The Duran Podcast - EU determined to keep Ukraine afloat

Episode Date: December 18, 2025

EU determined to keep Ukraine afloat

All right, Alexander, let's talk about the meetings that are taking place in Brussels, focusing on the Russian frozen assets, or actually two plans, which are now at play. The one plan is the Russian frozen assets and this reparations loan, I believe it's called, right? Reparations loan using the Russian frozen assets. And the second plan, Plan B is zero bonds. is collective, collective borrowing, collective debt and EU member states borrowing money and sending the money to Ukraine. Orban is defiant and he is saying that the first option, the Russian frozen assets is off the table. I've been reading comments from various diplomats taking part in these discussions who are saying no, that option is still on the table. And

Ursula is signaling that she is not going to allow anyone to leave Brussels until they have money for Ukraine, 210 million euros or $225,000, I'm sorry, billion, billion euros or $225 billion. It really does remind me of Greece 2012, 2013, and Cyprus and Cyprus and, and, Cyprus, and, and all of that that was going on back then. And they eventually found a solution, if you want to call it that. I think they'll find a way to get the money to Ukraine as well. What are your thoughts? I absolutely agree.

Now, we have two options, as you say. One is the loan using the Russian frozen assets as collateral. We've discussed this in several programs now. That plan is illegal. I mean, it is completely contrary to every conceivable law that you can imagine. The ECB has said that, the IMF has said that, the Bank of Japan, about it said it. The Bank of England and the British legal, the British banks have warned Stama that a similar plan in Britain would also probably be illegal. So, I mean, issues of illegality there all over the place.

The other option, which is Eurobonds, I think we should just say this, is illegal to. It is actually contradictory. It contradicts the provisions of the treaties. But as you absolutely rightly say, this train is left the station. It's now pulling, steaming ahead. There is the issue that Ukraine is going to collapse financially. if it doesn't get money to cover next year. There was even an article in the Daily Telegraph,

which said as much, by the way. So the Daily Telegraph tells you this. Then you really can't dispute this any further. Ukraine is going to run out of money next year. So they don't want to have that happen. They are determined to keep the war going. They're determined to keep Ukraine going. They're going to pull every store.

They're going to pull every lever to keep Ukraine funded. And one way or the other, they will do it. They will always find the money to do this. They may have great problems finding money now for everything else, but for this, they will sacrifice whatever they can. And they won't let little matters of legality, of laws and treaties stand in their way. We've discussed this already. Now, Orban says that the idea of using the frozen assets is off the table.

It is not off the table. If you listen to what Ursula was saying, if you listen to what others are saying, it clearly is still being pushed and proposed. And it remains, in my opinion, the preferred option for Ursula and Mautz and Kayakales. The reason is, for that is twofold. Firstly, they want to do it despite Russia. And by the way, also Donald Trump, who for his own reasons, opposes this plan. But also because taking on Eurobonds is going to be problematic in several European countries,

mostly principally in Germany. Eurobonds might very well provoke legal challenges in Germany as well. So if they can get this thing of moving forward with the loan using the Russian assets as collateral, if they can ram it through the European Council, that is their preferred option. Of that, I have absolutely no doubt. The trouble is Trump is against it. All of these other entities are against it. and it looks as if opposition is crystallising.

So we have Belgium, still opposing it. Italy, Maloney is now clearly having doubts, and she has Salvini, who's reappeared, resurfaced. And he's obviously breathing down her back on this. So Italy says it opposes it to, and Italy is a big player in the European Union. We have Malta, Cyprus, both financial centres. they are reposing it. Bulgaria too, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and perhaps other countries as well.

Lurking in the background, there's also Spain, and I gather that Spain is also unsure. So there is a lot of opposition to overcome. Don't assume at this point that it won't be overcome that, you know, the arm twisting might not succeed in some way. So I would not write off at all the possibility that they will move forward with this 140 billion euro loan. The only thing I would say is this, if the opposition remains as strong as it is at the moment, if Italy remains opposed and Belgium, then the option of ramming it through using emergency powers is probably off the table. because then there would be a massive legal challenge. Far too many countries would be seen to be opposing it. And I think at that point, there is a serious chance that it might fail when it goes to the European Court of Justice, which presumably it would do.

So the other option, as I said, is Eurobonds. And though I am confident that Ursula prefers to use the assets. the Russian assets as collateral for the loan. From her point of view, Eurobonds is also extremely attractive because, of course, it takes us a huge step towards fiscal union. If you start launching Eurobonds, if the European Union becomes a sovereign, a sovereign debt issuer, then it It's only a step, it's only one small further step towards fiscal unity and therefore direct taxation. And she would love that and the European Commission would love that.

