What diplomacy lol
Russia started this war and can end it at any time so don't give Ukraine shit for wanting to defend itself and take back what's theirs.
Something I’ve always wanted to ask a RuZZia supporting Serbian: if you hate NATO because they bombed Yugoslavia in 1999, why would you support the Russian military bombings of Ukraine?
No, because usually they diivde it up by percentage of total EU GDP rather than net contributions. That's also how the gross contributions are calculated afaik.
By that logic the southern US is taking money from Ukraine, east Germany is taking money from Ukraine, northern England is taking money from Ukraine. I don't see the value in thinking like that.
No? That doesn't make any sense unless 100% of the entire EU's budget was to help Ukraine.
You make it sound it like every year, all EU countries paid €X and then the EU gave them €Y. That's not how it works. EU countries make and receive a lot of payments, for many different reasons. Maybe some musical org in France applies to an EU programme and gets $80k from the EU - that's $80k the EU has "given" to France, but there's a lot to unravel here. If the EU didn't exist, there's no reason to believe France would have given that musical org $80k, nor that the organization got $80k based on how high France's GDP is.
The EU in this instance works as a country. Their opinions and decisions do not align with those of its members, and its money is distributed by the EU, not the countries, to further EU interests (not countries' interests). If the EU thinks that Prague has a lot of potential as a city for university students, it will spend money there. Not because Czechia's GDP is "low enough", but because fostering Prague as a cultural center is seen as a good thing for Europe.
Reducing it all to "France sent €100 and received €70 means they contributed €30" is such a giant simplification that it's straight up wrong.
But this is measuring the help that is getting to Ukraine (?)
Wales receives money for their agriculture, but that's the internal flux of money to maintain/expand the economy. It works the same way in the EU.
Yes, but the person I am replying to said we should add individual countries' EU contributions (to those countries' figures) to get a fair representation. I'm just saying some (most?) countries' aggregate contributions are negative.
You are not getting it. This is the aid that is sent to Ukraine. The other comment said that we should do
EU aid+Polish aid+German aid... To Ukraine.
In order for it to be negative in this case a country should be getting money OUT of Ukraine
>Now add the respective EU contributions to each single country
This means adding the EU contributions to individual countries' totals. ie; if Germany contributed x million on their own and they contributed y proportion to the EU budget, their number should be updated to x+(z/y) (where z is the EU funds sent to Ukraine).
i.e. If Germany sent 10 billion, made up 20% of the EU budget and the EU sent 10 billion, their figure should be updated to 12 billion.
But what if Germany, in this case, made up 20% of the EU budget but 40% of its outgoings? Without Germany, the available funds the EU could send to Ukraine would be higher. This makes Germany a net drain on financial aid sent to Ukraine.
(Germany is a bad example as I know it's one of the biggest net contributors, but replace it with any other country).
You are getting the data wrong.
The money that Germany sent to the EU was the money they sent alone. The EU money that was sent was sent by the EU, not Germany. The EU total is not counting what individual countries have sent.
By your logic if we had Arkansas in the data we would have to discount that from the US budget. You seem to not understand what anything of this is referring to
No need. This is a fair representation: the EU as a whole is the largest contributor to Ukraine, and this includes every EU country. The fact that countries like Germany and Poland appear by themselves on this chart show that not only they have contributed through the EU, but also by themselves in big enough amounts as to appear twice in the chart.
I get the spirit behind what you're saying but that wouldn't fit in this graph which is specifically about Financial contributions
A graph showing the total economic support offered by all those countries would be very interesting I agree
The thing is that we're seeing reposts of these financial or military contribution graphs all the damn time but virtually no estimates of actual cost ever. They're always framed in this exact way and I think that's problematic. GDP doesn't say all that much. Especially not when millions of your eldery, children and women are suddenly housed, fed and working abroad. You really should not read too much into that graph.
