🔗 Share this article Moscow Responds at the EU's Scheme to Loan Immobilized Russian Cash to Ukraine Kyiv remains depleting its financial resources to maintain its military and economy afloat, after nearly four years of the ongoing invasion by Moscow. From the EU's perspective, the answer to filling Kyiv's financial shortfall of €135.7bn for the coming 24 months lies in Moscow's immobilized funds held by Belgian bank Euroclear, and European Union officials hope to give it the green light at their EU leaders' conference next week. Authorities in Russia state the EU plan would be an illegal seizure, and Russia's central bank stated on Friday it was suing Euroclear in a Moscow court prior to a conclusive plan is made. 'Only Fair' to Use Moscow's Funds, Say European and Ukrainian Officials Overall, Russia has about €210bn of its assets immobilized in the EU, and €185bn of that is held by Euroclear. The EU and Ukraine argue that money should be used to reconstruct what Russia has devastated: The European Commission terms it a "loan for reparations" and has proposed a plan to prop up Ukraine's economy valued at €90bn. "It is appropriate that Russia's frozen assets should be used to rebuild what Russia has devastated – and that money then becomes ours," remarks Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz argues the assets will "help Ukraine to protect itself effectively against future Russian attacks". Moscow's lawsuit was foreseen in Brussels. But it is not only Moscow that is concerned. Belgium is anxious it will be saddled with an massive bill if it all goes wrong, and Euroclear chief executive Valérie Urbain argues using the assets could "destabilise the international financial system". Euroclear also has an roughly €16-17bn frozen in Russia. The leader of Belgium Bart de Wever has set the EU a series of "pragmatic, fair, and legitimate conditions" before he will accept the reparations plan, and he has refused to rule out legal action if it "carries significant risks" for his country. What is the EU's Proposal? The EU is racing against time prior to next Thursday's summit to come up with a compromise that Belgium can accept. Previously the EU has held off accessing the frozen capital directly but for the past year has transferred the "windfall profits" from them to Ukraine. In 2024 that was €3.7bn. Juridically, using the profits is seen as less risky as Russia is subject to sanctions and the returns are not Moscow's sovereign assets. But global military support for Ukraine has declined sharply in 2025, and Europe has found it difficult to make up the shortfall caused by the US decision to largely cease funding Ukraine under President Donald Trump. There are currently two EU plans aimed at providing Ukraine with €90bn, to cover a majority of its budgetary necessities. One is to borrow the funds on financial markets, guaranteed by the EU budget as a surety. This is Belgium's first choice but it needs a agreement by all by EU leaders and that would be challenging when Budapest and Bratislava are against funding Ukraine's military. The alternative is providing a loan of Ukraine cash from the Russian assets, which were initially held in securities but have now mostly been converted into cash. That funding is owned by Euroclear deposited at the European Central Bank. The EU's executive acknowledges Belgium has justified fears and says it is assured it has addressed them. The plan is for Belgium to be shielded with a insurance covering all the €210bn of Russian assets in the EU. If Euroclear incur losses of its own assets in Russia, the loss would be compensated from assets belonging to Russia's own clearing house which are in the EU. If Russia took legal action against Belgium itself, any ruling by a Russian court would not be enforced in the EU. In a significant move, EU ambassadors are poised to endorse on Friday to permanently block Russia's central bank assets held in Europe indefinitely. Heretofore they have had to vote by consensus every six months to renew the freeze, which could have meant a repeated risk to Belgium. The EU ambassadors are planning to use an emergency clause under Article 122 of the EU Treaties so the assets remain frozen as long as an "direct danger to the economic interests of the union" continues. Why Belgium is Not Yet Satisfied Belgium is adamant it remains a strong supporter of Ukraine, but sees regulatory pitfalls in the plan and fears being shouldering the consequences if things go wrong. A normally partisan political environment in this case has come together in support of Prime Minister Bart de Wever, who is facing pressure from fellow EU leaders. "Belgium has a modest-sized economy. Belgian GDP is approximately €565bn – consider if it would need to shoulder a €185bn bill," notes Veerle Colaert, expert in financial law at KU Leuven University. While the EU might be able to obtain adequate protections for the loan itself, Belgium worries about an additional danger of being vulnerable to extra legal costs. Prof Colaert also believes the requirement for Euroclear to grant a loan to the EU would breach EU banking regulations. "Banks need to adhere to stability regulations and shouldn't make one enormous loan. Now the EU is telling Euroclear to do just that. "Why do we have these financial regulations? It's because we want banks to be solvent. And if things go wrong it would be up to Belgium to save Euroclear. That's a further cause why it's so crucial for Belgium to obtain absolute assurances for Euroclear." The European Union In a Difficult Position from Every Direction Time is of the essence, state a group of EU member states including those neighboring Russia such as the Baltics, Finland and Poland. They maintain the proposal to use Russian funds is "the most financially feasible and practically possible solution". "This is a crucial test for us," says leading German conservative MP Norbert Röttgen. "Should we not succeed, I don't know what we'll do afterwards. That's why we have to succeed in a week's time". While Russia is adamant its money should not be touched, there are additional apprehensions among European figures that the US may want to use Russia's blocked funds differently, as part of its own peace initiative. Zelensky has said Ukraine is in discussions with Europe and the US on a recovery fund, but he is also aware the US has been talking to Russia about potential collaboration. A preliminary version of the US peace plan mentioned $100bn of Russia's blocked funds being used by the US for reconstruction, with the US {taking|receiving
