By Guy Birchall
European Union leaders agreed at a summit in Brussels on Dec. 18 to explore financing Ukraine’s 2026–27 funding needs through a loan backed by frozen Russian assets, temporarily setting aside plans for joint EU borrowing, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Tusk described the outcome as a political opening rather than a final decision, saying leaders had agreed it was “worth trying” to build a mechanism around Russian assets, even as major legal and risk-sharing hurdles remain.
Tusk said leaders agreed to focus technical work on that option after enthusiasm waned for borrowing against the EU budget.
The agreement signals a shift away from borrowing against the EU budget, an option that failed to gain enough traction.
“The use of the so-called headroom in the EU budget does not inspire enthusiasm in key EU countries,” Tusk said.
“We will rather be looking at the reparations loan on the basis of Russian assets, and we will rather be looking to provide guarantees for countries most at risk, like Belgium, so that they feel these guarantees are serious.”
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy attended the summit, as EU leaders sought to lock in funding to support Kyiv beyond 2025 amid uncertainty over long-term Western assistance.
European Council President António Costa said as he arrived at the summit that it would not end without a decision reached on how to fund the loan.
“We will never leave this council without a final decision to ensure the financial needs of Ukraine for 2026 and 2027,” he told reporters in Brussels.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed Costa’s sentiments that the summit would not come to a close without an agreement on how the loan would be funded.
“We’re speaking about 137 billion euros [$160.7 billion] that are necessary, the estimate, our own estimate, and the estimate of the IMF, and we have committed to cover two-thirds of it, 90 billion euros [$105.6 billion],” she said.
“I have made two proposals, two options on the table for this funding. One is funding through the EU budget, borrowing against the budget, and the second possibility is the reparations loan.”
The proposal for funding the reparations loan is to use frozen Russian assets, of which 185 billion euros ($217 billion) are held by Euroclear, a financial market infrastructure group based in Belgium. An additional 25 billion euros ($29 billion) are held in a number of other European countries.
However, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever said on Dec. 18 that he had still not seen guarantees that sufficiently allayed his legal concerns and worries over liquidity risks to support the plan to use the immobilized assets.
“I haven’t seen any text yet that would persuade me to change Belgium’s position. I hope to see it today, but so far, it hasn’t arrived,” he said in the Belgian Federal Parliament, VRT News reported.
In separate comments to journalists, he stood firm in his position, saying Belgium has “set conditions, and they’re clear and well-known,” adding that “everyone considers them rational and reasonable.”
“I simply have to get those conditions. There are dealbreakers that need to be removed from the text. Period,” he said.
“Otherwise, I’ll have to be thrown out. There can be no flexibility on matters that threaten the financial security of Euroclear and Belgium, let that be very clear.”
De Wever set out his conditions in October, saying he would remain opposed to the loan until he secured three guarantees from the EU: full mutualization of risk, that every member state would help foot the bill if the money had to be repaid, and that every country that had immobilized Russian assets would move together.
Meanwhile, other EU leaders struck a decidedly different tone on the topic of using Moscow’s frozen assets.
“We intend to use Russian assets to finance the Armed Forces of Ukraine for at least two more years. This step is not about prolonging the war, but about bringing the war to an end as soon as possible,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz wrote on X on Dec. 17.
Acting Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof issued a similar statement on X as he arrived for the meeting, saying, “Our preference is for recovery loans backed by frozen Russian assets.”
“This will ensure that Russia ultimately pays and that the risks and burdens are shared fairly among the member states,” he said.
Tusk said on X, “Now we have a simple choice: either money today, or blood tomorrow.”
“I’m not talking about Ukraine only, I’m talking about Europe,” he said. “This is our decision to make. And only ours. All European leaders must finally rise to the challenge.”
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, by contrast, was emphatic in his opposition to the proposal to use Russian assets to fund a loan to Ukraine, saying “the whole idea is a stupid one.”
“Confiscating Russian assets to fund Ukraine? A declaration of war,” he wrote on X.
“Taking the money of one side and giving it to the other would drag the EU into the conflict. This must not happen. Thankfully, I am not the only one who sees it this way.”
In a separate post, he also voiced opposition to the second proposal of funding a loan out of the EU budget, saying, “Pushing Hungary into joint debt to finance a war that isn’t ours is not an option.”
Russia has stated that using any of its frozen assets to fund Ukraine would be considered “theft” and suggested that it would respond in kind should the EU attempt to move ahead with its plan.
The Duma passed a unanimous resolution on Nov. 20 calling for action against Belgium, Euroclear, and “unfriendly investors” should the EU decide to use frozen Russian assets to fund a loan to Ukraine.
This move built on comments on Oct. 22 from Russian Deputy Finance Minister Alexey Moiseev, who said that Moscow currently has no plans to seize European assets but will reconsider its position if the EU confiscates frozen Russian assets.
“We are not confiscating anything yet,” he said. “The Europeans haven’t called for confiscation, so we won’t confiscate anything until they do. If they do end up confiscating, then we will consider it.”
