‘Judging Freedom’ edition of 17 December: Will the EU Steal Russian Bank Deposits?

The has been a torrent of news these past several days bearing on the title given to today’s discussion with Judge Andrew Napolitano.

From the results of the paper voting of EU Member States last Friday in which von der Leyen invoked emergency powers to override any possible vetoes, she succeeded in ending the six-monthly renewals of the freeze on Russian state assets held in Euroclear (Belgium) and making the freeze unlimited in time. For this she surely benefited from the argument that this would provide the EU with leverage against the United States and reserve for them a seat at the peace negotiations table which they otherwise would not enjoy.

Then on Monday, at a meeting of the Coalition of the Willing hosted by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and attended by Trump’s emissaries Witkoff and Kushner, as well as by Volodymyr Zelensky, the decision was taken to approve a peace proposal that incorporated all conditions that the Ukrainians have sought from the beginning of the conflict: a ‘security guaranty’ would be include NATO member states providing ‘boots on the ground’ in Ukraine, the armed force would be trained by European advisers and would number 800,000, the U.S. would participate in defending Ukrainian sovereignty by clauses similar to Article 5 of the NATO treaties, no territorial concessions to Russia would be made, the Russians would be obliged to pay reparations to Ukraine and the Russian leadership would be brought to justice. 

Incredibly, Trump’s emissaries sat through these discussions and said at the conclusion that peace was now closer than ever before, an idea which Donald Trump himself repeated publicly later in the day.

In a speech to Dutch legislators in The Hague on Tuesday, Zelensky boasted about these terms and said that the Russian aggression would be punished, thereby reinforcing international law.

This utter collapse of the Trump position on the peace which favored realism and acknowledgement of the Russian military victory did not promise anything good for the meetings in Brussels tomorrow and Friday to decide on confiscation of the frozen Russian state assets.

However, this morning’s edition of ‘Le Soir,’ the main French-speaking daily newspaper in Belgium has two full pages devoted to the issue of the disposition of the Russian assets and the domestic politics here relating to the coming Council meeting.  Per Le Soir, De Wever now has the support of ALL political parties in Belgium, north and south, left and right for his veto on von der Leyen’s plans unless she can produce written binding guaranties of all Member States to share the financial risks of the loan operation in case the loan is called by the lending banks.  This could happen under two different scenarios: that the Russians win a law suit against Euroclear for damages over what is effectively the confiscation of their assets OR if the Russians defeat the Ukrainians on the field of battle and force a capitulation, meaning that the peace term do not foresee any Russian reparations to Ukraine.

My present guess is that von der Leyen simply cannot provide such written guaranties to Belgium because there are many naysayers among the Member States to risk sharing, including such heavyweights as France and Italy.

This means that the only fallback position of the Ukraine cheerleaders in the EU will be to raise an EU loan from their own pockets, meaning going to their parliaments to get budgetary approval, and most Member States are loathe to do that. 

Accordingly, if the loan scheme fails this Friday in the European Council, then it is highly likely that Ukraine will be bankrupt in Q1 2026 and the war will end at the negotiating table in capitulation of Kiev.

As we also discuss in this Judging Freedom episode, the shocking flip-flop of Trump on the peace terms that we have seen these past two days is setting off a fierce fight within the highest decision-making levels of the Kremlin.  Putin’s bet on Trump is shown up to have been a strategic mistake. Hardliners including the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Ryabkov who said that diplomacy had exhausted its utility several weeks ago are now the winners in the debates around Putin.   The president’s ‘gently, gently’ approach to managing the war is shown to be wrong.   We may therefore expect a big change in Putin’s next moves towards escalation.  It would be best if he followed the advice of many in the elites who want him to blow up Kiev and end the war with a decapitation strike.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

NewsX World: Zelensky’s Speech yesterday at The Hague

In this hourly news bulletin, I come on at minute 3.45   

Fresh from the highly supportive meeting with European leaders in Berlin a day earlier, Zelensky sets out before Dutch legislators his demand that the peace agreements also foresee condemnation of Russia’s aggression and thereby uphold the principles of international law.

As I characterize his speech, “[Zelensky] is satisfied that his view of the war is now being upheld by the Europeans, namely that Russia has lost the war, it should capitulate, it should pay reparations, it should punish its leaders, and so forth. This is the most remarkable propaganda that one could ever hear. The loser is declaring that the winner is…the losing side and must capitulate.”

The truly shocking feature of the speech is that it would appear that the Americans in Berlin on Monday, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, did not object. Were there consistency in US policy, they should have risen from their seats and walked out.  Instead, we are told at the start of this news bulletin, that the USA will participate in the plans to ensure Ukraine’s security which includes European boots on the ground. And that will never be accepted by the Russian side, as Trump knows very well.

I await further news from Washington on what Team Trump has actually agreed to. But the situation at this moment does not look good for anyone awaiting peace in the foreseeable future.

