On 5 February, steelworkers from Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary are set to protest in Ostrava. Trade unions and industry representatives argue that the sector is in an increasingly difficult position, and that new trade and regulatory decisions could further drive up production costs while intensifying competitive pressure from imports.
One of the main flashpoints is Ukraine’s decision to introduce “zero quotas” on the export of certain raw materials—effectively halting shipments of, among other things, scrap (including non-ferrous metal scrap), copper and timber to the European Union from 1 January 2026. According to the accounts cited in the Polish media, the move was made abruptly and without any transitional period, forcing some steelworks to seek alternative—usually more expensive—sources of supply at short notice.
From Kyiv’s perspective, the measure is framed as economically and strategically justified: limiting scrap exports is meant to support domestic processing, protect jobs and secure inputs needed for reconstruction and industrial production under wartime conditions. Media reporting has also cited arguments that part of the export stream may have been routed in ways that did not generate meaningful value added for Ukraine.
Polish trade unions, however, say the export ban deepens an already uneven playing field. European plants would have to purchase scrap at higher prices, while Ukrainian mills—according to the protesters—could gain access to cheaper feedstock domestically. Andrzej Karol, head of the National Steel Industry Section of NSZZ “Solidarność,” also pointed out that the industry had previously urged Poland’s energy minister, Miłosz Motyka, to introduce protective measures for the market, including in relation to the flow of Ukrainian steel into the EU.
A second source of concern is the prospect of EU–India trade arrangements and the scale of India’s ambitions in steelmaking. Commentaries cited in Polish outlets argue that India’s production capacity is set to keep rising—up to around 300 million tonnes annually by 2030—which, if paired with broad access to the European market, could increase pressure on EU producers. At the same time, the sector highlights the importance of protective mechanisms such as CBAM and the ongoing debate over how strictly they will be applied to trade partners.
It is worth noting, however, that assessments of any potential agreement’s impact are not uniform. EUROFER has reportedly voiced satisfaction with certain solutions that—according to media accounts—are meant to limit the risk of a sudden surge in imports, for example through the parameters of quotas. Poland’s Steel Industry and Trade Chamber has also stressed that the decisive factor will be the technical details: how limits are distributed and which product categories are covered—elements that will determine the real impact on specific market segments.
The planned protest in Ostrava is therefore presented not only as opposition to a single decision by Kyiv, but also as a broader alarm signal about the condition of European steelmaking: energy costs, import competition and the risk of political decisions that, in the protesters’ view, could hit heavy industry hard. Organisers stress that steel remains a critical material for many sectors—from construction to defence—and that stable supply chains matter far beyond the industry itself.
