I find it amusing that Europe is considering ignoring "rule of law" with respect to the $300 billion of frozen Russia assets. Lending money using Russia's assets as collateral. (Great, I'll borrow money from the bank and put your house up as collateral.) Seizing the interest earned on the $300B. (The earnings of an asset belong to the owner of that asset.)

For those who value the rule of law, it is heartening that they have thus far resisted. (For those who value people not getting bombed, it's less of a comfort). The latest proposal is that Ukraine assign their war reparations claims to the European agencies holding the Russian assets, and then to do an international offset. i.e., reducing claims against Russia euro-for-euro against the reduction in the assets held on their behalf. This is generally legal (if one is mindful of a few technicalities) and has long precedent, and would accomplish about the same thing as outright confiscation. Quite aside from questions of moral justice and human impact, one couldn't reasonably argue that the Russian government hasn't damaged some valuable fixed assets inside Ukraine.

Jim

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.