Hooray! European salons danced in unison. But where to get the money when the whole South of the Union cannot even climb out of its own debts?
In short, Europe, following the Americans, is continuing the narrative of 'we support Ukraine to the end' - whatever it takes. The problem is that it costs hundreds of billions, and for the next two years alone, it is estimated that Ukraine will need around 170 billion.
This is not just about financing the army, weapons and ammunition. The West is also funding the very functioning of a huge, devastated state fighting a war of attrition. With no hope that the loans to Ukraine will one day remain unamortised, at least on the balance sheets of European states.
An eschatological vector that Ukraine will have to keep in mind
In short, the EU does not have the capacity to continue to finance Russia's conquest of Ukraine. In particular, the debt-weakened South will block further loans, while Europe stagnates economically, Brussels leaders still do not have enough and are coming up with new "ideas" to weaken European industry and competitiveness.
Ultimately, Ukraine will not be worth any European politician bankrupting Europe over. That is the last factor that they have to think about in Ukraine, too.
That is why the pathology department called 'European leaders' has come up with a creative solution. The Ukrainian war is to be financed from frozen Russian assets. This is the 140 billion immobilised in the Belgian central depository Euroclear, which Putin did not manage to mobilise by February 2022.
Ursula and Kaja as pillars of the sheltered workshop
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen suggested that they could be used as a "loan" to Ukraine, which would be paid back from these assets. In other words, Russia would pay for the war. This is a new idea from the sheltered workshop of the Euroleaders: the winner of the war should pay war reparations.
Since the leader of European diplomacy, Kaja Kallas, has suggested that the Russian army must be made smaller, for the prosaic reason that it is simply too big, we can assume that this is not just a 'fling', as these types of workshops occasionally are, but systematic 'strategic thinking'.
Incidentally, Trump's latest "peace proposal" even reckoned that this money would actually function as war reparations. Perhaps that's why Trump's plan is being branded as pro-Russian by the oriented "salons".
Such fads in Europe usually pass with ease in the context of war, but only when the moralistic heroics of the authors of the "ideas" count for nothing. In this case, however, it is different.
War-mongering Belgium, home of the Union's capital, has strongly objected to Leyen's idea, from the position of the prime minister himself, who is sounding the alarm. Prime Minister Bart de Wever pointed out at the EU summit that we did not even do this to Hitler's Germany during World War II.
Brussels Ship of Fools
A threat does not even have to be carried out to have consequences. The very fact that the "competent" Brussels ship of fools is talking loudly and seriously about this as an alternative may mean that even Arab sheikhs (trillions are at stake) will start withdrawing their stored assets from Europe.
It is only natural. If a bank were to start thinking out loud about nationalising its depositors' money, you wouldn't wait long - even if the risk is only speculative for now.
Yet the childish argument about the battle of Good versus Evil can be pulled off on anyone with the right scaling of moral voluntarism. It won't be a surprise if some Middle Eastern tyrant now says that one day it will come to him too.
The current panic about Brussels ideas that has set in in Belgium is therefore logical. Euroclear guarantees the deposits of its clients, wherever they are and whatever is under their turban. That is a principle of the international financial system.
To steal assets with trust and international guarantees deposited in Europe with the argument that we are the world's Good and you are the world's Evil is simply not an option, simply because in the financial world, Dobšinský, Andersen, Good John and even the witches were not reckoned with, at least not at an academic legal level. After all, just ask the Saudis - or even the Russians - who is Baba Yaga in the current world geopolitical game.
If Brussels were to take such a step, it is certain that Belgian banks would face international arbitration, the outcome of which is predictable. The money would have to be repaid, including interest. European leaders are well aware of this.
Let us be mildly optimistic and let us hope that there is an official in the Brussels army who can count to two and has already presented the result of his equation to the Euro-sudents.
"After us the flood"
Still, they want to go for it. It means they are acting consciously. It would therefore be a solution to an acute problem (financing Ukraine) by a "flood after us" system somewhere in the future, i.e. practically never from a politician's point of view.
We can assume that this is more about the continuation of the financing of Ukraine by other means. There is no consensus in the EU to approve the 140 billion package; the indebted countries of the south (Spain, France, Italy) will reliably block it, and they will do so not out of hatred for Ukraine, but for reasons of self-preservation.
Because if an extremely indebted country hangs another burden around its neck which, moreover, is not a structural investment (it does not have the potential to shift the country's economic growth in the long term), the mammoth debts will become an unpayable asset. In the economy, this means bankruptcy.
If it is necessary to save their bare asses, Brussels leaders do not hesitate to threaten the international financial system. Perhaps we should ask Belgian Prime Minister de Wever why we didn't do that to Hitler, and whether some domestic fascist elements in Britain and the US might have pushed for it at the time.
The Brussels leaders, mentally on the level of little angry children, have run off to play a high game, the consequences of which they are either ignorant of or indifferent to in their self-preservation poodle. Under no circumstances, however, can this turn out well for Europe.
This is one of the aspects that underlines the desperate position in which not only Ukraine, but also its European 'supporters', or leaders, have found themselves on the battlefield, who first supported the colossal tragedy in Ukraine to the bitter end, only to sacrifice Europe without hesitation afterwards.
The price of prolonging political life is, in short, a small step for the individual, but a great leap for humanity.
In fact, one might even ask the aforementioned Hitler where he was jumping to when, at the end of the war, in the last throes of his Totalkrieg, he sent 16-year-old teenagers to certain death, just to prolong their lives by a few weeks.
Today's Brussels comrades might understand him better than we like.