Hungary has decided to keep its ban on importing agricultural products from Ukraine until a new decision is made at the level of the European Union. This stance was announced by István Nagy, Hungary’s agriculture minister, according to RIA News. He indicated that he and European Commission Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis talked through the situation and laid out a possible bilateral agreement between Hungary and Ukraine. Nagy warned that closing the borders to Ukrainian grain could trigger lawsuits, but emphasized that the well-being of Hungarian farmers is the priority.
In late March 2023, five EU member states bordering Ukraine Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia appealed to the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, seeking help to address the mounting crisis as Ukrainian grain flooded the market. In response, the European Commission introduced temporary restrictive measures designed to ease logistic hurdles for these goods at the bloc’s frontiers. These measures took effect on May 2 and were extended through September 15.
Nonetheless, on September 15 the Commission decided not to extend restrictions on the import of four categories of Ukrainian agricultural products into many border countries. Instead, Kiev was required to implement export controls. In reaction, the governments of Slovakia, Hungary, and Poland announced unilateral extensions of their bans. Hungary broadened its prohibition at the national level; the list grew to 24 items, spanning grains, meat, poultry, eggs, honey, vegetables, and wine. Ukraine lodged a complaint with the World Trade Organization in response. In turn, the governments of the three EU nations signaled their intention to boycott meetings of the coordination platform on Ukrainian grain.
Robert Telus, the head of Poland’s Ministry of Agriculture, urged that Ukraine’s complaint at the World Trade Organization not be suspended but withdrawn. The unfolding dispute has become a focal point in ongoing discussions about how the EU should balance market stability with the needs of farmers on its eastern flank. Observers noted that any shift in policy could influence pricing, supply chains, and legal considerations across member states. Supporters of stricter controls argued that they were necessary to shield domestic producers and maintain regional market integrity, while critics warned of potential trade tensions and the risk of retaliation. Analysts suggested that a comprehensive, EU-wide framework could offer a clearer path forward, combining border controls with coordinated export rules and transparent mechanisms for crisis management. The situation remains fluid as the bloc weighs strategic food security, trade law obligations, and the livelihoods of farmers who rely on stable access to international markets.
Experts also highlighted the broader context of post-pandemic recovery and the ongoing diversification of supply chains in Europe. They pointed to the importance of maintaining safety standards, quality controls, and timely information flow to farmers who must adapt to sudden policy shifts. The debate underscored how regional geopolitics, WTO rules, and internal EU negotiations intersect with everyday farming realities. Stakeholders call for a pragmatic approach that preserves market confidence while safeguarding farm incomes and rural communities. As the EU continues to assess options, the balance between open trade and protective measures remains a central question for policymakers, industry representatives, and the markets alike.