With an ultimatum for the issuance of a eurobond, the European Commission responds to countries opposing the seizure of frozen Russian assets.
The Greek people are witnessing the ultimate deception, seeing how eager Europeans are to financially support Ukraine — a country that is not even a member of the European Union or the eurozone — while during Greece’s debt crisis, Greeks stood in line for a plate of food or a bag of potatoes.
When Greece was on the brink of collapse, a eurobond was considered “unthinkable,” “immoral,” and “contrary to the Treaties.”
At that time, the answer was austerity, bailouts, and soup kitchens.
Today, for the sake of Ukraine, the European Commission is promoting exactly the tool it once denied its own citizens.
Open your wallets
According to Politico, the EU is increasing pressure on member governments reluctant to fund Ukraine through frozen Russian assets, warning that if they fail to make Russia pay the bill, they themselves will have to foot it.
That’s because the alternative plan is joint borrowing through eurobonds.
Governments traditionally opposed to large-scale spending — such as Germany and the Netherlands, the so-called “frugals” — detest the idea of saddling taxpayers with even more debt.
Meanwhile, the more spendthrift countries — especially France and Italy — are already over-indebted and unable to shoulder additional burdens.
But that is precisely the point.
EU officials are betting that Belgium — which hosts almost all of the frozen assets and has voiced concerns about the legality of seizing them — along with other countries that have expressed more discreet reservations, will be persuaded to support the plan when faced with the alternative of joint borrowing, a concept long considered toxic.
“The lack of fiscal discipline [in some EU countries] is so large that I don’t believe eurobonds will be accepted, at least not by the frugals, in the next 10 years,”
said Karel Lannoo, from the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels.
“That’s why using the frozen Russian assets seems the only option on the table. €140 billion is a huge amount — we have to use it. We must show that we’re not afraid.”
European governments and the European Central Bank have gradually begun accepting the idea of using seized Russian assets to fund Ukraine’s €140 billion financing needs.
Initially, they were cautious, viewing the use of another nation’s frozen funds as legally and morally questionable.
However, Ukraine’s urgent needs and Washington’s uncertain stance have shifted attention toward this solution.
At last week’s European Council Summit, however, Belgian leader Bart De Wever refused to back down, forcing the EU to postpone the decision until December at the earliest, as unanimous approval from all 27 member states is required.
“This is diplomacy”
The EU now faces a race against time on two fronts.
First, Ukraine is expected to run out of money by the end of March 2026.
Second, decision-making may become even harder as Hungary seeks to ally with Czechia and Slovakia, forming a “Ukraine-skeptic” bloc.
The feeling is that it’s now or never.
That means Commission officials are walking a fine line to push the plan through, according to three European diplomats.
“This is diplomacy,” said one of them, who spoke anonymously due to the sensitivity of the talks.
“You offer something they don’t want to do — so that they’ll accept the lesser evil.”
A second diplomat was equally dismissive of Plan B:
“The idea that eurobonds are seriously on the table is simply ridiculous,” he said.
Although De Wever told other leaders at the recent summit that the Commission had underestimated the legal complexity of using Russian assets and the potential risks for Belgium, Brussels does not believe he will continue resisting after December, when leaders meet again.
“The loan backed by Russian assets will happen,” said a senior European official.
“It’s not a question of if — but when.”
The need to bolster support
Many European countries have long opposed eurobonds, arguing that they should not have to shoulder the debts of governments that fail to manage their finances.
The COVID-19 pandemic, however, weakened that resistance when EU governments agreed to a joint borrowing scheme to fund the €800 billion Recovery Fund.
Since then, Brussels has continued to mutualize EU debt for various initiatives — most recently to help member states increase defense spending to bolster Europe’s security against Russia.
Still, national capitals remain broadly opposed to expanding this model further.
There is also a third option: the EU could launch a €25 billion “treasure hunt” to locate Russian assets hidden in other member states.
However, this would likely take more time than Ukraine has — and could send the message that Europe is easing pressure on Moscow.
“Support for Ukraine and pressure on Russia are ultimately what can bring Putin to the negotiating table — and that’s why it’s so important for European countries to step up their efforts,”
said Swedish Minister for European Affairs Jessica Rosencrantz after the European Council meeting on Thursday, October 23, 2025.
Shared risk
The overwhelming majority of frozen Russian assets are held by the Euroclear financial depository in Belgium, leaving the country exposed to significant legal and financial risks.
“The Commission has been holding intensive discussions with the Belgian authorities on the issue and is ready to provide further clarification and assurances where necessary,”
said a Commission spokesperson.
“Every proposal will be based on the principle of collective risk-sharing. While we see no evidence that the Commission’s initial approach would create new risks, we fully agree that any risk stemming from the final proposal must be shared collectively by all member states — and not borne by one alone.”
The Commission plays down the risks for Belgium, stressing that the €140 billion would only be returned to Russia if the Kremlin ends the war and pays reparations to Ukraine.
That scenario is considered so unlikely that, in practical terms, the money is not expected to ever be repaid.
