- The EU is exploring shifting frozen Russian sovereign assets (over $300 billion, mostly held by Euroclear) into higher-risk investments to generate more revenue for Ukraine. Critics warn this could be seen as expropriation, violating international law.
- Euroclear’s CEO warns that diverting these funds into speculative ventures could trigger lawsuits, Russian retaliation and financial instability. Russia has already seized Euroclear’s assets in response to Western sanctions.
- If the EU seizes or redirects sovereign assets, other nations may retaliate, undermining trust in Western financial systems and potentially causing capital flight.
- Some member states want full confiscation, while others fear legal and economic fallout. Currently, only profits from frozen assets are being redirected, but declining returns are pushing the EU toward riskier moves.
- The plan could destabilize Euroclear (which safeguards $40 trillion in assets) and global finance. If the EU proceeds, it risks legal battles, financial chaos and long-term damage to Europe’s financial credibility.
The European Union is considering a controversial plan to move frozen Russian sovereign assets into higher-risk investments to generate more revenue for Ukraine. But critics warn the plan could amount to outright expropriation and trigger severe legal and financial consequences.
Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Western nations have immobilized over $300 billion in Russian state assets. Of this amount, Belgium-based Euroclear – a key financial institution that settles and safeguards securities transactions – holds $213 billion.
While the EU has already begun diverting profits from these assets to support Ukraine, declining returns due to European Central Bank (ECB) interest rate cuts have pushed Brussels to explore riskier investment strategies. But Euroclear CEO Valerie Urbain has warned against doing so.
At the heart of the dispute is whether Brussels’ plan crosses the line from freezing assets to effectively seizing them. Currently, Euroclear reinvests proceeds from Russian bonds and other maturing assets, such as coupon payments and redemptions, through central banks. The resulting profits are being used to back a $50 billion G7 loan for Ukraine.
However, the European Commission is now allegedly thinking of funneling the funds into speculative investments to maximize returns. Urbain argued that doing this would constitute “expropriation,” or the forced taking of property without compensation,
Euroclear would still be legally liable to the Central Bank of Russia if Moscow ever demands restitution. “If you increase the revenues, you increase the risks,” she cautioned.
Legal experts have long warned that outright confiscation of sovereign assets could breach international law, particularly the principle of sovereign immunity, which protects state property from seizure by foreign governments. While freezing assets is widely accepted as a sanctions tool, permanently diverting them is legally untested and could set a dangerous precedent.
Russia has promised to RETALIATE if its assets are seized
Moscow has already signaled it will retaliate if its assets are seized. In fact, Russia has reportedly confiscated €33 billion ($38 billion) in Euroclear client assets held in its own depository as a direct response to Western sanctions.
The risks aren’t just hypothetical. Euroclear is already facing over 100 lawsuits related to frozen Russian assets, including those of sanctioned oligarchs. If the EU proceeds with its plan, the institution could be caught in a legal crossfire.
Beyond the immediate legal and financial risks, the EU’s move could have far-reaching consequences. If Western nations begin repurposing frozen sovereign assets at will, other countries, particularly those at odds with the U.S. or Europe, might follow suit.
For example, China holds vast foreign reserves in U.S. and European bonds. If the precedent is set that these can be seized or redirected, global financial trust could erode, leading to capital flight and market instability.
Moreover, Euroclear itself plays a pivotal role in global finance, safeguarding over $40 trillion in assets. If its neutrality is compromised by political decisions, investors may question the safety of using European financial infrastructure, potentially shifting business to more stable jurisdictions. (Related: EU faces internal rebellion as Slovakia warns of collapse without Russian resources.)
The debate over Russian assets has exposed divisions within the EU. While some member states, particularly hawkish Eastern European nations, have pushed for full confiscation, others have been more cautious, fearing legal blowback and market disruption.
The EU’s attempt to squeeze more money out of frozen Russian assets is a high-stakes gamble. The legal and financial risks are undeniable. Whether the EU listens or doubles down could determine not just the fate of these frozen billions, but the stability of international finance itself.
Go to Collapse.news for more similar stories.
Watch the full video below of “Health Ranger Report” with Mike Adams about why the U.S. is incapable of honest negotiations with Russia.
This video is from the Health Ranger Report channel on Brighteon.com.
More related stories:
Russian central bank governor: Western seizure of frozen assets won’t affect Russia’s financial stability.
G7 inching closer to final resolution on seizing frozen Russian assets to aid Ukraine.
Switzerland confirms it holds $14.3 billion in FROZEN Russian assets.
