Babiš hesitates what to say about Ukraine

Prime Minister Andrej Babiš said that the European Union must find other ways to finance Ukraine than a reparation loan secured by frozen Russian assets or a Union loan guaranteed by individual member states. He thus set out the Czech position before the European Council meeting on Thursday. Petr Fiala called Babiš's actions selfish and threatening the country's security.

But the situation is more complicated. Babiš has already "explored the terrain" in Brussels by meeting with the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen. The key was the meeting with Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever, a strong opponent of the reparations loan, who believes that it will threaten the financial stability of Belgium, but also of the whole of Europe. This was also confirmed by the European Central Bank, which stated that the intended "financial and legal operation" could also threaten the stability of the euro. Italy, Hungary and Bulgaria are already rejecting it, so the plan to use Russian assets is getting cracked.

In the case of the loan, the Czech Republic would provide a guarantee according to the size of its gross national product, which would amount to almost CZK 90 billion. Brussels justifies the proposal with the "extraordinary situation": Ukraine faces a budget deficit of 71.7 billion euros (1.74 trillion crowns) next year and could cease to function as a state without further financial assistance after the cessation of support from the US.

In April this year, the well-known columnist for The Financial Times, Wolfgang Münchau, noted that the EU is absolutely incapable of financing the war and "if anyone desperately needs an agreement to end it, it is the EU."

The data already shows that European military aid to Ukraine has slowed down significantly this year and has not been able to compensate for the sharp decline in US support.

So is there any way to get out of the stalemate? It could be a US proposal that frozen Russian assets in the amount of about 200 billion euros be used for the economic reconstruction of Ukraine and the resumption of economic cooperation with Russia, which could be part of a peace agreement.

But it is unacceptable for key European leaders that Russian assets held in Europe become the subject of any U.S.-Russian business deals. Therefore, it was decided by a qualified majority of the Union to block the assets indefinitely. It can be understood.

Nevertheless, isn't the American intention as a kind of "bloody compromise" an alternative to the impending European disagreement on support for Ukraine, which could have severe political consequences for the Union? And couldn't the Czech Prime Minister also play with the American proposal in Brussels?

The Czech Republic would thus subscribe to a new US security strategy defining key interests towards Europe: to prevent an escalation of the conflict, to enable the reconstruction of Ukraine as a viable state, to stabilize the European economy and to restore strategic stability in relations with Russia. 

Miloš Balabán, Právo Daily