Nevertheless, Belgium fears that Moscow could unleash a “army of lawyers” to reclaim its funds — especially since the two countries signed a bilateral investment treaty back in 1989.
www.bankingnews.gr
When Greece was on the brink of collapse, a eurobond was considered “unthinkable,” “immoral,” and “contrary to the Treaties.”
At that time, the answer was austerity, bailouts, and soup kitchens.
Today, for the sake of Ukraine, the European Commission is promoting exactly the tool it once denied its own citizens.
Open your wallets
According to Politico, the EU is increasing pressure on member governments reluctant to fund Ukraine through frozen Russian assets, warning that if they fail to make Russia pay the bill, they themselves will have to foot it.
That’s because the alternative plan is joint borrowing through eurobonds.
Governments traditionally opposed to large-scale spending — such as Germany and the Netherlands, the so-called “frugals” — detest the idea of saddling taxpayers with even more debt.
Meanwhile, the more spendthrift countries — especially France and Italy — are already over-indebted and unable to shoulder additional burdens.
But that is precisely the point.
EU officials are betting that Belgium — which hosts almost all of the frozen assets and has voiced concerns about the legality of seizing them — along with other countries that have expressed more discreet reservations, will be persuaded to support the plan when faced with the alternative of joint borrowing, a concept long considered toxic.
“The lack of fiscal discipline [in some EU countries] is so large that I don’t believe eurobonds will be accepted, at least not by the frugals, in the next 10 years,”
said Karel Lannoo, from the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels.
“That’s why using the frozen Russian assets seems the only option on the table. €140 billion is a huge amount — we have to use it. We must show that we’re not afraid.”
European governments and the European Central Bank have gradually begun accepting the idea of using seized Russian assets to fund Ukraine’s €140 billion financing needs.
Initially, they were cautious, viewing the use of another nation’s frozen funds as legally and morally questionable.
However, Ukraine’s urgent needs and Washington’s uncertain stance have shifted attention toward this solution.
At last week’s European Council Summit, however, Belgian leader Bart De Wever refused to back down, forcing the EU to postpone the decision until December at the earliest, as unanimous approval from all 27 member states is required.
“This is diplomacy”
The EU now faces a race against time on two fronts.
First, Ukraine is expected to run out of money by the end of March 2026.
Second, decision-making may become even harder as Hungary seeks to ally with Czechia and Slovakia, forming a “Ukraine-skeptic” bloc.
The feeling is that it’s now or never.
That means Commission officials are walking a fine line to push the plan through, according to three European diplomats.
“This is diplomacy,” said one of them, who spoke anonymously due to the sensitivity of the talks.
“You offer something they don’t want to do — so that they’ll accept the lesser evil.”
A second diplomat was equally dismissive of Plan B:
“The idea that eurobonds are seriously on the table is simply ridiculous,” he said.
Although De Wever told other leaders at the recent summit that the Commission had underestimated the legal complexity of using Russian assets and the potential risks for Belgium, Brussels does not believe he will continue resisting after December, when leaders meet again.
“The loan backed by Russian assets will happen,” said a senior European official.
“It’s not a question of if — but when.”
The need to bolster support
Many European countries have long opposed eurobonds, arguing that they should not have to shoulder the debts of governments that fail to manage their finances.
The COVID-19 pandemic, however, weakened that resistance when EU governments agreed to a joint borrowing scheme to fund the €800 billion Recovery Fund.
Since then, Brussels has continued to mutualize EU debt for various initiatives — most recently to help member states increase defense spending to bolster Europe’s security against Russia.
Still, national capitals remain broadly opposed to expanding this model further.
There is also a third option: the EU could launch a €25 billion “treasure hunt” to locate Russian assets hidden in other member states.
However, this would likely take more time than Ukraine has — and could send the message that Europe is easing pressure on Moscow.
“Support for Ukraine and pressure on Russia are ultimately what can bring Putin to the negotiating table — and that’s why it’s so important for European countries to step up their efforts,”
said Swedish Minister for European Affairs Jessica Rosencrantz after the European Council meeting on Thursday, October 23, 2025.
Shared risk
The overwhelming majority of frozen Russian assets are held by the Euroclear financial depository in Belgium, leaving the country exposed to significant legal and financial risks.
“The Commission has been holding intensive discussions with the Belgian authorities on the issue and is ready to provide further clarification and assurances where necessary,”
said a Commission spokesperson.
“Every proposal will be based on the principle of collective risk-sharing. While we see no evidence that the Commission’s initial approach would create new risks, we fully agree that any risk stemming from the final proposal must be shared collectively by all member states — and not borne by one alone.”
The Commission plays down the risks for Belgium, stressing that the €140 billion would only be returned to Russia if the Kremlin ends the war and pays reparations to Ukraine.
That scenario is considered so unlikely that, in practical terms, the money is not expected to ever be repaid.
Nevertheless, Belgium fears that Moscow could unleash a “army of lawyers” to reclaim its funds — especially since the two countries signed a bilateral investment treaty back in 1989.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών