Lagarde, La Laggard?
I attach a piece here from my friend Nigel Gould Davis. Spot on when it comes to the debate around immobilised Russian assets. Lagarde really should not be making the decision here.
If Europe cares about its own national security then this just needs to get done.
The bean counters and lawyers cannot drive this process.
Needs must - Ukraine needs to be given the financial resources to win.
Just updating the numbers of Western financing of Ukraine from the full scale Russian invasion to the end of April - using the Kiel Institute data combined with that from the Ukrainian MOF, support comes to just over €215 billion. Roughly around $8bn a month just to stay in the war - not win. I would increase that to closer to the $12.5bn a month was getting just prior to last summer’s counteroffensive to put Ukraine in a position where it can be put back on the front foot - taking territory back. So there is a $50bn shortfall from current levels and that doubles if Trump wins. Is Europe going to fill the gap? Not if the past week’s European elections are anything to go by. So the only way to get the extra $50-90bn a year to Ukraine to win the war is giving it the full nine yards, or $330bn in immobilised Russian assets.
Lagarde’s lagging response on this risks European security.
Note also reference in today’s FT to ECB concerns of the impact of using immobilised Russian assets on the euro’s position as a reserve currency. Notable that the underlying ECB report cited included no evidence of a link between the move to immobilise and reserve holdings of the euro. So actually, counter to what the FT implied, the ECB seems to have added to the case for moving from immobilising Russian CBR assets to seizing and allocating to Ukraine.
https://www.ft.com/content/7e7bcb76-2d4b-41b1-8cea-73bebf74724b
Bureaucrats in Europe should not be allowed to stand in the way of getting this done, as a European national security priority.
This is the least we must do for ukrainians!