European Union foreign ministers have approved, for the first time, the transfer of approximately €1.4 billion ($1.5 billion) in military and financial aid to Kiev, using interest profits drawn from frozen Russian central bank assets. EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell made the announcement on Monday, as reports say Washington is preparing to send Ukraine another arms package worth $150 million. The EU also imposed a raft of sanctions on Russia along with entities in China, Turkey, and India.
Given Kiev’s long-range missile strikes into Crimea over the weekend, the EU’s plan comes amid dangerous developments in NATO’s Ukraine proxy war. Russia accuses Ukrainian forces of using US-supplied Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS), with a range of nearly 200 miles, and satellite imagery for the attack, which killed at least four people and wounded more than 100. Russia’s Foreign Ministry declared Washington “has effectively become a party” to the war now and threatened “retaliatory measures.”
For almost a year, Budapest has vetoed further funding of Kiev’s war effort using an off-budget fund known as the European Peace Facility (EPF) worth €6 billion. Another fund holding €5 billion is blocked as well. Borrell referred to this “structural difficulty” during a presser following the foreign ministers meeting in Luxembourg. Using interest profits off seized Russian assets was seen as a workable alternative. Such international theft marks an unprecedented escalation in the economic war targeting Russia. Earlier this month, G7 leaders agreed to provide Ukraine with $50 billion by the end of the year using stolen Russian funds.
According to the South China Morning Post, “A legal analysis noted that as Hungary abstained on the decision to use the frozen assets for Ukraine, and that the new aid is derived from the Russian Central Bank assets, and not EU funds, Budapest’s veto does not apply.” Therefore, Borrell said “it’s not necessary” to involve Hungary in the decision-making process. In keeping with Budapest’s objections against the bloc’s support for the Ukraine war, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto condemned the move and said it violated EU rules.
Some 90% of the aid disbursed will be for weapons to support Kiev’s war, while 10% will go toward direct financial aid. Per EU diplomats, Berlin and Prague were selected to use the stolen proceeds first to send Ukraine more air defenses as well as artillery shells. The European Commission says it has frozen roughly €210 billion in the Russian central bank’s funds. Between the US and Europe, about $280 billion in Russian assets have been seized. Euroclear, a financial institution based in Brussels, holds the majority of the European-held assets and claims to have extracted €4.4 billion in interest profits last year.
Moreover, the ministers also announced a series of new sanctions against Russia including asset freezes and travel bans imposed on 69 individuals and 47 entities they claim are linked to the Kremlin’s invasion. Organizations based in China, Turkey, and India were also hit with an EU export ban over accusations that these entities provide goods and services bolstering Moscow’s war effort.
Following a nine-month grace period, the Zeebrugge port in Belgium will be banned from exporting Russian liquefied natural gas to countries outside the EU. The bloc is also targeting 27 vessels alleged to be part of Russia’s “shadow fleet” used to transport crude oil and circumvent Western economic penalties. Last year, Chris Weafer, the chief executive officer of strategic consultants Marco-Advisory Ltd., told Newsweek that Russia has a “greatly dispersed fleet ownership with the flexibility to disappear and reappear with a new name faster than the G7/EU can catch them.” Despite the US-led sanctions blitz, Moscow became the top crude supplier to India and China during the first year of the war.
Washington is said to be announcing a new arms package on Tuesday, according to two US officials speaking with the Associated Press. The weapons will reportedly be pulled from Pentagon stockpiles using the Presidential Drawdown Authority. One official said cluster bombs were not a part of the arms transfer but did not confirm whether the tranche includes ATACMS. Russia maintains the US-provided cluster bomb variant of the long-range munitions fired from the High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) was used in the recent attack on Crimea.
Connor Freeman is the assistant editor and a writer at the Libertarian Institute, primarily covering foreign policy. He is a co-host on the Conflicts of Interest podcast. His writing has been featured in media outlets such as Antiwar.com, Counterpunch, and the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity. He has also appeared on Liberty Weekly, Around the Empire, and Parallax Views. You can follow him on Twitter @FreemansMind96.
