Over four years ago, at the start of Russia’s full-scale aggression, while leading an EU agency, I deployed a team to Ukraine’s borders. The extraordinary solidarity shown by the people of Europe’s villages and towns was striking. Host countries provided Ukrainians with the right to stay and access the labour market, education, healthcare and social protection. Europe did itself proud.

However, today, I am increasingly concerned about the growing fatigue and intensifying discussions at EU and national levels about ending emergency arrangements. While the EU has extended temporary protection for Ukrainians under the Temporary Protection Directive (TPD) until March 2027, a slow and fragmented phase-out risks leaving the most vulnerable exposed. In some countries, policy changes have diminished protection and assistance. In addition, I see rising anti-Ukrainian sentiment, sometimes fuelled by populist politics.

The stakes could not be higher: without robust national frameworks and a coordinated European approach, countless Ukrainians may be forced into impossible choices.

Protection remains vital as war rages on

The war is not over: it has escalated. Over the past year, there has been an unprecedented number of civilian casualties. Russian attacks on civilian infrastructure, including homes, hospitals, schools and energy infrastructure, continue to undermine basic living conditions. It is clear that no region of Ukraine is safe.

Any consideration of the future of temporary protection must be anchored in the principle that international protection is withdrawn only when return is safe and durable, conditions which are manifestly not met today.

Some host countries have started phasing out temporary protection by switching to other existing residence statuses. I fear that many people may be left behind because they do not meet the strict criteria linked to work, resources or studies. Countries must avoid what the UN refugee agency describes as a “cliff edge” scenario. They must ensure that the most vulnerable, including children, single mothers, people with disabilities and older people, do not fall through the cracks.

Several countries have reduced assistance, especially regarding housing and social protection benefits. Such reductions, alongside barriers to accessing key services, can create undue pressures to return prematurely, a risk that is especially acute for vulnerable persons.

Certain countries, not bound by the TPD, exclude newly arrived individuals from temporary protection or reject their asylum claims when they come from regions of Ukraine they designate as ‘safe’. Such steps risk violating the principle of non-refoulement.

From emergency to stability

Avoiding a protection gap after March 2027 must be the priority. Long-term solutions are also needed to allow Ukrainians to plan their futures. Millions live in uncertainty which exacerbates trauma.

Host countries need to give Ukrainians the opportunity to rebuild their lives, regardless of whether their futures lie there or back in Ukraine. For many, integration is already a reality; they contribute to the labour market, and their children speak the local language and know no other home. Yet, too many live a life ‘on hold’. I think in particular of those children who are still outside national education systems.

While maintaining access to Ukrainian culture, participation in society can be supported by local language classes, education and reskilling, access to the labour market, secure housing and family reunification.

Now is the time for more solidarity, not less. Every person displaced by the war in Ukraine should be guaranteed a secure legal status and access to rights for as long as protection is needed. The choices made in Europe in the coming months will define the future of millions of Ukrainians. It is time to reengage the welcome and generosity that was so evident in 2022.

- Michael O'Flaherty