Required reading

One of the benefits of being in multiple ‘press pools’ is that you get drawn into reporting on breaking news even before major media put out their accounts. Thus, early this morning I received a WhatsApp invitation from RT International to comment briefly on the Statement issued by the participating EU Member States at a meeting in Berlin yesterday hosted by Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_25_3086

Note: the meeting in Berlin set out Europe’s terms for a cease fire and peace to be concluded between Russia and Ukraine. It amounts to a Russian capitulation along the lines that Volodymyr Zelensky has demanded for more than three years now.

 The Americans Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner took part in that meeting. They are shown in photographs released today by The Financial Times standing next to the other participants and appearing to be relaxed and accommodating. We are led to believe that they agreed to the terms of this so-called peace deal, though that strains my credulity.

However, the importance of the Statement is not in settling with the Americans what terms for peace will now be presented to Moscow. It was a measure to get the EU states aligned for the decisive meeting of the European Council tomorrow and on the 19th to vote on disposition of the frozen Russian state assets being held in Euroclear (Belgium) as Ursula von der Leyen wants and the Belgian prime minister has so far vetoed.  In this context, it is important that we see Italy’s prime minister Meloni has signed the Statement, considering that among its terms it envisions using the frozen assets to serve as reparations to Ukraine for the damage Russia has caused by its war of aggression. That is precisely what the European heads of government and of state will be voting on in Brussels and on that issue Meloni had joined Belgium, Bulgaria and Malta in a statement last Friday which expressed opposition to the collateralization of the assets for purposes of lending 145 billion euros to Ukraine.

As I have said in the RT interview, which will be posted on the internet and for which I will share the link as soon as I receive it, the greater meaning of the meeting in Berlin yesterday as reflected in the Statement now on the Commission website is that it seeks to perpetuate all of the preconditions that Moscow has called the root causes of the conflict and what prompted them to launch their Special Military Operation. By its terms, NATO-Russian relations will be those of enemies who are armed and ready for the next round of battle at any time. Ukraine will be armed to NATO standards, with NATO military personnel present on the ground as a trip-wire to set off World War III at any time. And the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev will remain in power, with hundreds of billions of euros in Russian ‘reparations’ to sustain the criminal feeding frenzy of its civilian and military leaders.

Chancellor Merz and Ursula von der Leyen have gotten what they wanted from this meeting. They are well on their way to ensuring their continued rule for years to come while turning the EU from the Peace Project which it was in the 20th century to the War Project that it is today.

Meanwhile, the brutal suppression of civic freedoms in Europe that J.D. Vance denounced at his speech to the Munich Security Conference continues unchecked. Yesterday one reader alerted me to the latest EU sanctions applied to Jacques Baud for allegedly acting as a spokesperson for the Kremlin and spreading disinformation about the Bucha massacre and other issues relating to the ongoing war.

See the Radio Free Europe summary: https://www.rferl.org/a/eu-blacklist-russia-sanctions-shadow-fleet/33619173.html

For those who do not know Baud, from among the books he has published about the war, I can recommend his ‘The Russian Art of War: How the West Led Ukraine to Defeat’ (2024).  You will quickly understand that this former colonel and member of the Swiss strategic intelligence service who also advised United Nations peacekeeping operations, is a serious scholar. He has been interviewed by Glenn Diesen on his youtube channel and been a guest on other major Alternative Media programs.

The EU sanctions now potentially mean that Baud will not be allowed to travel to any EU country and any assets he may have in Europe will be confiscated.

I point out that the sanctions imposed on Baud could just as easily be imposed on any of the American and other non-EU passport holders appearing on any of the Alternative Media programs that readers of these pages are likely to consult.

In brief, this development should be brought to the attention of J.D. Vance because it bears directly on his denunciation of the EU Institutions for violating free speech principles. It also provides grist for Elon Musk’s call to disband the EU and restore sovereignty to the Member States.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

NewsX World hourly bulletin: discussing the latest Ukrainian massive drone attacks on Russia

I open with a word of gratitude to the NewsX World production team for inviting my commentary on the Russia-Ukraine war and peace efforts day after day given that they know very well how my interpretations of events contradict directly the Western mainstream spin that turns the news bulletins on Euronews, on the BBC and on some other Indian broadcasters into crass pro-Kiev propaganda!

Today’s discussion, beginning at minute 21 focuses on the latest wave of Ukrainian drones sent deep into the territory of the Russian Federation, with 15 targeting Moscow.  As I say here, this wave drone attack as well as the attack with an even greater number of UAVs on the previous day may be seen as a Public Relations effort. Zelensky has placed PR above purely military objectives in order to impress Western backers with Ukraine’s robust fight and wheedle still more financial and hardware support from them. In fact, there seem to have been no Russian infrastructure struck by these drones, only one incidence of reported damage due to falling debris from a drone struck by Russian air defenses.

I also was given an opportunity to decode Zelensky’s stated willingness to make concessions now on NATO membership so long as Ukraine receives strong security commitments from the US and other allies. His intent is clear:  to demand that his Western supporters, especially the USA install themselves in Ukraine for purposes of the country’s security. That, of course, is precisely what the Russians saw as an existential threat to themselves in the run-up to their December 2021 demand that NATO  move back its men and installations to the pre-1996 borders. It was to end the de facto NATO presence in Ukraine that the Russians they launched the SMO in February 2022.  A Russian rejection of peace over the stationing of Coalition of the Willing troops in Ukraine will be trumpeted as demonstration of ‘Putin’s unwillingness to end his war of aggression.

