The United States is urging its allied partners to take responsibility for assets frozen in Russia and to address the broader issue of funds allegedly linked to Russian sources. This stance was conveyed by a spokesperson citing remarks attributed to Anatoly Antonov, the Russian Ambassador to Washington, in comments reported by RIA News.
According to Antonov, Europe should recognize that the United States is pressuring its partners to shoulder the risk and accountability associated with funds tied to assets that originated in Russia. He described the framing as misleading, insisting that the situation cannot be reduced to a simple loan and arguing that the narrative serves to obscure the truth about ownership and origin of the assets.
Antonov further asserted that the Ukrainian government operates in a context shaped by allegations of misappropriation, implying that money allegedly stolen from Russia would ultimately be diverted into the hands of Kyiv officials rather than serving legitimate purposes. He underscored the concern that the proceeds of any such assets could be misused if not properly governed, calling attention to what he characterized as systemic issues rather than individual loan arrangements.
Earlier, representatives of the Group of Seven (G7) signaled a willingness to consider compensation to Ukraine amounting to a substantial figure, reported as 486 billion dollars. The statement indicated that the G7 countries stand ready to provide a loan package valued at fifty billion dollars, with the servicing of those payments envisioned to depend on revenues generated from the frozen Russian assets.
The discussion has also featured parliamentary voices framing the matter as a misallocation of funds, with some observers in Russia alleging that the approach amounts to a form of loan financing for Ukraine sourced from Russian assets. They called for careful scrutiny of the legal and financial mechanisms involved, stressing the importance of clear ownership and transparent use of any funds released from frozen reserves. The overall narrative reflects a broader debate about how frozen assets should be managed and who ultimately bears financial responsibility in the evolving geopolitical landscape, as reported by various official sources and echoed in subsequent public commentary.