“Taking Putin’s money and leaving the risks with [Belgium]. That’s not going to happen,” Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever said in New York. Most of the assets are held in Euroclear, a Brussels-based clearing house – making Belgium a key player in EU negotiations

“Taking Putin’s money and leaving the risks with [Belgium]. That’s not going to happen, let me be very clear about that,” Prime Minister Bart De Wever on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meeting in New York.

“If countries see that central bank money can disappear if European politicians see fit, they might decide to withdraw their reserves from the eurozone,” he added.

  • Quittenbrot@feddit.orgEnglish
    131·
    6 days ago

    Let me fix that for you, Bart:

    “If countries see that central bank money can disappear if European politicians see fit you wage a war of aggression in Europe, they might decide to withdraw their reserves from the eurozone,” he added.

    Doesn’t sound so bad anymore, does it?

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      8·
      6 days ago

      It’s kind of the same thing, honestly.

      The question is if banking should be totally neutral or not, and if not, exactly how high the bar to start messing with people’s assets should be.

      • Quittenbrot@feddit.orgEnglish
        61·
        6 days ago

        Waging a war of aggression for more than three years, massacring villages, abducting children… I don’t think the bar is particularly low here…

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
          51·
          6 days ago

          Yeah, and specifically in Europe, you were right about that. It’s hard to imagine that allowing Russia a pass wouldn’t just amount to total neutrality.

          At the other end, “give your money to Europe and you can have it back when we feel like it” would being shooting yourselves in the foot. That’s too far in the other direction.

      • Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        12·
        5 days ago

        messing with people’s assets

        I get what you mean, but Russian assets at Euroclear belong to the Russian state and its so-called political ‘elite’, ordinary Russian don’t benefit at all.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
          1·
          4 days ago

          Yes, I’m not suggesting it’s the people’s assets. The foreign people who’s assets Europe can mess with tend to be rich.

            • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
              1·
              3 days ago

              I’m not sure what you mean.

              Foreign people, as opposed to local EU citizens, who probably have a European bank account regardless of their financial situation.

  • A_norny_mousse@feddit.orgEnglish
    6·
    6 days ago

    The headline is misleading IMO: he doesn’t say that using Russian assets to support Ukraine will never happen. He (and thus Belgium I guess) is not against the proposal, they just don’t want Belgium to be left holding the bag. that’s what he says won’t happen on his watch.

  • Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    51·
    6 days ago

    The title is a bit odd given the content.

    In a thinly veiled barb at his German counterpart, De Wever called on fellow EU leaders to “talk and come up with something, rather than sharing an opinion every day”.

    “I find that quite frustrating,” he added.

    A Belgian official later clarified that Belgium is not categorically ruling out the Commission’s plan, but rather wants to see significantly more details before potentially agreeing. “We always look at the Commission’s proposals in a constructive and vigilant way,” the official said.

    So it’s more about a clear legal framework that has to be worked out to not “leaving the risks with Belgium” (which is quite understandable I would say). So leaving the risks with Belgium is what the prime minister says is not going happen, not the seizure of Russian assets,