When peace is made, this money will be repaid to Russia, and the bill will go to Western taxpayers. That will be required by courts in third party nations governing things like SWIFT.
In the meantime, Western taxpayers will be asked to reimburse those who suffer retalliation.
This is all a lie. It is just a secretive way of spending taxpayer money.
A couple of issues with that:
1) Third party nations do not govern SWIFT
2) Peace can be made between Ukraine and Russia without consent from the west so with sanctions in place.
3) Unless Putin defeats the west, the west is unlikely to agree to burden its taxpayers for peace – i.e. what you suggest is a democratic suicide project.
Why the west did not do that for the ones suffering retaliations after previous sanctions rounds. you may be right but so far this has not been the process.
Agreed. But I don't understand why they have to take Russia's money? Can't they just print all the money they want? …What's that? …Now they want to be sensible and responsible? …Or care about inflation?
Weaken Russia, weaken Russia, weaken Russia.
The irony is that if they take from Russia, others will notice that they could take from anyone. So, it diminishes the reserve currency status of the US dollar.
War reparations in advance! Hell yeah! Don't invade another country if you don't want to pay up.
So, the US should pay Iraq and Syria? And Israel should pay Palestine and Syria?
Regardless, it’s stupid even if you can’t understand why.
Actually? Yes. The US has paid for the reconstruction of Afghanistan and Iraq. (Not necessarily successful in the end but they paid none the less.)
Assad in Syria was backed by Russia and Iran so they would be responsible.
And its not stupid; its what's happening and Russia can't do s**t about it.
UBI would work for reparations. Syria was attacked by Israel. The US won’t leave Iraq after being asked, and Iraq is still worse off.
Ukraine is at least on Russia’s border. The US didn’t even know why it invaded Iraq. It’s on the other side of the world, and no one has ever been able to explain why the US needed to go in.
None of what you said was relevent or accurate. Maybe try again after a break?
I just reply to the disqus posts in disqus. Israel and the US are in Syria. Anyway, my post mostly fits.
– UBI is how to do reparations. The US didn’t improve Iraq. There’s no sense in reconstruction if not improving a polity.
– The US still will not leave and hasn’t officially annexed any territory.
– The US wanted influence in Iraq. Russia wouldn’t be able to influence Ukraine with its money in reconstruction. The US would control the money.
– Russia is more justified in invading Ukraine than was the US its invasions, and Russia actually knows its neighbor (the US didn’t know Iraq or Afghanistan).
– The US didn’t have any justification in invading Iraq. It’s the most ridiculous war. Tge US jumps in, accidentally spawns ISIS, never leaves. The US is the joke of the world. No one can even explain why it entered. Everything was a lie.
1) I didn't say reparations improved anything (and said so in my post).
2) The US administration wanted to control Iraq's oil. (I disagree with the reason but that WAS the reason.)
3) Russia has NO justification for invading Ukraine. You are contorting yourself to support Russia. (Which you always do.) And what the hell does it mean to "know your neighbor" before you invade? That might be the dumbest s**t you've said so far!
The US didn’t know Iraq. Iraq is far away. Russia does know Ukraine. The US messed up Iraq partly due to misunderstanding.
When I make these comments, you need to understand that I’ve read many articles over the years. The popular criticism in the past was the US didn’t understand far away Iraq.
I’d say Israel was the reason for the US entry, but the US claimed WMD. Oil and profit from war were part of it also.
The US should focus on oppressing Latin America. Iraq is too far away. Iran could oppress Iraq, and the US could oppress Mexico. Venezuela has plenty of oil, as does Canada. It’d make more sense to invade our neighbors.
Russia knows Ukraine and STILL messed up. So, what's your point again?
The US understood Iraq as well as they needed to win the war. They lost the part after. They knew Iraq was 3 separate, sectarian areas but didn't care to deal with them because of political issues. (Turkey vs the Kurds. Iran and the Shias.)
Israel wasn't as big an issue as you think but the Iran/Shia connection probably was considered.
