Asset-use debate for Ukraine funding
Belgium is pushing European partners to shoulder legal and financial risks if the bloc taps frozen Russian assets to finance Ukraine’s war effort and economic support. Prime Minister Bart De Wever argued that as the primary custodian of these funds through Belgium-based clearing houses, Brussels cannot bear potential liabilities alone. He urged a collective mechanism that spreads exposure across member states, warning that unilateral pressure on Belgium could slow decisions and weaken the credibility of the asset plan. The proposal comes as EU capitals debate how to convert windfall profits into reliable budget lines for Kyiv while navigating complex sanctions law and property rights. Officials say the aim is to lock in predictable, multi-year financing before winter disruptions strain Ukraine’s grid and public services.

The discussion also intersects with U.S. and G7 efforts to expand pressure on Moscow’s energy earnings and trading networks. European policymakers are examining models that would securitize future windfall proceeds, allowing front-loaded disbursements for reconstruction, air defense, and macro-stability needs. Legal services in several capitals have flagged potential challenges from asset owners, meaning any scheme must balance speed with court-proof design. Belgium’s stance—share the risk, share the decision—places the issue squarely on this week’s agenda of finance and foreign ministers. Diplomats note that a compromise may link risk-sharing to proportional benefits and responsibilities, with additional safeguards for financial market stability. For Kyiv, the stakes are immediate: locking in resources as battlefield and budget pressures intensify ahead of winter.