🔗 Share this article Moscow Demands Substantial Amount in Compensation from Euroclear over Seized Funds The Russian central bank has declared it is seeking compensation valued at $230 billion from the securities depository Euroclear. This move constitutes a direct response by the Kremlin regarding plans to utilize frozen Russian sovereign assets to support Ukraine. The Legal Claim According to accounts in Russian news outlets, the monetary authority initiated a lawsuit last week for an estimated 18 trillion roubles. This amount is equivalent to the aforementioned $230 billion claim. European Union officials are set to determine in the coming days on a proposal to leverage approximately €210 billion in frozen Russian state funds. The proposal involves granting Ukraine with a substantial loan to finance its military and financial needs. Most of these assets, totaling €185 billion, reside at the Euroclear clearing house in Brussels. Euroclear acts as the primary custodian for the Kremlin's frozen financial reserves. Dispute on Ownership European Union officials have argued that their plan is on solid legal ground. They argue is based on the fact that ownership of the sovereign wealth remains with Russia, even though it was immobilized in EU jurisdictions shortly after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Moscow, in contrast, has labeled any utilization of the assets as illegal appropriation. Authorities have warned of reciprocal measures, such as seizing EU private investors' assets within Russia. Kirill Dmitriev, who has assumed a prominent position in peace negotiations, stated on X that Russia "will prevail in court" and retrieve its assets. He warned that the EU, the common currency, and Euroclear "will face consequences" from the proposal. Strategic Positioning With statements interpreted as an attempt to drive a wedge between Europe and the United States, Dmitriev described the assets plan as "a vicious assault on property rights and the global financial system created by the United States." Euroclear declined to provide a statement on the new lawsuit. The institution has previously stated it is contending with more than 100 lawsuits in Russian jurisdictions. Enforcement Challenges While courts in EU countries are unlikely to recognize judgments from Russian courts, experts anticipate Moscow to pursue implementation in countries with closer relations to the Kremlin. "Russian monetary authorities could try to enforce a Russian legal ruling against Euroclear in jurisdictions like China, Hong Kong, the UAE, Kazakhstan, and other sympathetic nations, provided that relevant assets can be located," stated a legal expert from an international firm. European Safeguards European authorities said they are developing steps to discourage other countries from assisting any Russian lawsuits against European companies. They are also crafting safeguards to shield EU countries with investments in Russia from what they term "unlawful expropriation." The Proposed Loan Mechanism Under the detailed scheme, the EU would issue an initial €90 billion loan to Ukraine, backed by the cash generated from the immobilized assets at Euroclear. Critically, Russia's legal claim on the principal funds would remain untouched. Kyiv would solely be obligated to repay the money if and when Russia agreed to pay reparations for the immense damage caused during the ongoing conflict. Other Funding Ideas Belgium, supported by Italy, Bulgaria, and Malta, has asked the EU to examine an different method for funding Ukraine. This entails joint EU borrowing to secure a loan, using unused funds within the European budget. This alternative move, nevertheless, requires unanimity among all 27 member states. Hungary's government, considered aligned with the Kremlin, has previously expressed its opposition. Commenting on Monday, the EU top diplomat, a senior official, said the proposed loan scheme as "the most credible solution" for supporting Ukraine. "This mechanism is based on the Russian immobilized funds, meaning it is not drawn from our taxpayers' money, which is equally significant," she stated. "It also sends a powerful signal that when you do all this destruction to another country, you must pay for the rebuilding."