Volodymyr Zelenskyj receives billions from the EU, even if the solution found is suboptimal.Image: keystone
analysis
The European Union is having difficulty providing financial and military aid to Ukraine. That can be criticized, but Switzerland in particular does much less.
December 19, 2025, 3:53 p.mDecember 19, 2025, 3:55 p.m
The heads of state and government of the European Union have once again choked out a compromise. A particularly important one, however. They agreed on Friday night in Brussels a loan of 90 billion euros for Ukrainewith which the long-suffering and war-ravaged country should survive the next two years.
It will be financed by taking on common debt, and not from frozen assets of the Russian Central Bank. As a “location country”, Belgium fought tooth and nail against this originally planned solution. for understandable reasons. The result was a typical EU compromise, as is known from the euro crisis.
Belgium’s Prime Minister Bart De Wever successfully defended himself against the confiscation of Russian assets.Image: keystone
You definitely won’t win a beauty prize with this solution, and the criticism in the European media is sometimes clear. “The summit crime thriller does not give a clear sign of strength,” he said Mirror. At least it is recognized that at least the intended goal was achieved. This is also how Radio SRF’s Brussels correspondent sees it.
“A pale aftertaste”
However, this is “not sufficient”he said in his analysis and justified this with the following sentence: “The European Union has once again failed to show that it is willing to support Ukraine at all costs and is willing to take high political, financial and legal risks.” That’s why “a pale aftertaste” remains.
You can see it that way, but not for the reason mentioned. But because this criticism is made in the medium of a country that does not do a good job of helping Ukraine itself. All you have to do is replace “European Union” with “Switzerland” in the sentence in question and you will come to the same conclusion, especially when it comes to the willingness to take risks.
Ranked 17th out of 41 countries
The EU may have done too little for Ukraine financially and militarily, but this is even more true for Switzerland. She organized two conferences, in Lugano and on the Bürgenstock. But the memory has faded even at home. In both cases the result was too poor, and the beautiful pictures from Bürgenstock cannot change that.
The Bürgenstock summit produced beautiful images, but little substance.Image: keystone
Switzerland also does not set any standards when it comes to financial aid. That shows that Ukraine Support Tracker the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. With just over a billion euros, Switzerland is in 17th place out of 41 countries. That seems appealing, but in terms of share of gross domestic product (GDP) it only results in 27th place. Other and poorer countries do much more.
Zero military aid
Only when it comes to humanitarian aid does it rank high, at 8th place, but one still wonders whether more would be possible despite the austerity debates. The support tracker for military aid is completely blank. Switzerland hides behind neutrality, but other neutral countries such as Ireland and Austria make at least a small contribution.
Switzerland did not even want to allow the transfer of military equipment that had long since been bought and paid for. A relaxation of the War Materials Act was supposed to help, but in the end it was Under pressure from the SVP, exactly this point was overturned. Instead, the local defense industry should have better sales opportunities. Ukraine comes away empty-handed.
“Reasonable” return
Parliament blocked military aid, but advocated a “softening” of the S protection status for Ukrainian refugees. The Federal Council has therefore defined seven areas in the west of the country, to which a return is considered “reasonable”.. Disclaimer: There is not a single area in Ukraine that is not affected by Russian attacks.
After the outbreak of war, Ukrainian refugees were welcomed. Now some of them should go back.Image: keystone
This creates a picture of a country that is hesitant to help Ukraine, but at the same time wants to send refugees back to the war zone. From this perspective, it is cheap, if not cowardly, to criticize the EU’s inadequate aid. An editorial in the “Tagesanzeiger” criticized her last year nothing less than “treason”..
Questionable all-round blow
Switzerland’s decision to “no longer fully support the EU sanctions against Russia” was also criticized. When reading it, however, one could not shake the suspicion that this passage was inserted because those responsible were not comfortable with the all-round report written by a German editor.
One can attest to the fact that the Swiss media is generally holding back from criticizing the EU. Of course it is allowed, just out of respect for press freedom and because there are some reasons for it. But if it comes from a country that doesn’t do enough for Ukraine, you should think carefully about your choice of words.