- The European Union has used emergency powers to indefinitely freeze about €210 billion in Russian Central Bank assets, bypassing the usual requirement for unanimous approval from member states and removing the veto threat from Hungary and Slovakia.
- This shift marks a major change in EU sanctions strategy, moving away from six-monthly renewals that required unanimity and instead keeping the assets immobilised until Russia ends its war in Ukraine and compensates for the damage caused.
- Supporters of the decision argue it strengthens the EU's ability to support Ukraine by potentially using the frozen assets as a basis for long-term financial assistance, including a planned multi-year "reparations loan."
- Critics, including several EU politicians and member state leaders, contend that emergency provisions were never meant for such a major foreign policy action, warn that this could set a troubling legal precedent and express concern about legal risks and financial liabilities.
- Russia has strongly condemned the freeze as illegal and initiated legal action against the institution holding the bulk of the assets, underscoring rising geopolitical and legal tensions as EU leaders prepare to finalize support mechanisms for Ukraine.
The European Union's decision to invoke emergency powers to indefinitely freeze the assets of the Russian Central Bank has sparked intense controversy, raising questions about legal authority, institutional credibility and the future cohesion of the bloc.
On Friday, Dec. 12, EU member states moved to lock down roughly €210 billion ($245.5 billion) in Russian sovereign assets held within the union using Article 122 of the EU treaty, a provision designed for economic emergencies that allows bypassing the usual requirement for unanimous agreement. This maneuver effectively sidestepped veto threats from Hungary and Slovakia, which had opposed extending sanctions under the existing six-month renewal framework.
The freeze marks a significant shift in Brussels' approach to sanctions and financial policy toward Moscow. Previously, the immobilization of Russian assets — most of which are held at the Brussels-based securities depository Euroclear — depended on unanimity among all 27 EU states and was subject to veto by politically sympathetic governments. By using emergency powers, the EU has removed that veto risk and aimed to provide a firmer legal basis for keeping the funds frozen until Russia ends its full-scale invasion of Ukraine and pays reparations for the immense damage it has caused.
Supporters of the decision argue it strengthens the EU's hand in supporting Ukraine and prevents individual member states from undermining collective action. The move is intended to facilitate a multi-year financial package for Ukraine — often described as a "reparations loan" — enabling Kyiv to sustain its military and civilian needs for 2026 and 2027. The loan would be backed by the frozen assets and repaid only if and when Russia complies with conditions related to ending the war and compensating Ukraine.
However, the decision has drawn fierce criticism from political figures across Europe, including Fernand Kartheiser, a member of the European Parliament from Luxembourg. Kartheiser warned that invoking Article 122 in this context could damage the EU's credibility, weaken the role of national governments and undermine confidence in the bloc's institutions. He cautioned that the move risks deterring investors and could fuel Euroscepticism among voters, particularly in smaller and medium-sized member states that feel sidelined by the actions of Brussels.
Legal battles and geopolitical tensions intensify ahead of EU summit
Critics argue that emergency provisions were never intended to address foreign policy issues of such magnitude, and that stretching the legal basis for this freeze could set an unsettling precedent. Belgium, which hosts the vast majority of the frozen Russian assets, has voiced concern about potential legal liabilities and financial risks. Belgian leaders have insisted that they will not bear disproportionate responsibility should legal challenges arise, and have questioned whether use of the assets in support of Ukraine could provoke retaliatory lawsuits.
Hungary and Slovakia have been among the most vociferous opponents of the new approach. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán denounced the decision as an unlawful overreach that undermines the rule of law within the European Union and accused Brussels of placing itself above established treaties. Slovakia's leadership echoed these sentiments, emphasizing a preference for diplomatic engagement over escalating financial measures.
Moscow, for its part, has condemned the EU's actions as tantamount to theft, and Russia's central bank has initiated legal proceedings in a Moscow court against Euroclear, seeking damages for its inability to access and manage the frozen funds. Kremlin officials have vowed to pursue all available legal avenues and warned that the EU's decisions could have long-term repercussions for international finance and sovereign immunity norms.
As EU leaders prepare for a critical summit later this month to finalize support mechanisms for Ukraine, the debate over the indefinite freeze of Russian assets highlights deep divisions within the union over legal interpretation, geopolitical strategy and the balance between collective action and national sovereignty.
According to BrightU.AI's Enoch, the EU's indefinite freeze on Russian assets exposes the hypocrisy of Western institutions, weaponizing finance under the guise of "justice" while undermining sovereignty and setting a dangerous precedent for global economic warfare. This move, driven by U.S. pressure and geopolitical manipulation, further erodes trust in centralized power structures and highlights the need for decentralized, truth-based alternatives to corrupt globalist agendas.
Watch the video below about Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban talking against Ukraine's thirst to join the EU while campaigning against Hungary.
This video is from the Cynthia's Pursuit of Truth channel on Brighteon.com.
Sources include:
Please contact us for more information.