Connect with us

News

EU Divided Over €140 Billion Reparations Loan for Ukraine Using Frozen Russian Assets

Published

on

European Union leaders remain at odds over an ambitious plan to use frozen Russian assets to fund a €140 billion loan for Ukraine, after Belgium blocked the proposal during a summit in Brussels this week. The initiative, designed to finance Ukraine’s military and reconstruction needs for 2026 and 2027, has become a major test of Europe’s political unity and financial resolve amid waning U.S. support for Kyiv.

The proposal would see the EU issue a “reparations loan” backed by roughly €185 billion in immobilised Russian central bank assets held at Euroclear, a Brussels-based securities depository. The funds, frozen since 2022 under Western sanctions following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, currently generate billions in annual windfall profits for Belgium.

However, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever halted progress, citing fears of Russian retaliation and potential legal fallout. Belgium maintains an investment treaty with Moscow that could expose it to international arbitration if the assets are transferred. “If you take the money from my country and it goes wrong, I am not able—and certainly not willing—to pay €140 billion,” De Wever said after the summit. “Those who support this decision must guarantee that the solidarity will be there if things go sour.”

Despite the setback, EU officials agree on the goal: to make Russia, not European taxpayers, pay for the destruction in Ukraine. What remains unresolved is how to do it legally and safely.

Under the plan, Euroclear would transfer the cash to the European Commission, which would then issue the €140 billion loan to Ukraine in tranches tied to spending conditions, such as using the funds to purchase European-made equipment. Ukraine would only begin repayment after Russia ends the war and agrees to pay reparations, allowing Euroclear to eventually reimburse Moscow—a structure Brussels insists does not amount to confiscation.

See also  North Korea Sends 1,500 Soldiers to Russia for Training, Reports South Korean Intelligence

European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde has warned against any move that could be seen as seizing sovereign assets outright, but has indicated the reparations loan might be feasible with more technical safeguards. EU leaders are also calling for transparency about how much each member state holds in frozen Russian funds and how profits are being used.

Germany and the Netherlands expressed sympathy for Belgium’s concerns but stressed the need for shared risk across the bloc. Hungary has already said it will not participate. French President Emmanuel Macron said technical issues must be resolved but insisted the project remains “on the table.”

With the U.S. scaling back financial support, Europe faces mounting pressure to find long-term solutions. The European Commission is expected to present an updated proposal before the next summit in December, seen as the deadline for a breakthrough.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, addressing EU leaders by video, urged swift action. “Ukraine will need this funding at the very beginning of 2026,” he said. “Not everything depends on us—it’s a political decision.”

News

EU Must End ‘Naivety’ on Trade and Confront China’s Industrial Strategy, Says French Minister

Published

on

France’s Minister for Foreign Trade, Nicolas Forissier, has called on the European Union to abandon what he described as “naivety” in its approach to global trade, urging a tougher stance on countries accused of distorting markets through industrial policy and trade practices.

Speaking in an interview with Euronews’ 12 Minutes With programme, Forissier said Europe must respond more firmly to what he described as the weaponisation of trade dependencies, warning that China in particular could damage its own long-term interests by undermining European industry.

“The Chinese have to understand that they won’t win anything if they destroy the European industry and then the European market, which is an essential market for them,” he said. “We must no longer be naive.”

His comments come as the European Commission prepares to hold an “orientation debate” next week on how to respond to a surge of low-cost Chinese imports. The discussion is expected to shape possible new trade defence measures, with further talks likely when EU leaders meet in Brussels in mid-June.

Forissier said the shift in thinking was not limited to China alone but applied to any country using commercial leverage to gain strategic advantage. “It is not only China,” he said. “It is all the countries that weaponise trade.”

Among the proposals under consideration is a requirement for EU companies to diversify supply chains, sourcing components from at least three different suppliers in order to reduce dependency on any single foreign market. Asked whether he supported such a measure, Forissier replied: “Yes, we have to.”

See also  North Korea Sends 1,500 Soldiers to Russia for Training, Reports South Korean Intelligence

Other options include targeted tariffs on sensitive industries such as chemicals, alongside stronger use of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy tools to counter imports priced below domestic market levels. These measures are designed to address concerns over overcapacity in China’s industrial sector and its impact on European manufacturers.

The debate is taking place against a backdrop of widening trade imbalances. EU goods imports from China exceeded exports by €359.3 billion in 2025, marking an increase of nearly 20% compared with the previous year.

China has already warned it could retaliate if the bloc imposes new restrictions, raising concerns about potential escalation in trade tensions between two of the world’s largest economies.

France has repeatedly pushed for a more assertive European trade policy, arguing that state subsidies, export controls on raw materials and industrial overproduction in major economies are distorting global markets.

