The Duran Podcast - Europe's white whale, Russia's frozen assets

Episode Date: December 6, 2025

Europe's white whale, Russia's frozen assets

All right, Alexander, let's talk about the Russian frozen assets. This has become a Moby Dick scenario, huh? They're absolutely obsessed with the Great White Whale, the Russian frozen assets, the Europeans. They're obsessed to the point that they have no problem destroying the economies of the European Union. They absolutely have no problem destroying Belgium's economy. As a matter of fact, that's what they're trying to push Belgium to do, which is to destroy their own economy without having any of the solidarity, guarantees or backstops of the other member states, or even the ECB for that matter. The ECB said that they're out. They're not going to touch this thing.

Even the United States, even the USA is telling Ursula, just back off from this thing. If we come to a deal with Russia, you're going to have to give the money back anyway. Even the United States is telling the European Union enough, which is pretty much what the U.S. is saying. But Ursula and the Brussels technocrats and kleptocrats, they're not listening to anyone. They want those assets and they want them bad. Just real quick, even Politico put out an article, blaming Belgium, how Belgium, listen to this title, Alexander, how Belgium handed Putin an unexpected victory. They're upset at Belgium and at the prime minister, what's his name? Van Barth de Weber.

Bart de Weber, yeah, they're upset with Bart de Weber because he still refuses to just hand over the frozen assets. Your thoughts? Well, you're absolutely correct. And it's getting weirder and weirder. There is an article today out of the Financial Times. and it talks, it actually quotes a European official. We're not told who he is, obviously, but he's describing various schemes that Ursula and Kallas and others in the commission

are putting forward to try to get around all of these things. He's described them as crazy. Now, this is losing all sense of reality. It is becoming very, very weird. So, first of all, you. Euroclear has told them, do not do this thing. It is illegal. I mean, that's what Euroclear is basically saying. They're saying it is incredibly high risk. When Euroclear says it is incredibly high risk, what Euroclear is saying, if we go to court, if there is a court case over this, we will lose. So that's Euroclear. Belgium government, which would be hooked if Euroclear lost a case, they're so. don't do this thing. It's not workable. The European Central Bank, Christine Lagarde, is now coming out to say, don't do this thing. This is reckless. It is wrong. And I've understood, I've had some

explanations now about the legal risks because apparently Belgium has a commercial trade agreement with Russia and part of the provisions of this agreement, this treaty, which is in fact now common with many trade treaties, is that it has provisions in it for the setting up of a special court which would not necessarily be in the European Union. It could be in any particular place around the world. It could be in the United States. It could be in Asia. It could be in many places.

And this would be an international court that would rule on this question and whose decisions are binding and not subject to appeal. So that is when Kaya Kallas said, recently. There is no European court that would dare to find it against us if we went ahead and did this thing. Apparently, the Belgians said, this is utterly wrong. I mean, crazily wrong. And apparently within the European Parliament, Euro MPs were coming forward and saying, what are you talking about? Do you not understand the legalities and the treaty arrangements? here. And yet still they come forward. And their latest proposal is this. They say, look, what we're going to do is we're going to invoke

emergency powers. That will mean that we can move forward with this idea. We can cut out Hungary and Slovakia. We will freeze the Russian assets indefinitely. The only circumstance whereby those assets can be released is if there is unanimity. So any country can veto indefinitely the release of the Russian assets. And on the basis of emergency powers that the European Union has intended to protect the Russian economy from a financial crisis. And the financial crisis that they're talking about is a financial crisis which would arise if the money was repaid back to Russia. If the money was repaid back to Russia, then supposedly that would create a financial crisis within the European system. And of course, that is a way of saying that we need to invoke emergency powers

to protect us from a financial crisis that we are ourselves intent on creating. It does not get madder than this. It's beyond mad, but it also signals the end of the line for Project Ukraine. And we've been saying it for a while now, that when the globalists and the Europeans go after that money and take that money. than it is truly the end of Project Ukraine. And then that's where we are. We are at that point where it is the end of Project Ukraine.