We would be very close then to seeing the European Commission transform itself into the European government. The United States of Europe. Of Europe. Exactly. Yeah. The issue with the joint loans. the Eurobonds that I believe is pushing Ursula to look more at the Russian assets for Ukraine

is that it's going to take time. And Ukraine doesn't have time. I believe the estimates are at best April. And then Ukraine is completely bust. Zelensky says they have until February. So I mean, the whole Eurobond thing is complicated and it's going to take time. And there is division. And then this division has existed from before the conflict in Ukraine. They've been wanting to do joint loans and Eurobonds for a decade now. But the North is saying no. Yes. But the South is saying, hell yes.

Yes. Italy, Greece, Cyprus, all these countries would love to take out loans and to borrow and then have Germany pay for it. Exactly. I mean, they've been dreaming of this for 10. I remember in Greece 10, 15 years ago, the Greeks were, the Greek government was like, yes, What we need is joint borrowing. We need Eurobonds because that's what they want. Let us borrow.

And then let's have Germany and France and the Netherlands be on the hook, which is essentially what you're talking about when you're discussing your robots. And that is why you have the resistance from the north, right? But yeah, Ursula would love to go that route. But I think it's a timing issue and they're very pressed for time because the truth of the matter is that you create. is flat, broke. Absolutely.

And they've been broke. Yes. For the past four years, the United States and Europe has been funding this war from the very beginning. They've been paying for everything. Yes. So all the stories about Ukraine's economy as the number three best performing economy in Europe, remember all those stories?

Lies. Yes. They were all lies. Yes. Right? Yeah. And so, you know, you have to deal now with the reality of it, which is that Ukraine is broke and they need to get the money.

to Ukraine quickly. Joint loans, Eurobonds is a preferred route, but it's a lengthy, difficult route with a lot of division. The Russian assets is a quick route. I guess you could say it's a quicker route, but you have a lot of division. At the end of the day, for me, the issue here, the interesting point to all of this is that you're seeing $225 million billion to Ukraine, which is not in the EU. You know, Cyprus needed $10 billion, Alexander, when it had its banking problem. Yes. 10 billion is what it's needed, it was, what, is what was needed to preserve the banks in Cyprus. And you know what the EU said? Stuff it. Your banks are going bust, and we're going to take people's money in their accounts. Ten billion. And Greece was also, didn't need $225 billion right away, right?

I mean, it was a bigger package, Greece. And that carries over to Italy, Portugal, all the countries that were in trouble. You're talking about $225 billion on top of an already existing $200 or $250 billion that has already been given to Ukraine. And as Victor Oban has said, that money is gone. And you have a $40 billion euro loan to the G7, which is in this package, which no one wants to talk about, which is going to be paid back. Exactly.

Yeah. So this is exactly right. But what they have been doing, not just for the last four years. My own personal view, by the way, is that Ukraine basically went bust in 2015, because it was in 2015 that it basically started defaulting on loans. But anyway, the point is it's an iron rule. You don't lend money to a bankrupt. That's what they've been doing.

They haven't just been lending money. They've been shoveling money at the bankrupt. And the Americans who are perhaps rather more business-minded have stopped. And by the way, it isn't just Trump now, because we've had this decision by Congress. They've decided to limit, they continue to give funding to Ukraine. But the amount that they've allocated publicly is 800,000. million dollars over two years. I mean, that's, that's nothing. That is, that's, I mean, that's not even, that's not even small change relative to what we've been seeing before. So,

the Americans have stopped because they see that this is a black hole into which money vanishes. The Europeans, they continue crossing on. And there is, there is, as we've discussed, in previous programs, an obsessive quality about this. But it's also important to say that the people who are doing this, who are insisting on doing this, who are insisting on bailing out Ukraine, which, as you rightly say, is not a member of the European Union, are showing no responsibility to the people of Europe, the taxpayers of Europe, the people who produce the wealth that such wealth as Europe still has, and whose best interests these people are supposed to be there to look after and protect.

Well, they're not doing that. They're sacrificing all of that to keep Ukraine going. Yeah, and I just want to point out that in the case of Cyprus, Cyprus was a member. Yeah. It is a member of the EU when the EU told Cyprus to stuff it. And you forget about the $10 billion to bail out the bank. And I believe the total package for Greece, if I remember correctly, I could be wrong about these numbers.

But I remember it being around $100 or $110 billion with the Troika, with the IMF, the EU, and the World Bank, I believe they all came together to provide this package to Greece. Once again, I could be wrong about these numbers with regards to Greece. But I do believe it was much less than $225 billion, as well as the 150 or 200 that has already been given to Ukraine. I mean, it dwarfs the amount of money that has gone into Ukraine, what Greece needed at the time. Well, I know a little bit about Greece. Again, I don't remember the exact numbers, but I think you got them about right. But I remember something else.

