Secretary of State George Marshall, US Department of State, Public Domain

From The Hill, BRUCE STOKES AND THOMAS KLEINE-BROCKHOFF analyze what a Marshall Plan for Ukraine will look like.

It’s time for a Ukrainian Marshall Plan

Potential donors to reconstruction will meet in Berlin on Oct. 25. The last meeting in July failed to produce a plan. Ukraine cannot afford another failure.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has called for a “Marshall Plan” to rebuild war-ravaged Ukraine. The allusion is apt. The needed response to the devastation created by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is unprecedented in the post-World War II era. It will require a costly effort.

In many ways, organizing Ukrainian relief will be more difficult than the challenge that the Marshall Plan faced. That effort involved just one nation — the United States — funding the recovery of multiple war-torn countries. Rebuilding Ukraine will require corralling funds from multiple donors with just one recipient.

The necessary recovery funding will be massive. Preliminary estimates place the cost of reconstructing damaged Ukrainian infrastructure at more than $100 billion, the World Bank recently estimated $350 billion and Kyiv predicts overall recovery will cost $750 billion. These are daunting numbers. By comparison, the Marshall Plan cost $150 billion in today’s dollars.

This will require grants, loans and private investments from the United States, Europe, Canada, Japan, South Korea and Australia. Bitter experience funding rebuilding efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere suggests raising the necessary Ukraine funds from multiple donors and maintaining their engagement will be a daunting task.

For this reason, it is necessary for America and other donors, including the Ukrainian government itself, to agree now on principles, architecture, financing and accountability.

Glory to Ukraine!