NewsX Eurozone: this morning’s interview on latest war developments

In this hourly news bulletin on the Indian broadcaster, I comment on the Ukrainian response to American proposals for creating a free economic zone in the parts of the Donbas from which Ukraine withdraws under conditions of a peace treaty. We also discuss the latest Russian attacks on the Ukrainian port cities of Chernomorsk and Odessa in which Turkish ships were damaged.

RT International: “Unelected Rule”

10 December 2025

This morning’s chat with RT International (Moscow) focused on the questions of the democratic failings of the European Parliament and its domination by the Germans, whose power is leveraged via the European People’s Party, the single most numerous party in Parliament, to give them a 5:1 stronger say on how European affairs are conducted than the say of any other citizens in the European Union.  We also discuss the bravery of Belgium’s Prime Minister Bart De Wever and of CEO of Euroclear Valerie Urbain who do not just ‘talk the talk’ but actually put their credibility on the line by directly vetoing the plans for confiscation of Russian assets.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Y7DLcOJ5AafhZaYPLwl5vRnjdHu9GG2K/view

‘Judging Freedom’ edition of 10 December 2025: Trump Embraces Realism

I am grateful to Judge Andrew Napolitano for leading today’s discussion towards highly topical questions of how the Trump administration is functioning, to what contradictions there are between the ‘realism’ which is set as the guiding light of the new National Security Strategy and the day to day actions of Team Trump that we see in various parts of the world, to what are the merits of Marco Rubio having been installed as Secretary of State, to the Neocon population of State and not just of Rubio, its top executive, and to what qualifications do top business executives have to be diplomats, among other issues.

For this reason, viewers will find that there is very little overlap with yesterday’s lengthy conversation with Professor Glenn Diesen.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

Kremlin Welcomes Trump Remarks Claiming RUSSIA WILL WIN Ukraine War | NewsX World

This morning’s interview with NewsX World (India) on their hourly news bulletin, minutes 4.40 to 10.20, focused on Zelensky’s latest hopes for bringing European and US troops into Ukraine to ‘assure its security,’ now for purposes of holding elections, and also on the likely scenario here in Brussels next week when Ursula von der Leyen plans to impose an unprecedented ‘qualified majority’ voting rule over the indefinite extension of the freeze on Russian state assets in order to promote their collateralization for purposes of massive loans to Ukraine. I foresee  a very contentious meeting that may end up bringing down von der Leyen and like-minded leaders of EU Member States.

A conversation with Professor Glenn Diesen, 9 December: U.S. National Security Strategy Embraces Kissinger-Style Strategy

Today’s conversation goes on for 52 minutes, and could have run still longer if we were to examine more than the several aspects of the latest U.S. National Security Strategy document. I am pleased, nonetheless, that we had ample opportunity to explore the ways in which this 2025 document compares with Trump’s first NSS of December 2017, to see how there is continuity in thinking from then to now. Trump was then a Kissinger-mentored Realist. He is one today, as well.

His embrace of an interest driven foreign policy means that he is ready to seek compromises and compromises are arrived at by diplomacy, which is why he has placed emphasis on reestablishing communication lines with Russia. The efforts of the Biden administration to break off all contact with Russia, to close down diplomacy and to rely solely on a militarized foreign policy, was not the idiosyncratic wish of one man: it came directly from the Idealist, values driven approach to foreign policy that every U.S. administration since Richard Nixon has prioritized.

In this chat, I explained what insights into the NSS come from close textual analysis of the document, from decoding innocent statements like our favoring pragmatism over pragmatists, realism over realists; or by the mention of how Germany is deindustrializing because its industrialists are moving production to China to take advantage of cheap Russian gas there.

I also had a chance to explain the mechanisms in European politics which make it impossible to reverse course on failing policies, so that the meddling that Trump proposes in the NSS and which the Germans have denounced, is very much needed if Europe is to be saved from its present suicidal course.

There is a great deal more here for the Community to explore.

By the way, I perhaps abused my privilege as guest to promote my 2019 book of essays entitled The Belgian Perspective on International Affairs, sales of which are just beginning to take off, six years after its launch. Perhaps prospective readers were turned off by the notion that Belgium dominates the content and Belgium is too small to be of value for understanding world politics.  However, I had used a play on words, since the Belgian perspective was in reality, my perspective, now that I had become a naturalized Belgian two years earlier. It is in that book that you will find my detailed analysis of Trump’s 2017 NSS, which largely sets out the thinking he has stayed with in 2025. It is there, in chapter one, that you will find my call for Trump’s impeachment over his vile speech to the UN General Assembly in September 2017 when he proposed to utterly destroy North Korea and obliterate its 22 million population. I am viewing Trump very differently these days, focusing as I do on his top priorities for global power sharing with Russia and China and choosing to overlook his bullying, imperialist ways in Venezuela and his enabling genocide in Gaza.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025