Reflections from URC 2026: Ukraine’s Reconstruction Has Become Wartime Resilience

On June 25–26, 2026, Poland hosted the fifth Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC) in its port city of Gdańsk. The flagship event that began in Lugano, Switzerland, in 2022 as a war recovery conference has now turned into a platform that supports Ukraine’s strategic industries and infrastructure and embeds Ukraine deeper into European security architecture. The most noticeable outcome of this year’s conference is a foreseeable shift toward wartime resilience. This shift matters, as recovery is no longer about the day after the war. It is about keeping the economy afloat, operating and rebuilding energy systems that are actively under attack, developing defense capabilities, protecting critical infrastructure, and financing municipalities.

During the conference, former Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko announced 160 deals worth €10 billion. However, this amount should not be read as pure cash on the table. These are primarily loans, guarantees, investments, and grants that still require disciplined implementation and reporting. The needs are enormous: According to the latest Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA5) conducted by Ukrainian government, the World Bank, the European Commission, and United Nations, Ukraine will require an estimated $588 billion for recovery projects and modern reconstruction. Hence, what was pledged in Gdańsk is not enough to close Ukraine’s reconstruction gap—or even meet its annual financing needs—but it marks a turning point: a shift from political will to concrete projects and from conference diplomacy to an operational architecture for wartime resilience. Now all that remains is to see whether agreements will be disbursed, insured, contracted and implemented on the ground.

Ukraine has managed to maintain its strategic advantage of being a strong ally for the European Union and a wider circle of international partners, which is critical for the ability to withstand Russia during and after the war, both for Ukraine and Europe. Supporting Ukraine’s resilience now can only become a full-scale reconstruction effort if current programs are implemented in a transparent and effective way. This moment is about translating political pledges into implementation mechanisms that would ultimately shape the final form and size of the future reconstruction.

URC’s Main Achievements

The current URC 2026 became distinct from its predecessors since it connected the themes of recovery with Ukraine’s security and wartime reconstruction. The resilience ecosystem took clear shape, with projects in the areas of power generation, municipal services, logistics, defense, dual-use technologies, and domestic industrial capacity. The announced support programs and agreements are practical, actionable, and have strong implementation potential rather than constituting a mere wish list of projects.

The projects that came out of this year’s conference can serve two critical purposes: (1) ensuring resilience during the war and (2) landscaping the path for the entry of bigger private sector backed capital into Ukraine. Bankability and scalability of projects featured more prominently in Gdańsk than in previous conferences.

Financial Support for Ukraine’s Stability

The European Union’s support remains the strongest of all international partners, focusing on Ukraine’s economy, defense, and reconstruction efforts. Noticeably, the bloc sees a priority in underwriting Ukraine’s state capacity and ability to defend itself. The bridge is being built to connect Ukraine’s immediate needs, reconstruction efforts, and long-term EU accession agenda. The €90 billion Ukraine Support Loan (USL) is the evidence of that, designed to provide €30 billion in economic and budgetary support and €60 billion in defense assistance over the next two years. The first installment of €3.2 billion in budgetary support and €3.9 billion of defense funding have already been disbursed under the USL.

The European Union’s Ukraine Investment Framework (UIF) illustrates another important dimension—an aid delivery shift toward provisioning guarantees and blended finance tools. The current €1.1 billion commitment in Gdańsk under the UIF brings the current program size to €8.5 billion and is expected to mobilize up to €26 billion in investments. This commitment is important not due to its size, but due to its efforts at building investor confidence in the Ukrainian market during the war.

The same logic is applied by the European Flagship Fund for Ukraine with €220 million in initial capital. It is projected to attract up to €7 billion for infrastructure and industrial projects. This is one of the key advances in the recovery process—public money is being used to de-risk and attract private capital, making investments into Ukraine more disciplined and structured.

An additional layer of support in Gdańsk was provided by International Finance Institutions (IFIs). IFIs maintain a close link to players on the ground in Ukraine, and have the valuable ability to directly deploy capital to state-owned enterprises, municipalities and the private sector. Among the major IFI announcements were $3.39 billion linked to reforms via the Development Policy Operation agreement by the World Bank, the €500 million in investments and finance from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the European Investment Bank’s €470 million to finance housing and broader infrastructure along with an €80 million commitment to the European Flagship Fund.

