The European Union has agreed to immobilise roughly €210 billion in Russian central bank assets held inside the bloc for the foreseeable future, a move designed to lock in long-term leverage over Moscow and remove a recurring political risk: the need to renew the underlying sanctions framework every six months.
EU leaders have repeatedly said the money should remain frozen until Russia ends its war against Ukraine and pays compensation. On Friday, European Council President António Costa said the EU was delivering on that pledge—keeping the assets immobilised “until Russia ends its war of aggression against Ukraine and compensates for the damage caused.”
Why this matters: no more six-month cliff edge
Until now, the legal basis for holding the funds in place relied on sanctions rollovers that required regular renewal—creating a potential opening for a Kremlin-friendly government to block an extension. The new approach uses an EU emergency legal mechanism (widely cited as Article 122) to keep the assets immobilised without the same recurring veto pressure.
Russia targets Euroclear as tensions rise
The decision comes as Russia ramps up legal threats around Euroclear, the Brussels-based central securities depository that holds the bulk of Russia’s immobilised funds in the EU.
Russia’s central bank said it is filing a lawsuit in a Moscow court accusing Euroclear of “illegal actions” that harmed the bank’s ability to manage funds and securities. Euroclear has declined to comment on the specific suit, but has said it is already fighting more than 100 legal claims in Russia—a sign of how quickly this issue has turned from obscure financial plumbing into geopolitical frontline territory.
The bigger fight: using the assets to fund Ukraine
Freezing the assets indefinitely is also widely seen as a step toward more ambitious plans: using the immobilised funds to support Ukraine’s defence and budget needs—without formally confiscating Russia’s property.
Last week, the European Commission floated a plan that would cover about two-thirds of Ukraine’s financing needs for 2026–27 (around €90 billion) through a loan structure linked to the immobilised assets. The remaining third would be expected to come from other international partners.
Belgium’s concern: lawsuits and retaliation
Belgium is central to the debate because Euroclear is based there—and Brussels is worried about legal blowback, including a cascade of lawsuits and potential Russian retaliation against Belgian assets.
Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever raised the issue in talks with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer in Downing Street on Friday, where both sides said they would keep working on the “complex issue” of using the value of immobilised Russian sovereign assets while maintaining pressure on Moscow.
Belgium has signaled it needs firm guarantees from EU partners so it won’t be left holding the bill if Russia successfully sues or seizes assets. De Wever has previously described the approach as “fundamentally wrong,” arguing it could violate international law and threaten financial stability.
Several countries—including Belgium, Bulgaria, Malta and Italy—have also argued that decisions on any use of the immobilised assets should sit with EU leaders.
Germany steps forward
Germany, typically cautious about financial risk-sharing, has been described as supportive of the plan and, according to reporting, has indicated it could provide €50 billion in guarantees—a major attempt to address Belgium’s concerns.
What happens next
The debate is expected to intensify ahead of the next EU summit, where leaders are due to discuss Ukraine funding for 2026–27 amid warnings that Kyiv’s finances could face another crunch without new commitments.
The UK—holding an estimated €27 billion in frozen Russian assets—has backed the general direction of the plan and expects at least some G7 partners to move forward, though US participation is less certain (and US-held Russian sovereign assets are commonly described as comparatively small, often cited around $5 billion in other reporting).