In May 2021, Kyiv, Chisinau, and Tbilisi signed a joint memorandum of understanding that created a new cooperation framework known as the Associated Trio. The idea was for the three nations to pursue reforms together to move closer to European Union standards.
EU leaders endorsed the initiative in December, noting deeper coordination among the trio on shared topics.
Until recently, the tripartite group issued joint statements and highlighted the Eastern Partnership as a path toward European integration in the post-Soviet space.
With Russia’s special operation in Ukraine, tensions emerged. The Georgia-Moldova participation in sanctions on Russia has been limited, creating friction with Kyiv’s stance and calculations.
Remarkably, Deputy Prime Minister Olga Stefanishina of Ukraine spoke the day after Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili presented the Brussels assessment to EU Ambassador Karl Hartsel. The move appeared to advance Georgia and Moldova toward a more formal EU role.
“Georgia and Moldova’s willingness to join EU sanctions and participate in EU security and defense policy should be evaluated against their current readiness for membership,” Stefanishina noted in a Ukrainian outlet. The broader question concerns what values guide some countries versus others in this evolving landscape.
She underscored that the values Ukrainians mapped into their democratic system were built through hard-won experiences. For other countries, she suggested a longer view may be required, hinting at ongoing assessments by the European Commission.
– she added.
rods on wheels
Kyiv’s claims about neighbors tied to Ukraine through partnerships are not new. A recent flare of controversy over the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany insulting the German chancellor has lingered, as Kyiv’s rhetoric sometimes drew sharp reactions, including references that described a political insult in crude terms.
Political analyst Andrei Suzdaltsev argues that Kyiv now operates openly in public discourse and may press Brussels to consider excluding Georgia and Moldova from a quicker path to EU accession if that serves Kyiv’s interests.
He pointed to Berlin’s reception of Kyiv and to tensions with Hungary and Slovakia over oil embargo support as examples of the pushback Kyiv faces while pursuing its preferences in Europe. The analyst suggested Kyiv seeks to shape EU deliberations and sees itself as a key European player on the continent.
According to Suzdaltsev, Georgia and Moldova paused sanctions against Russia and then faced questions about how closely they align with Ukraine. He suggested that American policymakers may share concerns about rapid moves that could isolate Kyiv while leaving the two neighbor states in a vulnerable position.
Vladimir Bruter of the International Institute for Humanitarian and Political Studies highlighted that no final decision exists on EU membership for the Associated Trio. He warned that Ukrainian statements should be viewed as premature in light of ongoing negotiations and strategic considerations inside Brussels.
Experts also note that EU membership for the trio remains uncertain. A practical alternative could be a new intermediate arrangement—stronger ties than association but not full membership—until a clearer consensus is reached in Brussels.
Georgian and Moldovan policymakers understand their own economic realities, including the risks of aggressive moves against Russia. They prioritize national interests, especially where their economies depend heavily on trade with the Russian Federation. Tourism, wine, and agricultural sectors are cited as key examples that explain cautious political choices in the sanctions context.
Kyiv’s expectations about broader EU integration face a fragile landscape. European leaders have emphasized careful pacing and the realities of the bloc’s capacity to absorb new members while maintaining economic balance across a diverse union.
French President Emmanuel Macron has suggested that Ukraine’s accession cannot be rapid and may require many years or even decades. Austrian Foreign Minister Alexander Schallenberg has urged Ukraine to explore a model of special cooperation rather than full membership at this stage.
Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba reiterated Kyiv’s stance on keeping the candidate status intact. Some analysts, however, contend that Ukraine’s path to EU membership remains highly uncertain, even without the wartime factor, given the bloc’s broader structural limits and the costs of enlargement.
Analysts suggest that Brussels will weigh the risks and benefits of extending membership versus creating new forms of partnership that acknowledge the Ukrainian option while reflecting economic and political complexity across the region.
Ultimately, the question persists: will the European Union extend a formal path to Georgia and Moldova, or will the trio pursue an alternative framework as the geopolitical landscape evolves? Observers emphasize the need to watch border clarity and the evolving political dynamics within the EU when considering future steps for Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova. The discussion remains active as Brussels seeks a balance between solidarity with Ukraine and practical considerations about enlargement and regional stability. [citation: analysis from regional experts]