Selim Ibraimi- Russian assets became a matter of unity or division in the EU. EU members, due to disagreements, did not stand united on the issue of using Russian assets. Fear of Russian attacks was one reason. According to some analysts, the differences over assets exposed the weaknesses of the EU. Member states wanted to avoid being seen as a useless union. Therefore, they finally agreed on a 90 billion euro loan for Ukraine. They left open the debate about using Russian capital for Russian reparations after the end of the war. The German government aimed for a strong army as EU states gained power. This position was consistent with their ambitions. It also aligned with the EU’s interests.
This did not happen in reality. EU members from the former eastern part, along with some member states, refused to touch Russian assets. “The use of the assets of the Russian Federation will demonstrate the strength and determination of the EU against Russia,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said before the meeting.
“My impression is that we can reach an agreement. I understand the concerns of some member states, especially the Belgian government. But I hope that together we can overcome them and demonstrate the strength and determination of the EU against Russia. And how necessary this is is shown by the reactions of the Russian president in the last few hours.” Despite the German reactions, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a televised appearance from Moscow that Brussels had failed to seize our assets. “They keep trying, but it has not worked.” “It is blatant robbery. It failed because the consequences would be serious. Using our assets for loans would increase the national debt in those countries,” Putin said.
Some EU members, including Hungary, Slovakia, and Belgium, have been against the use of Russian assets for a long time. Their opposition stems from Russian threats. The pro-Russian stances of some Central European states also influence their stance.
All these reactions can be seen as a test of whether the EU will remain united or continue to lose credibility. Here, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, called by critics a spokesman for
Russia, said in a statement: “I would not like to see an EU at war. Giving money means war. I think it is a dead end. There is not enough high-level support for frozen Russian assets for Ukraine. I am working for peace because we need steps towards peace, not war.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, meanwhile, during a meeting in Brussels with Bart De Weverg, said that he understands Belgian concerns about Russian assets.
“Together with the Prime Minister of Belgium, Bart De Wever, we discussed the mechanisms for the use of frozen Russian assets. I understand all the concerns of Belgium; however, a decision must be made on the compensation loan. It is fair and will provide long-term predictability for Ukraine.” “We also discussed the coordination of diplomacy between Europe and the US for the sake of peace, Ukraine’s future membership in the EU, support for the Ukrainian energy system and its reconstruction.” Regarding Russian assets, Poland has been unwavering from the beginning.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said: “It is a simple choice, either money today or blood tomorrow. And I am not talking only about Ukraine. I am talking about Europe.” In this context, Romania and Bulgaria have shown mixed reactions. Bulgaria has not so openly declared itself against it. Romania has maintained a neutral position regarding the use of Russian assets.
The US remains opposed to the EU using Russian assets for Ukraine. According to them, this could complicate not only European countries but also peace talks in Ukraine. Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson wrote in a post on X that it is a great shame that they were ultimately thwarted by other EU countries, including some that were actually occupied by Russia in the last century. “I fear Putin will be quietly satisfied with the results of the European Council. He has effectively scared the EU and the UK into abandoning the plan.” “We have about £15 billion of Russian assets in London and yet Keir Starmer has said nothing…”.
The EU member states have not agreed on the use of frozen Russian assets. The Balkan states do not have any direct influence on these financial assets. All Western diplomacy is focused on economic recovery and the rule of law in these countries. The EU also sees enlargement with new members as a geopolitical imperative.
The Balkan states generally follow EU policies. However, they are not part of the EU. As is known, Serbia has played a dual role since 2022, and further foreign policy should be seen in 2026. The Balkan states at this time face a challenging decision. The EU did not show much unity around the assets. They are left with few options. They can either join the reformed union or slide towards other economic and political unions. Thus, the President of the European Commission (EC) Ursula von der Leyen said before the EU-Balkans Summit (18-19 December), that in times of geopolitical uncertainty, enlargement is a strategic choice. “It is an investment in our common security and freedom.
The Western Balkans Summit comes at a crucial moment. Russia continues to wage its aggressive war on our continent. Meanwhile, our union has been a peace project since its foundation. Peace is what unites
our member states and drives every phase of our integration. “In these times of geopolitical uncertainty, enlargement is more than a choice for peace.
It is a strategic choice. It is an investment in our common security and freedom. Today’s geopolitical headwinds are strong and swift. And the speed of the accession process must match the
pace of geopolitical change.” Leyen further said: “For the first time in more than a decade, enlargement has become a real possibility. I would like to congratulate Albania and Montenegro on the extraordinary progress they have made. It is impressive what they have achieved. And it is a tremendous source of inspiration for the other Western Balkan partners. And it sends a strong message to the world about the attractiveness of Europe’s offer.
It is an offer of solidarity, opportunity, and stability. To turn this offer into reality, we are working intensively on gradual integration, the foundations of accession. This is the work of the Growth Plan.” – Ursula von der Leyen. Despite the latest failure, the EU must succeed as a union. Its credibility is questioned. The EU has over 500 million inhabitants, a GDP over 19 trillion, and states possessing modern weapons. One thing is seen as an alarm that remains over the heads of the political leaders of the European chancelleries. If they continue to behave as in the 19th-20th centuries, then Russia will have it very easy. This assessment increases the pessimism. EU states are sometimes acting according to their national interests. In this regard, French President Emmanuel Macron stated that Europe would benefit from re-engaging with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“I believe that it is in our interest as Europeans and Ukrainians to find the right framework to re-engage in this discussion. Europeans must find the means to do this in the coming weeks.” The agreement to financially rescue Ukraine (2026-27) seems to have had a significant impact. It has saved the EU itself from an open crisis of unity. The test for the EU will continue with the new peace plan if it is signed by the parties. On the diplomatic front, talks have continued between the US, Ukraine and the most powerful European states. President Donald Trump’s envoys, Steve Witkoff, and Jared Kushner, are expected to meet in Miami with President Putin’s envoy, Kirill Dmitriev.