Skip to playerSkip to main content
  • 3 weeks ago
As the EU fails to reach consensus on using Russia’s frozen assets for a major loan to Ukraine, opting instead for a €90-billion EU-backed loan, Julia Roknifard of Taylor’s University says the outcome was predictable given political and economic risks and competing pressures from Washington.

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:00Now, as the EU fails to reach consensus on using Russia's frozen assets to back a major loan for Ukraine and opting instead for a 90 billion EU loan, Julia Rucknavert of Taylor's University says the outcome was predictable, citing both political and economic risks, as well as competing pressures from Washington.
00:19It's not surprising that there is a rift between the European countries and European political elites on what to do with these frozen assets.
00:31I think what's going on is partly, well, the need of funds in order to aid Ukraine, to render aid to Ukraine.
00:40On the other hand, it's also sort of a reaction to the 28-point plan proposed or coming from the U.S. administration, from the White House.
00:52So it looks like the EU would like to jump in and maybe preempt the distribution of these funds because the plan proposes, if I'm not mistaken, to put the funds into reconstruction of Ukraine.
01:07So the EU would like to have a say in it.
01:11And that's why they had a meeting about it.
01:13But it was, in my mind, predictable that they won't agree on expropriating these frozen assets completely because it's related to political and economic risks, including Belgium itself, which hosts the majority of those frozen assets, up to 180 billion.
01:32But the loan is supposed to be still coming from Euroclear.
01:37So how it will be channeled, distributed, and then later on compensated for, that's quite unclear.
01:45So if, let's say, the war is over, will Russia be asked to compensate for this loan?
01:53So that would amount then to the same expropriation of Russian assets in favor of Ukraine.
01:59Amid divisions within the EU, Julia argues that the real debate is whether Europe is choosing escalation over de-escalation of war, questioning the motive behind such a provocative move.
02:11So what the division among the EU states is, it seems, it's not even over the issue of who is a friend of Russia and who is not,
02:19but over the issue of perpetuation of the war, which Russia is, well, maybe it's not exactly succeeding, but it's not exactly losing it.
02:29And it has the capacity, what's most important, to continue it.
02:32So it's provoking it to keep continuing it, to double down on its effort.
02:39And some of the European leaders wouldn't like to see that.
02:42The justification of that, if Russia is not stopped, it will move further to Europe.
02:47I think it's groundless because the decision in the first place was made based on particular security concerns.
02:55So we have to ask the question if it's a warmongers in Europe that would like to go for this highly provocative move
03:03and make Russia to double down on its effort.
Be the first to comment
Add your comment

Recommended