You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
24 points
*

We may never know what Euroclear, which holds 191bn of 260bn in frozen Russian assets, thinks is wrong with using those assets to backstop Ukranian debts.

Can you imagine the damage to Euroclear’s reputation? Think of what would happen if, every time some government declared war on another, the global community froze those assets and gave them to the victim. My god, what an alarming precedent. Think what would happen to the market if those frozen assets started to move again. What would the Kremlin have to say if those assets, frozen in response to aggression, were given to the victim of that aggression? Cats and dogs living together, total anarchy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

The problem with giving away the assets, and I’m just parroting Simon Whistler here, is that they have never been used this way while in war time. This would be essentially funding one side’s war machine and could come back to bite western countries if they opt to overthrow a bad actor in the future.

For example, what if Bashar Al-Assad decides on the heavy use of chlorine gas on the majority Sunni in his country. The West opts to overthrow. The West are then the aggressors. Does Euroclear then freeze US assets and give them to Assad according to the precedent set by Russia v Ukraine?

The judiciary likes to follow precedent and consistency, it fairs less well when there is nuance and subject to interpretation. From a geopolitical standpoint, do we really want the judiciary determining who the good guys and the bad guys are?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The West are then the aggressors. Does Euroclear then freeze US assets and give them to Assad according to the precedent set by Russia v Ukraine?

For the love of christ PLEASE hold us accountable, SOMEBODY.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

You are walking on the street in the public square of your town. You encounter a child and someone who you perceive as a parent having a struggle. The struggle escalates and you see the parent start bludgeoning the child with their fists. Other than the absolute trauma of the experience, you fear the child is going to receive some long term injuries from this. How do you act?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

No sure if your statement is sarcastic:) It reads like it? But yes it would be a good precedent - invade and lose your foreign assets.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Hey, when the funds are stored in Russian banks, you are certainly welcome to freeze them all you want. But for some reason they typically aren’t. Huh, I wonder why?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

I absolutely refuse to use the /s tag. I tend to try to lay it on pretty thick, because specifying that you’re being sarcastic tends to ruin the comedic emphasis the sarcasm is intended to provide.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You did well in not using the /s

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 5.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 118K

    Comments