EU backs indefinite freeze on Russias frozen cash ahead of big loan plan for Ukraine

European Union governments have agreed to immobilise indefinitely Russian assets of up to €210bn (£185bn) that have been frozen in the EU since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Most of Moscow’s cash is held in Belgian bank Euroclear, and European leaders are hoping to agree a deal at next week’s crunch EU summit that would use the money for a loan to help Kyiv fund its military and economy.

After almost four years of Russia’s full-scale war Ukraine is running out of cash, and needs an estimated €135.7bn (£119bn; $159bn) over the next two years.

Europe aims to provide two-thirds of that, but Russian officials accuse the EU of theft.

The Russian Central Bank said on Friday it was suing Belgian bank Euroclear in a Moscow court, in response to the EU loan plan.

Russia’s assets in the EU were frozen within days of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, and €185bn of that is held by Euroclear.

The EU and Ukraine argue that money should be used to rebuild what Russia has destroyed: Brussels calls it a “reparations loan” and has come up with a plan to prop up Ukraine’s economy to the tune of €90bn.

“It’s only fair that Russia’s frozen assets should be used to rebuild what Russia has destroyed – and that money then becomes ours,” says Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz says the assets will “enable Ukraine to protect itself effectively against future Russian attacks”.

Russia’s court action was expected in Brussels and European Economic Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis said on Friday that EU financial institutions were “fully protected” from legal proceedings.

But it is not just Moscow that is unhappy.

Belgium is worried it will be saddled with an enormous bill if it all goes wrong and Euroclear chief executive Valérie Urbain says using it could “destabilise the international financial system”.

Euroclear also has an estimated €16-17bn immobilised in Russia.

Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has set the EU a series of “rational, reasonable, and justified conditions” before he will accept the reparations plan, and he has refused to rule out legal action if it “poses significant risks” for his country.

The EU is working to the wire ahead of next Thursday’s summit to come up with a solution that Belgium can accept.

Until now the EU has held off touching the assets themselves directly but since last year has paid the “windfall profits” from them to Ukraine. In 2024 that was €3.7bn. Legally using the interest is seen as safe as Russia is under sanction and the proceeds are not Russian sovereign property.

But international military aid for Ukraine has slipped dramatically in 2025, and Europe has struggled to make up the shortfall left by the US decision to all but stop funding Ukraine under President Donald Trump.

There are currently two EU proposals aimed at providing Ukraine with €90bn, to cover two-thirds of its funding needs.

One is to raise the money on capital markets, backed by the EU budget as a guarantee. This is Belgium’s preferred option but it requires a unanimous vote by EU leaders and that would be difficult when Hungary and Slovakia object to funding Ukraine’s military.

That leaves loaning Ukraine cash from the Russian assets, which were originally held in securities but have now largely matured into cash. That money is Euroclear property held in the European Central Bank.

The EU’s executive, the European Commission, accepts Belgium has legitimate concerns and says it is confident it has dealt with them.

The plan is for Belgium to be protected with a guarantee covering all the €210bn of Russian assets in the EU.

Should Euroclear suffer a loss of its own assets in Russia, a Commission source explained that would be offset from assets belonging to Russia’s own clearing house which are in the EU.

If Russia went after Belgium itself, any ruling by a Russian court would not be recognised in the EU.

In a key development, EU ambassadors have agreed that Russia’s central bank assets held in Europe should be immobilised indefinitely.

Until now they have had to vote unanimously every six months to renew the freeze, which could have meant a repeated risk to Belgium.

The EU ambassadors used an emergency clause under Article 122 of the EU Treaties so the assets remain frozen as long as an “immediate threat to the economic interests of the union” continues, or until Russia pays war reparations to Ukraine in full.

Swedish Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson said the decision was an “important step in enabling more support for Ukraine and protecting our democracy”.

Belgium is adamant it remains a staunch ally of Ukraine, but sees legal risks in the plan and fears being left to handle the repercussions if things go wrong.

A usually divided political landscape in this case has rallied behind Prime Minister Bart De Wever, who is under pressure from European colleagues.

“Very important decisions” would be made by the EU in the coming week, he said during a meeting with UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer in London on Friday. He added that Belgium and the UK would work together to “get the certainty that we can support Ukraine to stay a free, democratic and sovereign country”.

The EU believes it can secure sufficient guarantees for the loan itself, but Belgium fears an added risk of being exposed to extra damages or penalties.

“Belgium is a small economy. Belgian GDP is about €565bn – imagine if it would need to shoulder a €185bn bill,” says Veerle Colaert, professor of financial law at KU Leuven University.

She also believes the requirement for Euroclear to grant a loan to the EU would violate EU banking regulations.

“Banks need to comply with capital and liquidity requirements and shouldn’t put all their eggs in one basket. Now the EU is telling Euroclear to do just that.

“Why do we have these bank rules? It’s because we want banks to be stable. And if things go wrong it would fall to Belgium to bail out Euroclear. That’s another reason why it’s so important for Belgium to secure water-tight guarantees for Euroclear.”

There is no time to lose, warn seven EU member states including those closest geographically to Russia such as the Baltics, Finland and Poland. They believe the frozen assets plan is “the most financially feasible and politically realistic solution”.

“It’s a matter of destiny for us,” says leading German conservative MP Norbert Röttgen. “If we fail, I don’t know what we’ll do afterwards. That’s why we have to succeed in a week’s time”.

While Russia is adamant its money should not be touched, there are added concerns among European figures that the US may want to use Russia’s frozen billions differently, as part of its own peace plan.

Zelensky has said Ukraine is working with Europe and the US on a reconstruction fund, but he is also aware the US has been talking to Russia about future co-operation.

An early draft of the US peace plan referred to $100bn of Russia’s frozen assets being used by the US for reconstruction, with the US taking 50% of the profits and Europe adding another $100bn. The remaining assets would then be used in some kind of US-Russia joint investment project.

An EU source said the added advantage of Friday’s expected vote to immobilise Russia’s assets indefinitely made it harder for anyone to take the money away. Implicit is that the US would then have to win over a majority of EU member states to vote for a plan that would financially cost them an enormous sum.

Hungary’s Viktor Orban, seen as Russia’s closest partner in the EU, said Europe’s leaders were “placing themselves above the rules” and replacing the rule of law with the rule of bureaucrats.