A new political context is emerging in the discussion surrounding the use of frozen Russian assets. Political scientist Stanislav Zhelikhovsky explained to a journalist from UNN why Belgium is slowing down the EU's decision and how this could affect peace negotiations with Russia.
The EU aims to provide Ukraine with a reparations loan guaranteed by future payments from Russia, but Belgium warns of the risks. This issue is particularly acute because most of the assets are stored in Belgium. The political scientist says that the Kremlin's attention to this process is also a key factor.
If the European Union now creates a mechanism that automatically links Russia's assets to Ukraine, then such an option may be possible. But Belgium risks legal attacks from Russia. These could be lawsuits that would drag on for years if the assets are confiscated or put into circulation. This could, in fact, have legal consequences for this country.
Belgium also fears that the confiscation of Russian assets could undermine trust in its financial institutions. The country understands that such a step could affect investors and other states that hold funds in Euroclear. An additional risk is the possibility of information campaigns from Russia. Propaganda narratives could use the topic of confiscation for a long time, creating pressure on the Belgian leadership.
Belgium is afraid of looking like a confiscator, because not only Russian assets but also funds from various countries are located on its territory. This could undermine its authority and trust in Euroclear and have economic, legal, and financial consequences.
The issue also has an international dimension related to the prospects for a peaceful settlement. If assets are transferred to Ukraine outside the framework of negotiations, Russia may refuse dialogue. The political scientist emphasizes that Moscow could use this as a pretext for escalation or increased propaganda. In such a case, EU support for Ukraine could affect the dynamics of military actions.
Russia may simply refuse negotiations, and then Ukraine may receive these funds, but Moscow will continue hostilities. Plus – lawsuits, propaganda, and Belgium will suffer negative consequences for its reputation.
However, if these funds are not unfrozen, there may be alternatives to how Ukraine can be strengthened financially without harming a possible peace process. This involves creating additional funds and other financial instruments that will work both during the war and after its completion. The political scientist is convinced that Ukraine's partners will look for options that are acceptable to all member states. At the same time, the issue of reparations remains tied exclusively to Russia as the aggressor country.
These funds are a good idea because they are already in Europe's hands. We just need to find a mechanism that will allow them to be transferred to Ukraine, avoiding risks and taking into account the course of the negotiation process.
The political scientist also doubts that Belgium's position will change significantly in the near future. He emphasizes that the situation remains sensitive, as there are practically no similar precedents in modern international politics. Everything will depend on how the negotiations develop.
Supplement
EU leaders tried at a summit last month to agree on a plan to use 140 billion euros ($162 billion) of frozen Russian sovereign assets in Europe as a loan for Ukraine, but failed to secure support from Belgium, where a significant portion of the funds are held.
The European Commission, the EU's executive body, hopes to address Belgium's concerns in a draft legal proposal it will present this week on the use of frozen sovereign assets to support Ukraine in 2026 and 2027, EU officials said.