A core question for European Union leaders discussing whether to use frozen Russian assets to help Ukraine is whether the idea is legally sound.

The European Union’s agreement to extend 90 billion euro (around $105 billion) in no-interest loans to Ukraine last week was not elegant or free of risk, but it could represent a significant shift in how the nearly four-year-old Russia-Ukraine war plays out.

The European Union on Friday indefinitely froze Russia’s assets in Europe to ensure that Hungary and Slovakia, both with Moscow-friendly governments, can’t prevent the billions of euros from being used to support Ukraine.

The European Union has imposed sanctions on five businessmen linked to Russian oil companies Lukoil and Rosneft.

European Union leaders decided to borrow cash to loan $105 billion to Ukraine to fund its defence against Russia for the next two years rather than use frozen Russian assets, sidestepping divisions over an unprecedented plan to finance Kyiv with Russian sovereign cash.

Comments from deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov carried by state news agency

The European Union is on the precipice of a momentous decision on whether to use frozen Russian assets to finance more support for Ukraine. Critics argue the plan is legally questionable and risks retaliation by Moscow.

The Associated Press has documented 145 incidents in what Western officials say is a campaign of disruption across Europe masterminded by Russia since President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Russia "does not have the capability to conquer and occupy Ukraine," let alone invade Europe, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has said, accusing "deep state warmongers" and sections of the Western media of pushing alarmist narratives to derail peace efforts.