First, the US can "oppress" most anyone it wants to some degree. They don't have to be "close" because of the global reach of the US military/dollar.)
The US won't fight for oil anymore because we don't need to. Technology (fracking) has made the US a global exporter of petroleum.
Again, it doesn't make any more sense to invade a neighbor over anyone else. Maybe read more articles about the world in 2024?
The US is corrupt. Maybe all polities are corrupt. When you say the US invaded for oil, you think the US acted out of state interests. I disagree.
Oil is profitable for some. War is profitable for some. The interests of a few outweighed the interests of the whole, corruption. Separately, the US doesn’t exit Iraq because of Israel. Israel was a major reason for the war.
When the US went into Iraq, critics noted that Saddam was secular Sunni Arab nationalist socialist. You might say he was slightly different, but the point is it empowered Iran by having the US remove him. Iraq is majority Shia Arab. Now, the US is stuck there.
Russia made mistakes in Ukraine, but it makes sense that Russia is focused on Ukraine. If Russia places in or gives nukes or other military ability to Cuba or Venezuela, it will concern the US. Location matters. Russia’s problem is the Ukrainians will hate it.
Meh. I’m gonna have to disagree and leave it at that.
War is profitable. That’s why I keep repeating: “It’s a big club, and you’re not in it.”
Another point: The US is so massive that each part doesn’t know what the whole is doing. When Assange revealed US crimes, he revealed that many of us are complicit by playing small parts in supporting the larger machine.
Pat Buchanan used to argue that without religion and nationalism, what would Americans fight for? The answer is we’ll just become more corrupt.
Yeah, we’ll both of those people are of questionable character so you’ll excuse me if I don’t listen to anything they say, yeah?
I just figured you’d find the arguments interesting. I guess I see politics as akin to math. It’s just fun to work with concepts and apply them.
Not a bad approach but if you get better source material, I’ll certainly respond.
I think the US knows why it invaded Iraq. Bush II wanted to impress Bush I and finish the job his dad didn't. Tying Saddam to Al Qaeda and Iraq to 9/11 was just a thin veneer over a family issue.
I must have missed Afghanistan's reconstruction. And any money spent on Iraq is because we are still there.
Russian and Syria are allies of Syria and Assad was/is the leader of a sovereign country. So, the responsible party would be the uninvited guest who won't leave and had no business getting involved in another country's civil war.
“So, the responsible party would be the uninvited guest who won't leave…”
Hahaha. EXACTLY my original point! Thanks, Wars. You never disappoint! The irony of your attempts to prove me wrong!
Now, secondly:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-nation-building/
Why, you think I don't want Russia to leave Ukraine or I think Russia shouldn't help with their reconstruction? I guess you haven't been listening to me. I've said multiple times that Russia should give back the territory they have taken. But that would take diplomacy and an acknowledgement that Russia's security concerns were/are genuine. So no, there is no irony in my trying to prove you wrong. And you were wrong.
And Afghanistan is a shithole. The amount of money spent "nation building" doesn't change that.
And that is the GLARING message sent to the rest of the world – the DPRC in particular but also loosely-affiliated or neutral countries like India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Brazil… Your money is safe FOR NOW & "would be a shame" if your country thought to go your own way on policies "we" (USA, EU, NATO) decide for you.
It’s the dumbest move possible by the US elite, unless it wants to destroy the USD as reserve currency to replace with a IMF basket of currencies as is talked about.
Russia will retaliate in kind soon…!
Russia can’t do much, but being wronged can be good, can create a positive reaction in Russia.
They can do a lot…not necessarily in kind…But they have lots of options…!
Flood world markets with fake $USD.
Imagine hundreds of billions' – a trillion ! – worth of counterfeit US$20's, $50's, $100's showing up in every city, every market, every corner-store, every mailbox and doorstep on every continent.
People have spent it before the US has realised it happened and the face value of the vaunted greenback is immediately and irreparably FSTS (F**king Shot To S**t).
Whine and cry?