And they want that cash. They want that payoff. That's what this is all about. They're actually upset at the fact that Trump put in the 28-point peace plan that the United States gets that money or profits from that money. That's what's angered the Europeans the most about that 28-point peace plan. No one's saying that. We're saying it.

I've said it in a video. What really angered the Europeans about that 28 point piece plan, forget about the 27 other points. What really angered them was the clause that was put in there where it said that the United States is going to get a part of those Russian frozen assets. That really set them off. These European elite, they want that money. And they also run with the fiction that this money is going to hold Ukraine for two years. That's nonsense. This money's going to last six months at best.

Exactly. Now, there's something, there's a few, there's another point to make. And it goes directly to the point that you've been making many times, which is that the amount of these Russian frozen assets changes with every article that I've been reading. So we've had figures of over 200 billion euros, which have been discussed many times. Then Bart de Vava came back.

and said, look, we're only going to agree to this if European countries give us a unconditional, unrevocable guarantee, separately and severally, to cover us for losses. And he wanted that guarantee to be for the 193 billion euros of Russian central bank assets, which he says are in euro. and now Ursula is saying that there's 185 billion Russian assets in Euroclear. So what is it? What is the exact money that is in Euroclear? Now, I have to say this with every change, with every alteration in the amount.

And these changes are too big to be explained away by exchange rate fluctuations or anything of that guy. which I know some people have been TEPs talking about. They're just too big for this. With every change that comes, it's clear to me that already the fact is they've been dipping into this capital in all sorts of ways. They have absolutely refused, apparently, but DeVevaeva's request that if there's going to be seizures of Russian foreign assets to be used to cut, you know, to securitize this alleged loan that they're coming up with.

that frozen assets in other European countries should be appropriated first. They've absolutely refused that, which tells me that you've been right all along. They have been taking these frozen assets, maybe not the money in Euroclear, but the assets that exist across Europe. They've already been dipping into the capital, and they need the money. Euroclear to cover what they have already done. It's a huge scandal, if this is true. Absolutely.

And you already have another scandal which broke the other day via the Belgian police and Belgium investigators. I wonder if Belgium is sending a warning shot to Brussels because Belgium is getting a lot of pressure from the EU to greenlight, the frozen assets to Zelensky. I wonder if they're saying back off with the investigation of, of, uh, Federica Mogherini and another very high level, two very high level EU officials. Well, that is, you took the words out of my mouth because that is exactly what I think is going on. I mean, Mogherini has been out of the picture for some time, but she was the EU's high representative of foreign policy,

the predecessor of Borrell and Kayakales, just to say. and now she is under investigation. And apparently the investigation is expanding, and it has been conducted by the Belgian police. I think the Belgians, by the way, are horrified. I mean, there is obviously no more pro-EU country in Europe than Belgium. How can there be, given that the EU is based in Belgium. The British, by the way, used to call the EU. the Belgian Empire.

So that gives you a sense of how pro-EU Belgium is. But I think the Belgians are now absolutely horrified by what has been going on and by the complete indifference and recklessness of the European leadership relative to Belgium's economy and Belgium's society and the stability of Belgium altogether. And I think they're starting to take countermeasures. Yeah. The commission, the European commission has basically told Belgium that you've got to sacrifice yourself or for the sake of us in order to cover our positions from everything that we've taken. And also to give to Zelensky, of which even the Belgium prime minister

has said in an interview, Ukraine is lost. They're losing and they're losing. I lost, I mean, he's even admitted that they lost. Why would we give up, why would we put ourselves at this risk, a huge risk for a project which has failed? Absolutely. And of course, just to add, Ukraine is going through a massive corruption scandal. There's all sorts of massive numbers of figures that have been thrown about. I've read figures of up to $48 billion of money that are supposed to be misappropriated.

