President Zelensky of Ukraine advocates using Russian billions seized by world banks to aid in reconstructing Ukraine. However, the G7 group is reportedly contemplating a more conservative approach, considering only the rise in value and interest accrued since the assets were frozen in 2020.
In an interview with the BBC, Zelensky expressed a more ambitious stance, suggesting that the seized funds should be employed for Ukraine’s reconstruction. He questioned the reluctance to use the available $300 billion, highlighting the potential benefit for his country.
Behind the scenes, it is understood that European central bankers harbour concerns about the broader implications of such a move. They fear that utilising the entire sum could undermine the haven status of banks. This hesitation is particularly evident among European central bankers, who are more sceptical than their US and UK counterparts.
The concerns revolve around the possibility of setting a challenging legal precedent, which might have far-reaching consequences for global financial stability. If the G7 were to use the entirety of the seized funds, it could deter other countries from placing their haven assets in Western banks, as they may fear similar actions in the future. The debate highlights the delicate balance between supporting a nation in need and safeguarding the stability of the international financial system.
Belgium plays a significant role in housing a substantial portion of the frozen Russian assets due to its involvement in the clearing system for European reserves. The country has already taken a proactive step by applying a charge to some funds, resulting in the generation of €2 billion for Ukraine. Advocates for the broader plan believe that by tapping into the approximately $360 billion in frozen assets and the current high-interest rates, tens of billions of dollars could be raised to aid Ukraine’s reconstruction.
Zelensky Statement
President Zelensky, speaking to the BBC on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, emphasised the importance of not burdening Western taxpayers with the financial responsibility for the aftermath of the conflict. He pointed out that with $300 billion of frozen Russian assets, there is a direct opportunity to use those funds to rebuild what has been destroyed by Russian military actions. Zelensky questioned the necessity for Western societies to deliberate on how to help when a substantial pool of funds is already available.
During his time at Davos, President Zelensky engaged with prominent figures in the global financial sector, including Wall Street financiers like Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan and Steven Schwarzman of Blackstone. However, there are concerns within the global financial community about seizing the profits of Russian frozen assets.
Bill Winters, the CEO of British bank Standard Chartered, acknowledged that the response from the financial community would be “mixed.” There are fears about the potential “weaponising” of central banks and currencies, and Winters highlighted the legitimate concerns of central bankers regarding the broader implications of such a move. Despite the moral imperative to do the right thing, there is recognition that central bankers have valid reasons to be cautious in navigating these complex financial and geopolitical waters.
The situation described in your information suggests a military development between Ukraine and Russia. According to the report, the Ukrainian Air Force, led by General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, claims to have successfully targeted and destroyed a Russian A-50 long-range radar detection aircraft and an Il-22 control centre plane. These aircraft are crucial components of Russia’s air defence and coordination systems.
The A-50 is responsible for detecting air defences and coordinating targets for Russian jets, making its destruction a significant blow to Russia’s aerial capabilities. The Il-22, on the other hand, serves as a control centre plane, and its reported damage could impact Russia’s command and control capabilities.
It’s important to note that the BBC states it has been unable to verify the attack independently, and Russian officials have claimed to have no information about the reported incidents. However, pro-war Russian commentators have acknowledged the potential significance of losing an A-50, with some speculating that it would be a “black day for the Russian air force.”
One Russian military channel suggested that if Ukraine’s information is confirmed, it would be a severe setback for the Russian air force. Another channel mentioned the possibility of the Il-22 being hit by Russian “friendly fire,” and Ukrainian sources claim that it suffered irreparable damage.
The emergence of an image on social media showing what appears to be an Il-22 with visible damage adds a visual element to the claims. Still, the lack of detailed information in the picture makes independent analysis challenging. The situation is dynamic, and further verification and updates from credible sources will be essential to understand the events and their implications fully.
Source Link:https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68004361
