What Russia Could Do

It Doesn't Get Any More Criminal Than This

The Numbers

According to various institutions, including the European Commission, around $300 billion (€257 billion) in Russian state assets have been frozen worldwide. This figure does not include frozen assets belonging to Russian oligarchs.

Of this, €210 billion is in Europe, and €185 billion of that is with Euroclear.

Approximately €176 billion of Russian assets held by Euroclear have now been converted into cash, and the remaining securities, worth €9 billion, will mature in 2026 and 2027.

A Major Setback for Merz and von der Leyen

Reparations or “ Reparations Credit” Model of the EU Commission

By December 18, the EU Commission intended to use the Russian Central Bank's assets frozen in the EU for a special loan instrument (“reparation loan”): According to this plan, these funds would supposedly remain formally Russian property, but would be used to grant Ukraine long-term loans, which Ukraine would use to wage war against Russia and finance its government spending. Russia would only get these loans back once it had made reparations payments to Ukraine after the end of the war. In this way, the EU is attempting to avoid direct expropriation and circumvent legal disputes.

Merz threw his entire ( feather- )weight behind the plan, thinking that, in typical German arrogant and haughty fashion, he could force his European colleagues to embark on the biggest heist in recent geopolitical history. Among other things, he made the following statement, which bordered on cocky, hubris, and delusion:

“To be very clear and very explicit here: we are not doing this to prolong the war. On the contrary, we are doing this to end this war as quickly as possible, ladies and gentlemen. Because this sends a clear signal to Moscow that continuing this war is pointless for Moscow.”

Friedrich Merz, December 15, 2025

One recalls with horror Adolf Hitler's speech on November 2, 1942, in Munich's Löwenbräukeller, where he invoked the impending victory in Stalingrad. Twenty days later, the 6th Army was completely surrounded and lost in the course of Operation Uranus.

And that's exactly what happened to Merz: he put all his eggs in one basket—and lost dismally. This is now being reported by German newspapers—practically in unison.

His X-message after losing the battle, in which he described the complete defeat as a victory, “Financial package is in place—as I demanded,” is unbeatable in its pitifulness.

“The financial package for Ukraine is ready: an interest-free loan of €90 billion, as I requested. A clear signal to Putin from Europe. The war will not be worth it. We will keep Russian assets frozen until Russia has compensated Ukraine.”

Friedrich Merz, December 19, 2025

History buffs will immediately recall Joseph Goebbels' speech at the Sportpalast on February 18, 1943, when he screamed after the Germans' biggest defeat in World War II up to that point:

“Do you want total war?”

Joseph Goebbels, February 18, 1943

We can look forward to the next bon mot from the new war chancellor, because this defeat not only weakens him in Germany, but has also significantly reduced his influence in Europe.

Concluded Agreement is also Illegal

On the night of December 19, a compromise was reached that only appears non-criminal at first glance: Russian state assets were used indirectly, but still: specifically, the Commission will raise €90 billion on the capital market and pass it on to Ukraine as an interest-free loan. According to the agreement, Ukraine must repay the loan as soon as it has received reparations from Russia for the damage caused by the war of aggression. If Russia does not pay—which I believe is certain, because it is the losers and not the winners of a war who pay reparations—the EU reserves “the right” to use the frozen funds to repay the loan.

This act of desperation was preceded by two criminal acts: the permanent freezing of Russian assets and the theft of the interest that had already accrued on them.

Less than Half Goes to Ukraine – Brussels Helps Itself First

The G7 countries (the US, Canada, Japan, UK, Germany, France, Italy) agreed at the G7 summit in Apulia in June 2024 to provide Ukraine with a joint loan of up to USD 50 billion.

These loans were to be serviced and repaid over time with income from the “extraordinary earnings” of the frozen Russian state assets – in other words, with the profits from the “withheld” Russian central bank reserves.

Now it seems that these ladies and gentlemen are helping themselves first in order to recoup this loan. Of the 90 billion, 50 billion will not go to Ukraine at all. Of the remaining 40 billion, a large part will probably flow into the German and American arms industries, and the remainder will then probably be divided among Zelensky and his cronies.

Permanent Freezing Already a Crime

On December 12, Russian assets were permanently frozen by the EU.

