A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
wtf are they afraid of? what protections does the Neo-imperialist, invading, war criminal state have?
Afraid of loosing posturing, like the US did when they used their economic advantage to do just that. People, even the good guys, don’t like knowing that they don’t have total control over their wealth… and by using the bad guy’s money, even in justified matters, it sends a message to everyone in the broadest of daylight: “we control the money.”
If your advantage comes from other countries being willing to invest in your currencies, then trust becomes a huge part of that advantage. People care about money, not ethics, when they’re concerned about where to store their billions.
It's a shame (and maybe shameful) they couldn't use the frozen assets. I found this from an article in the Sydney Morning Herald, but didn't want overpost the story.
"Some €210 billion of Russian assets are frozen in Europe, most of them in the Belgian financial clearing house Euroclear. Belgium had objected to the loan plan, calling it legally risky and warning that it could harm Euroclear’s business."
Think it's important to see what influence banks have on highly political decisions.
Link to Sydney Herald article, similiar reporting.
Oh they could have used them. They chose not to.
Definitely shameful, I was hoping to see Europe develope a spine in the wake of the US losing theirs. That was wishful thinking.
They chose not to.
Not really, Belgium wouldn't budge, there was a clear majority in favor of using the frozen assets. This is mainly on Belgium.
Exactly. Either Belgium does not realise we are already at war or Putin has his fingers stretched deeply across the European mainland.
That's a choice. And it's Belgium, the rest of Europe could have pressured them into doing the right thing but they're not that serious about Russia so they didn't.
if they weren't serious, there wouldn't be a deal.
they, the EU, are/is serious.
the Belgians are just being greedy little cunts.
...so business as usual ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
if they weren't serious, there wouldn't be a deal.
Yeah I guess they wouldn't be working on the 20th sanctions package if they weren't serious /s
These cute little deals and sanctions packages are rolled out periodically to make it look like they're doing something substantial to counter Russia.
In reality they're easy political wins that don't make many waves, in Russia or with EU voters.
The proof is in the outcome, 4 years on since the full invasion and Putin is as emboldened as ever. Maybe we just need to wait for the 21st sanctions package to hit, maybe then he'll rethink things.
I'm somewhat disappointed that they could not find a way to use the agressor's own assets.
Perhaps it's true that laws would have to be changed and some treaties (with Russia) should be exited from. I hope this provides the incentive to change them and do that.
I think it should be a feature of international law: if one tries to conquer a country, one should be prepared to have assets confiscated and given to the target of agression to help them defend against it.
We're coming up on the 4 year anniversary of the invasion. If Europe wanted to use these assets they would have done so already. The willingness just isn't there.
I've been wondering if Ukraine can't sue Russia in the ICJ for the damage Russia has caused to Ukraine, and claim these frozen assets as part of that.