“We will pay for it forever.” This sentence hides, or not so much, the refusal of the Belgian government to use of frozen Russian funds to help Ukraine. It is the only Member State to oppose it while the European Commission does the calculation not only to convince the executive of Bart de Wever, but also for the peace of mind of the rest of the partners. Brussels is looking for the ideal formula to take probably the most difficult and at the same time the most important step to put pressure on Putin at a key moment in the peace negotiations in Ukraine.
What did Von der Leyen present? Bobbin lace is not easy. First, the goal is cover 90,000 million euros of support to Ukraine for the years 2026 and 2027. Initially, the proposed figure was 140 billion, but expectations were lowered to appease the Belgian “no”. Russian assets are the Chinese in place of the EU and the system – called reparations loan – would involve the use of these frozen assets, covering all the institutions which currently hold them, through the announced mechanism; The entities would therefore transfer them to the tool proposed by the European Commission. Once there, the money would go to Ukraine and kyiv would have to return the money. once Russia pays reparationsexplained the head of the Community Executive, who proposed an alternative to this model: option b would attempt to directly generate community debt.
Another nuance is that the route of Russian assets could be approved on December 18 at the leaders’ summit by qualified majorityperhaps with the idea of avoiding De Wever’s refusal. The objective is to provide kyiv with economic and military support, always within the EU or Ukraine itself; Only in cases of urgent needs is it possible to resort to third countries.
So what is happening with Belgium? This is the Member State more exposed to banking risks due to hosting the largest amount (through the Euroclear entity, approximately 62% of the total); France also has a percentage of it and another good portion is in the UK, which is not a member of the EU. Thus, the Commission promised a series of safeguards so that the partners “protect” each other during the sale of Russian assets. “We have created a very strong solidarity mechanism in which, ultimately, the Union can intervene because we want to guarantee, for all our Member Statesbut also specifically for Belgium, one thing is certain: we will share the burden fairly,” concluded the German.
This does not convince the government of Bart de Wever. It is almost a strategic question that he raises: he considers it “an illusion” to think that Russia will lose the war and voluntarily return the means, as he explained this week in an interview: “Russia will never lose this war. Moreover, it is not even desirable for a country with nuclear weapons to lose a war. and becomes completely unstable. This does not suit us either,” he declared, remaining impassive in the face of pressure, for example from Germany. Chancellor Friedrich Merz went to Brussels this Friday to try to convince him in the company of von der Leyen.
Likewise, the Belgian Prime Minister sees it as a fairly complex national element. “This could involve counter-seizures of Belgian factories in Russia, prosecution in Russian courts and similar risks for other EU countries,” he warned. And it is clear, at the same time, that this formula, even if it seems very categorical, would not even tickle Vladimir Putin. “THE confiscation of assets should only be considered after the end of the warand only from the state that lost it, but, in his opinion, Russia will not be that state,” he said.
Russia will never lose this war. Moreover, it is not even desirable for a country with nuclear weapons to lose a war.
Community sources explained that Russia has legal obligation to pay reparations for the invasion of Ukraine and that it would be the EU which would grant a loan of these amounts into the hands of kyiv. The EU would finance this loan by borrowing cash balances associated with Russian assets tied up in financial institutions, without touching Russia’s claims on these institutions. Before the war, the Central Securities Depository (CSD), the sources added, and other institutions held bonds and other securities on behalf of the Central Bank of Russia; When these securities matured, they were converted into cash which, due to sanctions, could not be transferred to Russia and thus accumulated in these institutions.
Right away, total Russian sovereign assets tied up in the EU amount to 210 billion euros (185 billion in CSD and 25 billion in other institutions), they expressed. Of this amount that is in the CSD, 45 billion must be kept as a reserve to cover ongoing loans, so there would be up to 165 billion available for new loans. The sources also clarified that the guarantees of the Member States will incorporate a liquidity mechanism which, once activated, will allow the country in question to contribute money to the EU budget or for the EU itself to grant it a loan and in this way the money will remain available in the CSD.
On the other hand, the experts consulted by 20 minutes They understand that the dynamic is new for the EU, even if there are precedents in the case of the United States, for example with Afghanistan, and they do not consider it appropriate that the decision can be approved by qualified majority; No one can be unhappy with what is being done in this regard, they warn. The Union seeks, they add, set a precedent that can be a masterstroke or a failure. These funds exist, they can be used, but the sensitive side is whether Russia, when the time comes, will take charge of the reparations.
The second path, besides freezing Russian assets, involves EU debt, “which essentially involves raising capital on capital markets and using the EU budget as collateral For this, and deliver this capital in the form of a loan to Ukraine”, they explained from Brussels. This, which has already been done with the recovery fund after the pandemic, is a model that many partners continue without wanting to reproduce. The one who does the calculation here is Von der Leyen, but everything involves convincing Belgium and, above all, completely tightening Putin’s siege because, they repeat, he is the only one responsible for the war and he is the one who must pay for it.
About The Author
