Russian President Vladimir Putin remarked on Friday that the European Union (EU) hasn’t been able to forge a consensus on its attempts to seize around $246 billion worth of Russian assets held in the bloc to fund Ukraine's needs as such a move would have “severe consequences” for the bloc.
Addressing the annual year-end presser in Moscow, Putin cautioned that the seizure of Russian assets would not only damage Europe’s global image but also undermind confidence in the Eurozone.
“Granting a loan to Kiev secured by Russian assets would increase the obligations of EU countries, which are already facing budget problems,” the Russian President said.
He said that “stealing” of Russian assets in the EU would lead to fundamental consequences for the global financial system, adding that Russia will defend its interests over these assets primarily through the courts.
Further, Putin noted that a number of countries were already having doubts about the safety of their assets in Europe in view of these recent attempts being pushed by the EU leadership.
Putin’s statements have drawn support in India, as experts echoed the sentiment that EU’s global credibility was at stake.
Savio Rodrigues, a politician from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), said that any such measure would accelerate the trend of “de-Euroisation”.
“When President Vladimir Putin describes the seizure of Russian sovereign assets as “outright robbery,” it is not mere rhetoric; it is a warning that strikes at the very foundation of the global financial order. If the European Union proceeds with such a move, it will fundamentally shake faith in the Eurozone as a safe, rules-based financial jurisdiction,” Rodrigues told Sputnik India.
The Indian politician stressed that Eurozone’s credibility rested on one “core principle”, which was the “sanctity of assets protected by law, treaties, and due process.”
“The moment sovereign assets are confiscated and politically repurposed, Europe sends a dangerous signal to the world—that property rights are conditional, not guaranteed. This will inevitably push nations, sovereign wealth funds, and central banks to rethink parking their reserves in European banks or holding assets denominated in euros,” Rodrigues said.
Further, he predicted that nations, particularly those in Global South which were already uneasy about weaponisation of financial instruments, would diversify away from the euro towards gold, alternative currencies, and non-Western financial systems.
“Over time, this erosion of trust can increase borrowing costs for EU nations, weaken the euro’s reserve currency status, and strain already stressed European budgets - exactly the risks President Putin has alluded to,” Rodrigues said.
Spelling out the financial maxim underpinning the rules-based global economic order, Rodrigues said that the financial system thrived on predictability rather than “political adventurism”.
“If the EU chooses short-term geopolitical signalling over long-term institutional credibility, the damage will boomerang back to Europe, undermining confidence in its financial architecture and reinforcing the belief that the Eurozone is no longer a neutral or reliable custodian of global capital,” the politician remarked. “In the end, the real casualty of such a decision will not just be diplomatic credibility, but the very trust that keeps the euro and Europe’s financial system afloat.”
Niranjan Marjani, an Indian geopolitical analyst and Fellow at Kalinga Institute of Indo-Pacific Studies, told Sputnik India that any decision or even continued signalling by EU to seize Russian assets would be akin to the bloc “shooting itself in the foot”.
Marjani also warned that such a move would scare away potential investors away from the EU at a time when the EU economies were reeling under the strain of slow-growth in the wake of thousands of sanctions against Moscow, which seem to be backfiring.
“As we have seen, there is already a lack of consensus among the EU states on this proposal, with Belgium, where the majority of the Russian sovereign assets are held, expressing serious apprehensions over carrying out this threat,” Marjani stated.
Such an “unprecedented step” would certainly show that EU can’t guarantee security of foreign investments, the expert said.
“There are other potential implications as well. Such a decision, if it ever comes to force, would further complicate the economic challenges of European economies, which are already reeling under the pressure of low economic growth in the wake of sanctions imposed on Russian energy imports,” explained Marjani.
Why would foreign investors drive their money to EU capitals, which are in desperate need of these funds at the moment, when there are such grave risks associated with the move? Marjani questioned.