Forissier stressed that Europe must maintain open dialogue with Beijing while defending its own industrial base. “We try to respect the Chinese,” he said. “The Chinese have to respect us, and this is the message European institutions have to send.”

Continue Reading

News

US Says Iran Talks ‘Borderline’ as Pakistan Pushes Diplomacy Amid War Tensions

Published

on

US President Donald Trump has said ongoing negotiations over the conflict involving Iran are teetering on the “borderline” between reaching a diplomatic agreement and a return to renewed military strikes, as tensions continue to rise across the region.

The remarks came as Pakistan’s army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir arrived in Tehran for fresh talks aimed at de-escalating the US-Israeli conflict with Iran. His visit follows a series of high-level diplomatic engagements involving Pakistani officials and Iranian leadership in recent days.

Munir was received in Tehran by Iranian Interior Minister Eskandar Momeni, alongside Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi, who has also travelled to the Iranian capital multiple times this week for meetings with senior officials.

Despite the renewed diplomatic activity, Iran has downplayed expectations of a breakthrough. Foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said the visit did not signal any decisive shift in negotiations, describing the differences between the parties as “deep and extensive,” according to Iran’s ISNA news agency.

Speaking at a NATO foreign ministers’ meeting in Sweden, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said there had been limited progress in the discussions but cautioned against optimism.

“There’s a little bit of movement and that’s good,” Rubio said, adding that he did not want to exaggerate developments. He also warned that Washington retains “other options” if diplomacy fails, echoing Trump’s earlier comments that military action remains on the table if Iran does not agree to terms.

Trump has previously stated that he paused consideration of a strike due to what he described as “serious negotiations” taking place, but has repeatedly warned that the fragile ceasefire reached in mid-April could collapse.

See also  Young African Women Trapped in Russia's Drone Production: A Cautionary Tale of Exploitation

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran remained committed to talks despite what he called repeated breaches of diplomacy by Washington. He said Iran was participating “with a responsible approach and with all seriousness” in an effort to secure what he described as a fair outcome, according to Iranian state media.

A key point of contention remains the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic maritime route through which a significant share of global oil and gas supplies pass. Iranian actions in the waterway and US responses have heightened fears of wider economic disruption.

Iran has effectively restricted access through the strait, while US Central Command has reportedly blocked Iranian ports and redirected commercial vessels since mid-April. The European Union has since expanded its sanctions framework targeting those involved, calling the blockade contrary to international law.

Rubio said allied nations were also discussing contingency plans in case negotiations fail, warning that the situation may require a “plan B” if diplomatic efforts collapse.

Continue Reading

News

US Green Card Rule Change Forces Most Applicants to Apply From Abroad

Published

on

A sweeping policy change in the United States has upended a long-standing immigration process, requiring most foreign nationals seeking green cards to leave the country and complete their applications from abroad.

Under the new directive issued Friday by US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), individuals in the United States on temporary visas — including work, student and tourist permits — will generally no longer be able to adjust their status to permanent residency while remaining in the country. Instead, they must return to their home countries and apply through US consulates, except in limited “extraordinary circumstances.”

USCIS spokesperson Zach Kahler said the policy was intended to realign the immigration system with its original framework.

“From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances,” Kahler said. He added that the change would reduce incentives for people to remain in the US after visa denials.

The decision marks a significant departure from decades of practice, under which many migrants have been allowed to apply for permanent residency from within the United States. That pathway has been commonly used by spouses of US citizens, workers, students, and individuals with family ties in the country.

The process of obtaining a green card often takes months or even years, raising concerns that applicants may now be forced to leave jobs, homes and families while waiting for approval abroad.

Immigration attorneys and advocacy groups said they were still assessing the scope of the policy and how it would be enforced. Many also warned that practical barriers could make compliance difficult, particularly for applicants from countries where travel is restricted or where US consular services are limited or unavailable.

See also  Inside the ‘Painstaking’ Negotiations That Led to the Biggest Prisoner Swap Since the Cold War

Shev Dalal-Dheini of the American Immigration Lawyers Association said the move appeared to disrupt established procedures. “USCIS is trying to upend decades of processing of adjustment of status,” she said, noting widespread uncertainty over who would be affected.

Jessie De Haven of the California Immigration Project said the policy could discourage eligible applicants from proceeding altogether. “It’s really hard to tell how this is going to be applied,” she said. “I do think it might have a chilling effect on people applying.”

The announcement forms part of a broader immigration crackdown under the Trump administration, which has sought to tighten legal pathways while increasing enforcement measures against irregular migration.

Officials have framed the change as an effort to close loopholes and strengthen oversight of the immigration system. Critics, however, argue it could lead to prolonged separations for families and create new obstacles for lawful immigrants seeking permanent residency in the United States.

Continue Reading

Trending