The mining and steel company Metinvest continues to hope for support from its global partners amid the war, but recently, the European Union and the European Commission have taken numerous measures that cast doubt on whether it is worth investing in the Ukrainian steel industry at all.
The company’s CEO, Yuriy Ryzhenkov, expressed this view in an interview with the Financial Times.
As an example, he cited the quotas imposed on Ukrainian steel in the EU, even though Ukraine’s agreements with the EU—in particular the Association Agreement and other agreements signed in recent years—effectively provided for free access to the European market. Despite the fact that Ukraine has exported significantly less steel to the EU over the past few years than before, the corresponding Ukrainian quotas have been reduced by more than 50%.
“In my view, this is a very strange move. If you want to support the country, it’s better to allow its industry to operate and pay taxes. These funds will strengthen the country’s defense capabilities and economy. This is more effective than grants or preferential loans. I hope our officials, together with their European colleagues, will be able to review this situation and rectify it,” said Ryzhenkov.
According to him, a much better approach would be to consider how the Ukrainian economy—particularly the metallurgical sector—can become part of the broader European market and the European economy, thereby making it stronger rather than weaker. “I also believe that it is very important right now for people in Brussels to understand the conditions under which we are working. We are forced to operate amid constant disruptions in logistics and staff shortages. Many people have left the country. More than 8,500 of our employees have been drafted into the army. We have an unstable energy supply and very high energy costs,” the CEO noted.
He emphasized that it is, to some extent, unfair and incorrect to treat the Ukrainian steel industry on par with that of other countries supplying products to the EU. The situation in Ukraine requires a special approach, greater understanding, and, perhaps, certain tools that will allow us to survive now and return to investment and growth in the future.
When asked whether the company had assessed the total amount of losses, the CEO noted that a comprehensive assessment has not yet been conducted. “As I’ve already said, we are currently clearing debris and assessing damage to infrastructure and production facilities. And this is not the first time since the Russian invasion that our facilities have come under attack, so we will be able to provide a more accurate assessment once the war is over. Only then will it be possible to discuss the cost of recovery from the damage.”
Ryzhenkov noted that all of the company’s international projects are linked to Ukrainian production and Ukrainian resources, and there is hope that this will continue to be the case. “Currently, our rolling mills in Europe and the United Kingdom are operating autonomously. At the same time, we already have plans in place and are taking steps to restore vertical integration with Ukrainian enterprises and return to our previous model. In short, we remain very active. We consider Europe, as well as the Mediterranean and Black Sea regions, to be our main markets. We want to continue to be present in these markets and remain open to new opportunities,” Ryzhenkov concluded.
Metinvest is a vertically integrated group consisting of mining and metallurgical enterprises. Its enterprises are located in Ukraine—in the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Dnipropetrovsk regions—as well as in European countries. The holding’s main shareholders are the SCM Group (71.24%) and Smart Holding (23.76%). Metinvest Holding LLC is the management company of the Metinvest Group.
Source: https://metinvestholding.com
Ukraine is proposing that the European Union increase the existing duty-free export quota for Ukrainian bioethanol—currently set at 125,000 metric tons per year—to account for the volume of bioethanol that Ukraine imports from the EU as part of automotive gasoline, Minister of Agrarian Policy and Food Taras Vysotsky told reporters.
“We have calculated that Ukraine currently imports about 10,000 metric tons of bioethanol per month as part of gasoline… This proposal applies to the period of martial law, as the current security situation prevents Ukraine from blending gasoline with bio-components, so we have to import it,” the minister explained.
He noted that the requirement for a mandatory bioethanol content of at least 7% in A-92 and A-95 automotive gasoline took effect in Ukraine on July 1 of this year, while the quota of 125,000 metric tons was set last year, when gasoline was imported without any bioethanol content.
Vysotsky noted that the quota can be flexible: if, for example, 5,000 metric tons of bioethanol are imported in a given month, then an additional 5,000 metric tons of export quota becomes available; if 15,000 metric tons are imported in a given month, then 15,000 metric tons.
According to him, this could amount to an additional 120,000 metric tons of bioethanol over the course of a year.
In the opinion of the Minister of Agrarian Policy, this proposal from Ukraine is very likely to be accepted and implemented by European partners.
Bioethanol, EU, EXPORTS, QUOTA, UKRAINE
The European Union’s promises regarding Ukraine’s accession through the standard procedure are not true, Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama said in an interview with the German newspaper *Welt am Sonntag*.
“What they are promising her (Ukraine) is a lie,” Rama emphasized, adding that under the standard enlargement rules and with all existing criteria met, the country will definitely not be admitted into the bloc, and “everyone knows this.”
At the same time, the Albanian prime minister cautioned Brussels against making concessions in the process solely for geopolitical reasons. Instead, he proposed granting full membership only based on the results of specific tasks and achievements (a results-oriented process).
At the same time, the Albanian prime minister called for accelerating his country’s European integration. Albania applied for EU membership back in 2009 and has held candidate country status since 2014.
The European Union did not support Ukraine’s request for early disbursement of additional funding in 2026 and emphasized that the allocation of funds will depend directly on Kyiv’s implementation of agreed-upon reforms, according to the Financial Times, citing a letter from European Commissioners Valdis Dombrovskis and Marta Kos to Verkhovna Rada Chairman Ruslan Stefanchuk.
This summer, Ukraine estimated its additional defense needs at approximately $27 billion and approached the European Commission with a proposal to advance a portion of the funds from the two-year €90 billion Ukraine Support Loan program (€60 billion earmarked for defense, €30 billion for direct budget support). According to the program’s terms, up to €45 billion is to be made available to Ukraine in 2026, with the remaining €45 billion to follow in 2027.
