Belgium blocks EU push to use Russian assets for Ukraine aid

Debate at EU summit on December 18 initially focused on the proposed reparations loan for Ukraine and efforts to address concerns raised by Belgium, whose prime minister, Bart De Wever, had taken a firm stance in the weeks leading up to the meeting. De Wever warned he would not accept an arrangement that could leave Belgium vulnerable to potential Russian retaliation.

His position, however, unsettled other delegations and prompted fresh doubts about the viability of the proposal, Caliber.Az reports, citing foreign media.

De Wever demanded “uncapped guarantees” to shield Belgium and Euroclear—the Belgium-based financial services company that holds the bulk of Russia’s frozen assets—from possible legal and financial risks. The request proved unacceptable to most other member states.

According to one diplomat, several countries flatly rejected the idea of offering “unlimited guarantees,” while draft working documents designed to appease Belgium raised what were described as insurmountable concerns for the rest of the room.

“Leaders didn’t really know what they would end up guaranteeing,” a diplomat said. After multiple revisions, it became clear the proposal would not gain sufficient support. At that point, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán reportedly opted to hold talks with Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and former Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš.

The inconclusive outcome marked a setback for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who had been a vocal advocate of using the cash balances generated by Russia’s frozen assets to provide Ukraine with immediate financial assistance. Earlier on Thursday, Merz had described the reparations loan as “the only option.”

Speaking after the meeting, De Wever said the notion of “uncapped” guarantees had made his European counterparts “nervous,” a reaction he said validated Belgium’s position.

“Today, we proved that the voice of small and medium-sized member states also counts. Decisions in Europe are not simply driven by the biggest capitals or institutions. They are collective,” he said, in what appeared to be a thinly veiled reference to Germany.

“We avoided stepping into a precedent that risks undermining legal certainty worldwide,” he added.

De Wever reiterated that Russian assets should remain beyond Moscow’s reach and ultimately be used to help rebuild Ukraine—but only once the war has ended. Asked about European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, he said she had done an “excellent job,” while suggesting she may have been misled by countries most forcefully backing the reparations loan.

“Politics is not a softball game. It’s hardball. And if there are big interests at stake, it can clash. And a normal politician, when he makes a decision, he lets go of all the emotions,” De Wever said. “For me, the reparations loan was not a good idea.”

Merz, for his part, told reporters that “Europe has demonstrated its sovereignty” by agreeing in principle to issue common debt to finance Ukraine’s needs amid a complex geopolitical environment.

“When it comes to Russian assets, we just changed the timeline a bit,” he said, adding that “Russian assets will be used as securitisation for the loan.”

Whether Russia will ever pay reparations for its invasion of Ukraine, however, remains far from certain.

By Vafa Guliyeva