Kyiv remains depleting its financial resources to maintain its military and economy afloat, after nearly four years of the ongoing invasion by Moscow. From the EU's perspective, the answer to filling Kyiv's financial shortfall of €135.7bn for the coming 24 months lies in Moscow's immobilized funds held by Belgian bank Euroclear, and European Union officials hope to give it the green light at their EU leaders' conference next week. Authorities in Russia state the EU plan would be an illegal seizure, and Russia's central bank stated on Friday it was suing Euroclear in a Moscow court prior to a conclusive plan is made. 'Only Fair' to Use Moscow's Funds, Say European and Ukrainian Officials Overall, Russia has about €210bn of its assets immobilized in the EU, and €185bn of that is held by Euroclear. The EU and Ukraine argue that money should be used to reconstruct what Russia has devastated: The European Commission terms it a "loan for reparations" and has proposed a plan to prop up Ukraine's economy valued at €90bn. "It is appropriate that Russia's frozen assets should be used to rebuild what Russia has devastated – and that money then becomes ours," remarks Ukraine's Volodymyr Zelensky. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz argues the assets will "help Ukraine to protect itself effectively against future Russian attacks". Moscow's lawsuit was foreseen in Brussels. But it is not only Moscow that is concerned. Belgium is anxious it will be saddled with an massive bill if it all goes wrong, and Euroclear chief executive Valérie Urbain argues using the assets could "destabilise the international financial system". Euroclear also has an roughly €16-17bn frozen in Russia. The leader of Belgium Bart de Wever has set the EU a series of "pragmatic, fair, and legitimate conditions" before he will accept the reparations plan, and he has refused to rule out legal action if it "carries significant risks" for his country. What is the EU's Proposal? The EU is racing against time prior to next Thursday's summit to come up with a compromise that Belgium can accept. Previously the EU has held off accessing the frozen capital directly but for the past year has transferred the "windfall profits" from them to Ukraine. In 2024 that was €3.7bn. Juridically, using the profits is seen as less risky as Russia is subject to sanctions and the returns are not Moscow's sovereign assets. But global military support for Ukraine has declined sharply in 2025, and Europe has found it difficult to make up the shortfall caused by the US decision to largely cease funding Ukraine under President Donald Trump. There are currently two EU plans aimed at providing Ukraine with €90bn, to cover a majority of its budgetary necessities. One is to borrow the funds on financial markets, guaranteed by the EU budget as a surety. This is Belgium's first choice but it needs a agreement by all by EU leaders and that would be challenging when Budapest and Bratislava are against funding Ukraine's military. The alternative is providing a loan of Ukraine cash from the Russian assets, which were initially held in securities but have now mostly been converted into cash. That funding is owned by Euroclear deposited at the European Central Bank. The EU's executive acknowledges Belgium has justified fears and says it is assured it has addressed them. The plan is for Belgium to be shielded with a insurance covering all the €210bn of Russian assets in the EU. If Euroclear incur losses of its own assets in Russia, the loss would be compensated from assets belonging to Russia's own clearing house which are in the EU. If Russia took legal action against Belgium itself, any ruling by a Russian court would not be enforced in the EU. In a significant move, EU ambassadors are poised to endorse on Friday to permanently block Russia's central bank assets held in Europe indefinitely. Heretofore they have had to vote by consensus every six months to renew the freeze, which could have meant a repeated risk to Belgium. The EU ambassadors are planning to use an emergency clause under Article 122 of the EU Treaties so the assets remain frozen as long as an "direct danger to the economic interests of the union" continues. Why Belgium is Not Yet Satisfied Belgium is adamant it remains a strong supporter of Ukraine, but sees regulatory pitfalls in the plan and fears being shouldering the consequences if things go wrong. A normally partisan political environment in this case has come together in support of Prime Minister Bart de Wever, who is facing pressure from fellow EU leaders. "Belgium has a modest-sized economy. Belgian GDP is approximately €565bn – consider if it would need to shoulder a €185bn bill," notes Veerle Colaert, expert in financial law at KU Leuven University. While the EU might be able to obtain adequate protections for the loan itself, Belgium worries about an additional danger of being vulnerable to extra legal costs. Prof Colaert also believes the requirement for Euroclear to grant a loan to the EU would breach EU banking regulations. "Banks need to adhere to stability regulations and shouldn't make one enormous loan. Now the EU is telling Euroclear to do just that. "Why do we have these financial regulations? It's because we want banks to be solvent. And if things go wrong it would be up to Belgium to save Euroclear. That's a further cause why it's so crucial for Belgium to obtain absolute assurances for Euroclear." The European Union In a Difficult Position from Every Direction Time is of the essence, state a group of EU member states including those neighboring Russia such as the Baltics, Finland and Poland. They maintain the proposal to use Russian funds is "the most financially feasible and practically possible solution". "This is a crucial test for us," says leading German conservative MP Norbert Röttgen. "Should we not succeed, I don't know what we'll do afterwards. That's why we have to succeed in a week's time". While Russia is adamant its money should not be touched, there are additional apprehensions among European figures that the US may want to use Russia's blocked funds differently, as part of its own peace initiative. Zelensky has said Ukraine is in discussions with Europe and the US on a recovery fund, but he is also aware the US has been talking to Russia about potential collaboration. A preliminary version of the US peace plan mentioned $100bn of Russia's blocked funds being used by the US for reconstruction, with the US {taking|receiving