The USA tried to persuade Europe to block a loan for Ukraine secured by Russian assets

Washington is conducting quiet but persistent work with individual EU countries — the goal is simple: to prevent them from supporting the idea of a “reparations loan” for Ukraine, linked to frozen Russian assets. This is reported by Bloomberg, citing European diplomats. No lists of countries, no direct names — only the fact of pressure and its reasoning.

American representatives explain to partners that the assets of the Russian Central Bank may be useful for a future peace agreement. Using them now to finance the war, according to Washington, is a step that could complicate negotiations. This is a position that not everyone in Europe accepts.

After the Russian invasion in 2022, about 260 billion euros of Russian state assets were frozen in the West. The main part — almost 193 billion — is held in Belgium, in Euroclear. This is where the political knot begins. When European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed a “reparations loan” scheme for 140 billion euros, secured by these funds, Belgium was the first to point out the risks: legal, financial, political. The decision has been postponed until December, and now the US is actively involved in the discussion.

In the American version of the peace plan, there are 28 points. It includes an amount of 100 billion dollars, which should go to the reconstruction of Ukraine; the US retains 50% of the profits from the operation. But in the US, there are only about 5 billion of frozen Russian funds — and this is also part of the dispute. As expected, Russia reacts sharply: any attempts at confiscation are called theft and threaten counterclaims.

Amid all these calculations, a question arises that is reluctantly discussed in Europe: the financial benefit of the countries through which the assets pass. Regarding Belgium, there are hints that the income from Euroclear may be “underestimated” and that part of the discussions is fueled not only by politics but also by economics. This only adds to the tension.

For the EU, the problem is broader than just a technical operation with frozen funds. It concerns whether Europe is ready to take on financial commitments in a war where the end is still uncertain, and how much partners agree with the US approach. The political will of countries begins to diverge from their economic interests — and the issue of reparations turns into a persistent source of disagreement.

The decision-making process becomes more complicated. Some want acceleration, others demand caution, and still others call for a revision of the entire concept. And they all understand that any decision will set the framework for a future peace agreement, if it ever takes place. We will continue to monitor the positions of allies and the situation around frozen assets — in analyses by “NANews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency”.