Brussels, Belgium: Attempts to access frozen Russian funds in Belgium have been reportedly made through a 1989 treaty between Belgium, Luxembourg, and the former Soviet Union, according to French-speaking Greens MP Samuel Cogolati.
The three nations inked the treaty in February 1989 to primarily safeguard and promote each other’s foreign financial investments.
Despite the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the agreement has never been officially renounced. Cogolati alleges that Russian oligarchs are eyeing this treaty as an “unparalleled” avenue to unfreeze their assets in Belgium.
Article four of the treaty stipulates that Russian investments on Belgian soil must receive “fair and equitable treatment, excluding any unjustified measure or discrimination.” However, Article Five allows for exceptions, citing measures taken “in the public interest” as grounds for limiting access.
Cogolati, expressing concerns about the implications of the treaty on European sanctions against Russia, submitted a request to the Finance Department for clarity.
He emphasized the urgency: “It would be a disgrace if an old Belgian-Soviet investment protection treaty were now to offer Russian oligarchs a bulwark against EU sanctions.”
Finance Minister Vincent Van Peteghem (CD&V) responded to Cogolati’s inquiry, confirming that several Russian entities with frozen assets in Belgium had invoked the treaty.
Despite this, he sought to allay fears, asserting that the treaty is “irrelevant” and holds no sway over European sanctions.
Van Peteghem clarified that the government considers only the unfreezing possibilities outlined in European regulations, and any pre-existing agreement with the USSR is overridden by Belgium’s obligations under European law.
Notably, he emphasized that the Belgian Treasury does not independently designate sanctions; it adheres strictly to measures imposed at the European level.
The Finance Minister’s reassurances come at a time when Belgium is grappling with a significant financial dilemma, with a staggering €66 billion worth of frozen Russian funds and €190 billion in paused transactions.
This financial bottleneck is partly attributed to the country’s concentration of economic institutions like Euroclear.
The ongoing attempt to utilize the 1989 treaty raises questions about the longevity and relevance of such agreements in a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape.
As the international community grapples with the fallout from Russia’s actions in Ukraine, the incident highlights the intricate legal and diplomatic challenges associated with freezing and unfreezing assets on a global scale.
Using a decades-old treaty to navigate contemporary sanctions underscores the resourcefulness of individuals seeking to protect their interests.
It also sheds light on the need for constant review and adaptation of international agreements to ensure they align with current geopolitical realities.
As Belgium navigates this delicate situation, the international community will be closely watching how European regulations prevail over historic treaties.
The implications of this episode extend beyond the financial realm, emphasizing the ongoing struggle to balance the sanctity of international agreements with the necessity of adapting to the ever-changing dynamics of global politics.
In the face of this challenge, the Belgian government remains steadfast in its commitment to upholding European sanctions, underscoring the importance of unity in the international response to geopolitical crises.
The incident serves as a reminder that, even as the world grapples with evolving threats and conflicts, the foundations of diplomatic and legal frameworks must remain resilient in the pursuit of justice and accountability.
This article was created using automation technology and was thoroughly edited and fact-checked by one of our editorial staff members
