By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The European Union has implemented new emergency powers to prevent the unfreezing of Russian assets, a move that undermines any potential post-war peace settlement involving the return of these funds. These powers, effective until Russia ceases its aggression and provides reparations, significantly diminish the influence of pro-Kremlin countries within the EU in relation to the release of frozen assets. The legal workaround overhauls existing rules requiring unanimous consent for sanctions renewal, removing the ability of individual nations to block continued sanctions, and will protect the EU from potential economic instability and hybrid attacks. This decision was made in response to the potential negative impacts of returning the assets to Russia.
Read the original article here
EU Approves Legal Workaround to Sidelining Orbán, Keeping Russian Assets Frozen Forever is a big win for the EU, showing it has both the agency and the political will to stand firm against the Kremlin’s aggression. It’s a move that underscores the bloc’s independence, especially in the face of potential interference or pressure from other global powers. It’s a clear signal that Europe is capable of charting its own course and defending its interests. The fact that this is happening, regardless of the specific issue at hand, is impressive.
This workaround could potentially pave the way for a major shift in how the EU operates. If it holds up, it could set a precedent for the bloc to make decisions based on a majority vote, bypassing the veto power of individual member states on crucial matters. This could fundamentally alter the EU’s decision-making process, making it more efficient and less vulnerable to obstruction by single member nations.
Let’s be honest, there’s a strong sentiment that this move is more than justified. Many believe that certain leaders, like the one in Hungary, are compromised and not acting in the best interests of the EU. This isn’t just about the current situation; it’s about addressing the core issues of corruption and undemocratic practices within member states. The situation is considered to be so severe that some are calling for them to face consequences for the corruption that has occurred.
The concern that this legal maneuver undermines the spirit of existing agreements among EU countries is understandable, but the consensus seems to be that the EU is dealing with an emergency. Agreements, even important ones, should not protect those who aren’t honoring the agreed principles. This action seems to be a necessary response to a threat, not a violation of core values.
Some may wonder if this action defeats the purpose of bilateral agreements among the EU countries, and whether small countries may be later overridden. But this is where the importance of the situation lies. The EU is in a crisis, which is reflected in the establishment documents and agreements. This is particularly relevant when considering the actions of Hungary, which has arguably failed to maintain itself as a genuine democracy.
This is a response to a member state that has, allegedly, violated its duties. It raises the question: does a state that fails to uphold the principles of the Union still deserve a say in its functions? It’s a balancing act between adhering to existing legal frameworks and protecting the broader security of the EU.
The EU’s choice here is clear, and the decision seems to be centered on the bloc’s security. It’s about prioritizing the safety and stability of the entire union over strict adherence to existing rules. Sure, questions arise from such a move, but the consensus is that the EU is doing the right thing.
There’s a feeling that leaders like Orbán actively obstruct progress, much like that frustrating teammate in a school project who refuses to contribute. The EU’s message here is clear: “We’re moving forward, and you can either get on board or get out of the way.”
There’s a sense that the EU can’t afford to hesitate. The risks of being perceived as weak in the face of external pressures are too great. The world is watching, especially those who might see an opportunity to exploit any perceived vulnerability. The choice is to protect the whole community over being passive.
This is about more than just keeping Russian assets frozen. It’s about preserving the EU’s integrity. It’s about safeguarding its security. And it’s about sending a message that the EU is not easily swayed. Here’s hoping the changes in power happen and they get rid of the “fat fucker.”