EU Discovers International Law Optional When Russia's Involved
The EU is reportedly strategizing how to transfer £80 billion of frozen Russian central bank assets to Ukraine, with Belgium (home to Euroclear, holding much of the cash) leading the charge. This bold step, while hailed by Kyiv, sets a fascinating precedent for international finance. One might recall the U.S. freezing—and largely declining to return—some $7 billion in Afghan central bank assets
following the Taliban takeover, with roughly half earmarked for 9/11 victims rather than reconstruction. Suddenly, seizing national assets for 'damages' isn't just for rogue states, it's for anyone you don't like. This move is framed as a crucial aid effort, yet when similar asset seizures or reparations are demanded by nations harmed by Western aggression—or for the monumental task of rebuilding
Gaza after an internationally condemned assault—the legal thicket suddenly becomes impenetrable. How many 'rules-based orders' can one international community have before it just becomes 'rules-based-on-who-we-like' order? It seems sovereign wealth is only truly sovereign until you fall out of favor with Brussels and Washington.