According to the FT, European Commissioners have made it clear that access to funding is contingent upon fulfilling an agreed-upon list of commitments. Specifically, this involves the elimination of VAT exemptions for small international parcels, the introduction of taxation rules for digital platforms, and proper financial monitoring of politically exposed persons (PEPs)—changes to which have raised concerns in Brussels as a deviation from the anti-corruption agenda. According to the publication’s assessment, meeting these requirements will pave the way for Kyiv to receive approximately 34 billion euros in support as early as 2026.
At the same time, the European Commission emphasized that the rejection of the request for an early advance payment does not mean a curtailment of financial assistance. On October 1, the parties announced that they had agreed on sources of funding for budgetary and defense needs through the end of 2026, noting that there is no unfunded financial gap for the current year.
In addition, on October 2, the European Commission transferred another tranche of 2.9 billion euros to Ukraine as part of the Ukraine Facility program. The total amount of aid to Kyiv from the EU and its member states since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion has reached 227.4 billion euros.
According to the Serbian business media outlet Parametar, Croatia is claiming property worth over $2.7 billion located in Montenegro that remained there following the breakup of Yugoslavia. And this is by no means limited to the well-known training sailing ship “Jadran.”
This was stated by Croatian Minister of Foreign and European Affairs Gordan Grlić Radman during a visit to Montenegro. Zagreb has documentation regarding property that ended up on Montenegrin territory and was sold or transferred to other owners after the breakup of Yugoslavia.
Among these, the minister specifically mentioned military ships, submarines, and a military hospital.
The “Jadran” has become the most well-known part of the dispute. The training sailing ship was built in the 1930s and was used by the Yugoslav Navy. The vessel is currently in Montenegro, while Croatia insists on its return.
But the property dispute is only part of a much broader list of Zagreb’s demands on Podgorica.
The Croatian Ministry of Foreign Affairs lists the following among the unresolved issues:
– the return of the “Jadran” and the settlement of other property claims;
– compensation for former Croatian prisoners of the Morin camp;
– the search for 14 people who are still considered missing in action following the war of the 1990s;
– the investigation and prosecution of war crimes;
– the return of property belonging to Croatian families in Montenegro and the conclusion of protracted court proceedings;
– the preservation of a memorial plaque at the site of the former Morin camp;
– renaming the swimming pool in Kotor named after Zoran Hopčević;
– resolving the maritime border between the two countries.
These issues take on particular significance in light of Montenegro’s EU accession negotiations.
Croatia is already using its status as an EU member state to block the closure of certain negotiation chapters. In September, a planned intergovernmental conference had to be postponed after Zagreb refused to agree to the closure of several chapters.
Currently, Croatia is blocking the closure of chapters related to transport policy, foreign policy and security, the judicial system and fundamental rights, as well as justice, freedom, and security.
Podgorica hopes to conclude negotiations and become the 28th member of the European Union in 2028. However, this date is not guaranteed: the consent of EU member states is required for progress and final accession.
At the same time, Croatia is currently the main source of bilateral demands on Montenegro, which directly affect the negotiation process. There is currently no comparable official set of claims from other EU member states.
This creates a rather interesting situation: the closer Montenegro gets to the EU, the greater the significance of long-standing disputes dating back to the breakup of Yugoslavia.
And Croatia’s property claims, totaling more than $2.7 billion, are now becoming not only a matter of relations between Zagreb and Podgorica but also a potential factor capable of influencing the timing of Montenegro’s accession to the European Union.
In the first quarter following the EU’s introduction of quotas on metal product shipments, Ukrainian metal exporters used 100% of their quarterly guaranteed quota for duty-free shipments to the EU of cold-rolled flat products made of unalloyed and alloyed steel, hollow sections, and other seamless pipes, according to a statement on the website of the “Ukrmetallurgprom” association.
According to the statement, as of September 30, 2026, the quotas in the following categories under the global (final) quotas in which Ukraine participates have been exhausted: metal-coated sheets (MFN subgroup—“Most-Favored-Nation treatment”), metal-coated sheets (FTA subgroup—“countries with a free trade agreement with the EU”), unalloyed and other alloyed steel bars and light sections (MFN subgroup—“most-favored-nation treatment”), stainless steel bars, billets, and small-section products (MFN subgroup – “most-favored-nation treatment”) and stainless steel bars, billets, and small-section products (FTA subgroup – “countries with a free trade agreement with the EU”).
Among competing countries, the guaranteed quota as of September 30 has been exhausted for the following categories: rebar – Turkey; wire rod of non-alloy and alloy steel – Turkey; hollow sections – Turkey and Macedonia; seamless stainless steel pipes—India; cold-rolled bars and rods of unalloyed and alloyed steel—Switzerland; and unalloyed wire—Turkey.
As of September 29, 2026, the competitive quota has been exhausted for the following categories: hot-rolled flat products of unalloyed and alloyed steel, rebar, wire rod of unalloyed and alloyed steel, hollow sections, seamless stainless steel pipes, other seamless pipes, and non-alloy wire.
As previously reported, once the guaranteed and competitive quotas are exhausted, further shipments to the EU are subject to a 50% tariff. “Ukrmetallurgprom” criticized the EU’s decision to restrict shipments of Ukrainian steel products, which had been supplied to Europe duty-free for the first three years following Russia’s full-scale aggression. The association believes that Ukraine currently poses no threat to European producers, as the war initially caused the country’s steel production to plummet from 40 million metric tons to 7.5 million metric tons, and currently, nearly all steel plants are shut down due to shelling.
EU, EXPORTS, METALLURGY, QUOTA, UKRAINE
