Europe can make up the Ukraine funding shortfall if the U.S. withdraws, analysts say

After the election of Donald Trump and a Republican sweep of both chambers of Congress, the risk of the United States cutting its funding for Ukraine is a real possibility, stoking concerns among leaders in Europe on what it means for the ongoing conflict.

Trump has previously expressed he would end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours and has been vocally critical of funding the war-torn nation alongside hardline Republican congressmen, who almost blocked a critical aid package in April of this year. On Sunday, Trump told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that Ukraine will “possibly” receive less military aid once he takes office.

But according to experts that spoke to CNBC, there is reason to believe Europe, which is Ukraine’s biggest donor, can make up the shortfall if the U.S. withdraws or tightens that funding.

Ukraine relies on military and financial aid from international partners to sustain its military campaign, especially the U.S. and Europe.

According to the Kiel Institute of Economy’s Ukraine Support Tracker, which has been tracking funding to Ukraine since January 2022 up until October 2024, Europe has committed 241 billion euros ($255 billion) in aid and the U.S. has committed 119 billion euros. Out of this, Europe has actually allocated 125 billion euros and the U.S. 88 billion euros, thus far.

Both Europe and the U.S. have provided “a comparable amount of military aid,” Pietro Bomprezzi, the project lead of the Ukraine Support Tracker, told CNBC.

As Ukraine’s largest donor and neighbor, Europe would face the brunt of costs if U.S. aid runs out and isn’t renewed under Trump. In the tracker’s latest press update released last week, Christoph Trebesch, the head of the Ukraine Support Tracker, stated: “With the current funding due to end, all eyes are now on the incoming U.S. administration and its willingness to support Ukraine.”

European leaders have convened several times since the election to bolster support for Ukraine, with many countries doubling up on their commitments.

Germany, which is Europe’s biggest donor to Ukraine, has repeatedly reiterated its support for Ukraine and pledged further military aid on a surprise visit to Kyiv last week: “Ukraine can rely on Germany,” Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz said.

Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has repeatedly blocked EU funding to Ukraine, offered a different tone last month, stating that Europe would not be able to fill in the gap financially if the U.S. withdraws aid.

But according to analysts who spoke to CNBC, Europe can fill the gaps, and has several ways to do so.

In its latest update on Dec. 5, the Ukraine Support Tracker stated that the use of profits from frozen Russian assets, which are “primarily available to European donors,” “could help them compensate for the loss of U.S. funds in the future.”

Jacob Funk Kirkegaard, a senior fellow at the Brussels-based Bruegel think tank, told CNBC that “making up for U.S. financial support for Ukraine would be very easy for the EU,” by using instruments such as new common debt, bilateral donations, and seizing the 250 billion euro in frozen Russian assets and distributing them to Ukraine.

Nigel Gould-Davis, a senior fellow for Russia and Eurasia at The International Institute for Strategic Studies, stated that seizing and distributing frozen Russian assets would be a “game changer.” While the G7’s $50 billion loan using interest payments from Russian assets is a small step in this direction, the EU can do more as it has full control over these assets.

“At a stroke, if [the G7] had the will to do so, it could provide a huge slice of the aggressor’s money and put it to defend Ukraine,” Gould-Davis said. The main reason this hasn’t been done is due to a fear among certain EU members on the financial consequences, he added.

There are also other ways Europe can fill in the gaps. Kirkegaard mentioned the Danish model of financing Ukraine: Instead of sending over Western-made weapons, which are more expensive to produce, countries could directly finance Ukraine’s military industrial complex.

Even in the case of withdrawal of critical U.S. weaponry, Kirkegaard points out that they can still be purchased: European countries could agree to a trade deal, like China did in 2018, and agree to purchase American-made products, in this case weapons to supply to Ukraine in exchange for a relief on tariffs.

It is “an entirely political choice” how much Europe devotes to defend itself and Ukraine, said Gould-Davies.

He frames it as a balance of resources versus a balance of resolve — the balance of resources is in Europe’s favor, but the balance of resolve is in Russia’s: If Europe has the political will to make use of its advantage in resources, Ukraine’s defense can greatly be bolstered.

Max Bergman, the director of the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studiesn told CNBC that while European countries are likely to increase aid in the case of U.S. withdrawal “it is unclear if Ukraine can survive the gap between the withdrawal of U.S. aid and the ramp up of European defense production.”

In the case that Europe didn’t step up its aid in the case of U.S. withdrawal, Ukraine would lose the war: “The danger is that we see in Kyiv in 2026 what we saw in Kaboul in 2021 — a military collapse, leading to the end of Ukraine and Ukrainian democracy.