“I want a maximum of legal certainty. I want solidarity and I want transparency on the situation in the other countries”, insisted Belgian Prime Minister, Bart De Wever, on Thursday 2 October, the day after the informal summit of European leaders, which briefly raised the issue of frozen Russian public assets.
Speaking on the sidelines of the European Political Community (EPC) meeting in Copenhagen, Mr De Wever commented on a new European Commission proposal to use the cash balances generated by the Russian fixed assets held by Euroclear in Belgium to support the Ukrainian war effort (see EUROPE 13720/4). An interest-free ‘repair loan’ of €140 billion could be made available to the country. It should then be repaid to the EU via the war reparations that Russia will have to pay to Ukraine, once a peace agreement has been sealed.
No “free money”. While the institution gave assurances that the assets themselves would not be touched, Mr De Wever warned against an “extremely risky” legal precedent and pointed out that, under international law, the EU had no competence to “rule on the sovereign money of another country”.
Visibly well prepared before the international press, the Belgian Prime Minister gave a long presentation on the outstanding issues. He acknowledged that, if Europe found itself alone on the international stage to support Ukraine, it would necessarily need more money. However, he pointed out that there was no such thing as “free money” and that recovering the Russian Central Bank’s frozen assets did indeed come at a price.
Demand for transparency from other European countries. The “weight on Belgium’s shoulders” is recognised by other European leaders and the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, who argues the need to pool risks between Member States.
Mr De Wever questioned the other European leaders on the issue and asked for “a signature” from them. “Who is going to embark on that boat with me?”, he asked.
He also called on other European countries to demonstrate transparency, given that “Euroclear is the only financial institution to transfer income from Russian assets to Ukraine”.
“There are others in the ‘Coalition of the Willing’. There are even others around the European table who also hold Russian assets”, he stated, mentioning the figure of 160 billion in Russian money said to be located outside Belgium.
A possible decision at the next European Council. Since the discussions ended quickly the day before, the Prime Minister does not yet seem to have received any concrete answers to his questions. However, he has made it clear that he will not oppose the Commission’s plan if he quickly receives sufficient guarantees.
Several EU leaders, including German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, have publicly stated their willingness to move discussions forward and to examine the Commission’s proposal (see EUROPE 13721/2). “In three weeks’ time, at the next European Council, a concrete decision will very probably be taken on this subject”, commented the Chancellor after the meeting.
In the same vein, the French President, Emmanuel Macron, stated that the principle had been accepted and that the next step was to “define the modalities”.
The previous day, in a joint statement, the finance ministers of the G7 countries recommended “using, in a coordinated way, the full value of the RSAs immobilised in (their) jurisdictions” (https://aeur.eu/f/iqd ).
New procedure for renewing sanctions. A European diplomat present at the Copenhagen summits also spoke of the need to review the procedure for renewing European sanctions against Russia, so that they are only lifted once Russia has paid reparations to Ukraine. Only then will Ukraine be able to reimburse the EU, which in turn will be able to reimburse Euroclear, in order to honour the Russian debt.
The renewal of sanctions could thus be voted on by a qualified majority of Member States, rather than unanimously as is currently the case. Not least in order to deal with a potential Hungarian veto. According to the same diplomat, a second option would be to unanimously extend the duration of the asset freeze. (Original version in French by Pauline Denys)