We had the Troika, the Troika, which is the ECB, the IMF, and the European Commission. The ECB, yeah, were physically present in Greece. They had their representatives in every department of every ministry. They were keeping a careful watch on what everybody was doing. I mean, it for a time became what almost felt like a neo-colonial enterprise, just saying, has anything like that ever been set up in Ukraine? Where the funds are far bigger, where the corruption issues are now much more public, where they have the golden toilets,

and all of those things, has anything like that ever been done for Ukraine since 2014, or any time since, or since the war began? Far bigger sums of money. But of course, you just give them, you hand them over. They go into Zelensky's hands, and those are the officials there. And as far as I can see, there's none of the kind of supervision, the minute almost oppressive supervision that we got in Greece. And as you absolutely rightly said, Ukraine is not even a member of the European Union.

So the other thing, and it's a point you've made before in previous programs, is that this money that they're talking about, whatever it is, 140 billion, 210 billion, $225 billion, whatever it is, it's going to last, as they think, two years. it will probably last a few months before the Ukrainians come back and ask for more. It is as night follows day. That is a certainty. And, of course, if Ukraine plodes before then, if the Russian army breaks through, which people are thinking is increasingly likely, then all that money will be gone even faster.

Well, did you know about the $40 billion loan from the G7? I mean, I'm sure it was reported on, but I don't. remember us actually doing a show or talking about it, but I mean, all of a sudden, it's revealed. You know, we're going to take part of this $225 billion because we have to pay back a $40 billion loan from the G7, which was given to Ukraine, right? So that money, where is that money? Where did it go? What was done with it? Exactly. To answer your question, I didn't know about it until a couple of days ago. The first thing to do, to say about this is, again, it is to put it mildly, bad lending practice to lend money to a borrower so that that borrower can then pay back

the money he already owes you. I mean, that is an extremely bad. To buy one credit card to pay another to get paid. Exactly. Exactly. I mean, it is unbelievable. And, And remember, we're not talking about commercial lending here. I mean, you know, if banks do that, I mean, you know, they're probably violating their fiduciary duties and regulations and all the sorts of things. But, I mean, it's pretty bad, but, you know, it can be done, I suppose. These are supposed to be sovereign states and the European Union that is doing this. And they have an obligation to their taxpayers. This is the money of their taxpayers that they're giving to Ukraine.

So, you know, if you are actually going to repay a loan to yourself in this kind of way, first of all, you absolutely do ask what has happened to that money. And there's no, I've not seen anybody talk about that. Nobody is talking about where that $40 billion went to. I mean, I'd be interested to know. I would have thought that this would be the main issue to be talking about now. I mean, it ought to be absolutely something that people need to discuss and comment about publicly because if you're going to lend money in order to pay yourself back money and things of that

kind, lend more money to pay yourself back more money, well, then at least you have to come out straight and tell your taxpayers, for that is what you're going to do. But anyway, there it is. That's how Ursula and Callas and all of these people amounts as well, remember. I mean, he's obviously heavily involved in all of this. That's how they manage their affairs. Well, or rather our affairs, because it is our affairs. So they're basically asking Belgium to sacrifice itself to fall on on the sword, right? Yeah. To destroy its economy.

Yeah. To destroy Euroclear so that the money can go to Zelensky. Russia is going to go after Belgium and Euroclear. Yeah. I think that's obvious. Absolutely. And they'll probably go after them in jurisdictions around the world, right? Yes.

I mean, the one that they're apparently most scared of is Singapore. So they've started the first, they're taking the first step, which is the claim in the Moscow arbitration court. Once they got a judgment there, which they will get a judgment there, they will take it to Singapore. The courts in Singapore apparently have a history of taking very hardline, correct positions on the sanctity of sovereign debt. We've already discussed that all of these debates, all this discussion, all these arguments about whether this is legal or not, is itself. immensely strong evidence, which a court will accept that this is illegal. And Euroclear has assets in Asia that will open the way for the Russians to take action

against the assets in Asia. The Moscow judgment is probably going to open the way for the Russians to take action against assets in Russia itself, and some of these will be private assets. And of course, Fitch, which is one of the three big credit rating agencies, has now told Euroclear that if this happens, we're going to have to downgrade your credit rating, or at least we're thinking about doing it. Now, for an institution like Euroclear, which is a depository, If they start having their credit ratings downgraded, then I would have thought that would sink them. Who puts money in an unsaved depository?