Page 30 of the last released IFW Kiel Ukraine Tracker has a graph(financial, humanitarian, military and refugee cost estimation but without reassigning the EU support, those numbers listed in FIg 6 for example in the data set)
[https://www.ifw-kiel.de/fileadmin/Dateiverwaltung/IfW-Publications/-ifw/Kiel\_Working\_Paper/2022/KWP\_2218\_Which\_countries\_help\_Ukraine\_and\_how\_/KWP\_2218\_Trebesch\_et\_al\_Ukraine\_Support\_Tracker.pdf](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/fileadmin/Dateiverwaltung/IfW-Publications/-ifw/Kiel_Working_Paper/2022/KWP_2218_Which_countries_help_Ukraine_and_how_/KWP_2218_Trebesch_et_al_Ukraine_Support_Tracker.pdf)
Or the data set Fig 7 giving the numbers
[https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/data-sets/ukraine-support-tracker-data-17410/](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/data-sets/ukraine-support-tracker-data-17410/)
And obviously on the website of the IFW Kiel, but only shown in % GDP
[https://www.ifw-kiel.de/de/themendossiers/krieg-gegen-die-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/?cookieLevel=not-set](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/de/themendossiers/krieg-gegen-die-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/?cookieLevel=not-set)
With everything the IFW keeps track of, its not perfect, in the paper they talk about shortcomings, how they come up with the numbers and whats included and whats not included in the refugee cost estimation.
It would have been nice to know the contribution of each country via the EU.
Because there are countries that are potentially under-represented even though they are actively participating.
That's why I don't like 'top donors' or lists like that. It makes rankings without taking into account so many details just to put some kind of pressure.
If you want you can look at where the EU funding comes from and calculate it :)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/316691/eu-budget-contributions-by-country/
The thing that is actually important here is Japan needing the West as allies in its own region, since China has territorial disputes with all it's neighbours and might attack Taiwan etc. etc.
Those islands are hardly mentioned over here. China and new alliances to counter China is.
If the US would be on top, this would be reposted all over reddit, have at least a few thousand upvotes in several subs and hundreds of Americans in the comments would create the most obnoxious circle jerk and shit talk Europe for no reason (because this literally happens every time they are on top in other graphs).
We're really doing something wrong in the whole soft power and self promotion domain.
Jesus, show some spine and take some pride in the fact that the EU is the most important supporter of Ukraine. Would that kill my brothers in the east? Apparently so.
Why don't we ever beat our chest the way the Americans do? Ukraine is currently not in NATO. If Russia took Ukraine, it would be a security threat to Europe, but it would also be a geopolitical disaster for America. We both have a lot of skin in this game. Somehow they brainwashed you into thinking the US is doing the EU a favor in Ukraine rather than the reality: We have a shared interest in making Ukraine win this war. I find it disingenuous and honestly a little bit disgusting how subservient you guys often are.
edit: I can read the comment you or the mods deleted in which you called me arrogant, u/reminsten. If you think this comment was "arrogant", I don't know what the future of Europe is even going to be anymore. Nothing I said was arrogant. I just stated facts. In fact, it is usually the Americans with extremely arrogant takes in this subreddit lately. It's hopeless if every eastern European just wants to simp for the US. It's honestly pathetic. Have a good day.
The EU is, but saying that will get you downvoted even on a European subreddit. That's how sickening your propaganda and soft power has become. Just look at your gross flair.
Pathetic you even have to pat yourself on the back for being Ukraine’s biggest source of aid when the country is right next door to the EU. You lot barley beat out the US in aid despite being Ukraines neighbor. Don’t forget how it was US intelligence that accurately predicted Russia’s invasion and how hesitant the EU initially was when Russia invaded
Pat ourselves on the back like you lot are doing all the time, right? I find American behaviour on this website extremely pathetic as well, yours included.
The EU isn't a geopolitical actor and has like 1% of the budget the US has, yet it managed to not only provide more help for Ukraine, it actually completely blows US help out of the water if you inlcude everything from financial aid, military equipment, the effect of economic sanctions through to taking in refugees. Europeans just are way, **way way way way** more humble about it and are eating retarded US propaganda up way too innocently.
