G7 Leaders Agree to Lend Ukraine Billions Backed by Russia’s Frozen Assets

A number of world leaders during the G7 summit (AFP)
A number of world leaders during the G7 summit (AFP)
TT

G7 Leaders Agree to Lend Ukraine Billions Backed by Russia’s Frozen Assets

A number of world leaders during the G7 summit (AFP)
A number of world leaders during the G7 summit (AFP)

Leaders of the Group of Seven wealthy democracies have agreed to engineer a $50 billion loan to help Ukraine in its fight for survival. Interest earned on profits from Russia’s frozen central bank assets would be used as collateral.

Details of the deal were being hashed out by G7 leaders at their summit in Italy. The money could reach Kyiv before the end of the year, according to US and French officials.

President Joe Biden told reporters at a news conference Thursday that the move was part of a “historic agreement.” Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said providing a loan through Russia's assets "is a vital step forward in providing sustainable support for Ukraine in winning this war."

Here's how the plan would work:

Where would the money come from? Most of the money would be in the form of a loan mostly guaranteed by the US government, backed by profits being earned on roughly $260 billion in immobilized Russian assets. The vast majority of that money is held in European Union nations.

A French official said the loan could be “topped up” with European money or contributions from other countries.

A US official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to preview the agreement said the G7 leaders' official statement due out Friday will leave the door open to trying to confiscate the Russian assets entirely.

Why not just give Ukraine the frozen assets? That's much harder to do.

For more than a year, officials from multiple countries have debated the legality of confiscating the money and sending it to Ukraine.

The US and its allies immediately froze whatever Russian central bank assets they had access to when Moscow invaded Ukraine in 2022. That basically was money being held in banks outside Russia.

The assets are immobilized and cannot be accessed by Moscow, but they still belong to Russia.

While governments can generally freeze property or funds without difficulty, turning them into forfeited assets that can be used for the benefit of Ukraine requires an extra layer of judicial procedure, including a legal basis and adjudication in a court.

The EU instead has set aside the profits being generated by the frozen assets. That pot of money is easier to access.

Separately, the US this year passed a law called the REPO Act — short for the Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity for Ukrainians Act — that allows the Biden administration to seize $5 billion in Russian state assets in the US and use them for the benefit of Kyiv. That arrangement is being worked out.

How could the loan be used and how soon? It will be up to technical experts to work through the details.

Ukraine will be able to spend the money in several areas, including for military, economic and humanitarian needs and reconstruction, the US official said.

Biden's national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said the goal is “to provide the necessary resources to Ukraine now for its economic energy and other needs so that it's capable of having the resilience necessary to withstand Russia's continuing aggression.”

Another goal is to get the money to Ukraine quickly.

The French official, who was not authorized to be publicly named according to French presidential policy, said the details could be worked out "very quickly and in any case, the $50 billion will be disbursed before the end of 2024.”

Beyond the costs of the war, the needs are great.

The World Bank’s latest damage assessment of Ukraine, released in February, estimates that costs for reconstruction and recovery of the nation stand at $486 billion over the next 10 years.

The move to unlock Russia's assets comes after there was a long delay in Washington by Congress in approving military aid for Ukraine.

At an Atlantic Council event previewing the G7 summit, a former US ambassador to Ukraine, John Herbst, said “the fact that American funding is not quite reliable is a very important additional reason to go that route.”

Who would be on the hook in the case of a default? If Russia regained control of its frozen assets or if the immobilized funds were not generating enough interest to pay back the loan, "then the question of burden-sharing arises,” according to the French official.

Max Bergmann, director of the Europe, Russia and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said last week that there were worries among European finance ministers that their countries “will be left holding the bag if Ukraine defaults.”

Some nations are critical of the plan to seize Russian assets.

Chinese Embassy spokesman Liu Pengyu told The Associated Press that the US is "fueling the fight and inciting confrontation.”

“We urge the US to immediately stop slapping illegal unilateral sanctions and play a constructive role in ending the conflict and restoring peace.”



UK Foreign Minister to Meet Rubio amid Tensions over Joint Air Base

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
TT

UK Foreign Minister to Meet Rubio amid Tensions over Joint Air Base

British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon
British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, president of the United Nations Security Council for February speaks during a press conference before the Security Council meeting, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, February 19, 2026. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon

Britain's foreign minister Yvette Cooper ‌will meet with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday, after President Donald Trump renewed his criticism of London for ceding sovereignty of ​the Chagos Islands, which is home to a US-UK air base.
Last year, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer agreed a deal to transfer sovereignty of the Indian Ocean islands to Mauritius, while keeping control of one - Diego Garcia - through a 99-year lease that preserved US operations at the base, Reuters said.
Washington last year gave its blessing to the agreement, but Trump has since ‌changed his mind ‌several times. In January, Trump described it ​as ‌an ⁠act ​of "great stupidity", ⁠but earlier this month said he understood the deal was the best Starmer could make, before then renewing his criticism this week.
Cooper is meeting Rubio to discuss defense and security issues in Washington as Trump also toughens his rhetoric on Iran, saying Tehran must make a deal over its nuclear program in the ⁠next 10 to 15 days, or "really bad ‌things" will happen.
The Diego Garcia ‌base has recently been used for ​operations in the Middle East against ‌Yemen's Houthis and in humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Although on Tuesday ‌Rubio's State Department said it backed the Chagos accord, the next day Trump said Britain was making a big mistake.
"DO NOT GIVE AWAY DIEGO GARCIA!" Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social, saying the ‌base could be called upon in any future military operation to "eradicate a potential attack" from ⁠Iran.
Under the ⁠conditions for using the joint base, Britain would need to agree in advance to any operations out of Diego Garcia.
On Thursday, Britain's The Times newspaper reported that Trump's latest criticism of the Chagos deal came because Britain was yet to give permission to use the bases for future strikes against Iran, owing to concerns they may breach international law.
Asked about The Times report, Britain's Ministry of Defence said on Thursday it does not comment on operational matters and that Britain supported ​the ongoing political process between ​the US and Iran.


Turkish Police Detain Deutsche Welle Journalist over Social Media Posts

19 February 2026, Canada: Deutsche Welle (DW) logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. Photo: Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
19 February 2026, Canada: Deutsche Welle (DW) logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. Photo: Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
TT

Turkish Police Detain Deutsche Welle Journalist over Social Media Posts

19 February 2026, Canada: Deutsche Welle (DW) logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. Photo: Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa
19 February 2026, Canada: Deutsche Welle (DW) logo is seen displayed on a smartphone screen. Photo: Thomas Fuller/SOPA Images via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa

Turkish police have detained investigative journalist Alican Uludag on suspicion of insulting President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and spreading misinformation, sparking outrage among journalism groups.
Uludag, who works for German broadcaster Deutsche Welle’s Turkish service, was taken from his home in Ankara late Thursday as part of an investigation into social media posts. The Istanbul Chief Prosecutor’s Office said he is suspected of “insulting the president” and “disseminating misleading information.”
The journalist, whose reporting focuses mainly on the judiciary and on corruption cases, was later transferred to Istanbul for questioning.
His detention drew sharp condemnation from press freedom advocates, who described it as an attack on media independence and democratic norms, The Associated Press said.
Deutsche Welle’s director‑general, Barbara Massing, demanded his release, calling the arrest “a deliberate act of intimidation.”
On Friday, journalists gathered outside Istanbul’s Çaglayan Courthouse to protest Uludag’s detention and to call for his immediate release.
The advocacy group, Reporters Without Borders considers Türkiye to be one of the most repressive countries for journalists, nothing that most media organizations are under government control and journalists face frequent legal pressure or intimidation.
At least 14 journalists or media sector workers are currently in prison, according to the Turkish Journalists Syndicate.


South Korea’s Ex-President Yoon Apologizes After Life Sentence Over Martial Law 

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol  delivers a speech to declare martial law in Seoul, South Korea, December 3, 2024. (The Presidential Office/Handout via Reuters/File Photo)
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol delivers a speech to declare martial law in Seoul, South Korea, December 3, 2024. (The Presidential Office/Handout via Reuters/File Photo)
TT

South Korea’s Ex-President Yoon Apologizes After Life Sentence Over Martial Law 

South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol  delivers a speech to declare martial law in Seoul, South Korea, December 3, 2024. (The Presidential Office/Handout via Reuters/File Photo)
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol delivers a speech to declare martial law in Seoul, South Korea, December 3, 2024. (The Presidential Office/Handout via Reuters/File Photo)

Former ‌South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol apologized on Friday for his short-lived declaration of martial law in December 2024, a day after a Seoul court sentenced him to life in prison for masterminding an insurrection.

In a statement released by his lawyers, Yoon said that while he was sorry for the "frustration and hardship" brought upon the people by his martial law decree, he stood behind the "sincerity and purpose" behind his actions.

The Seoul Central District Court's decision ‌to hand him ‌a life sentence on Thursday was "predetermined," he ‌said, ⁠adding that the verdict ⁠against him was political retaliation.

"Forces that seek to smear a decision made to save the nation as an 'insurrection' and to use it beyond political attacks as an opportunity to purge and eliminate their opponents will only grow more rampant going forward," he said.

Yoon also questioned ⁠whether an appeal would have meaning ‌in what he described as an ‌environment where judicial independence could not be guaranteed, while telling ‌supporters to "unite and rise."

His lawyers separately said the statement ‌did not amount to an intention to forgo an appeal.

Yoon's martial law declaration lasted around six hours before being voted down by parliament, but it sent shockwaves through the country and ‌sparked street protests.

The court found Yoon guilty of subverting constitutional order by deploying troops ⁠to storm ⁠parliament and move to detain opponents, capping a dramatic fall that saw him stripped of office and end up behind bars.

Yoon, a former career prosecutor, denied the charges, arguing he had presidential authority to declare martial law and his action was aimed at sounding the alarm over opposition parties' obstruction of government.

A special prosecutor had sought the death penalty for Yoon, though South Korea has not carried out an execution since 1997.

A prosecutor said on Thursday the team had some "regret" over the sentencing, but declined to say whether they planned to appeal.