There was never any legal basis for freezing the Russian central bank's foreign assets on February 26, 2026. This has never happened before in economic history—and for good reason. Our current system is based on the various central banks holding different foreign currencies in order to be able to settle the costs of an economy incurred in different currencies. The ladies and gentlemen in Brussels seem too stupid to be able to assess the consequences of their actions, or who would deposit money with a thief?

Apart from this principle that central bank funds are sacrosanct, Brussels is also violating its own EU law with the permanent freeze. The indefinite freeze, which is tantamount to confiscation, would not have been enforceable under current EU rules, as Hungary, Italy, Malta, Belgium, Czechia, Slovakia, and Bulgaria would have refused to approve this theft.

The gnomes in Brussels therefore conjured up an “emergency law” out of thin air for this purpose, invoking Article 122 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

It reads as follows:

1. Without prejudice to any other procedures provided for in the Treaties, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may decide, in a spirit of solidarity between Member States, upon the measures appropriate to the economic situation, in particular if severe difficulties arise in the supply of certain products, notably in the area of energy.
2. Where a Member State is in difficulties or is seriously threatened with severe difficulties caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences beyond its control, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may grant, under certain conditions, Union financial assistance to the Member State concerned. The President of the Council shall inform the European Parliament of the decision taken.

Source: Eurolex

Paragraph 1 of Article 122 gives the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, the right to come to the aid of a member state in the event of supply shortages, with the law expressly mentioning the energy sector.

Paragraph 2 of the emergency clause 122 refers to natural disasters and exceptional occurrences in a member state, where the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may grant financial assistance to a member state.

The upcoming robbery cannot in any way be subsumed under Article 122 invoked by Brussels, i.e., the facts do not fit the provisions of the law. It fails simply because this emergency law was legislated for the assistance of member states—and exclusively so. Ukraine is not a member of the EU. Therefore, invoking Article 122 is complete legal nonsense.

The ladies and gentlemen in Brussels, Berlin, Paris—and probably also in London—who are seeking to legalize this raid are thus not only violating international legal principles, the violation of which makes the functioning of the international banking system impossible, but are also trampling on the very law that forms the basis of the entire EU and its member states.

One cannot help but feel that a few criminals—nota bene, unelected ones—are abusing the EU institution to carry out raids against sovereign states, simply brushing aside the opinions of those members who want to abide by the law.

From a legal perspective, we find ourselves back in the dark 1930s in Germany, when Dr. Hans Frank made the following remark at the German Lawyers' Congress in 1933:

“ Law is that which is useful to the German people.”

Hans Frank, 1933

Incidentally, Hans Frank, who served as Governor-General of Poland during World War II, was executed in Nuremberg on October 16, 1946.

Apart from the fact that this behavior on the part of an institution of a confederation of states or some of its members is appalling from a legal and ethical point of view, these people are jeopardizing the very existence of the EU itself and those member states that implement such actions as principal and accessory parties, promote them as accomplices, or tacitly accept them as a silent group. I refer here to an essay by our author Tony Deden, who wrote an article for us in July about the reasons for the rise and fall of nations (“Why Do Nations Rise and Fall: An Overview”). Among other things, he considers the rule of law and the unconditional protection of property to be essential for a nation to flourish. If these – and other – essentials are not present in a society, nations perish.

The Crime has Already Been Completed

We have thus heard so far that the freeze of February 26, 2022, was already illegal, and that the indefinite freeze of December 12, 2025, amounts to confiscation, whereby the type of decision—the invocation of Article 122—is also illegal within the EU.

Many people are unaware that the transfer of billions in proceeds from frozen Russian assets, which has been going on since September 2024, has already completed the theft.

A simple example: if you deposit 1 million euros in your account and at the end of the year you are credited with 50,000 euros in interest, and your banker helps himself and transfers this to his account, this is outright theft (in the case of the banker, who has contractual access to the funds, it is embezzlement). This is probably the case in every legal system. The nitwits in Brussels don't even understand the concept of property and the principle that the fruits of property belong to the owner.