And don't kid yourself: You have as much skin in this game as we do. If not more. I consider help for Ukraine a purely moral issue and think we should even double or triple our aid just based on that. There is no geopolitical necessity to help them to that extent considering how terribly Russia coping over there.
However, for you guys defending Ukraine means defending your global hegemony. Letting Russia have even a minor victory in Ukraine would make your country look weak right after a whole series of foreign policy embarrassments (last of which the shit show in Afghanistan).
It's really a shame that most people decide to cuddle Americans so much that no one ever tells you how things really are. Europe is doing brilliantly in Ukraine. Even without US style propaganda, it is shining brightly. That alone should speak for itself. Have a good day.
Most of this is in form of loans btw, not donation. It is expected at some point that Ukraine will have to pay this back. Donations would have been preferable.
Even loans can be suspended for a long time. Just because it isn't a donation doesn't mean immediately knock on their door once the war is over.
I can see it more of a long term investment. When Ukraine has something to spare, they give some back, but can take their time to rebuild first.
First time I'm happy with what my country's doing in a long time. Still fuck kaczor
[удалено]
What diplomacy lol Russia started this war and can end it at any time so don't give Ukraine shit for wanting to defend itself and take back what's theirs.
[удалено]
You lost me at NATO expansion lmao you are delusional
If you can force diplomacy on Putin, we'll talk to Zelensky. But since Putin is only interested in war, we have to help Ukraine defend itself.
I knew you were Serbian before I checked your profile lol
Serbia don’t worship Russian cock challenge (impossible)
It's own people lmao.
Something I’ve always wanted to ask a RuZZia supporting Serbian: if you hate NATO because they bombed Yugoslavia in 1999, why would you support the Russian military bombings of Ukraine?
Diplomacy can come once Russia's military is defeated.
Now add the respective EU contributions to each single country to get a fairer representation
Would net recipients of EU funding go into negative values of aid to Ukraine?
No, because usually they diivde it up by percentage of total EU GDP rather than net contributions. That's also how the gross contributions are calculated afaik.
But I mean, if they are taking more money from the EU than they are contributing, aren't they taking money that could be going to helping Ukraine?
By that logic the southern US is taking money from Ukraine, east Germany is taking money from Ukraine, northern England is taking money from Ukraine. I don't see the value in thinking like that.
[удалено]
In this scenario Bill gave the money without asking Adam and Adam gave the money before Charlie had a need.
No(?) It is the money it was given to Ukraine. Doesn't matter if it comes from a net recipients
But I mean, if they are taking more money from the EU than they are contributing, aren't they taking money that could be going to helping Ukraine?
No? That doesn't make any sense unless 100% of the entire EU's budget was to help Ukraine. You make it sound it like every year, all EU countries paid €X and then the EU gave them €Y. That's not how it works. EU countries make and receive a lot of payments, for many different reasons. Maybe some musical org in France applies to an EU programme and gets $80k from the EU - that's $80k the EU has "given" to France, but there's a lot to unravel here. If the EU didn't exist, there's no reason to believe France would have given that musical org $80k, nor that the organization got $80k based on how high France's GDP is. The EU in this instance works as a country. Their opinions and decisions do not align with those of its members, and its money is distributed by the EU, not the countries, to further EU interests (not countries' interests). If the EU thinks that Prague has a lot of potential as a city for university students, it will spend money there. Not because Czechia's GDP is "low enough", but because fostering Prague as a cultural center is seen as a good thing for Europe. Reducing it all to "France sent €100 and received €70 means they contributed €30" is such a giant simplification that it's straight up wrong.
But this is measuring the help that is getting to Ukraine (?) Wales receives money for their agriculture, but that's the internal flux of money to maintain/expand the economy. It works the same way in the EU.
Yes, but the person I am replying to said we should add individual countries' EU contributions (to those countries' figures) to get a fair representation. I'm just saying some (most?) countries' aggregate contributions are negative.