I mean, it's the sort of thing that is far more likely to persuade people to start taking their money out. So, I mean, my final question to you is what happens when Belgium is destroyed, when Euroclear is destroyed? Who bails out Belgium and Euroclear? where's that money going to come from? Who's going to bail them out? I imagine it's going to be a lot more than $225 billion. And then my follow-up question is what happens when Zelensky burns through the $140 or $180 billion? Because $225 billion, but keep in mind, $40 billion is going to go to the G7.

So that money is already gone. Yeah. So you're talking about $180 billion, whatever, less than that, whatever it is. Annalina Berbach math. But who is going to give Zelensky money when he burns through this package, which is he's going to burn through it in a year. Yes. Maybe even less than that. This is not going to last Ukraine for two years. Well, indeed, quite. So then where does the money come from? Well, well, from you and me is the answer. I mean, it's, I mean, the short, and by the way, I should make it clear, but I also pay to it.

in the European Union because I have property in Greece and I pay taxes on them. So when I say from you and me, I mean, I do include me because... Many people watching this video. Absolutely. Yeah. Exactly. I mean, obviously Belgium, they cannot let Belgium crash. And by the way, Belgium has very high debts.

As for a Euroclear, as I understand it, it manages around 4 trillion euros of assets. assets, four trillion. Now, remember, whatever money is held by a bank is actually a liability of the bank. I don't know how Euricle works exactly. I understand that it is not exactly a bank. It is a depository. I'm not going to pretend I know the difference. But if there is a run, if people are starting to take money out of Euricle, if there is a crisis, for Euroclear and it crashes. I'm not saying that's going to happen because I don't know that it's the future, but if things like that start to happen, then I mean the sums are going to be absolutely phenomenal. I mean, they will make the 2011-13 and the sovereign debt crisis at that time. I mean,

look like small potatoes. I mean, it's going to be on a much, much bigger scale. And we are doing all of this at a time when European governments, the big ones, all of them, are already massively indebted and where Germany is getting deeper into debt as a result of the, shall we say, unconventional economic policies that Freedict Nazis is conducting. So how it will all work out, I don't know. But one can imagine a situation where it thinks really get out of control, it could break the euro. I mean, it would be so big, potentially, that it could break the euro. The 200 billion, by itself, they could manage.

If we're throwing in the debts of Belgium, the liabilities that Euroclear is carrying, I mean, the sky's the limit. I don't want to look too far ahead. They ought to be, by the way. I mean, they ought to be strategizing this. There's no sign that they are. But they ought to be thinking about this. And they ought to be preparing for it.

And I don't know how one does. Now, as for Zelensky, well, of course, when he runs through the $180 billion, he will come back if you'll ask him more. And if we are still there, if the European Union is still there, if they manage to somehow navigate through all of these things, they will work to try and give him more. Because they always give him more. I mean, they never stop giving him more. And to repeat again, what they're going to be giving him ultimately is either our money or they will give him things that we are going to be on the hook for, just as we are on the hook for, whichever one of these two schemes, they're eventually put in place.

I'll give you a final question and we'll wrap up the video. They know this. I mean, they have bankers, they have accountants, they have lawyers in Europe. They probably have very good accountants, bankers and lawyers. They know all of this. They know all of this is a bad idea, whether it's plan A or plan B. And they know the risks in both of these plans. They know that Ukraine is losing the conflict.

They know that there's going to be no Russian reparations or anything like that. There are people in Europe and definitely the United States that know this. And they're telling Ursula and Kayakhalis all of this. Is the, and Mertz, is the plan that the ideologues in Brussels are betting on, is the plan this money will last Ukraine for two years? They're already holding back the Russians. They believe they're holding back the Russian military. The two years will allow them to.

continue to hold back the Russian military. This is what they're thinking. And then right before the crash, we can begin our war with Russia. Yes. The other hope is that, you know, at that point, President Gavin Yuson, something like that is elected in the United States. And we go back to Biden-era policies and the mighty United States with its unlimited credit card comes back in and starts picking up the slack again and printing the money and covering all these states. So I suspect there's some element of that too, but I think that's exactly, that is exactly right. I think that I think you've set out the ideas absolutely correctly. These people, these people are not living in the world worlds and they're taking risks

and the risks are becoming utterly reckless gambles. In one of my programs recently, I said that it's like people with a gambling. addiction. They put all their money on one number and they tell themselves if they spin the roulette wheel, just one more time, that number will come up and we'll be able to make so much money from it that we will cover all the losses that we've been running up up to now. I've seen people who do that. I know people. I've known people who do that. A member of my family was like that. And I think this is what we're seeing today. All right, for a country that's not even in the European European.

Well, I know you. We'll end the video there. The durand.orgals.com. We're on X. We're on Rumble. And we are also on telegram and on substack. So check us out on substack. And the Durant shop, pick up some merch. Take care.