I mean, I don't know where that comes from, but anyway, that number comes from. But anyway, the huge sums of money, a massive corruption scandal. The chief of staff of Zelensky, Andrei Yermak, has been forced to resign, supposedly in connection with it. And you're proposing to give this utterly corrupt country that is going down fast. You're proposing to give them another 140 billion euros of somebody else's money. I mean, as I said, it doesn't get madder than this. And we're on the hook for it. And it does make you wonder what has really been going on.

What has really been going on? I mean, I think we identified it in this video, right? We've identified it in many, many videos going back almost two years of what has been going on. Because every month we were getting reports not only from Europe, from the UK as well. Stammer has also said, we're giving two, three, four, five billion. in euros to dollars to Ukraine. But don't worry, citizens of the UK.

It's backed by the interest from the Russian frozen assets. They've all been saying that. Stamer, Macron, Ursula, every single leader of every single country that has been giving money to Ukraine has come out with the same line.

Don't worry, this money is backed from the interest of the Russian frozen assets. Well, what the hell does that mean? What does that mean? Yeah. It's bad. What?

You're taking the interest from the Russian frozen assets and you're giving it to Ukraine? Or you set up some sort of loan or deal where you're giving money to Ukraine but the interest from the frozen assets, which is only around $1.5 billion a year, that that's the collateral for the money that you're giving? Well, exactly. Well, exactly. And it's nowhere near enough, as you've been pointing out, many times. and you only have to do a little bit of arithmetic, and you can say that. So just a final question. They want to remove the unanimity clause in order to remove any type of Hungary or Slovakia veto.

So then they can convince Belgium by removing the veto by Hungary. They convince Belgium that the sanctions will stay indefinitely. but on the other side, they want to make it unanimous in order to not. Yes. Yes. Well, they want to make it unanimous in order to give back the Russian fraud and assets if a deal is made. Correct.

Correct. Correct. I mean, as I said, it's already been pointed out, by the way, and the Financial Times article mentions this, that this is already almost certainly contrary to EU law. So this arrangement that has been discussed is a gross misuse of emergency powers, if it's ever used in that kind of way. And it would probably be illegal. In fact, it's definitely going to be illegal anyway. Everybody can see it. How do you justify in a court of law the argument that this money needs to be given to Ukraine

because we have an emergency to the European Union when Ukraine is not in the European Union. Or when you're not a party to the war. That's what they say. You're not a party to the war. Exactly. It would be a crisis for the EU economy, for the financial system in the EU

if the money were given back to Russia. Again, based on what they are saying, it makes absolutely no sense. But of course, what it is intended to do again is to legalise theft. And you can't do that. I mean, you cannot use the law to legalize something which is already illegal. It can't be done. I mean, not in a legal sense.

Of course, you can do it. You can pass laws that will do it. But everybody outside Europe around the world will understand immediately what you have done. What if Ursula says by the power of the commission, because EU law supersedes local, local law, right? What if she just tells Belgium, I don't care what you say anymore, we're taking the money? What happens then? I mean, what legally, geopolitically, what does that mean? Well, yeah, first of all, that would be an enormous.

extension of EU power. Well, absolutely. I mean, we're in that, we are indeed in that kind of situation. But I mean, it would completely set aside the veto. It would mean that the European Commission has set itself up as essentially the authority across the entire European Union. And it would have escaped the control of the European Council. it would also be an utterly arbitrary decision, arguably contrary to, well, not arguably, it would be contrary to the treaties.

None of that is likely to slow or stop Ursula by itself, provided big countries like Germany and France agree. but around the world, people will say from this point on, it's no longer safe to keep our money in Europe. If they all came together, all of the EU states came together and simply confiscated the Russian money and did it straightforwardly, it would be less damaging than what they're trying to do now. All right.

We will end the video there. The durand.com. We're on X. We're on Rumble telegram. And we are also on substacks. So check us out on Substack, and you will find a link to the Duran Shop and the subscription box down below. Take care.