EU-Russia Assets: Poland & Hungary Clash Over Ukraine War Funds
EU Asset Freeze Sparks Diplomatic Clash Between Poland and Hungary
A dispute over the European Union’s plan to utilize frozen Russian assets to aid Ukraine has ignited a public spat between Poland and Hungary, highlighting deep divisions within the bloc over how to respond to Moscow’s aggression.
The friction began after Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán condemned the EU’s efforts to tap the funds as a “declaration of war,” arguing it violates European law. Orbán, known for his close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, claimed the move disregards Hungary’s interests.
Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski responded sharply on X, formerly Twitter, with a pointed reference to Soviet-era honors, suggesting Orbán’s stance aligned him with Moscow. “Viktor has earned his Order of Lenin,” Sikorski posted.
Unless Russia invades again there won’t be such a war but we understand that this time you would be on her side.
— Radosław Sikorski 🇵🇱🇪🇺 (@sikorskiradek) December 14, 2025
Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó countered, accusing Poland of seeking to escalate the conflict. “We understand that what they want is a war between Russia and Europe, but we will not be dragged into it,” he stated. Sikorski retorted that Hungary would likely side with Russia in any renewed invasion of Ukraine.
The exchange underscores the challenges facing the EU as it attempts to forge a unified front against Russia. Last week, EU member states reached a provisional agreement to indefinitely immobilize approximately €210 billion (roughly $225 billion USD) in Russian assets held within the bloc. The aim is to leverage these funds for the long-term reconstruction of Ukraine, a move intended to pressure Moscow to contribute to the rebuilding effort.
However, the plan is encountering resistance. Hungary and Slovakia voted against the measure, while Andrej Babis, the newly designated prime minister of the Czech Republic, has refused to provide guarantees for financing aid to Ukraine, aligning himself with Budapest and Bratislava.
“The European Commission must find another way to finance Ukraine,” Babis said on social media, adding that the Czech Republic “needs money for Czech citizens and we do not have money for other states.”
Belgium, which holds the majority of the frozen Russian assets, is seeking assurances from other EU members to cover potential legal costs should Russia initiate an international arbitration case to reclaim the funds. This coverage is estimated at around €3.56 billion for the Czech Republic alone.
Moscow has already signaled its opposition. The Central Bank of Russia announced Friday it is suing Euroclear, the Belgian financial group holding the frozen assets, calling the restrictions on access to its funds “illegal.”
The EU envisions Ukraine repaying the proposed €90 billion loan only if Russia provides reparations. If Moscow refuses, sanctions would remain in place, Ukraine would not be obligated to repay the loan, and Russia would remain unable to recover its assets.
The EU’s move to make sanctions permanent, providing the legal basis for the asset freeze, was a significant step forward. The debate highlights the complex geopolitical and economic considerations at play as the EU seeks to support Ukraine while navigating its own internal divisions and the potential for Russian retaliation. The long-term implications of this decision, and the unity of the EU in its implementation, remain to be seen.
Why this matters: The dispute isn’t just about money. It’s about the fundamental direction of Europe’s policy towards Russia and the extent to which member states are willing to prioritize collective action over national interests. The outcome will shape the EU’s ability to effectively support Ukraine and deter future Russian aggression.