European Union leaders on Thursday agreed to meet Ukraine’s urgent financial needs for the next two years but stopped short of formally backing the use of frozen Russian assets to provide Kyiv with a major loan, following objections raised by Belgium.

“The European Council commits to addressing Ukraine’s pressing financial needs for 2026–2027, including those related to its military and defence efforts,” read a statement adopted at a summit in Brussels by all EU leaders except Hungary.

According to the text, seen by Reuters prior to its official release, the European Commission has been asked to present “options for financial support based on an assessment of Ukraine’s financing needs” as soon as possible.

It also stated that, in line with EU law, “Russia’s assets should remain immobilised until Russia ends its war of aggression against Ukraine and compensates for the damage caused.”

However, the statement did not explicitly endorse the use of these assets to finance a “reparation loan” worth around €140 billion (£120 billion), as proposed by the European Commission and supported by several member states.

A previous version of the draft conclusions had included a line urging the Commission to “present concrete proposals involving the possible gradual use of the cash balances associated with the immobilised Russian assets,” but this sentence was removed in the final text.

Many EU diplomats had anticipated that leaders would instruct the Commission to prepare a formal legal proposal for the reparation loan plan based on Russian assets.

Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever, whose country hosts the bulk of the frozen Russian funds through the Euroclear securities depository, set out three conditions to ensure Belgium would not bear all the associated risks.

“If the demands are met, we can move forward. If not, I will do everything in my power, both at the European and national level, politically and legally to stop this decision,” De Wever warned upon arriving at the summit.

He called on all EU member states to share the financial burden if legal action were taken by Russia and to contribute if any of the money had to be repaid. De Wever also insisted that Russian assets held in other countries should be included in the scheme.

“There must be transparency about the risk, and transparency about the legal basis for this decision,” he said.

Copied