Ukraine and Moldova have moved closer to the next formal stage of EU accession talks after all 27 member states agreed to open negotiations on the first cluster of issues, ending a blockage that had delayed progress in both countries’ membership bids.
The move was confirmed after Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko said that all EU members had agreed to open talks with Ukraine and Moldova on the first group of negotiating chapters. Cyprus, which holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU, said it had begun preparations for the formal opening of negotiations. The first cluster covers rule-of-law and democratic standards, the area known in EU enlargement policy as “fundamentals”.
The decision is politically important because Ukraine and Moldova had been held back by Hungary’s opposition to the opening of the first cluster. Budapest had linked its position to the rights of the ethnic Hungarian minority in Ukraine, particularly over language, education and cultural guarantees. That issue had become one of the main barriers preventing the accession process from moving beyond technical preparation.
The blockage eased after Hungarian Prime Minister Peter Magyar said Budapest and Kyiv had reached an agreement on the rights of Ukraine’s Hungarian minority. According to current reporting on the agreement, the understanding includes measures on minority schools, language use in education and examinations, and the use of Hungarian national symbols during celebrations. Magyar has said those commitments must be incorporated into Ukrainian law and into Ukraine’s EU accession action plan.
The shift does not mean Ukraine or Moldova is close to EU membership. Accession negotiations are long, technical and politically exposed. The EU’s negotiating process is divided into policy chapters grouped into clusters, and the fundamentals cluster is opened first because it covers the rule of law, democratic institutions, public administration, public procurement, statistics, judiciary and fundamental rights, justice and security, and financial control. These areas determine the pace of the wider process and can also slow or block progress if reforms stall.
For Ukraine, the development carries particular weight because accession talks are unfolding while the country remains at war. Kyiv applied to join the EU shortly after Russia launched its full-scale invasion in 2022, and EU leaders decided in December 2023 to open accession negotiations. The European Commission’s country page on Ukraine notes that the European Council took that decision on 14 December 2023, after the Commission recommended opening talks.
For Moldova, the same step keeps its accession process tied to Ukraine’s, despite different domestic conditions. Moldova has faced hybrid pressure, energy vulnerability and political destabilisation attempts, while also seeking to advance reforms required by Brussels. The Commission’s 2025 enlargement assessment said Moldova had adopted roadmaps on the rule of law, public administration and democratic institutions, and had completed the screening process. The same enlargement package noted that Ukraine had also completed screening and adopted reform roadmaps, including an action plan on national minorities.
The immediate importance of the latest decision lies in the removal of a veto point. EU enlargement requires unanimity among member states, giving individual governments the ability to delay progress for political, bilateral or domestic reasons. Hungary’s previous opposition showed how one member state could hold up not only Ukraine’s path but also Moldova’s, because the two candidacies have been treated in parallel.
The Hungarian shift therefore has consequences beyond enlargement procedure. It changes the balance of pressure inside the EU, where support for Ukraine and Moldova has had to coexist with disputes over migration, agriculture, budget costs, institutional reform and the future voting weight of an enlarged Union. Opening the first cluster would not settle those questions, but it would move the process from political blockage into measurable reform benchmarks.
The timing is also relevant for Brussels. Enlargement has returned as a strategic issue since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but the EU has often struggled to match political declarations with institutional progress. The first cluster would test whether the Union can turn its enlargement commitments into a structured process while maintaining strict conditions on rule of law and democratic standards.
That point matters because accession is not only a reward for geopolitical alignment. It is a legal and administrative process that requires candidate states to align with EU rules and prove that reforms can be implemented. In Ukraine’s case, Brussels has repeatedly stressed the importance of judicial independence, anti-corruption institutions and safeguards against democratic backsliding. In Moldova’s case, the challenge includes institutional resilience and implementation capacity under external pressure.
The decision to prepare the first cluster is therefore best understood as a controlled opening rather than a breakthrough to membership. Ukraine and Moldova gain momentum, Hungary gains commitments on minority rights, and the EU regains some credibility on enlargement after months of delay. The next test will be whether the formal opening of the cluster is followed by sustained reform, clear benchmarks and continued unanimity among member states.
For Kyiv and Chisinau, the message is that accession remains possible but conditional. For Brussels, it is a reminder that enlargement is now part of Europe’s security and governance agenda, not only a bureaucratic process. The first cluster will show whether that agenda can survive the practical demands of unanimity, reform and political pressure.
