José Goulão
Theft or taxpayer extortion - such is the state of the European Union, the beacon of liberal democracy and of "our civilisation"
Steal the frozen Russian assets held in European territory or extort even more money from the taxpayers of the Member States - that is the dilemma tormenting the European Union in this final quarter of 2025.
Contrary to what those who still believe in the EU's speeches, documents and propaganda might think, it is not scruples that paralyse the leaders of the Member States, but rather the risks involved in either option - risks that some "non-aligned" members are unwilling to share. The organisation is hardly new to stealing from other states or extorting its own citizens, but this time, if things go wrong, there will be losses, damage, and new quarrels and dissensions among governments - perhaps adding more fuel to the fire consuming an entity that lies and disrespects its peoples.
The central issue once again is the collection of funds to keep feeding the Kiev regime and the buffoon Zelensky. Brussels continues to insist that we must give up our last cent - and, if need be, our last soldier - to prevent the Russians from taking over the Berlengas, the Farilhões, and the island of Pessegueiro*, supposedly a great obsession in the Kremlin. It seems Moscow has nothing else on its mind, and thus the 27 Member States must turn the territory still controlled by Kiev's Nazis into a "steel hedgehog," as various EU leaders and eurocrats like to say.
What is being discussed is how to find 140 thousand million to fund Zelensky's regime before it runs out of money - something expected to happen by next March. As is well known, Donald Trump is not as generous as his predecessors since Obama - including his own first term - which means it falls upon the European Union to foot the bill.
Another bill, as we know. At the moment Brussels is looking for those €140 thousand million to finance Kiev, plus another €100 thousand million to buy weapons from the United States and send them to western Ukraine, as well as some €800 thousand million estimated for "modernising" the Member States' "defence system" - that is, their war apparatus - in order to frighten the terrible Putin.
All told, the European Union is seeking more than one billion euros (a real billion, a thousand times the Anglo-Saxon billion), directly or indirectly tied to the war in Ukraine. In this financial chokehold - enough to make any masochist envious - the Union is also involved in issuing €800 thousand million in eurobonds to mutualise, across the 27, the investment deemed necessary to recover from the miserable state of its economy. A situation that, incidentally, is a direct consequence of the very policies followed by the EU, which have reduced the bloc's productive capacity to that of a crippled dwarf on the world stage.
Extortion is difficult, theft is risky
At the European Council meeting held in the second half of October, the 27 decided not to decide on how to raise the €140 billion intended to feed Zelensky and "rebuild" his ruined territory.
The option that most occupied von der Leyen, Costa, and the other government leaders was theft - that is, taking the €140 thousand million in frozen Russian assets held in Belgium and sending it to Kiev.
Most of those present supported this possibility, but Bart De Wever, the Flemish right-winger heading the Brussels government, was having none of it. The money is under the custody of an entity called Euroclear, based in Brussels, and the Belgian Prime Minister considers that the EU is underestimating the legal issues involved in "moving" those seized assets. He insists that the risks must be shared among the 27 in case a court rules that the money must be returned to Moscow.
Besides De Wever's right to protect himself from shouldering all potential liabilities, the 27 quickly began to lose members from this process, which requires unanimous approval. In other words, either Belgium bears the consequences of the theft alone, or there will be no money sent to Zelensky through this method. Hungary, Slovakia, and very likely the Czech Republic have no intention of taking responsibility for continuing the war in Ukraine - and even less for extorting money from their citizens to cover for the kleptomania of most of their EU Council colleagues.
As mentioned, the Council decided not to decide, postponing the matter to the December summit. Until then, the most ardent supporters of theft hope that the enormous pressure (or rather, blackmail) to be exerted on De Wever and his government will succeed - so that Belgium alone will bear the risks of sending to third parties money that does not belong to it, against the will of its legitimate owners.
Nothing new, after all, in the European Union's practices.
In a desperate tone, another alternative was floated to finance Zelensky's Nazism: issuing eurobonds - that is, a shared loan among all EU governments to try to plug the irreparable budget hole of the Kiev regime. In other words, our governments would once again dip into our pockets to sustain war, dictatorship, and destruction in the western territories of what is still called Ukraine.
From the outset, some labelled the idea "toxic."
Behind the scenes, anonymous Council officials quoted by Politico said that "frugal" countries like Germany and the Netherlands want nothing to do with Eurobond issuance "for at least the next ten years." The required unanimity was thus immediately compromised, meaning there was no need to wait for the predictable "no" votes from Hungary and Slovakia.
On the other hand, "spendthrift" countries such as France, Italy, and certainly Portugal (where respect for citizens is practically zero) are in no position to share such obligations - already drowning in debt themselves. Furthermore, many other governments distrust further mutualised loans because financial "discipline" in the Union is nothing short of chaos - so there would be no guarantees that everyone would honour their share of a debt of roughly €150 thousand million.
Besides being toxic, some officials described this act of extortion against citizens as "ridiculous," given how impossible it would be to carry out.
Some of the more persistent Council members raised yet another idea: mobilising the frozen Russian assets located in countries other than Belgium. According to Politico, their combined value amounts to no more than €25 thousand million - a desperate drop compared to the €140 thousand million frozen in Brussels. Moreover, there is no guarantee that the governments of those countries would behave differently from Belgium or take sole responsibility if the theft were reversed.
Assessing the situation, it seems that the most plausible way to satisfy Zelensky's dictatorial and destructive impulses is to "bend De Wever," as the saying goes in EU power corridors. On one hand, Brussels assumes that Russia will not unilaterally end the war - the only condition under which its assets could be unfrozen. On the other hand, many EU leaders and bureaucrats fear that Moscow would respond to any theft of its property by deploying an army of seasoned lawyers capable of making life hell for the kleptomaniacs and forcing them to compensate Moscow for an amount equal to the stolen funds, plus heavy interest and legal costs.
All the more since Russia and the EU have had a mutual investment treaty in place since 1989, whose existence could make any such case even more complex and disadvantageous for Brussels. This was precisely the warning the Belgian Prime Minister issued when he reminded his Council partners that they were underestimating the risks and possible consequences of assaulting another nation's property.
Theft or taxpayer extortion - such is the state of the European Union, the beacon of liberal democracy and of "our civilisation," blinded by its obsession with funding a lost war and propping up a decrepit neo-Nazi regime.
* Small islands off the western coast of Portugal