The IFIs efforts to advance project pipelines and reform-linked financing also continued in Gdańsk. These institutions bring more than money: They offer strong technical expertise, world class project preparation standards, and long-term implementation discipline.

A note of caution: The figures pledged should not be confused with immediate expenditure in Ukraine. The ultimate value of this assistance will depend on Ukraine’s ability to translate these commitments into implemented projects and, over time, demonstrate successful outcomes that build confidence and catalyze future investment.

Energy Development as a Key Priority

Energy security has emerged as the clearest sectoral priority during the conference, as Ukraine’s power systems remain a strategic target of Russia’s attacks. This sector has arguably the strongest link between recovery and security, and is a pillar of Ukraine’s wartime economy. The energy agenda is focused on rebuilding a system that would be more effective and harder to destroy, and shifting toward distributed, investor-ready projects.

The following are among the main initiatives:

• The Renewable Acceleration and Market Development for Ukraine Programme (RAMP-UP), announced by the World Bank and the EBRD, has the same logic and focuses on the attraction of private investment into Ukraine’s renewable energy sector. The EBRD signed letters of intent at the URC with Germany and Norway for €45 million and €10 million respectively to support the program. According to the World Bank, RAMP-UP can support the development of around 1,000 megawatts (MW) of new power generation and battery storage facilities and can mobilize around €1.5 billion in private capital investments.
• The EBRD has also signed a €90 million loan to Ukrenergo (the main state-owned electricity transmission system operator in Ukraine) for the reconstruction of several substations, a €50 million loan for the GNG Group 189 MW wind project, and a €65 million loan for Notus Energy to build a 120 MW wind plant.
• State company Naftogas has agreed to begin work on financing mechanism of up to $300 million with the U.S. Export-Import Bank for direct lending to U.S. suppliers and contractors.
• Private energy company DTEK has signed a €900 million MOU with GE Vernova to build a 650 MW gas powered power generation plant with targeted commercial operation before 2032, and a $100 million deal with Octopus Energy (Project RISE) to build a 100-rooftop solar and battery storage project.
• EBRD, Amber Dragon Ukraine Infrastructure Fund I and Negen have signed a mandate letter for EBRD’s intention to provide long-term debt finance to Power One Phase II for a distributed power generation project with estimated cost of over for €90 million, adding nearly 170 MW across six sites.
• Just before URC 2026, at the G7 summit, Energoatom and Urenco signed a £210 million loan guarantee deal backed by the UK Export Finance to supply enriched uranium to Ukrainian nuclear power stations.

Defense, Security and Dual-Use Technology Gain Prominence

One of the most notable and important outcomes from Gdańsk was the increase in defense and dual-use projects for Ukraine’s reconstruction. This reflects a wartime reality, and Europe’s future security vision for the decades to come. Ukrainian defense projects are no longer seen as separate from recovery, but rather as one of its key elements. Ukraine must protect itself during and after the war, which will be no less important for attracting capital and Ukraine’s ability to rebuild itself long-term.

As an example, Ukraine received a €3.9 billion as the first disbursement of the €5.01 billion defense tranche under the USL. Also, the European Union announced a package of €343 million in grants and guarantees for defense and dual-use projects, further showing commitment to support development of Ukraine’s defense capabilities. The URC’s security and defense dimension covered air defense, intelligence coordination, unmanned technologies, protection of energy infrastructure, demining, and countering disinformation. These are not traditional reconstruction categories, and prove, once again, how far the process has moved from postwar recovery planning toward wartime resilience.

Defense production, energy security, and overall reconstruction are increasingly being shaped as part of the same strategic agenda. That doesn’t mean that recovery has become militarized—it just indicates the reality that Ukraine cannot rebuild schools, homes, factories, and power plants unless it can also protect these assets. In addition, the Gdańsk conference made it clear that Ukraine’s recovery and its ability to sustain itself are no longer only about Ukraine, but also concern European security and geopolitical challenges. Defense cooperation with Ukraine is increasingly becoming part of Europe’s security policy. Ukraine’s battlefield innovation and experience will become relevant to strategic matters far beyond the current war.

