صاحب‌خبر - Tensions have surfaced between France and the UK over whether $350bn of frozen Russian assets can be seized and then offered to the US to buy defence equipment, binding America closer to the defence of Europe. The UK’s willingness to seize the assets is longstanding, but its position has become more pronounced in recent weeks, with a high-level endorsement by the UK foreign secretary, David Lammy. The proposal has also had the support of the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. However, in common with the European Central Bank and Germany, Emmanuel Macron opposes the move over fears that it would breach the principle of the immunity of sovereign assets and thereby have a deterrent effect on investment in the eurozone area by countries like Saudi Arabia and China. UK defence spending is about to boom – can British firms step up? Read more Speaking alongside Trump last week, the French president said: “We have $250bn frozen Russian assets in Europe, but this does not belong to us so they are frozen. If at the end of the day in the negotiation we would have with Russia, they are ready to give it to us, super.” Macron has also long argued that Europe must end its reliance on US weapons for its defence, and feels vindicated by Donald Trump’s treatment of Ukraine. He would also be reluctant to see frozen Russian assets being used to boost the US defence industry, as opposed to strengthening the ability of Europe to protect Ukraine. When he was UK foreign secretary, David Cameron repeatedly said he instinctively favoured seizing the assets, arguing there was little practical difference since the UK was already committed to not returning the frozen assets to Russia until Russia had paid war reparations to Ukraine. The Guardian understands there is some tension over the assets question between the UK and France, which have committed to leading a “coalition of the willing” to help end the fighting in Ukraine. Inside the EU the Czech Republic, Estonia and Poland have been the strongest supporters of seizing the assets and not just using the interest to secure loans for Ukraine. The assets question has become more urgent as Europe casts around for a means of keeping Trump from entirely withdrawing US support for Ukraine. The UK and France have both said some sort of US security guarantee is required for them to send peacekeeping forces into Ukraine. The European Union is to discuss relaxing rules on defence spending at a summit this week. A proposal for a large part of the Russian assets to be spent on the US defence industry is seen as the kind of offer that might make Trump change course. Disagreements over the feasibility of the proposal stem from differing opinions over whether Trump would take up the offer, and whether it would undermine the need to build a European defence industry independent of the US. France has been frustrated since the war began that EU countries have only ordered 22% of their military equipment from Europe, with the majority coming from the US. Macron has focused on raising defence spending inside Nato to 3.5% of GDP, with the funding coming from a variety of sources including unused EU cohesion funds, a joint defence bond or increases in national defence spending. In a weekend interview with Le Figaro he admitted it might take a decade for Europe to become fully self-reliant as a defence force. skip past newsletter promotion Sign up to First Edition Free daily newsletter Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters Enter your email address Sign upPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. after newsletter promotion The UK’s commitment to maintaining the transatlantic alliance has been underlined by it arguing that the stalled raw minerals agreement between Ukraine and the US will have to be revived, and probably on terms that make it appear more favourable to the US. The aim would be to let Trump feel vindication for his showdown with Zelenskyy in the White House on Friday. The near two-year debate in the UK and across Europe about the legality and wisdom of seizing Russian state assets was given a boost last week when the former Conservative prime minister Rishi Sunak argued the legal challenges to seizure can be overcome. France suggests partial one-month truce between Russia and Ukraine Read more Writing in the Economist, he argued: “Russia’s brutal assault on Ukraine has so violated the principle of ‘sovereign equality’- that all states have a duty to respect the territorial integrity and political independence of other states – that it is hard to see how this concept can be invoked to stop these assets from being seized.” It is estimated about $240bn of the Russian frozen assets are in the EU, up to $28bn to $30bn in the UK and the rest elsewhere. The UK former national security adviser Lord Ricketts has argued France and the UK can avoid tensions by handing the assets to Ukraine. He said if the UK and EU agreed to raise a large fund of up to €100bn using frozen Russian assets it would be possible for Ukraine to buy arms from both European suppliers, but also large quantities from the US, creating a double win.∎​