There’s been some pretty explosive statements coming out of Belgium.

Their Prime Minister has come right out and said it: those frozen Russian assets? In the end, they’ll have to be returned. That’s about as blunt as it gets.

What’s interesting? This politician used World War II as an example—back then, Germany’s funds were only frozen, nobody actually dared to confiscate them. His logic is simple: seizing another country’s central bank money and sovereign wealth fund? That’s never happened in history—are we really going to start now?

But the second half is even more hard-hitting.

He asked the question everyone’s thinking but nobody dares say: who really thinks Russia is going to lose? “That’s an illusion,” he said. And he followed up with something even more direct—if a nuclear-armed country spirals out of control, who pays the price?

Clearly, Brussels has received some “messages.” Moscow’s position is clear: touch the assets, and be prepared to face “permanent” consequences. The Prime Minister spelled it out: “Permanent” isn’t just a throwaway word about time.

At the end of the day, there’s a bigger issue behind all this—when geopolitics collides with financial rules, who gets to decide? The line between freezing and confiscating assets is being pushed, but clearly, some people are starting to think about the consequences.

The rules of the game for sovereign assets are being redefined. But this time, even the rule-makers are starting to get nervous.