The Role of Subnational Governments and the Local Dimension

Attention to regions during the URC conference was significant, as ultimately, this is where reconstruction efforts have no choice but to succeed. Ukrainian municipalities have huge needs, but not always the strong capacity to implement projects. Hence, there is a strong need to ensure effective collaboration between central authorities, international partners, and Ukrainian regions, specifically in the context of public-private partnerships.

The URC announcements have a direct effect on Ukrainian regions and local recovery action. For instance, one of the main commitments announced was the €478 million package under UIF in grants and guarantees for municipal infrastructure and essential services. Ukrainians measure reconstruction progress through public services including the availability of heating, electricity, water, and internet.

In this regard, public-private-partnerships (PPP) can play important role as an implementation instrument for Ukraine’s recovery, applicable to all key sectors, at state and local levels. The PPP pipeline can be treated as one of the key project-delivery tools for Ukraine’s recovery, and as a de-risked and structured investment attraction mechanism. However, PPPs are not magic: They need thorough planning, strong implementation discipline, and capacity, as well as an effective and transparent regulatory environment. There was much discussion of PPPs at the conference, and more related activity now and after the war is likely.

Insurance is another important de-risking element for private investments in Ukraine. The role of private capital in Ukraine’s reconstruction cannot be underestimated. Since the 2023 URC in London, Ukraine and its partners have continuously declared that recovery needs cannot be covered by public funds alone. Hence, de-risking mechanisms have a paramount importance for the implementation of projects in Ukraine and the attraction of new investments. The agreement between the Development Finance Corporation and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) signed in Gdańsk established an insurance framework linked to the U.S.-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund and is intended to mobilize additional private investment alongside the fund’s projects. MIGA has issued $948 million in political-risk insurance for investments in Ukraine since 2022 and over $600 million in new guarantees. This result is small compared with Ukraine’s needs but is an achievement worth scaling up. The next URC in 2027 should focus more on presenting the deals that were able to reach financial close, obtain insurance, attract coinvestment, and effectively operate in Ukraine. The announcement of programs and platforms is important, but nothing gathers the attention of private investors like success cases.

Key Takeaways and the Road Ahead

The 2026 URC in Gdańsk has demonstrated a practical shift from general planning and broad commitments for Ukraine’s reconstruction to more practical projects, a focus on resilience, and overall European security. Unlike previous conferences, the 2026 URC has treated recovery, security, industrial policy, and European integration as part of the same agenda: resilience during the war. This architecture is dictated by real conditions on the ground and can be scaled up with the ongoing reconstruction efforts or remain limited and fragmented. Much will depend on Ukraine’s ability to convert these commitments into bankable projects: usable and protected assets wrapped in the EU-focused long-term agenda.

Ukraine is backed by significant EU economic and budgetary support, and its wartime investment landscape is mainly focused on energy, defense, and critical infrastructure. Ukraine has significant potential, but it does not yet have the resources required to undertake the scale of reconstruction ahead.

The next recovery phase should focus on a transparent and effective delivery of commitments rather than political announcements. Trust must be built between Ukraine and the international investor community, specifically with the private sector players. New dimensions and sectors must be added to the conference agenda and to Ukraine’s investment menu: issues and solutions related to human capital, SMEs, agri-processing, wider industrial and manufacturing scope, healthcare and rehabilitation, IT and tech—all should be included. Focus on science development, technologies of the future, and sustainable AI application for the reconstruction of Ukraine is also timely and critical.

The URC in Gdańsk has secured resilience potential, laid out new support programs based on the situation on the ground, and passed the implementation baton to Ukraine. The upcoming 2027 conference in Estonia will reveal the results of this cooperation, and hopefully more movement toward Ukraine’s deeper economic recovery.

Sergiy Tsivkach is an adjunct fellow (non-resident) for the Project on Prosperity and Development at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).