How much the EU must change to be able to withstand future Russian aggression. The procedure for confiscating Russian assets to support Ukraine and the problems that arise in connection with this demonstrate this once again.1. To begin with, I will remind you that the European Union is a classic peacetime formation. It does not have a common foreign policy, a unified financial system for all, or a common army. Russia's full-scale invasion has not fundamentally changed anything: until 2025, no one in Europe seriously realized the need to restructure the EU for a potential war with Russia. Paradoxically, over the years, the military and intelligence services of practically every EU country regularly reported on the inevitability of Russian aggression, while politicians did almost nothing to be prepared for it."The biggest shock for the EU was not Russia's full-scale invasion, but Donald Trump's return to power in the United States. Only after this did Europe realize its own vulnerability, which led to further militarization. Everyone understands that rearmament will take several years, during which Putin will have a window of opportunity to invade weak European countries."If this happens, the only combat-ready asset that Europe will be able to count on will be the Ukrainian army. Therefore, preserving Ukraine's independence and ensuring the combat capability of the Ukrainian Armed Forces was and remains a strategic interest of every European country.2. "Right now we have a simple choice — either money today or blood tomorrow. And I'm not just talking about Ukraine, I'm talking about Europe," Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said yesterday. It is no secret that Ukraine's resistance is financed at the expense of EU countries. To continue it, Ukraine needs about 70 billion euros next year. According to estimates by the IMF and the European Commission, the nominal GDP of all EU countries is about 19 trillion euros, and therefore the amount needed to support Ukraine is approximately 0.37% of the EU's total GDP. On average, this is 5–6 times less than what EU countries spend on their own defense (currently 2% of GDP, while in the summer NATO adopted a decision to increase this figure to 5%). In other words, we are not talking about amounts that are significant for Europe — tens of times more was spent on fighting COVID.Given the critical importance of Ukrainian defense for Europe, there is no doubt that the necessary funds will be found. At the same time, the Europeans' attempts to use frozen Russian assets for this purpose increasingly resemble the position of the American administration, which does not mind supporting Ukraine but would like someone else to pay for it. Unlike the U.S., which can shift this problem onto Europeans, Europe does not have such an opportunity. After all, the war is taking place inside Europe.3. It is now clear that the EU will not confiscate frozen Russian assets to finance Ukraine.Throughout its entire history, the European Union has adopted laws aimed precisely at preventing such situations. Since no EU country is at war with Russia, martial law legislation that would allow confiscation of the aggressor's assets cannot be applied. Therefore, in the event of confiscation, including in the form of the so-called "reparation loan," Russia will definitely go to court. And since the judicial system in Europe is independent, no one can predict the future court decision.Understanding this, Belgium, on whose territory the majority of frozen Russian assets are concentrated, is asking to be provided with financial guarantees in case of losing in court. The problem is that no one can provide such guarantees. The reason is simple: the EU does not have its own ministry of finance that could make such decisions on behalf of all EU countries.At the same time, Belgium is an absolutely pro-Ukrainian country: it is among the largest donors, supplies Ukraine with significant volumes of weapons, including F-16 aircraft. Belgium does not have its own Orbán or Fico, and it does not make any political demands on Ukraine. This is exclusively about guarantees that in the event of a future loss in court, Belgium will not be forced to independently bear financial responsibility for a decision made by all of Europe. As a result, two weeks before the start of 2026, Europe still cannot decide on the form of financing Ukraine's resistance.4. It is hard to understand why we are spending so much time and energy on the issue of frozen assets. It is obvious that the European Union is economically a superpower capable of financing Ukraine for decades without even feeling it. There is no doubt that the necessary funds will eventually be found. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen yesterday announced the possibility of alternative mechanisms — in particular through issuing EU borrowings. However, the prolonged lack of progress once again demonstrates the critical need to adapt the EU to the realities in which modern Europe lives.The European Union was created as an economic bloc to simplify mutual trade between countries. Europeans delegated the issue of their own security to NATO, whose military power was based on the might of the American army. The United States' revision of its role as a security guarantor in NATO and Russia's military invasion destroyed the European security system that had existed for decades. Europe has very little time to build a replacement for it. Since no European security system is possible without Ukraine, supporting our state's resistance is a condition for the survival of most European countries. Delaying this today will cost significantly more in the very near future.SourceAbout the author. Mykola Kniazhytskyi, journalist, Ukrainian lawmaker.The editorial board does not always share the opinions expressed by blog or column authors.