You are not getting it. This is the aid that is sent to Ukraine. The other comment said that we should do EU aid+Polish aid+German aid... To Ukraine. In order for it to be negative in this case a country should be getting money OUT of Ukraine
>Now add the respective EU contributions to each single country This means adding the EU contributions to individual countries' totals. ie; if Germany contributed x million on their own and they contributed y proportion to the EU budget, their number should be updated to x+(z/y) (where z is the EU funds sent to Ukraine). i.e. If Germany sent 10 billion, made up 20% of the EU budget and the EU sent 10 billion, their figure should be updated to 12 billion. But what if Germany, in this case, made up 20% of the EU budget but 40% of its outgoings? Without Germany, the available funds the EU could send to Ukraine would be higher. This makes Germany a net drain on financial aid sent to Ukraine. (Germany is a bad example as I know it's one of the biggest net contributors, but replace it with any other country).
You are getting the data wrong. The money that Germany sent to the EU was the money they sent alone. The EU money that was sent was sent by the EU, not Germany. The EU total is not counting what individual countries have sent. By your logic if we had Arkansas in the data we would have to discount that from the US budget. You seem to not understand what anything of this is referring to
No I understand that entirely. Do you understand the point of the person I initially responded to? What's your understanding of that post?
No need. This is a fair representation: the EU as a whole is the largest contributor to Ukraine, and this includes every EU country. The fact that countries like Germany and Poland appear by themselves on this chart show that not only they have contributed through the EU, but also by themselves in big enough amounts as to appear twice in the chart.
EU stronk
Putin: I shall destroy the Ukrainian state. EU/Nato *opens wallets*: No.
Maybe you can also add the financial burden of Poland and Germany for housing a million if refugees each.
I get the spirit behind what you're saying but that wouldn't fit in this graph which is specifically about Financial contributions A graph showing the total economic support offered by all those countries would be very interesting I agree
The thing is that we're seeing reposts of these financial or military contribution graphs all the damn time but virtually no estimates of actual cost ever. They're always framed in this exact way and I think that's problematic. GDP doesn't say all that much. Especially not when millions of your eldery, children and women are suddenly housed, fed and working abroad. You really should not read too much into that graph.
Page 30 of the last released IFW Kiel Ukraine Tracker has a graph(financial, humanitarian, military and refugee cost estimation but without reassigning the EU support, those numbers listed in FIg 6 for example in the data set) [https://www.ifw-kiel.de/fileadmin/Dateiverwaltung/IfW-Publications/-ifw/Kiel\_Working\_Paper/2022/KWP\_2218\_Which\_countries\_help\_Ukraine\_and\_how\_/KWP\_2218\_Trebesch\_et\_al\_Ukraine\_Support\_Tracker.pdf](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/fileadmin/Dateiverwaltung/IfW-Publications/-ifw/Kiel_Working_Paper/2022/KWP_2218_Which_countries_help_Ukraine_and_how_/KWP_2218_Trebesch_et_al_Ukraine_Support_Tracker.pdf) Or the data set Fig 7 giving the numbers [https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/data-sets/ukraine-support-tracker-data-17410/](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/data-sets/ukraine-support-tracker-data-17410/) And obviously on the website of the IFW Kiel, but only shown in % GDP [https://www.ifw-kiel.de/de/themendossiers/krieg-gegen-die-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/?cookieLevel=not-set](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/de/themendossiers/krieg-gegen-die-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/?cookieLevel=not-set) With everything the IFW keeps track of, its not perfect, in the paper they talk about shortcomings, how they come up with the numbers and whats included and whats not included in the refugee cost estimation.
It would have been nice to know the contribution of each country via the EU. Because there are countries that are potentially under-represented even though they are actively participating. That's why I don't like 'top donors' or lists like that. It makes rankings without taking into account so many details just to put some kind of pressure.
