Unlock the White House View Newspaper FREE
Your guide to what the 2024 American elections mean for Washington and the world
The writer was a national security adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris. Daleep Singh, Deputy National Security Advisor to International Economy in Biden Administration, also contributed
Europe’s response to the shocking attraction of the Trump administration of support for Ukraine has been admirable and may be historic. Instead of accepting Donald Trump’s hug for Russia’s fake narrative of war, staying silent or quarreling with each other, European leaders have doubled in support for Kyiv, pledging to increase security and collect a “will coalition”.
These steps are welcome, but not enough. Growths in European protection spending will not come as fast as to replace the equipment that Washington has transferred to Ukraine. And without American support, which Trump refuses to provide, even European forces in Ukraine would not be an adequate obstacle against future Russian aggression.
On the contrary, the only really effective opportunity to save Ukraine is to reach over $ 200 billion in Russian assets currently frozen in Europe and make money to support the industrial basis of the economy, army and protection of Ukraine. This money would help Ukraine earn the means to protect herself and provide a salvation for her economy. And it would give Europe a negotiating lever it needs to mediate a just and sustainable end of war.
French officials are reportedly considering a plan to capture Russian assets if Moscow violates a future ceasefire agreement. But this idea bypasses the reality that any securities of the letter to which it is written will require Ukraine to develop a force capable of preventing future Russian aggression and a way to rebuild an economy destroyed by three years of Russian attacks. None of these things will be possible without using some of the frozen assets, especially after Washington interrupts financial support for Ukraine.
In the Biden administration, we have worked for years to persuade Europe to join us in the transfer of those assets to Ukraine, but we were unsuccessful. While Europeans went along with a G7 agreement in the fall to secure a loan to Ukraine guaranteed by the frozen assets, they continued to come with reason not to capture the director. But their arguments were not convincing then and are much less convincing now. While European leaders review their options, they must keep in mind a few points.
First, while the legal basis for confiscation is controversial, many legal scholars have concluded that it is healthy as long as it is in the context of countermeasures against Russia’s illegal aggression. The principle created for a long time of “kicks off” would allow Ukraine to seek its claim for damages against Russia’s claim to obtain its frozen assets.
Second, the capture of Russian assets in Europe does not, contrary to European concerns, prevents countries from maintaining more than freezing these assets for an indefinite time, which European countries and G7 are already doing. The US, European, United Kingdom and Japanese action to immobilize Russia’s assets in 2022 has not prevented anyone from keeping dollars, euros, sterling or jen since then, though almost no one believes Russia will ever take those assets.
Third, only because most frozen assets are in Europe does not mean that the euro would be in more danger than the dollar. It is no secret that US authorities directed the way to the G7’s conviction to freeze Russia’s assets in the immediate consequences of Putin’s occupation. Last spring, Congress voted over the majority to give the president’s authority to capture these assets for the benefit of Ukraine. Today, no possible aggressive nation would conclude that their assets are safer in the US than in Europe.
Fourth, the risk of opening a Pandora box for World War II reparations is overloaded. While some in Poland will use the seizure to strengthen their long claims, there is no other appetite for reopening that resolved issue.
And finally, while Russia has threatened to retaliate against foreign companies operating there if Europe transfers its frozen assets to Ukraine, the additional risk is minimal. Businessdo Western business that still has physical or intangible wealth within Russia either has repaid those claims or already realizes that they will have to do so.
None of this is to dismiss European concerns about the capture of Russia’s assets as irrelevant. But with the US support for Ukraine now in serious doubt, the greatest risk continues inaction. European crucial steps to capture Russia’s assets will shock the balance of power in conflict as much as Trump’s leadership in Russia last week – but this time in the name of justice and freedom than the shameful betrayal of a democratic ally fighting for its existence.