Sources include:
RT.com
FT.com
KyivIndependent.com
Brighteon.com
Read full article here
EU plan to shift frozen Russian assets into riskier investments for Ukraine sparks backlash
- The EU is exploring shifting frozen Russian sovereign assets (over $300 billion, mostly held by Euroclear) into higher-risk investments to generate more revenue for Ukraine. Critics warn this could be seen as expropriation, violating international law.
- Euroclear’s CEO warns that diverting these funds into speculative ventures could trigger lawsuits, Russian retaliation and financial instability. Russia has already seized Euroclear’s assets in response to Western sanctions.
- If the EU seizes or redirects sovereign assets, other nations may retaliate, undermining trust in Western financial systems and potentially causing capital flight.
- Some member states want full confiscation, while others fear legal and economic fallout. Currently, only profits from frozen assets are being redirected, but declining returns are pushing the EU toward riskier moves.
- The plan could destabilize Euroclear (which safeguards $40 trillion in assets) and global finance. If the EU proceeds, it risks legal battles, financial chaos and long-term damage to Europe’s financial credibility.
The European Union is considering a controversial plan to move frozen Russian sovereign assets into higher-risk investments to generate more revenue for Ukraine. But critics warn the plan could amount to outright expropriation and trigger severe legal and financial consequences.
Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, Western nations have immobilized over $300 billion in Russian state assets. Of this amount, Belgium-based Euroclear – a key financial institution that settles and safeguards securities transactions – holds $213 billion.
While the EU has already begun diverting profits from these assets to support Ukraine, declining returns due to European Central Bank (ECB) interest rate cuts have pushed Brussels to explore riskier investment strategies. But Euroclear CEO Valerie Urbain has warned against doing so.
At the heart of the dispute is whether Brussels’ plan crosses the line from freezing assets to effectively seizing them. Currently, Euroclear reinvests proceeds from Russian bonds and other maturing assets, such as coupon payments and redemptions, through central banks. The resulting profits are being used to back a $50 billion G7 loan for Ukraine.
However, the European Commission is now allegedly thinking of funneling the funds into speculative investments to maximize returns. Urbain argued that doing this would constitute “expropriation,” or the forced taking of property without compensation,
Euroclear would still be legally liable to the Central Bank of Russia if Moscow ever demands restitution. “If you increase the revenues, you increase the risks,” she cautioned.
Legal experts have long warned that outright confiscation of sovereign assets could breach international law, particularly the principle of sovereign immunity, which protects state property from seizure by foreign governments. While freezing assets is widely accepted as a sanctions tool, permanently diverting them is legally untested and could set a dangerous precedent.
Russia has promised to RETALIATE if its assets are seized
Moscow has already signaled it will retaliate if its assets are seized. In fact, Russia has reportedly confiscated €33 billion ($38 billion) in Euroclear client assets held in its own depository as a direct response to Western sanctions.
The risks aren’t just hypothetical. Euroclear is already facing over 100 lawsuits related to frozen Russian assets, including those of sanctioned oligarchs. If the EU proceeds with its plan, the institution could be caught in a legal crossfire.
Beyond the immediate legal and financial risks, the EU’s move could have far-reaching consequences. If Western nations begin repurposing frozen sovereign assets at will, other countries, particularly those at odds with the U.S. or Europe, might follow suit.
For example, China holds vast foreign reserves in U.S. and European bonds. If the precedent is set that these can be seized or redirected, global financial trust could erode, leading to capital flight and market instability.
Moreover, Euroclear itself plays a pivotal role in global finance, safeguarding over $40 trillion in assets. If its neutrality is compromised by political decisions, investors may question the safety of using European financial infrastructure, potentially shifting business to more stable jurisdictions. (Related: EU faces internal rebellion as Slovakia warns of collapse without Russian resources.)
The debate over Russian assets has exposed divisions within the EU. While some member states, particularly hawkish Eastern European nations, have pushed for full confiscation, others have been more cautious, fearing legal blowback and market disruption.
The EU’s attempt to squeeze more money out of frozen Russian assets is a high-stakes gamble. The legal and financial risks are undeniable. Whether the EU listens or doubles down could determine not just the fate of these frozen billions, but the stability of international finance itself.
Go to Collapse.news for more similar stories.
Watch the full video below of “Health Ranger Report” with Mike Adams about why the U.S. is incapable of honest negotiations with Russia.
This video is from the Health Ranger Report channel on Brighteon.com.
More related stories:
Russian central bank governor: Western seizure of frozen assets won’t affect Russia’s financial stability.
G7 inching closer to final resolution on seizing frozen Russian assets to aid Ukraine.
Switzerland confirms it holds $14.3 billion in FROZEN Russian assets.
Sources include:
RT.com
FT.com
KyivIndependent.com
Brighteon.com
Read full article here