Open the newsletter to watch the White House for free

Your guide to what the American elections mean 2024 for Washington and the world

The writer was Vice President Kamala Harris National Security. Dialip Singh, Deputy National Security Adviser for International Economy in the Biden Administration, also contributed

Europe’s response to the amazing withdrawal of the Trump administration to support Ukraine has been impressive and may prove its date. Instead of accepting Donald Trump’s embrace of Russia’s wrong novel about the war, silent survival, or quarrels between them, European leaders doubled the support of Kiev, pledged to enhance security assistance and collect a “coalition of wishing”.

These steps are welcome, but not enough. European defense spending will not come quickly enough to replace equipment Washington was transferred to Ukraine. Without an American behind, Trump refuses to provide him, even European forces in Ukraine will not be an appropriate deterrent against Russian aggression in the future.

Instead, the truly effective option to save Ukraine is to seize more than $ 200 billion in Russian assets currently frozen in Europe and committing these funds to support the industrial, military and defensive economy in Ukra. This money will help Ukraine to obtain means to defend itself and provide a lifeline for its economy. Europe will give the negotiating influence it needs to the mediator War.

French officials I mentioned To consider a plan to seize Russian origins if Moscow violates the ceasefire deal in the future. But this idea overlooks the fact that any ceasefire deserves the paper it writes will require Ukraine to develop a force capable of deterring Russian aggression in the future and a way to rebuild the economy that destroyed three years of Russian attacks. None of these things will be possible without using some frozen assets, especially since Washington reduces financial support for Ukraine.

In the Biden administration, we have worked for years to persuade Europe to join us to transfer these assets to Ukraine, but they did not succeed. While the Europeans continue the G7 agreement in the fall to provide a loan to Ukraine guaranteed by benefits on the frozen assets, they continued to reach reasons for not seizing the manager. But their arguments were not convincing at the time and less persuasive now. While European leaders reconsider their options, they must take several points in mind.

First, while the legal basis for confiscation is disputed, many legal scholars have concluded that it is sound as long as it is done in the context of counter -measures against illegal aggression in Russia. The long -awaited “Set Off” principle will allow Ukraine to formulate its demand for compensation compensation against Russia’s demand to recover its frozen assets.

Second, the seizure of Russian origins in Europe will not, unlike European fears, deter the countries of carrying the euro more than freezing these assets indefinitely, which Europe and the G7 countries are already performing. The United States, the European, the United Kingdom and the Japanese to prove Russia’s assets in 2022 have not prevented anyone from carrying dollars, euros, pound sterling or yen since then, although almost no one believes that Russia will ever restore these assets.

Third, just because most of the frozen assets in Europe do not mean that the euro will be more dangerous than the dollar. It is not a secret that the American authorities led the way to persuade the Group of Seven to freeze Russia’s assets in the wake of Putin’s conquest directly. Last spring, Congress voted with an overwhelming majority to give the president the authority to seize these assets in favor of Ukraine. Today, the potential aggressor countries will not conclude that their origins are safer in the United States compared to Europe.

Fourth, the risk of opening the Pandora Fund for World War II equipment is exaggerated. While some in Poland will use Nubia to enhance their long -term claims, there is no appetite elsewhere to reopen this stable issue.

Finally, while Russia threatened revenge on foreign companies operating there if Europe transferred its frozen assets to Ukraine, the additional danger is minimal. Any Western company still has physical or incalculator assets within Russia, either to remove these allegations or already understand that it will need to do so.

None of this is to reject European concerns about the seizure of Russia’s origin as trivial. But with the United States’ support for Ukraine now in a serious doubt, the greatest danger is the continued failure to work. The decisive European steps to seize the origins of Russia will shake the balance of power in the conflict as much as the Trump axis of Russia last week – but this time in the name of justice and freedom instead of shameful betrayal of a democratic ally fighting for its existence.