Robbing Russia’s frozen assets wont assist Ukraine nor West

(MENAFN) As the war in Ukraine persists, the situation on the battlefield has grown increasingly dire, with signs of exhaustion on the Ukrainian side and rising discontent over military mobilization. Despite Ukraine’s dire circumstances, polls suggest that many Ukrainians are now calling for a negotiated end to the conflict, acknowledging that some concessions to Russia may be necessary. Meanwhile, the U.S., a key backer of Ukraine, is poised for a potential shift in leadership with Donald Trump’s upcoming return to power, bringing with it promises to end the war, or at least American involvement, swiftly.

Against this backdrop, there is a growing push in the West, notably from European economics commentators like Martin Sandbu, to seize Russia’s frozen assets. The West had previously frozen approximately €260 billion of Russian central bank assets as part of its economic sanctions. However, while these assets remain inaccessible to Russia, they have still generated significant profits, which the West now uses to finance aid to Ukraine. Sandbu’s call for full confiscation of these assets has been met with strong resistance from Russia, which considers the seizure of both the assets and their profits as unlawful.

Critics argue that confiscating Russian assets would not only be legally dubious but could also harm the West's broader strategic goals. Legal challenges against the frozen assets are already underway, with Russian entities claiming their rightful ownership of both the assets and the profits. Seizing these resources without Russia's consent would not only violate international legal norms but could also escalate tensions further, harming the global economy and worsening the West's already fragile relations with Russia. Despite Sandbu's calls for more aggressive action, the notion of using frozen assets as a permanent source of revenue for Ukraine is both legally flawed and counterproductive.

MENAFN17122024000045015687ID1109001566