Euroclear: The Line Europe Can't Cross Without Breaking Global Trust

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

Euroclear and the Looming Breach of Trust

The alliance financing the war in Ukraine is facing a new problem. Seven members of the European Union want to block the expropriation of the Russian central bank assets held at Euroclear. This puts the continuation of war financing at risk. At the same time, the specter of a financial crisis looms—one that would once again leave taxpayers footing the bill.

The negotiation marathon between representatives of Ukraine, the EU and the United Kingdom, with a US delegation acting as mediator, continues in Berlin. As usual, it is accompanied by familiar phrases about “progress” on the road to peace and assurances that roughly 90 percent of the target has already been reached.

How much weight this interim result actually deserves will become clear in the coming days. Expect a frantic ramp-up of the propaganda machine, drones over airports (and over Wolfram Weimer’s residence), and growing pressure on US President Donald Trump. The militarily precarious situation of Ukraine’s armed forces is now colliding with an almost equally dramatic financial situation among Kyiv’s creditors.

Everything points to mounting pressure to cut the Gordian knot—sooner rather than later—as war costs on both sides threaten to spiral out of control.

This brings the latest developments in the debate over the expropriation of the Russian central bank and its assets parked at Euroclear back into sharp focus.

A Critical Demarcation Line

Euroclear could turn into a personal Waterloo for EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. She is working at full throttle to convert the current crisis into a massive expansion of power for Brussels—and thus for her Commission.

Hungary, Slovakia and Belgium—already outspoken critics of expropriating Russian assets—are now joined by Italy, Bulgaria, Malta and Cyprus. Resistance to Brussels’ escalation push is growing by the day.

Notably, this resistance coincides with a clear shift in timing. Since the United States effectively withdrew from financing Ukraine, Europe’s financial reality has come into view without cosmetic filters. Without access to roughly €210 billion in Russian assets—about €25 billion of which are spread across various EU states—continued financing of this war of attrition appears barely feasible.

All major creditors—Germany, France and the United Kingdom—have long overstretched their budgets and are running new debt levels between four and six percent. The Ukraine project is on the brink of fiscal collapse.

The Illusion of Expropriation as a Lifeline

What is being attempted is as simple as it is dangerous. These assets—partly government bonds, partly matured bond holdings in foreign currencies—are to be used as collateral for further loans. Europe is already trapped in a debt spiral and is tapping every remaining source of funding. Even the enemy is no longer off-limits for the London-Brussels tandem.

Observers with a sensitivity for political phraseology and grandiosity understood as early as April 2022 what was unfolding: in a state of euphoric overconfidence, decision-makers catastrophically miscalculated and constructed a scenario in which a defeated Russia would be forced to pay for the entire war. This would have allowed Europe to neatly extract its own banks—deeply entangled in Ukraine’s financing—from the equation.

History offers a familiar pattern: bankers and politicians working hand in hand, this time in Kyiv. Many were already anticipating the day of Putin’s submission, followed by regime change in Moscow and the launch of large-scale extraction of Russia’s immense raw-material wealth. Europe’s banking system would have been recapitalized to the rooftops, and the energy problem solved once and for all.

That calculation has clearly failed. Instead, the taxpayer will bear the losses.

Ukraine as a Systemic Risk

Without credit guarantees, Ukraine would already be insolvent. A disorderly collapse of the state would hit the European banking system like a nuclear detonation. There is no realistic way around the public sector eventually absorbing these massive loan liabilities.

This inevitably brings the debate over expanding Eurobonds—formally prohibited under EU law—back to center stage, potentially reintroduced outright as European war bonds.

With the “NextGenerationEU” program, this supposedly forbidden practice has already become de facto reality. Brussels has raised €800 billion on capital markets through this mechanism. These funds fuel the EU’s bloated subsidy machine and are now structurally embedded in its power architecture, always backstopped by the ECB.

Brussels is already acting as a sovereign bond issuer in its own right, further increasing member states’ liability exposure and debt levels. Europe has maneuvered itself into both a geopolitical and financial dead end—an outcome that has been foreseeable for years.

Euroclear and the Looming Breach of Trust

The chronic reality denial and embedded incompetence of EU and UK political leadership defy rational explanation. All the more notable is the emerging resistance around Euroclear—even as Brussels searches for ways to force the decision through by simple majority if necessary.

There is reason for cautious optimism that countries like Italy understand what expropriating Russian central bank assets at Euroclear would mean for the eurozone’s financial stability. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s initiative to discreetly safeguard Italy’s central-bank gold against potential ECB access underscores that Rome knows exactly what is at stake. Italy would be well positioned for a potential reboot of a sovereign currency.

The damage caused by expropriating Russian assets would be maximal: a financial super-GAU, a total loss of credibility and of the merchant-law principles indispensable to banking and international transactions. The entire global financial system—transaction settlement and custodial asset holding—rests on trust: on the absolute stability of its core pillars.

Institutions like Euroclear are among those pillars. They do not merely safeguard international transaction flows—they make them possible in the first place. Once this foundation is damaged, far more than a political signal is at risk. The stability of the entire system is on the line.