I used to supervise Euroclear and Clearstream so this @FT story caught my attention. @MESandbu suggests Euroclear is too big to destabilise and Belgium is to small to bear the risks of $360 billion restoration costs if ever the Central Bank of the Russian Federation succeeds in regaining rights to frozen or expropriated assets - which it will regain in any settlement of the Ukraine war. What he fails to address entirely is Rule of Law and Private Property Rights. Sure these are inconvenient to thieves, but they are essential to global securities markets. Securities are called securities because they convey secure property interests and claims to their owners at law. What will destabilise Euroclear is global perception that $44 TRILLION in securities assets under custody are now UNSAFE because the EU can decide to steal them. Also, it’s irritating to see him suggest ECB can force Euroclear ‘to split off the risky part of its balance sheet into a separate entity’. That is just another form of theft. Euroclear is licensed as a bank, but its core business in its charter and under specific Belgian legislation is as a fiduciary or trustee of OTHER PEOPLES’ ASSETS. Because it is so central to European and global markets, it is forbidden to take normal commercial risks. Fiduciary, custodian, and trust assets under Euroclear custody are NOT on Euroclear’s balance sheet because 100% ownership remains with the depositors. Even if Euroclear goes bust, customer assets will NOT form any part of the insolvency estate and can be reclaimed by depositors. I designed and modernised the laws protecting Euroclear and Clearstream depositors. I pray they withstand these lawless attacks by would-be thieves. Break Rule of Law and Property Rights and you break global securities markets.