What Russia Could Do

BRICS-Pol – as a Counterpart to Interpol – Criminal Charges Against Responsible Politicians

Interpol, with its 196 member countries, is supposed to improve international cooperation between national police organizations. However, like so many other organizations in the Collective West, it has degenerated into a political body. This became abundantly clear in 2018. Bill Browder was arrested in Spain in May 2018 on the basis of an Interpol arrest warrant issued by Russia, but was quickly released because Interpol classified the arrest warrant as politically motivated.

In our article “Bill Browder: The so-called ‘human rights activist’ – who himself became rich through shady deals,” we proved that Browder is nothing more than a criminal tax evader who was sentenced to nine years in prison in Russia for his crimes.

Interpol has thus become a worthless tool for Russia—and probably for the entire Global South—unsuitable for internationally searching for criminals and handing them over to the competent national authorities.

The members, partners, and candidates of BRICS and SCO, the two main organizations of the Global South, should establish a parallel organization to Interpol based on criminal law rather than politics, so that cooperation between national police organizations in the Global South can function more effectively. Interpol's systems would work if politicians did not replace criminal law with politics.

Criminals like Bill Browder feel safe today because he is effectively not being prosecuted for his crimes as he is protected for political reasons – it is not a desirable situation for a society when criminals are not prosecuted.

In any case, the Russian state should, without wasting any time, instruct its competent public prosecutors to initiate criminal proceedings against all those European politicians who are involved in the heist because, as we have seen above, this is no longer a matter of different interpretations of the law; these people are criminals and should be treated as such.

Furthermore, one should consider that the current efforts of Merz & Co. are the final step in stealing all of the capital. Billions (interest on the capital) have already been stolen. Parts of the crime have therefore already been completed.

I assume that BRICS-Pol, in which countries of the Global South will participate, is already being discussed behind closed doors. If this is implemented—and I have no doubt that it will be—these ladies and gentlemen will only be able to move around within the moribund EU area. Outside this declining zone of the world, they will run the risk of being arrested and extradited to Russia.

Civil Actions Against All Who Collaborated

The Russian Central Bank has already filed a lawsuit against Euroclear in the Arbitration Court in Moscow for an amount of 230 billion US dollars. A preliminary court date has been set for January 16, 2026. This will only be the beginning, because all institutions—the EU, every EU member—as well as every person involved in the matter should be sued, and then these judgments should be enforced wherever the corresponding assets are located.

One could even take this a step further if the same standards for expropriation were applied as the West has done with Russia. It was enough for a wealthy Russian to be seen in a photo with President Putin. Simply because of a photo with President Putin, these people had everything taken away from them; they were stripped of their rights and expropriated (specific cases here, here, and here).

If the same standards are applied as the West did, this will be a feast for the Russians.

Step 1:

Together in a photo, for example with the criminal chancellor, documenting their “closeness.”

Let's pick Mr. Markus Kamieth, Chairman of the Board of Executive Directors at BASF, as an example from this group.

Step 2:

This sufficiently proves the criminal energy of Mr. Kamieth and thus also of his employer, BASF, and therefore all private assets of Mr. Kamieth and all assets of BASF are fair game, i.e., ready for looting.

Many readers will now argue that this is unfair and unworkable, but in this thought experiment, we are merely applying the same standards that the EU, Switzerland, and the US have applied to Russia. We are confident that all individuals and companies affected would have no objection to a course of action that they themselves have employed. Admittedly, in this scenario, it is preferable to be the one taking action rather than the one on the receiving end.

Step 3:

Russia is now searching for assets in Russia itself and in those countries that will enforce the decisions, in our example from BASF. One gem is in China, where BASF has invested 10 billion euros.

If Russia were to proceed in the same manner as the West has been doing for years, the Russian bear would be able to gorge itself for years to come, as it would be able to choose its own honey pots.

Conclusion

The Europeans are turning out to be foolish, arrogant, and short-sighted criminals—led by Friedrich Merz and Frau von der Leyan, who nevertheless tried to sell his complete defeat last week as a victory.

“The last one turns off the lights.”

With their actions, the EU and the member states that support such raids are losing any remaining credibility as reasonable discussion partners. The individuals involved run the risk of being arrested throughout the Global South and extradited to Russia—as thieves of billions of euros.

In our thought experiment, the Russians are applying the same standards that the West has been applying for years; this time, however, it is not the Russians but the Europeans who are affected. The result: the last one turns off the lights.