Ukraine finds itself in a critical situation. Both from a military and financial point of view.
The suspension of American aid decreed by Donald Trump for next year, alongside increasing pressure on Volodymyr Zelensky to accept the peace agreement favorable to the Kremlin, forces Europe to continue supporting the Ukrainian war effort.
One possible solution to this stagnation in financial aid would have been a “reparation loan” financed with the balances of Russian assets tied up in the EU.
A formula that has been talked about for some time within the European Commission, but which carries enormous risks, given that Vladimir Putin considers it a little less than belli case.
This solution, which enjoys majority support with the exception of Belgium, reluctant Italy and hesitant France, is not only “the most financially viable and politically realistic”, according to the Commission, but also takes into account Ukraine’s “right to receive compensation for the damage caused by the aggression”.
But the heads of state and government of the 27 meeting this Thursday at a momentous summit marked by uncertainty They failed to reach an agreement.
After more than fifteen hours of negotiations which lasted until dawn, European leaders did not dare contradict the Belgian Prime Minister, Bart Weverwho fears reprisals from the Kremlin for the “confiscation” of the assets of the Central Bank of Russia.
Because most of this money (185 billion out of a total of 210 billion) is deposited with Euroclear, a financial company based in Brussels.
Before this meeting, Zelensky met in Brussels with the Belgian Prime Minister to try to overcome his veto on the use of frozen Russian assets.
Belgium’s fears are understandable, as are the doubts of countries which understand that confiscation could have unpredictable consequences.
But meeting Ukraine’s military and economic needs is an inevitable and imperative necessity.. And it will always be preferable to do it with Russian funds rather than through a joint issue of debt of several billion euros at the expense of the community budget.
But this is precisely the compromise solution found yesterday.
The heads of state and government of the Twenty-Seven agreed to grant kyiv a loan of 90 billion euros for the next two years, which will be financed by a joint issue of European debt using the EU budget as guarantee.
The issuance of Eurobonds was the Commission’s “plan B”. A “plan B” which has been rejected several times by Germany and the Nordic countries, the most ardent defenders of Ukraine within the EU, because it increases the debt.
The loan borne by European taxpayers is therefore a lesser evil. Because Ukraine represents the first front on which the survival of the rules-based international order is resolved.
And because the United States has joined the faction of imperial powers that seek to divide the world into spheres of influence and impose their will by force, as the recently released National Security Strategy has proven.
The isolationist turn in American foreign policy and its hostility towards its traditional allies sealed in this document certify the abandonment of Europe. And faced with this Trumpian shock doctrine, The European Union must take responsibility for its own security. And it starts in Ukraine.
The destinies of Europeans are linked to those of Ukrainians: if we let kyiv fall, and therefore the aggressorthe dismantling of international law will have been established.
It is in this reasoning that lies the pedagogy that European leaders should promote to convince those who wrongly consider that this war is foreign to them.
Because Ukraine needs Europe, but more.
It is Zelensky’s men who act as a barrier to contain Russian expansionism. And if they protect Europe, it is only fair that Europe contributes to supporting its resistance, by providing it with the security guarantees it needs.
This is a decisive moment for Ukrainewho without this credit will most likely lose the war. The loan will allow Zelensky to avoid the capitulation to which Trump wants to force him.
The EU must guarantee its independence and the defense of its own interests. And prove the White House braggarts wrong when he calls her “weak” and confused.
About The Author
