It seems that just as households are rushing to prepare for Christmas, Washington is keen to wrap up the “Ukrainian question” by 24 December and sit down to its festive dinner. That urgency put the global spotlight on Berlin on 14–15 December, where European leaders met alongside Ukrainian and American negotiating teams.
But those talks were just the opening act in a week packed with decisions that could shape Ukraine’s future. On Tuesday, 16 December, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the Netherlands, where leaders from Europe and beyond gathered in The Hague to kick off the second phase of the mechanism for compensating Ukraine for the damage caused by Russia’s war. This mechanism will build on the Register of Damage, set up in 2023 under the Council of Europe.
And the week isn’t over. On 18–19 December, what could be the most important meeting for Ukraine this year takes place: the European Council session, where leaders will vote on a reparations loan backed by frozen assets from Russia’s Central Bank (CBR).
Here’s a closer look at what’s at stake.
Berlin
“We now have a real chance for a genuine peace process in Ukraine,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said at a joint press conference with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Berlin. He was not alone in praising the outcome of the two-day talks.
“For the first time, I heard from the American negotiators that the United States will be involved in Ukraine’s security guarantees in a way that leaves the Russians in no doubt that any new attack would be met with a military response,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said.
Following the meeting, European leaders released a joint statement outlining key elements for security guarantees and economic support during Ukraine’s reconstruction. These include maintaining a Ukrainian military of 800,000 troops to deter war and defend the country’s territory, deploying multinational forces based on the Coalition of the Willing to help rebuild Ukraine’s armed forces and secure its airspace and maritime zones, establishing a U.S.-led ceasefire monitoring and verification mechanism with international participation, implementing mandatory measures to restore peace and security in the event of future aggression, investing in Ukraine’s long-term prosperity, and supporting the country’s eventual accession to the European Union.
Pressure from the United States on Ukraine to make territorial concessions remains intense, a fact reflected both in public statements from European leaders and in off-the-record comments by American officials to global media. In the wake of the Berlin meeting, European leaders made clear that the decision ultimately rests with Ukraine. “Only the Ukrainian people and their president, who is defending the country’s territory here, can answer this question,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said. “Poland will certainly not pressure Ukraine into any concessions. This has to be a decision based on the Ukrainians’ own assessments,” added Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk.
While the joint statement from European leaders stopped short of directly addressing territorial concessions, it reaffirmed a key principle: “International borders cannot be changed by force. Decisions regarding territory belong to the people of Ukraine, once reliable security guarantees have been effectively implemented.” In practice, this remains a clear “red line” that Ukraine is unlikely to let anyone cross.
The Berlin talks were not just important for Ukraine—they were also a crucial test for European leaders. By negotiating directly with Moscow, Washington has shown a willingness to sideline its European partners, a move that risks leaving them diplomatically marginalised. That makes it all the more urgent to bring European states back into the process.
European leaders understand the stakes. Vladimir Putin’s actions make it clear that he has absolutely no intention of backing off, and his end goal extends far beyond the borders of Ukraine’s Donetsk and Luhansk regions—what he really wants is a Ukraine under Russian control. The Kremlin, aware of Washington’s eagerness to wrap things up quickly, is once again dragging out the process. Europeans appear to have finally recognised this tactic, unlike the United States, though they have yet to develop the means for a serious counter.
Opportunities for meaningful pushback could come as soon as 18 December, when the European Council meets to vote on a “reparations loan” for Ukraine, backed by frozen assets from Russia’s Central Bank.
The Hague
The week before the holiday break is proving to be significant, and not just because of the Berlin talks. On 16 December, Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the Netherlands, where the first 34 member states of the Council of Europe and the European Union signed an agreement to establish a Claims Commission for Ukraine.
The International Claims Commission will form the second stage of the mechanism for compensating Ukraine for Russia’s aggression, building on the Register of Damage created in 2023. Like the Register, the Commission will operate under the Council of Europe’s oversight. So far, 44 states have joined the Register, which collects and logs compensation claims from individuals, organisations, and Ukrainian state authorities. To date, it has received more than 80,000 claims.
The Commission will be responsible for reviewing and assessing these claims, deciding on compensation, and determining how much should be awarded. According to the Council of Europe, the Convention establishing the Commission will come into force once it has been ratified by 25 signatories and provided sufficient funding is in place to support its initial operations.
Brussels
After the EU agreed last week to freeze Russian sovereign assets indefinitely, all eyes are now on the European Council, which will vote this week on a so-called “reparations loan” for Ukraine. The summit of EU leaders on 18–19 December in Brussels is expected to be the stage for this crucial decision. If approved, frozen Russian assets worth €210 billion could be redirected to fund Ukraine’s defence.
“If, on Thursday, they agree to confiscate these reserves rather than simply freeze them, it will be a turning point in the war — and possibly for Europe’s own security,” says American financier Bill Browder, whose work was instrumental in creating the long-elusive Magnitsky sanctions list. He argues that such a move would give Ukraine and its European allies, including the UK, a way to push back against Vladimir Putin without depending on American funding, “which has virtually disappeared under the Trump administration.”
For now, the outlook for the vote on the “reparations loan” is far from encouraging. That may be one reason, several media outlets suggest, why Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has been invited to the European Council meeting, is unlikely to attend in person, though he is expected to join via video link.
Belgium has emerged as the most vocal opponent of the plan to channel frozen Russian assets to Ukraine. A key sticking point is that the largest share of these assets — €185 billion — is held at the central securities depository Euroclear in Brussels. Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has expressed concern that his country could be held liable and forced to return the full sum to Russia if the latter were to win a court case. He outlined these worries, among other things, in an official letter to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
But according to six international legal experts, such fears are largely unfounded. They argue that Russia would struggle to find a jurisdiction willing to hear a case against Belgium or enforce any claim against the Belgian government or Euroclear over the assets. Beyond Belgium, Italy, Bulgaria, and Malta have also voiced opposition to the proposed “reparations loan.”
“Right now, a lot hinges on the actions of individual leaders, particularly Friedrich Merz and Emmanuel Macron — on their direct talks with Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever, on persuading Belgium, and on providing it with credible guarantees where they are needed,” says Olena Halushka, co-founder of the International Centre for Ukraine’s Victory (ICUV), in a comment to The Ukrainian Week. Since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion, Halushka has been working alongside Ukrainian communities worldwide to advocate for the freezing of Russian assets. Among the guarantees she believes could reassure Belgium is a shared commitment to cover the loan amount if Russia were to succeed in a court challenge.
Yet, according to Politico, citing anonymous sources in Brussels, Belgium may not be the EU’s biggest obstacle after all. The more pressing problem, the report suggests, is Donald Trump. “Officials from the Trump administration are pressuring European governments — at least those they consider most friendly to them — to reject the plan to use €210 billion in Russian assets to fund Ukraine,” it writes, citing four officials involved in the negotiations.
Germany is currently one of the main forces pushing for a positive decision on a reparations loan for Ukraine. Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s comments make it clear that Berlin is taking the 18 December European Council meeting very seriously. “Let’s not fool ourselves. If we don’t succeed in this [vote on the reparations loan — ed.], the European Union’s ability to act will be seriously weakened for years, if not longer,” Merz said.
