The planned creation of a Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine is currently in jeopardy due to significant budgetary difficulties. Multiple sources familiar with the matter indicate that the financial viability of the tribunal is being undermined by a critical concern: the anticipated disengagement of the United States from supporting Kyiv, particularly under a potential Trump administration.
European donor nations worry that they will be unable to cover the substantial operational costs without Washington’s backing. This complicates European fundraising efforts and forces an unwelcome discussion about which Ukraine-related projects to prioritize, as the financial and military assistance burden increasingly falls on their shoulders.
The establishment of the tribunal was bilaterally agreed upon by the Council of Europe and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in June. It is intended to complement the work of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which cannot prosecute the specific crime of “waging” a war (the crime of aggression).
The Council of Europe has presented a draft budget outlining estimated annual operational costs of approximately €75 million. Additional funds will be needed for premises and security, as the tribunal is slated to be hosted by The Netherlands. The European Union is reportedly expected to contribute €10 million per year.
However, the major European G7 countries-France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom-who are key donors to the Council of Europe, are not yet actively engaging in the annual funding of the tribunal, according to multiple sources.
The primary anxiety among donors stems from the fear of a continuing US policy of disengagement from multilateral institutions. With fewer funds likely to flow from Washington towards Ukraine, the implementation of the tribunal itself is considered to be at risk.
The tribunal requires a minimum number of participating countries to begin work. While the Council of Europe has 46 member states, any nation can join. Experts emphasize that the tribunal needs not just a minimum quantity of participants (which is typically 16), but also countries with significant relevance and influence in international relations.
The Council of Europe has declined to comment on the financial negotiations, stating only that “Talks with member states are ongoing.” The delay in securing firm financial commitments has led to serious private discussions about the tribunal’s future, potentially stalling a crucial step towards individual accountability for the aggression against Ukraine.
