unconditional, and comprehensive ceasefire on land, in the air, and at sea. A ceasefire does not mean recognizing occupation, abandoning territories, trusting Russia, or disarming. First — stop the fire. Then — negotiate for as long as it takes.
And it cannot mean stopping the strengthening of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Therefore, the 2027 budget should be a budget for a strong army, to show Russia that our army will have people, weapons, ammunition, and technology. Only then will the enemy have a real incentive to ceasefire.
We have found 515 billion hryvnias of additional resources, which should go exclusively to the military. We propose to give up or reduce what the country can do without during the war: 41 billion — roads, 35.3 billion — cash payments, 16 billion — “3000 kilometers,” 10 billion — screening, 9.4 billion — cashback, “investment nannies,” and industrial parks, even 1.62 billion — telethon. Another 87 billion — review of government spending, 161.5 billion — consumption and development spending of ministries. And reserves — 200 billion from the security and defense sector reserve and 46 billion from the reserve fund. The principle is simple: everything the state can mobilize for defense should work for defense.
However, the ability to finance the army also depends on the financial stability of the state, and therefore on the support of European partners. Next plenary week, the Rada will consider a number of bills regarding our European obligations. These depend on further financial assistance and progress in membership negotiations with the EU.
We will not act on the principle “the worse, the better.” We are a responsible pro-European opposition. Therefore, we will evaluate each government bill based on its quality and compliance with European obligations because EU membership is our strategic goal, and we initiated the enshrinement of the Euro-Atlantic course in the Constitution. European funds maintain macro-financial stability and the state’s social obligations. This allows more domestic resources to be directed to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
European integration, partner support, and strengthening the army are not three different policies, but one strategy: to make Ukraine strong enough so that Russia understands that continuing the war will not bring it results.
We need strength not instead of diplomacy — we need strength for diplomacy.