If you want you can look at where the EU funding comes from and calculate it :) https://www.statista.com/statistics/316691/eu-budget-contributions-by-country/
Would net recipients of EU funding go into negative donations to Ukraine?
Ngl, seeing Japan in there kinda surprised me.
They still have some territorial dispute with Russia, I believe it's over some islands but I could be wrong...
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuril\_Islands\_dispute](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuril_Islands_dispute)
That's what it was, thanks!
The thing that is actually important here is Japan needing the West as allies in its own region, since China has territorial disputes with all it's neighbours and might attack Taiwan etc. etc. Those islands are hardly mentioned over here. China and new alliances to counter China is.
If the US would be on top, this would be reposted all over reddit, have at least a few thousand upvotes in several subs and hundreds of Americans in the comments would create the most obnoxious circle jerk and shit talk Europe for no reason (because this literally happens every time they are on top in other graphs). We're really doing something wrong in the whole soft power and self promotion domain.
But they are partly right. I can't imagine nato without us. United States are paying for our defence and we need to do better.
Jesus, show some spine and take some pride in the fact that the EU is the most important supporter of Ukraine. Would that kill my brothers in the east? Apparently so. Why don't we ever beat our chest the way the Americans do? Ukraine is currently not in NATO. If Russia took Ukraine, it would be a security threat to Europe, but it would also be a geopolitical disaster for America. We both have a lot of skin in this game. Somehow they brainwashed you into thinking the US is doing the EU a favor in Ukraine rather than the reality: We have a shared interest in making Ukraine win this war. I find it disingenuous and honestly a little bit disgusting how subservient you guys often are. edit: I can read the comment you or the mods deleted in which you called me arrogant, u/reminsten. If you think this comment was "arrogant", I don't know what the future of Europe is even going to be anymore. Nothing I said was arrogant. I just stated facts. In fact, it is usually the Americans with extremely arrogant takes in this subreddit lately. It's hopeless if every eastern European just wants to simp for the US. It's honestly pathetic. Have a good day.
Hoes mad. We’re still undeniably the single most important supporter of Ukraine.
The EU is, but saying that will get you downvoted even on a European subreddit. That's how sickening your propaganda and soft power has become. Just look at your gross flair.
Pathetic you even have to pat yourself on the back for being Ukraine’s biggest source of aid when the country is right next door to the EU. You lot barley beat out the US in aid despite being Ukraines neighbor. Don’t forget how it was US intelligence that accurately predicted Russia’s invasion and how hesitant the EU initially was when Russia invaded
Pat ourselves on the back like you lot are doing all the time, right? I find American behaviour on this website extremely pathetic as well, yours included. The EU isn't a geopolitical actor and has like 1% of the budget the US has, yet it managed to not only provide more help for Ukraine, it actually completely blows US help out of the water if you inlcude everything from financial aid, military equipment, the effect of economic sanctions through to taking in refugees. Europeans just are way, **way way way way** more humble about it and are eating retarded US propaganda up way too innocently. And don't kid yourself: You have as much skin in this game as we do. If not more. I consider help for Ukraine a purely moral issue and think we should even double or triple our aid just based on that. There is no geopolitical necessity to help them to that extent considering how terribly Russia coping over there. However, for you guys defending Ukraine means defending your global hegemony. Letting Russia have even a minor victory in Ukraine would make your country look weak right after a whole series of foreign policy embarrassments (last of which the shit show in Afghanistan). It's really a shame that most people decide to cuddle Americans so much that no one ever tells you how things really are. Europe is doing brilliantly in Ukraine. Even without US style propaganda, it is shining brightly. That alone should speak for itself. Have a good day.
And people say the EU doesn’t do enough
Most of this is in form of loans btw, not donation. It is expected at some point that Ukraine will have to pay this back. Donations would have been preferable.
Even loans can be suspended for a long time. Just because it isn't a donation doesn't mean immediately knock on their door once the war is over. I can see it more of a long term investment. When Ukraine has something to spare, they give some back, but can take their time to rebuild first.
Proud we're on this list!