“This Will Undermine Peace Efforts”

On Thursday evening, November 27, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever sharply escalated his criticism of the European Commission’s plan to channel around €140 billion in frozen Russian assets held in Brussels to support Ukraine—effectively dashing the EU’s hopes for a breakthrough on their mobilization. His position is set out in a strongly worded letter addressed to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and obtained by POLITICO, which reviewed the document. It was sent just hours before the Commission was due to present a proposal that would address Belgium’s concerns over the use of these funds.

The Brussels executive is pushing for the 27 EU member states to agree at the next European Council summit on a mechanism allowing billions of euros in Russian reserves held at Belgium’s Euroclear to be released and transferred to Kyiv as a compensation loan. De Wever opposes what he calls a “fundamentally flawed” scheme, fearing that in the event of a lawsuit from Russia it would be Belgium that ends up liable for repaying these funds.

In recent days, expectations had been rising in Brussels that De Wever might soften his stance if the Commission were to include clear legal guarantees in its proposal to shield Belgium from any financial risk. Yet despite mounting diplomatic pressure on Brussels, De Wever only hardened his tone on Thursday. Expanding on his earlier objections, he argued that the Commission’s proposal could undermine the prospects of a peace agreement on Ukraine. According to him, if the EU initiative does not go ahead, the frozen Russian assets could serve as leverage to pressure Moscow into negotiations rather than being transferred directly to Kyiv.

“Hastily moving forward on the proposed reparations loan scheme would have, as a collateral damage, that we as EU are effectively preventing reaching an eventual peace deal,” De Wever wrote in the letter.

After a prolonged standoff, the European Commission plans to finally present an official proposal outlining the parameters of the loan on Friday or early next week.

Talks in October ended without result, and EU leaders now intend to revisit the most sensitive issues at the mid-December summit. In principle, most member states support the idea of a loan, but De Wever remains immovable.

“In the highly plausible scenario that Russia is ultimately not officially recognized as the losing party, it will, as historical experience shows, be legally entitled to demand the return of its sovereign assets,” he stressed in the letter.

The Belgian prime minister reiterated that the proposed loan could destabilize EU financial markets and ultimately shift onto European taxpayers the obligation to repay the full amount if the assets are returned to Russia.

Instead of using Russian reserves, De Wever proposed an alternative—having the European Commission issue €45 billion in joint debt to cover Ukraine’s financing needs in 2026. The idea is unpopular among most EU governments, as it would require a direct contribution from taxpayers.

Holding to his position, the Belgian prime minister said he would agree to the loan scheme only if member states immediately guarantee repayment of the full amount should Russia demand the return of its assets.

“I will not give my consent if these guarantees, as outlined above, are not provided and signed by the member states at the moment the decision is taken,” he stressed.